The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 06/27/2017 Item # 9A06/27/2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 2011-08, the Addie’s Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development, to allow 250 multi-family dwelling units or Group Housing/Retirement uses in Tract C as shown on the Master Plan and 75,000 square feet of gross floor area of commercial development and Group Housing/Retirement Community uses in Tract A as shown on the Master Plan; providing for amendment to the Master Plan; by providing for revised development standards; and by providing an effective date. The subject property consists of 23.33+/- acres and is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida [PL20150001776]. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) review staff’s findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above referenced petition to render a decision regarding this PUD amendment, and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County. The petitioner is requesting that the Board consider an application to amend Ordinance Number 2011-08, the Addie’s Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) to add Tract C to allow 250 multi-family dwelling units or group housing retirement uses and to reduce the currently allowed commercial development on Tract A from 135,000 square feet of gross floor area of commercial development to 75,000 square feet on Tract A. Tract A also currently allows community/group housing and hotel/motel uses. FISCAL IMPACT: Other than Fire Impact Fees, the County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of the building permit certificate of occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to maintain an adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order to meet the requirements of concurrency management, the developer of every local development order approved by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project in accordance with Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Finally, additional revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates, and that revenue is directly related to the value of the improvements. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the CCPC to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): Staff identified the FLUE policies relevant to this project and determined that the proposed amendment to the MPUD may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Please see Attachment 4 - FLUE Consistency Memorandum for a more detailed analysis of how staff derived this determination. 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 GMP using the 2014 and 2015 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). 9.A Packet Pg. 16 06/27/2017 Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states the following: 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 applicable 2016 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the proposed new development will generate approximately 447 adjusted PM peak hour two-way trips, which is a reduction of 227 PM peak hour trips from the PUD’s current trip count. The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments with the listed capacities: Roadway Link 2016 AUIR Existing LOS Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Service Volume/Peak Direction 2016 Remaining Capacity Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard to Wilson Boulevard C 3,300/East 974 Immokalee Road Logan Boulevard to Collier Boulevard D 3,200/North 647 Collier Boulevard Immokalee Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road C 3,000/North 1,026 Based on the 2016 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the current and proposed (reduced) trips for the amended project within the five-year planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. 9.A Packet Pg. 17 06/27/2017 Staff notes that Immokalee Road is projected to fail the required Level of Service (LOS) past the current five-year plan projections. Staff is diligently working on various network improvements, such as the recently approved authorization to reinitiate the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension project, which will serve as a parallel corridor within the network. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the CCME. The project site contains 13.81 acres of native vegetation, a minimum of 25%, which equates to 3.45 acres, is required to be retained pursuant to CCME Policy 6.1.1, if developed as a mixed use. If developed entirely as non-residential, a minimum of 15% or 2.07 acres of the native vegetation present on-site is required to be retained. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard petition PUDA-PL20150001776 on May 18, 2017 and by a vote of seven to zero, they recommended to forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval, subject to the changes requested at the hearing. The changes are summarized as follows: 1. Reduce the number of dwellings units to 250. 2. Edit Exhibit A of the PUD Document to clarify the uses allowed on Tract C. 3. With respect to Exhibit B of the PUD Document, the height of the multi -family dwellings shall be limited to 55 feet (actual) and 45 (zoned), the PUD Boundary setbacks shall be increased from 20 feet to 25 feet, and other minor edits shall be made to the Development Standards Tables and the associated notes for Tracts A and C. 4. Reduce the perceived massing of the residential building closest to the west property line where abutting the Esplanade Golf & Country Club, so that narrow part of the building (its width) will be oriented parallel to the west property line and its length will be perpendicular. 5. Procure a landscaping agreement with Esplanade Golf & Country Club prior to Board hearing. This includes agreed upon quantities, heights, and opacity of plant material. 6. Eliminate Deviation #3, which is related to a requested reduction to required off -street parking requirements. 7. Depict the location of the pedestrian pathways on the Master Plan. 8. Modify the Transportation Commitments (Exhibit F) to eliminate the reference to Mirasol PUD. The petition returned to the CCPC on June 1, 2017 on consent agenda to ensure all the requested changes were incorporated into the PUD Document. Additional edits to the PUD Document were requested. The applicant updated Exhibit A to indicate the maximum number of dwelling units allowed (i.e., 250) as well as including a landscaping commitment in Exhibit F. The petition is placed on Advertised Public Hearings because of the concerns expressed by the public at the CCPC hearing on May 18, 2017. Some of the public comments include concern over the height of the buildings, the intensity of development, reduction of the preserve, concerns over the requested dumpster and right-of-way width deviations, the prospect of more noise and traffic that will impact property values, proposed landscaping/buffering between the subject property and the Esplanade Golf & Country Club, and the desire for greater building setbacks. Commissioner Fryer noted the staff report, page 8 of 21, should be corrected to indicate that the new Tract A would be 4.32 acres and that Tract C would be reduced to 9.82 acres. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is an amendment to the existing Addie’s Corner MPUD (Ordinance No. 2011-08). The burden falls upon the applicant for the amendment to prove that the proposal is consistent with all the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board, should it consider 9.A Packet Pg. 18 06/27/2017 denial, that such denial is not be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. Criteria for MPUD Amendments Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval or not. 1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. 3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed MPUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. 4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development? 6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 8. Consider: Conformity with MPUD 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. 9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan? 10. Will the proposed MPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern? 11. Would the requested MPUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. 9.A Packet Pg. 19 06/27/2017 14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 15. Will the proposed change 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? 16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? 19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations? 20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot (“reasonably”) be used in accordance with existing zoning? (a “core” question…) 22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county? 23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 24. Consider: 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. 25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed MPUD rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended. 26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the MPUD rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? The Board must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the Board hearing as these items relate to these criteria. The proposed Ordinance was prepared by the County Attorney’s Office. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. (HFAC) RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendation of the CCPC to amend the MPUD and further recommends that the Board approve PUDA-PL20150001776. All changes are reflected in the 9.A Packet Pg. 20 06/27/2017 attached Ordinance. Prepared By: Eric Johnson, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Attachment 1 - Staff Report (PDF) 2. Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (PDF) 3. [Linked] Attachment 3 - Application and Support Material (PDF) 4. Attachment 4 - FLUE Consistency Memorandum (PDF) 5. Attachment 5 - Density Map (PDF) 6. Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (PDF) 7. [Linked] Attachment 7 - Emails_Letters from Public (PDF) 8. Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (PDF) 9. Legal Ad - Adenda ID # 3252 (PDF) 9.A Packet Pg. 21 06/27/2017 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 9.A Doc ID: 3252 Item Summary: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 2011-08, the Addie’s Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development, to allow 250 multi-family dwelling units or Group Housing/Retirement uses in Tract C as shown on the Master Plan and 75,000 square feet of gross floor area of commercial development and Group Housing/Retirement Community uses in Tract A as shown on the Master Plan; providing for amendment to the Master Plan; by providing for revised development standards; and by providing an effective date. The subject property consists of 23.33+/- acres and is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida [PL20150001776]. Meeting Date: 06/27/2017 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal – Zoning Name: Eric Johnson 05/23/2017 4:46 PM Submitted by: Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 05/23/2017 4:46 PM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Department Judy Puig Level 1 Division Reviewer Completed 05/24/2017 4:49 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Additional Reviewer Completed 05/25/2017 12:29 PM Zoning Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Completed 06/02/2017 8:26 AM Growth Management Department Judy Puig Level 2 Division Administrator Skipped 05/24/2017 11:49 AM County Attorney's Office Heidi Ashton-Cicko Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 06/07/2017 3:37 PM Growth Management Department James French Additional Reviewer Completed 06/13/2017 1:53 PM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 06/14/2017 10:31 AM Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 06/14/2017 11:58 AM Budget and Management Office Mark Isackson Additional Reviewer Completed 06/16/2017 10:54 AM County Manager's Office Leo E. Ochs Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 06/16/2017 11:08 AM Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 06/27/2017 9:00 AM 9.A Packet Pg. 22 PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 1 of 21 May 9, 2017 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: MAY 18, 2017 SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20150001776 ADDIE’S CORNER ______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNERS/APPLICANT/AGENT: Owner/Applicant: Agents: Creekside West, Inc. D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. Coleman, Yovanovich an Koester, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Parcel ID: 00190041500 is owned by Collier County to be used for right-of-way purposes. REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to amend Ordinance Number 2011-08, the Addie’s Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 23.33+/- acres and is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (see location map, page 2). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petition seeks to amend the MPUD to add Tract C to allow 349 multi -family dwelling units or group housing retirement uses and to reduce the currently allowed commercial development on Tract A from 135,000 square feet of gross floor area of commercial development to 75,000 square feet on Tract A. Tract A also currently allows community/group housing and hotel/motel uses. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) Collier BLVDImmokalee RD IMMOKALEE ROAD BURNT PINE DRIVE HOLLOW BROOK CIR DRIVEPEBBLEBROOKEBROKEN BACK ROADCOLLIER BOULEVARDBELLAIRE BAY DRIVEESPLANA DE BOULEVARD ESPLANADE BOULEVARDAMOUR COURTCAVANO STREET CAVANO STREET ESPLANADE BOULEVARDAMOUR COURTTRACT R-2 TRACT R-1 TRACT R-1 2 1 TRACT R TRACT R3TRACT 8 TR C-2TRACT C-6PARCEL L-1 NOTTINGHAM AT PEBBLEBROOKELAKES CONDO PARCEL 2 TRACT 8TR C-5 TRACT 4TRACT 1 TRACT R-1TR FTRACTL-2 TRACT G TRACT 2 9 68 27 27.2 TRACT R1 TRACT L3TRACT L5 TRACT L4 TRACT L2TRACT O6TR O4TRACT O1TRACT O1TRACT O1TRACT O1 TRACT L1 TRACT GC1 TRACT S TRACT C TRACT R2 TRACT R2TRACT GC1 TRACT R2 TRACT GC1 TRACT R2TRACT R1X11X10 X70 X23 X26 À1 À1 À2 À69À79À81À78À80À75À76À77 À66 À63À74À71À67À64À72À65À70À73À68 À2 À1 À1 À1 À46À27À25À55À61À59À26À57À60À56À62À58 À45À28À24 À29 À44 À52À54 À47À51À49À53À50À48À23À30 À43 À11 À42À31 À3 À2À10À32À41À39À33À37À40À36À35À38À34 À1À9 À8 À1 À7 À6 À1 À5 À2 À4 À3 À1 À1À1À1À2À2À3À4 À1 À3 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1À2 À3À4À5À6À7 À8À9À10À11 À12 À24 À25 À26 À27 À28 À29 À30 À31 À35 À36 À37 À38 À39 À40 À41 À42 À43 À44 À45 À46 À47 À48 À49 À50 À51 À52 À53 À54 À55 À56 À57 À58 À59 À60 À61 À62 À63 À64À65À66 X27.3 DRI PUD RPUD PUD MPUD A MPUD TREEFARM ESPLANADE GOLFAND COUNTRYCLUB OF NAPLES HERITAGEBAY RICHLAND ADDIE'SCORNER Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2015-1776 PROJEC TLOCATION SITELOCATION ¹ Docu ment Path: M:\GIS_Requests\2016\06-June\0 6-17-2016 PL 201500017 76\workspace\site-location.mxd 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 3 of 21 May 9, 2017 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject amendment proposes a density of 15.98 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC). This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding boundaries of the Addie’s Corner MPUD: North: Preserve and open space tracts, then farther north are platted undeveloped residential lots, all of which are zoned Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD). Maximum zoned building height five stories and 50 feet, including of under-building parking (0.74 DU/AC). East: Undeveloped lands in the A Tract and Commercial, Mixed-Use District (C/MU) Tract in the Tree Farm MPUD, a mixed use project (175,000 square feet of commercial). Maximum building height is 77 feet (7 DU/AC). South: Right-of-way for canal, and farther south is right-of-way for Immokalee Road, still farther south is preserve for Richland PUD. Maximum building height is 35 feet (3.10 DU/AC). West : (to the north) A 15-foot wide landscape buffer easement, and farther west is an open space tract and then a right-of-way for Esplanade Boulevard, all of which are zoned Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD (0.74 DU/AC). West: (central) A 15-foot wide landscape buffer easement, and farther west is an open space tract and then a 20-foot wide land maintenance easement, all of which are zoned Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD (0.74 DU/AC). West: (to the south) A drainage easement and sidewalk easement are zoned Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD (0.74 DU/AC), and a canal right-of-way. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 4 of 21 May 9, 2017 Aerial (County GIS) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed rezoning. 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. This petition is consistent with the GMP. Future Land Use Element (FLUE): Staff identified the FLUE policies relevant to this project and determined that the proposed amendment to the MPUD may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Please see Attachment 3 – FLUE Consistency Memorandum for a more detailed analysis of how staff derived this determination. 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 GMP using the 2014 and 2015 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states the following: 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 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 5 of 21 May 9, 2017 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 applicable 2016 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the proposed new development will generate approximately 447 adjusted PM peak hour two-way trips, which is a reduction of 227 PM peak hour trips from the PUD’s current trip count. The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments with the listed capacities: Roadway Link 2016 AUIR Existing LOS Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Service Volume/Peak Direction 2016 Remaining Capacity Immokalee Road Collier Boulevard to Wilson Boulevard C 3,300/East 974 Immokalee Road Logan Boulevard to Collier Boulevard D 3,200/North 647 Collier Boulevard Immokalee Road to Vanderbilt Beach Road C 3,000/North 1,026 Based on the 2016 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the current and proposed (reduced) trips for the amended project within the five-year planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 6 of 21 May 9, 2017 Staff notes that Immokalee Road is projected to fail the required Level of Service (LOS) past the current five-year plan projections. Staff is diligently working on various network improvements, such as the recently approved authorization to reinitiate the Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension project, which will serve as a parallel corridor within the network. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the CCME. The project site contains 13.81 acres of native vegetation, a minimum of 25%, which equates to 3.45 acres, is required to be retained pursuant to CCME Policy 6.1.1, if developed as a mixed use. If developed entirely as non-residential, a minimum of 15% or 2.07 acres of the native vegetation present on- site is required to be retained. STAFF 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 LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the “PUD Findings”), and Section 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. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading “Zoning Services Analysis.” Drainage: The proposed PUDA request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area, provided the project’s stormwater management system is designed to the current Cocohatchee River Canal Basin discharge rate of 0.04 cubic feet second/acre. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting with the South Florida Water Management District. County staff will evaluate the project’s stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at the time of SDP and/or plat. Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD Document to address environmental concerns. The project does not require review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), since it does not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Native vegetation retention identified in the existing PUD Document and on the Master Plan exceeds that which is required by the GMP and LDC, with 8.85 acres of preserve identified. Evaluation of the site, by the applicant and staff, shows the MPUD would contain 13.81 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 25%, 3.45 acres, is required to be retained if developed as mixed use. If developed entirely as non-residential, a minimum of 15%, 2.07 acres, of native vegetation is required to be retained. The proposed preserve is located in the northwest corner of the MPUD to act as a buffer and provide a connection to the preserve to the north within Esplanade Golf and Country Club of 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 7 of 21 May 9, 2017 Naples RPUD. Connections to preserves, on and off-site, are required by LDC Section 3.05.07 A.5. Landscape Review: The Master Plan shows that a 15-foot wide, Type B buffer is proposed along the project’s north property line, except in the area where the preserve abuts the Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD. The Master Plan also shows a Type B buffer of varying widths, from 15 feet to 30 feet, is proposed along the western boundary of the MPUD where abutting the Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD. A 15 -foot wide, Type B buffer would run along the east property line where abutting the Tree Farm MPUD. Finally, the Master Plan depicts a 20-foot wide, Type D buffer along the canal and the Immokalee Road right-of-way. These buffers would comply with the requirements of the LDC. The Master Plan depicts an internal right-of-way, proposed between Tracts A and C. Landscape buffers would be placed outside the right-of-way, along its north and south sides. School District: There is sufficient capacity within the elementary and middle school concurrency service areas for this proposed development. There is not sufficient capacity at the high school concurrency service area the project is located in, but there is available capacity in adjacent concurrency service areas. At the time of site development plan (SDP) or plat (PPL), if there is not capacity within the concurrency service areas the development is located within adjacent concurrency service areas will be included in the determination of capacity. This finding is for planning and informational purposes only and does not constitute either a reservation of capacity or a finding of concurrency for the proposed project. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. Utilities Review: The project lies within the potable water and north wastewater service areas of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Water service is readily available via a new 24 -inch water main recently constructed along the north side of the Cocohatchee Canal. Wastewater service is readily available via an existing 12-inch force main along the centerline of Immokalee Road. Downstream wastewater system capacity must be confirmed at the time of development permit review and shall be discussed at a mandatory pre-submittal conference with representatives of the Public Utilities Engineering and Project Management Division and the Growth Management Development Review Division. Any off-site improvements necessary to provide wastewater service to the project shall be the responsibility of the developer and shall be conveyed to the Collier County Water-Sewer District at no cost to the County. Zoning Services Review: The original Addie’s Corner MPUD was adopted on April 12, 2011 pursuant to Ordinance 11-08 and approved for up to 135,000 square feet of commercial uses and/or a Group Housing/Retirement Community with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.60. Hotels and motels were approved with a maximum intensity of 26 unit per acre. This amendment proposes significant changes to the Master Plan, including the reduction of the 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 8 of 21 May 9, 2017 preserve area from 8.85 acres to 3.45 acres and would modify Tract A, to create a separate, distinct tract of land for development known as Tract C. Under Ordinance 11-08, Tract A is 12.37 acres; however, if this amendment were approved, Tract A would be reduced to 9.82 acres and a new tract, Tract C, would be 4.32 acres. Combined, they would account for 14.14 acres or 65% of the MPUD. This amendment also seeks to introduce multi-family residential and townhouse dwelling units as permitted principal uses on Tract C, in conjunction with reducing the maximum allowable gross commercial square footage on Tract A from 135,000 square feet to 75,000 square feet. Group Housing, Independent Living Units, Assisted Living Units, and Retirement Community, which are only allowed on Tract A under the current ordinance, would also be allowed on Tract C as well. Staff does not have an issue with the new uses or the configuration of the developable tracts. The staff report for the original Addie’s Corner MPUD petition (PUDZ-2009-AR-14425), written in 2010, identified that the lands to the north and west of the MPUD had not yet been developed. Staff compared the proposed building heights for the MPUD to the neighboring properties and concluded the following: Staff is of the opinion that the proposed maximum zoned building height of 55 feet is comparable to the maximum height limits approved for abutting properties which are as follows: Tree Farm MPUD, abutting the subject site on the west, allow buildings with a 77 foot maximum height; Mirasol, abutting the site on the east, would allow actual height of structures to reach 75 feet; and Richland PUD, which is located across Immokalee Road, would allow 35 foot high residential structures and would allow commercial structures up to 50 feet tall. Because the site abuts the future relocated Cocohatchee Canal, the 25-foot setback from the Immokalee Road Canal right-of-way is sufficient. To the east, the proposed uses could be commercial or a combination of commercial and residential; to the south any uses within the Richland PUD are already separated by Immokalee Road, thus this project would have little impact upon the residential uses within that project. As noted previously, to the north, uses on this site would be buffered by this project’s 8.8+/- acre preserve tract, thus there should be slight impact. To the west, however is the Mirasol PUD. That PUD is approved for only residential uses. According to the site plan, however, the project’s main roadway is planned to run north to south along the Mirasol/Addie’s Corner shared boundary, thus any negative impact will be lessened. The Mirasol site plan recognizes that the land now proposed to be Addie’s Corner is located within an Activity Center that would allow more intense, i.e., commercial uses adjacent to Mirasol. An interconnection has been provided between the two projects to allow local traffic to move more easily from Mirasol and Addie’s Corner thus preserving the capacity of Immokalee Road. As described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of the staff report, the Addie’s Corner MPUD is bounded by the Esplanade Golf and Country Club RPUD to the north and to the west. The most recent aerial photography from the Collier County Property Appraiser reveals that no dwellings have been constructed yet on the platted residential lots within the Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD to the north of the MPUD. To the west of the MPUD, residential lots have been platted and several houses have been constructed in the RPUD, as recently as 2015. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 9 of 21 May 9, 2017 Because building heights in Addie’s Corner MPUD are of concern to some residents in the RPUD (see Attachment 6 – Emails_Letters from Public), staff has determined it would be worthwhile to provide a brief overview of the building heights allowed within the RPUD. The lands located directly west of the MPUD were once known as Mirasol PUD, which was approved in 2001 for 799 dwelling units on 1,558 acres (Ordinance 01-20). This ordinance allowed multi-family dwellings to be as tall as 50 feet, measured from the first habitable finished floor area to the uppermost finished ceiling elevation of the structure. In 2009, Ordinance 01-20 was repealed in favor of the adoption of Ordinance 09-21 (799 dwelling units on 1,543 acres), which reclassified the PUD to an RPUD. The adoption of 09-21 also established a maximum zoned height for the RPUD and a maximum actual (building) height. For multi-family dwellings, the maximum zoned height remained at 50 feet as in the original ordinance; however, the 2009 ordinance established a maximum height limitation applicable to the clubhouse/recreation buildings land use. The RPUD also contained special provisions associated with building heights for both the multi- family dwellings as well as clubhouse/recreation buildings land use. For multi-family dwellings, the 2009 ordinance established a maximum actual height of 65 feet. For the clubhouse/recreational buildings land use, the maximum actual height was 75 feet. In 2012, another amendment was approved for the RPUD, which added approximately 95 acres and allowed for a total of 1,121 dwelling units on 1,638.6 acres (Ordinance 12-41). In 2014, approximately 19.7 acres of land located just north of Addie’s Corner MPUD was added to the RPUD, allowing for a total of 1,233 dwelling units on 1,658.3 acres (Ordinance 14-36). This ordinance renamed the Mirasol RPUD to the Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD, and this is the current name. Except for the deletion of a minor note related to the clubhouse/recreation buildings land use, the maximum zoned height and the maximum actual height for multi-family dwellings and clubhouse/recreations buildings remained the same. As previously mentioned, this amendment to the Addie’s Corner MPUD seeks to introduce new principal uses (i.e., multi-family residential and townhouses) for Tract C. The PUD Document also proposes a maximum zoned height of 55 feet and an actual height of 65 feet, for multi-family dwellings. The PUD Document also clarifies that both Group Housing and Retirement Community would have a maximum zoned height of 45 feet and a maximum actual height of 65 feet. The current petition to amend the MPUD does not seek to increase the building heights above what was already established under Ordinance 11-08. Staff analyzed the proposed development standards for principal and accessory structures in the MPUD for this petition and compared them to the standards of the Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD and the Tree Farm MPUD. Staff has determined that the development standards proposed for this amendment would be comparable and compatible with the development standards of the aforementioned projects. The applicant requested the placement of signs within the County’s road right-of-way, and applicant was informed that a license agreement approved by the Board and a right-of-way permit would be needed in order to place signage in the right-of-way. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 10 of 21 May 9, 2017 PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 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 in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08”: 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 subject site fronts on Immokalee Road. Water and wastewater transmission mains are readily available within the Immokalee Road right-of-way, and there is adequate water and wastewater treatment capacity to serve the proposed MPUD. The south property line of the development abuts the Cocohatchee River Canal which conveys stormwater from the site. The Cocohatchee River Canal Basin will have the drainage concurrency ne eded to prevent adverse impacts, provided the development maintains a discharge rate of 0.04 cubic feet per second per acre. 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. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of conformity with the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP Consistency portion of this staff report (or within an accompanying memorandum). 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. As described in the Analysis section of this staff report, staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The MPUD is required to provide at least 30% of the gross area for usable open space. No deviation from the open space requirement is being requested, and compliance would be demonstrated at the time of SDP or PPL. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 11 of 21 May 9, 2017 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring 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 the 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 are sought, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains, to accommodate this project based upon the commitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will continuously 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. This MPUD was approved with two deviations pursuant to Ordinance 2011-08, and the petitioner is now seeking four new deviations, requiring an evaluation to the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this MPUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Each new deviation requested by the petitioner is itemized and analyzed in the Deviation Discussion section of this staff report on page 13. Staff is supportive of all deviations, because it is the opinion of staff that the petitioner has demonstrated that “the elements may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community” in accordance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3 and that the petitioner has demonstrated the deviations are “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations” in accordance with LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h. 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”: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals, 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 12 of 21 May 9, 2017 objectives, and policies of the FLUM and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern (of the abutting properties) is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this staff report. The proposed use would not change the existing land use patterns of the surrounding properties. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The property is currently zoned MPUD and would remain as such. Staff responded to this criteria in the initial rezoning petition by stating the following: The proposed PUD rezone would not create an isolated zoning district because the abutting lands are also zoned PUD. Additionally, the project is required to provide a vehicular interconnection to the adjacent developments. No changes are proposed to the interconnections with this petition. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. This petition does not propose any change to the boundaries of the MPUD. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed MPUD is not anticipated to 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 PUD Ordinance. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed PUDA request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area, provided the project’s stormwater management system is designed to the current 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 13 of 21 May 9, 2017 Cocohatchee River Canal Basin discharge rate of 0.04 cubic foot per second per acre. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage on this project will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). County staff will evaluate the project’s stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at time of SDP and/or PPL. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. It is not anticipated the changes proposed to this MPUD would reduce light or air to the adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. 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 value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The Tree Farm MPUD is currently vacant and staff does not anticipate this amendment serving as a deterrent to its improvement. 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 GMP 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 can be used in accordance with existing z oning; however, the proposed design standards cannot be achieved without amending the MPUD. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. It is staff’s opinion the proposed uses and associated development standards and developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 14 of 21 May 9, 2017 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 for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, 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. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF), and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except as may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by County staff 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. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this amendment will have no impact on public facility adequacy in regard to utilities. 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. Deviation Discussion: This PUD was approved with two deviations pursuant to Ordinance 2011-08. The petitioner is now seeking to add four additional deviations, and those deviations have been directly extracted from the proposed PUD Ordinance, itemized in Exhibit E (see Attachment 1 – Proposed Ordinance). The petitioner’s justification and staff analysis/recommendation for each deviation are listed below. Proposed Deviation #3 (Off-Street Parking) “Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G – Parking Spaces Required for Multi- Family Dwellings, which requires one parking space per residential unit plus 0.75 guest spaces for one-bedroom residential units and 1 guest space for two bedroom and larger units. In the event that Tract C is developed as leased multi-family units, this deviation proposes to establish the 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 15 of 21 May 9, 2017 required number of parking spaces for leased multifamily residential units at 1.65 spaces per one bedroom unit and 1.8 spaces for two bedroom and larger units (inclusive of resident and guest parking spaces).” Petitioner’s Justification: The applicant responded to this request as follows: The LDC standards do not distinguish between apartment and condominium multi-family land uses. Multi-family condominium projects generally have greater occupancy and as such a greater parking demand than rental apartment uses. In the event that the residential portion of the project is developed as a leased apartment development under single ownership, this deviation proposes to allow for a required parking ratio that is more appropriate for the parking demands associated with that use (based on Institute of Transportation Engineers guidelines and a site specific parking analysis of similar uses). Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The above justification references a leased apartment development. Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved for a leased apartment development. Zoning staff is supportive of this deviation, provided that it be applicable only for multi-family dwellings proposed on Tract C (see Recommendation section of this staff report, page 19). In this instance, staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation for a leased apartment development, 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.” Proposed Deviation #4 (Dumpsters and Recycling) “Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.04.G – Dumpsters and Recycling, which requires that multi-family rental units provide dumpsters or a compactor to allow for rental units to have the option for building staff to transport bulk containers from storage areas internal to the buildings to designated areas for pick up by the solid waste and recycling hauler.” Petitioner’s Justification: The applicant responded to this request as follows: In the event that rental units are proposed within the project, the requested deviation would provide flexibility in the type of services provided to residents and the provision of solid waste and recycling pick up. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Public Utilities staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, 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.” 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 16 of 21 May 9, 2017 Proposed Deviation #5 (Width of Right-of-Way) “Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N – Street System Requirements and Appendix B, Typical Street Sections and Right-of-Way Design Standards. The LDC establishes a minimum 60-foot right of way width for local streets. This deviation proposes to reduce the required right-of-way width for local streets to 50 feet. See Typical 50’ ROW Cross Section Exhibit.” Petitioner’s Justification: The applicant responded to this request as follows: The number of lanes and required lane width can be accommodated within the proposed 50-foot rights of way and the reduction in the minimum required width will provide for a more efficient and compact development project. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, 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.” Proposed Deviation #6 (Off-Street Parking Distance) “Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G – Parking Spaces Required for Multifamily Dwellings allows for a reduction of the number of required parking spaces for small- scale recreational facilities within multi-family developments based upon the proximity of the units to the small scale recreational facility. The LDC allows for the required parking at the recreational facilities to be calculated at 35% of the normal requirements in cases where the majority of the multifamily units are located within 300 feet of the recreational facilities. This deviation proposes to increase the specified distance for the reduction of parking requirements for small-scale recreational facilities from 300 to 500 feet.” Petitioner’s Justification: The applicant responded to this request as follows: The proposed project will have a system of connected pathways from the multifamily units to the small scale recreational facilities that will allow for efficient pedestrian access to recreational facilities and will encourage walking within the potential multifamily uses. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Zoning staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, 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.” 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 17 of 21 May 9, 2017 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): For the initial rezoning petition (PUDZ-2009-AR-14425), the applicant held a NIM on December 7, 2009. Five people from the public signed in. A representative from the Naples Pathway Coalition was also in attendance. With respect to issues brought up at the NIM, the staff report dated November 18, 2010 identified the following: 1. It was verified that the project is located on the NW corner rather than what had previously been advertised as the NE corner. 2. One attendee questioned the possibility of a nightclub or bar and expressed interest in having one. Staff note: The proposed amendment contains permitted uses which does include drinking places but does not allow for cabarets. See Exhibit A, page1. 3. Residents expressed concern about the pathway and the developer commitments. They want to be sure the pathway is not removed from the proposal. Robert Duane explained that the canal would be relocated and a 10-foot wide pathway would be made, that 1.6 acres will be dedicated to the County and another bridge would be built to the west. A second NIM was scheduled and duly noticed for December 16, 2010 to address project density and building height; however, no one from the public attended the second meeting, so no presentation was made. For the proposed petition, the applicant conducted a NIM on December 21, 2016 at St. Monica’s Episcopal Church at 7070 Immokalee Road in Naples. The meeting commenced at approximately 5:36 p.m. The NIM meeting minutes are included in Attachment 2 – Application and Support Material. The applicant’s team consisted of Wayne Arnold, Dan Waters, Bruce Layman, Richard Yovanovich, Norman Trebilcock, and Sharon Umpenhour. Mr. Arnold opened the NIM by explaining the intent of the project. An attendee mentioned that he thought the maximum building height of the current ordinance should not be allowed. A question was asked if the buildings would have elevators, to which Mr. Arnold responded he believed they would if the buildings exceeded three stories. An unidentified male, who lived in Esplanade, asked if the extra traffic anticipated by this request was taken into consideration. When asked if a traffic light would be installed, Mr. Arnold answered that he did not think there would be a light at the entrance to the proposed MPUD. He re-iterated this later in the NIM, and a longer discussion ensued about the anticipated traffic movements. Earlier at the NIM, however, Mr. Trebilcock responded to transportation related question by explaining how the proposed changes to the MPUD would reduce traffic intensity by about 30% of what is currently approved. Mr. Arnold and an attendee discussed preserve requirements and the removal of exotic species. The attendee later commented as follows: 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 18 of 21 May 9, 2017 Because we live on the street facing - this is our view and we look across the golf course and we see these beautiful trees that are right here. And so we're worried that these trees are going to get cut down and that's why I asked about exotic vegetation. More long discussion about landscaping ensued with the following statements: Mr. Arnold: Uh-huh. Unidentified Male Voice: And as far as the height, 40 and 50 feet, those trees are pretty tall. So we're hoping that if the trees remain, even if you do build that high, we still will have our view. We don't wish any harm on your development. We're not trying to get against it, but, you know, we have a nice. Mr. Arnold: Sure Unidentified Male Voice: We were told that was a preserve. So can you address that question? Where is this buffer? You showed it on this other map, but where would it be on this? A lot of us -- a lot of us through here live right on this side of the street. Mr. Arnold: It's roughly along part of our northern boundary and on our western boundary. Unidentified Male Voice: That doesn't do us a bit of good. Unidentified Male Voice: Right here. Right here. Unidentified Male Voice: So you're going to cut down all these trees over here? Mr. Arnold: Yes, sir. It would be for the commercial tract in the front. Unidentified Male Voice: So it – Mr. Arnold: That was always the intent (indiscernible). Unidentified Male Voice: We're going to look at golden arches and Wendy's? Mr. Arnold: Well, under the existing PUD that's there today, that was always the intent, that the whole site was not going to be preserved. Unidentified Male Voice: Is there any way that you can avoid that? Mr. Arnold: I would like to say (indiscernible). Unidentified Male Voice: The answer is probably no. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 19 of 21 May 9, 2017 Mr. Arnold: Right. Unidentified Male Voice: So you're going to cut down all these trees. And then what -- there's no requirement for a buffer here? Mr. Arnold: There are buffering requirements for the county. Unidentified Male Voice: So you're going to plant new trees? Mr. Arnold: Yeah, the county requires the minimum buffering standards between all projects. So the vegetation would have to be replanted to at least meet that minimum criteria for buffering. Unidentified Male Voice: And what's -- is there any height – Mr. Arnold: Well, the county has heights. It's certainly not – Unidentified Male Voice: It's not 65 feet. Mr. Arnold: It's not 65 feet. Unidentified Male Voice: So probably 12, 14-foot trees (indiscernible)? Is there any way -- and maybe I'm addressing this to the gentleman from Collier County, if you're going to plant new trees, why go to the expense of cutting down these beautiful tall trees that are giving us some privacy and then having to go to the expense to plant a shorter tree? Can something be worked out? I don't see any disadvantage to the developer. Mr. Arnold: Well, one of the difference, and Dan is probably the guy that can address it in much more detail, but the challenge that we have for a lot of sites is that a lot of fill has to be brought in and the existing vegetation can't be retained where you have to place so much fill material on the site. Do you live in Esplanade? Unidentified Male Voice: Yeah. Mr. Arnold: That was probably one of the hardest fought environmental battles that occurred in Collier County since I've been here, and I know Rich and I both had some involvement in that over the years, but, you know, you have to keep in mind that all of your property that's now developed looked just like that. Unidentified Male Voice: So what I'm hearing is within six months all those trees are going to be gone. Mr. Arnold: A lot of the portion of -- you know, the southerly portion, that's certainly the intent, yeah. Ma'am, you've been very patient. 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie’s Corner MPUD Page 20 of 21 May 9, 2017 When asked if the project was going to federal low-income housing, Mr. Yovanovich responded that it would not be federal low-incoming housing and that it would be market-rate housing. Mr. Arnold discussed off-street parking and how they are requesting a deviation. With respect to building height, an attendee commented that a 65-foot structure would be met with “significant resistance from everybody living in the area.” Mr. Arnold answered more questions about the preserves on the subject property, and stated that there would be a minimum PUD setback of 15 feet for the residential tract and 25 feet on the western periphery of the commercial tract. When discussing building heights and fill for the property, Mr. Arnold inform ed the crowd that the 65- foot building height would be measured from the center line height of the nearest arterial road, which is Immokalee Road. He also stated the County requires a 20-foot wide landscape buffer along Immokalee Road and a ten-foot wide buffer along Esplanade PUD. When Mr. Arnold informed the crowd that a hotel is still allowed, an attendee commented “That would be a totally inappropriate use of that site.” Toward the end of the NIM, Mr. Arnold clarified that it would unlikely that a six-story building would be proposed where the MPUD is restricted to a maximum zoned height of 45 feet. He ended the NIM by clarifying that an assisted living facility is considered the same as group housing. The NIM ended at approximately 6:38 p.m. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report on May 3, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the CCPC forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval, contingent upon the following: 1. Staff recommends approval of Deviation #6, but only to the extent that it is applicable to Tract C and if developed with multi-family dwellings, designed as an apartment complex whereby the individual units are not owner-occupied. The type of land use will be determined at the time of SDP. Attachments: 1) Proposed Ordinance 2) Application and Support Material 3) FLUE Consistency Memorandum 4) Density Map 5) Legal Notifications 6) Emails_Letters from Public 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Staff Report (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Proposed Ordinance (3252 : Addie's Corner) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, FL 34104, 239-252-2400 Page - 1 - of 4 Growth Management Department Zoning Division Comprehensive Planning Section MEMORANDUM To: Eric Johnson, AICP, CFM, Principal Planner Zoning Services Section, Zoning Division From: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section Date: April 25, 2017 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review APPLICATION NUMBER: PUDA-20150001776 Review 5 APPLICATION NAME: Addie’s Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Amendment REQUEST: To amend Addie’s Corner MPUD, approved via Ordinance #11-08, to add a third tract, “Tract C,” to allow up to a maximum of 349 multi-family residential dwelling units (DU’s) and reduce the maximum allowable square feet of commercial and general office development in Tract A from 135,000 to 75,000 square feet. This petition requests 4 additional deviations be added to “List of Requested Deviations from the LDC.” The proposed deviations address parking spaces for multi-family dwelling units, dumpsters and recycling, Right-Of-Way width for local streets, and parking spaces for recreational facilities within multi-family developments. The amended Development Commitments adds owner (or assigns) responsibility for the permitting impacts to wetlands and costs of grading, clearing, and grubbing within the ±1.5-acre Right-Of-Way dedicated to Collier County. The proposed PUD amendment also removes the language referencing the minimum number of preserve area acres required in “V Tract B: Permitted Preserve Area Uses.” The updated Exhibit ‘C’ Master Plan shows a reduction of preserve acres from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed amendment would allow the following uses: Tract A: • Maximum of 75,000 square feet of commercial and general office (Tract A only); • Group housing/retirement community for age 55 and above, at a Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 0.60 • Hotel/motel at a maximum intensity of 26 units per acre. • Note: Preserve area shall not be used in calculating F.A.R. for Group Housing/Retirement Community use or the density for Hotel/Motel 9.A.4 Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Attachment 4 - FLUE Consistency Memorandum (3252 : Addie's Corner) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, FL 34104, 239-252-2400 Page 2 of 4 Tract B: • Preserve Tract C: • Residential - multi-family residential dwelling units (with a maximum of 349 DUs) IF ONLY residential dwelling units are constructed in Tract C OR Group housing/retirement community for age 55 and above, at a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.60 – ONLY IF there are no residential dwelling units constructed in Tract C LOCATION: The subject property is located on the north side of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and the Cocohatchee Canal, approximately 600 feet west of Plateau Road (northern extension of Collier Blvd.), in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property, containing approximately ±23.33 acres, inclusive of ±1.50 acres conveyed to Collier County for future Right-of-Way (ROW), is designated Urban, Urban Commercial District, Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict (#3), as depicted on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. According to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE), “the Mixed-Use Activity Center (MUAC) concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. Mixed- Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. Further, they are generally intended to be developed at a human scale, to be pedestrian-oriented, and to be interconnected with abutting projects – whether commercial or residential. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged.” Mixed-Use Activity Centers are intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential uses, including commercial development such as the uses approved with this Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). Eligible land uses within the Mixed-Use Activity Center include the full array of commercial uses, residential uses, institutional uses, and hotel/motel uses at a density consistent with the Land Development Code. Addie’s Corner MPUD is entirely located within the Activity Center #3. The Future Land Use Element MUAC factors (for commercial use) were reviewed by Comprehensive Planning staff at the time of the original PUD rezone submission in 2010. Since this PUD amendment petition is reducing the maximum square footage of commercial (75,000 sq. ft. instead of the previously approved 135,000 sq. ft.), Staff is of the opinion that this consistency review analysis does not need to re- consider the factors that were previously analyzed with the original Addie’s Corner PUD (Ordinance #2011- 08) petition. The MUAC also provides that: “Mixed-use developments ‒ whether consisting of residential units located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building ‒ are allowed and encouraged within Mixed Use Activity Centers. Density for such a project is calculated based upon the gross project acreage within the Activity Center. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed-Use Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and is not within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the eligible density is sixteen dwelling units per acre.” The petition is requesting 349 multi-family dwelling units. The table below shows the calculations for FLUE density eligibility. The calculation is based on acreage that is exclusive of the +1.50 total acres of ROW that was conveyed to Collier County and no longer owned by petitioner (23.33 – 1.50 = 21.83 acres). 9.A.4 Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Attachment 4 - FLUE Consistency Memorandum (3252 : Addie's Corner) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, FL 34104, 239-252-2400 Page 3 of 4 Table: FLUE Eligible Density without ROW Acreage FLUM Designation Acres +/- Total Eligible Density Units/Acre Eligible Total Dwelling Units Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict without ±1.50 acres of ROW conveyed 21.83 16 349.28 = 349 Select FLUE Policies are given below, followed with [bracketed staff analysis]. FLUE Policy 5.4 “New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended).” [It is the responsibility of the Zoning and Land Development Review staff, as part of their review of the petition in its entirety, to perform the compatibility analysis. Note that the Mixed-Use Activity Centers are to be developed on a human-scale with a pedestrian-orientation.] FLUE 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, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable.” FLUE Policy 7.1 “The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code.” [Addie’s Corner Exhibit ‘C’ MPUD Master Plan indicates one (1) direct access connecting the subject property with Immokalee Road to the south, identified as a principal arterial roadway in the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan.] FLUE Policy 7.2 “The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals.” [Addie’s Corner – Exhibit ‘C’ MPUD Master Plan shows two internal accesses – one from the residential/group housing (Tract ‘C’) and one from the commercial (Tract ‘A’) development. Both of these internal accesses connect to the development’s internal drive that will run from the southwestern boundary of the subject site and Immokalee Road and continue along the western/northern boundary of Tract ‘A’. These internal accesses will allow Addie’s Corner residents to travel to the MPUD’s commercial tract without having to utilize nearby collector and arterial roads.] FLUE Policy 7.3 “All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or 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. [Addie’s Corner MPUD Exhibit ‘C’ - Master Plan indicates a future shared access interconnection with Tree Farm Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD), located to the 9.A.4 Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Attachment 4 - FLUE Consistency Memorandum (3252 : Addie's Corner) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, FL 34104, 239-252-2400 Page 4 of 4 east, and a potential shared access interconnection to the west with Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD, formerly known as Mirasol PUD. These interconnections are described in ‘Development Commitments Specific to the Project’ - #2 in Exhibit ‘F’. As shown on the existing Exhibit ‘C’ Master Plan, the Tract ‘B’ Preserve and the Water Management Area on the northern portion of the site precludes interconnection to the north. Since the PUD to the north is the same as to the west of Addie’s Corner, and staff is recommending an interconnection to the west, staff is of the opinion that it is not necessary to include a second interconnection to the north to Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples RPUD.] FLUE Policy 7.4 “The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types.” [Common open spaces are shown on Addie’s Corner Exhibit ‘C’ - MPUD Master Plan with the Tract ‘B’ Preserve Area and the Amenity Area. Civic uses are allowed per Exhibit ‘A’, List of Permitted Uses, item no. 23. Exhibit F: ‘Development Commitments Specific to the Project’ #4 agrees to provide at no cost to the County a 12-foot multi-use pathway along the north side of the future location of the Cocohatchee Canal within property owned by Collier County, which shall connect to the pathway to the west. No sidewalk deviations were requested; therefore, the PUD is subject to LDC requirements for sidewalks.] CONCLUSION Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed Planned Unit Development Amendment may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: Michael Bosi, AICP, Director, Zoning Division David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section Raymond Bellows, Planning Manager, Zoning Services Section PUDA-PL2015-1776 Addie's Corner MPUD R5.docx 9.A.4 Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Attachment 4 - FLUE Consistency Memorandum (3252 : Addie's Corner) p 0 300 600 900150Feet Zoning: PUD Zoning: RPUD Zoning: MPUD Zoning: PUD Esplanade BLVDPlateau RDBellaire Bay DR Wea the red S ton e DR Quartz LNIn digo Lak es D R Toscana WAY Burnt Pine DRAmour CTSage AVE Cortona WAY P e b b le b ro o k e D R Bellano CT Savannah DR Gervais CIRCavano STKey Royal CIR Broken Back R D Breakwater DR Sweet Bay LNS p id e r L ily L N Skipping Stone LNSi l k O a k LNKey Royal LNLa ur e l L ak e s W AY Backwater CTWaterview PTCanoe PTSki ppers PTFly Caster PTV o l t e r r a C T Weathervane PTCrystal CT Big Acorn CIR Hollow Brook CIR Tu s ca ny Co ve DR Zoning: P UD Zoning: RPUD Zoning: P UD Zoning: A Zoning: A Zoning: A A GROSS DE NS ITY UNIT S PER AC RE (UP A) FO R A DDIE'S COR NER MPUD A ND SU RR O UN DIN G PR O PER TIES ³ SUB JE CT PROPE RT Y:ADDI E'S CORNER M PU D Density:1 per 5 a c. RichlandDensity:3.1 Tuscany CoveDensity:4.8 Cr ystal Lak eDensity:3.0 7 Esplanade Golf and Country Club of NaplesDensity:0.74 Tr ee FarmDensity:7 He ritage Ba yDensity:1.3 Bent Cree kPreserv eDensity:3.26 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Attachment 5 - Density Map (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment 6 - Items Collected at CCPC (3252 : Addie's Corner) Published DailyNaples, FL 34110 Afﬁ davit of PublicationState of FloridaCounties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Daniel McDermott who on oath says that he serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier Coun-ty, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed. Afﬁ ant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post ofﬁ ce in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of one year next pre-ceding the ﬁ rst publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and afﬁ ant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.___________________________________________________________Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ BCC/ZONING DEPARTMENT 1579090 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEA 45-176563 Pub Dates April 28, 2017 _______________________________________ (Signature of affi ant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This May 02, 2017 _______________________________________ (Signature of affi ant) _______________________________________ (Signature of affi ant) Sworn to and subscribed before me This May 02, 2017 _______________________________________ (Signature of affi ant) 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) 10A Friday, April 28, 2017 Naples Daily News + NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M.,on May 18th,2017,in the Board of County Commissioners meeting room,third floor,Collier Government Center,3299 East Ta miami Tr ail,Naples FL.,to consider: AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2011-08,THE ADDIE’S CORNER MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,TO ALLOW 349 MULTI- FA MILY DW ELLING UNITS OR GROUP HOUSING/RETIREMENT USES IN TRACT C AS SHOWN ON THE MASTER PLAN AND 75,000 SQUA RE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND GROUP HOUSING/RETIREMENT COMMUNITY USES IN TRACT A AS SHOWN ON THE MASTER PLAN;PROV IDING FOR AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN;BY PROV IDING FOR REVISED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS;AND BY PROV IDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 23.33+/-ACRES AND IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE INTERSECTION OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846)AND COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951),IN SECTION 22,TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA.(PL20150001776) All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard.Copies of the proposed ORDINANCE will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk’s Office,Fo urth Floor,Collier County Government Center,3299 East Ta miami Trail,Suite #401,Naples,FL,one week prior to the scheduled hearing.Wr itten comments must be filed with the Zoning Division,Zoning Services Section,prior to May 18th,2017. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will need a record of that proceeding,and for such purpose he 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. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the provision of certain assistance.Please contact the Collier County Fa cilities Management Division,located at 3335 Ta miami Trail East,Suite #101,Naples,FL 34112-5356, (239)252-8380,at least two days prior to the meeting.Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MARK STRAIN,CHAIRMAN April 28,2017 ND-1579090LoganBLVDNI-75 ImmokaleeRD CollierBLVD. PROJECT LOCATION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) at 9:00 A.M.on May 18,2017,in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room,Third Floor,Collier Government Center,3299 East Ta miami Trail,Naples FL.,to consider: A RESOLUTION AMENDING DEVELOPMENT ORDER 85-5,AS AMENDED,THE PINE AIR LAKES DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT,PROV IDING FOR SECTION ONE:EXTENSION OF BUILD OUT DATE AND EXPIRATION DATE;SECTION TWO: FINDINGS OF FACT;SECTION THREE:CONCLUSIONS OF LAW;SECTION FOUR: EFFECT OF PREVIOUSLY ISSUED DEVELOPMENT ORDER,TRANSMITTAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY;AND PROV IDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF AIRPORT-PULLING ROAD AND NAPLES BOULEVARD IN SECTION 11,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 25 EAST IN COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA.[PL20160002736] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard.Copies of the proposed RESOLUTION will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk’s Office,Fo urth Floor,Collier County Government Center,3299 East Ta miami Trail,Suite #401,Naples,FL,one we ek prior to the scheduled hearing.Written comments must be filed with the Zoning Division,Zoning Services Section,prior to May 18th,2017. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will need a record of that proceeding,and for such purpose he 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. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled,at no cost to you,to the provision of certain assistance.Please contact the Collier County Fa cilities Management Division,located at 3335 Ta miami Trail East,Suite #101,Naples,FL 34112-5356, (239)252-8380,at least two days prior to the meeting.Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MARK STRAIN,CHAIRMAN April 28,2017 ND-1579610GOODLETTE-FRANKRDNTAMIAMITRLNPINE RIDGERD VA NDERBILTBEACH RD AIRPORTPULLINGRDNLOGANBLVDSLIVINGSTONRDI75. PROJECT LOCATION what happened.” Hagmann saw a Chrysler Sebring spin out during a heavy rainstorm and hit the guardrail. She stopped to render aid and let the driver, Lauren Richardson of Ontario, California, sit in her GMC Arcadia. Every- thing was fine until she went to retrieve a blanket from her trunk. A massage thera- pist, Hagmann carries blankets. As she was unfolding a blanket, she said she first heard and then felt the secondary crash. The FHP report said Hagmann was standing between her Arcadia and Richard- son’s car when a Mercedes hit the Sebring, which was still blocking part of I-75 near the Luckett Road exit. “I had looked, I remember my mom say- ing, ‘Don’t stand between cars at a crash,’ ” she said. “I thought ‘is this a joke’ and then excruciating pain and then no pain.” Her next memory was lying on the grass looking up at EMTs. “Don’t look at your legs,” she said the EMTs told her. And, Hagmann said, she heard the voice of her grandmother, who died last year, telling her to relax and be calm. She said she focused on the face of an EMT who was hovering over her, looking him in the eyes and giving him an order: “I have kids, and I’m going home. I’m not dy- ing tonight. I’m going home.” That determined promise was the last thing she remembers, she said, before she awoke in the hospital. The days since have been a kind of crazy hodgepodge of medical care, family and friends tending to her, thoughts of what happened and what’s to come. It hasn’t all been easy. Far from it. She was in good spirits while giving an interview to a television news crew Wednesday, but the ensuing night was not pleasant and her thoughts turned to her in- juries. With her spouse, Lindsey Johns, holding tight to her right hand, Hagmann recount- ed: “Last night,” she said she was thinking, “why me, why do I have to hurt like this?” Her children, two of her own and three others she has “adopted” from a bad situa- tion, only know she has had surgery and is in the hospital. She will share with them what happened when she, and they, are ready. Any talk of insurance claims, lawyers and the like will come later, Hagmann and Johns said. “There’s a lot of stuff we have to wait for,” Johns said. “We will get through this just fine.” Several stuffed animals lay at the end of her hospital bed, including “Bob,” also known as “Teddy from Hawaii,” a stuffed bear Johns got from a pal in the island state. Hagmann said there has been some talk of the recovery process, but it is still too early. That process may hamper a planned trip she and a friend were to take to England in July. “It’s just somewhere we wanted to go,” she said. But, despite still wanting to go on the current timetable, rehab is going to be the deciding factor even if she could possi- bly go. “I don’t want to be a burden,” she insist- ed. Meanwhile, disbelief is her reaction at the response to her plight, some of it from strangers. “It is unbelievable,” she said. “I still can’t believe the things people are saying and do- ing.” Comments calling her a hero and laud- ing her actions on Sunday morning are odd to her. “Who is this person they are talking about,” she said. “I didn’t do it for attention. Anyone should do it.” She marvels at the help, from an offer of free prosthetics from a Lee County ortho- pedics company to checks and cash from complete strangers. Two gofundme.com sites have collected more than $30,000, and the family opened a Wells Fargo account in her name. At her North Fort Myers home there have been ramps built in anticipation of her needs, Johns said. “I never once for a second thought any- thing like this would happen,” Hagmann said. “That an entire town or county would band together to help. This is emotional, but a good emotional.” Hagmann credited Johns, her spouse of two years, for helping through the first few days following the crash. “She is an incredible person,” she said, looking at Johns holding her hand. “You for- get there are people who support you. Even if you don’t see them, they are there. She is my strength when I am weak.” Johns boasted about Hagmann’s strength: “She’s gonna walk out of rehab, she’s not going to stop, she’ll be fine. Just be- cause of who she is.” Hagmann has known Johns since their North Fort Myers High School days. She smiled at the thought and said she sort of had a crush on her spouse even then. She added that Johns and a fellow North Fort Myers high student whom she consid- ers her best friend are among a tight group of former teen pals. “Facebook helps,” Hagmann said. Proof of that, she said, came from one fellow Red Knight who sent her flowers when he heard online about the crash and said he always looked up to her. Her father, Steven Berkowitz, said his daughter was intolerable of people being picked on in high school and was known for defending weaker students. “I just don’t like bullies,” she laughed. That attitude has been her guidepost and was what was at play when she stopped at the crash Sunday. “I just can’t see a need and walk away,” she said. Survivor Continued from Page 5A The former site director of one of Hen- dry County’s largest primate farms has filed a federal whistleblower lawsuit against the facility. In the suit, veterinarian Kelly Hopper of Fort Denaud alleges she was fired for re- porting wrongdoing at the Mannheimer Foundation’s rural Haman Ranch, between LaBelle and Clewiston. Hopper told Florida regulators the foundation claimed members of its medi- cal staff, including the executive director’s wife, were licensed veterinarians when they weren’t, and then used that misinfor- mation to get lucrative federal grants. Hopper complained about chronic time card violations as well, and also refused to fire a pregnant worker the company want- ed to force out to avoid paying family leave, she said. When the state sent Mannheimer a let- ter ordering it to stop misrepresenting em- ployees as state licensed vets with medical degrees from U.S. veterinary schools, it neglected to remove Hopper’s name. Hop- per was called into a meeting and berated, then fired a few days later. Joseph Wagner, Mannheimer’s execu- tive director, declined to comment on the suit when reached by phone, saying he hadn’t yet received it, “so I think that it’s probably best not to discuss the issues at hand at this time.” Granted tax-exempt status in 1969, the foundation was started by chemist Hans Mannhemier, who invented no-tear baby shampoo, as a way to care for his hundreds of pet chimpanzees and small monkeys. Since Mannheimer’s death in 1973, the trustees transformed the organization into a money-making operation that, among other things, breeds primates for biomedi- cal research, while maintaining its non- profit, tax-exempt status. It has two locations: a headquarters in Homestead and the 200-acre Haman Ranch, which housed 2,302 macaque mon- keys last September, the last month for which USDA inspection records are avail- able. In 2015, the last year for which its IRS returns are on file, it reported paying Wag- ner $218,000 annually and having assets of $39.6 million. In a 2015 letter to Hendry County fol- lowing a zoning complaint, Wagner wrote his facility does no research, testing or ex- periments on primates, nor does it import them. “We provide macaques for the devel- opment of new medical treatments aimed at improved human health,” he wrote. Yet Hopper said that two veterinarians working for Mannheimer, Krisha Rivas- Wagner – the wife of the CEO – and Vittorio Palmieri, who were both trained in Venezu- ela, were holding themselves out as clinical veterinarians and doctors of veterinary medicine. Rivas-Wagner and Palmieri could not be reached for comment. A foreign-trained veterinarian can be- come licensed in Florida but must meet li- cense requirements, which include testing. “It’s a lot of work, which is why some peo- ple don’t bother doing it,” Hopper said. In 2015-16, the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation got 27 complaints about unlicensed veterinari- ans and issued 10 cease-and-desist notices. Hopper’s attorney, Benjamin Yormak of Bonita Springs, said reporting wrongdoing to state regulators is a “statutorily protect- ed activity” and that an employer can’t re- taliate against an employee for doing it. “It may be uncomfortable to keep someone employed, but the law protects the person. You can only imagine what would happen to complaints of wrongdoing if employers could fire you and there was nothing you could do about it.” Federal suit filed against Hendry monkey farm Haman Ranch AMY BENNETT WILLIAMS AND MELANIE PAYNE USA TODAY NETWORK - FLORIDA 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) COLLIER COUNTY Growth Management Department April 28, 2017 Dear Property Owner: This is to advise you that because you may have interest in the proceedings or you own property located within 500 feet (urban areas) or 1,000 feet (rural areas) of the following described property, that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning Commission at 9:00 A.M., on May 18, 2017, in the Board of County Commissioners meeting room, third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL., to consider: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, amending Ordinance Number 2011-08, the Addie’s Corner Mixed Use Planned Unit Development, to allow 349 multi-family dwelling units or Group Housing/Retirement uses in Tract C as shown on the Master Plan and 75,000 square feet of gross floor area of commercial development and Group Housing/Retirement Community uses in Tract A as shown on the Master Plan; providing for amendment to the Master Plan; by providing for revised development standards; and by providing an effective date. The subject property consists of 23.33+/- acres and is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (PL20150001776) You are invited to appear and be heard at the public hearing. You may also submit your comments in writing. 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 COUNTY STA FF MEMBER NOTED BELOW, 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 Collier County Planning Commission 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. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. P lease contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. This petition, and other pertinent information related to this petition, is kept on file and may be reviewed at the Growth Management Department building located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Flor ida 34104. Please contact the staff member noted below at (239)-252-2931 to set up an appointment if you wish to review the file. Sincerely, Eric Johnson Eric Johnson, Principal Planner EricJohnson@colliergov.net 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) Collier BLVDImmokalee RD IMMOKALEE ROAD BURNT PINE DRIVE HOLLOW BROOK CIR DRIVEPEBBLEBROOKEBROKEN BACK ROADCOLLIER BOULEVARDBELLAIRE BAY DRIVEESPLANA DE BOULEVARD ESPLANADE BOULEVARDAMOUR COURTCAVANO STREET CAVANO STREET ESPLANADE BOULEVARDAMOUR COURTTRACT R-2 TRACT R-1 TRACT R-1 2 1 TRACT R TRACT R3TRACT 8 TR C-2TRACT C-6PARCEL L-1 NOTTINGHAM AT PEBBLEBROOKELAKES CONDO PARCEL 2 TRACT 8TR C-5 TRACT 4TRACT 1 TRACT R-1TR FTRACTL-2 TRACT G TRACT 2 9 68 27 27.2 TRACT R1 TRACT L3TRACT L5 TRACT L4 TRACT L2TRACT O6TR O4TRACT O1TRACT O1TRACT O1TRACT O1 TRACT L1 TRACT GC1 TRACT S TRACT C TRACT R2 TRACT R2TRACT GC1 TRACT R2 TRACT GC1 TRACT R2TRACT R1X11X10 X70 X23 X26 À1 À1 À2 À69À79À81À78À80À75À76À77 À66 À63À74À71À67À64À72À65À70À73À68 À2 À1 À1 À1 À46À27À25À55À61À59À26À57À60À56À62À58 À45À28À24 À29 À44 À52À54 À47À51À49À53À50À48À23À30 À43 À11 À42À31 À3 À2À10À32À41À39À33À37À40À36À35À38À34 À1À9 À8 À1 À7 À6 À1 À5 À2 À4 À3 À1 À1À1À1À2À2À3À4 À1 À3 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1 À1À2 À3À4À5À6À7 À8À9À10À11 À12 À24 À25 À26 À27 À28 À29 À30 À31 À35 À36 À37 À38 À39 À40 À41 À42 À43 À44 À45 À46 À47 À48 À49 À50 À51 À52 À53 À54 À55 À56 À57 À58 À59 À60 À61 À62 À63 À64À65À66 X27.3 DRI PUD RPUD PUD MPUD A MPUD TREEFARM ESPLANADE GOLFAND COUNTRYCLUB OF NAPLES HERITAGEBAY RICHLAND ADDIE'SCORNER Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2015-1776 PROJEC TLOCATION SITELOCATION ¹ Docu ment Path: M:\GIS_Requests\2016\06-June\0 6-17-2016 PL 201500017 76\workspace\site-location.mxd 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.8 Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Attachment 8 - Legal Notifications (3252 : Addie's Corner) 9.A.9 Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Legal Ad - Adenda ID # 3252 (3252 : Addie's Corner) Prepared May 8, 2017 Addie’s Corner MPUD (PL20150001776) Application and Supporting Documents May 18, 2017 CCPC Hearing PDF Page 1 of 264 PDF Page 2 of 264 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 June 13, 2016 Mr. Eric Johnson Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Division/ Planning and Regulation Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Collier County Application for Public Hearing, Addie’s Corner MPUD – PL20150001776 Dear Mr. Johnson: Attached, please find copies of a Collier County application for Public Hearing for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment for property located near the northwest quadrant of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard. This PUD amendment proposes to add an optional development plan that would permit up to 350 multi-family residential dwelling units and up to 75,000 square feet of commercial development. This development plan would be an option to the currently authorized plan, which permits, 135,000 square feet of commercial uses, hotel, and senior housing uses. The PUD document has been revised to reflect the optional development scheme and an additional conceptual PUD Master Plan is included. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP c: David Genson Richard D. Yovanovich GradyMinor File PDF Page 3 of 264 PDF Page 4 of 264 ! "# $ %& ' ( ) )*+,(-. .,/0 12 ) )*' -. ., 3 ) #4(+5 6 $ "78 %$' '*. .,%9'' PDF Page 5 of 264 /:,& , PDF Page 6 of 264 ! PDF Page 7 of 264 2:;;( 2:;;( ; . + ''<=< $ )> 2;( 8# #6 / /:,& , ##7 ## "# " ! ?*8 , 0< 9''+ 5<. PDF Page 8 of 264 / 9 9+;(+ +$, 898 +, ;(, , ''+ '' @'2;(; .'' / 9 9+;(+ &&&2 ) # &&&( " / 9 < <&9 !! ' +A6 4 = $5 !"!5 (.6< " PDF Page 9 of 264 PDF Page 10 of 264 PDF Page 11 of 264 #B #B #B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B #B #B #B #B PDF Page 12 of 264 #B B PDF Page 13 of 264 PDF Page 14 of 264 Addie’s Corner MPUD Exhibit 2 Legal Description The North one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (I/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; and The South one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (114) of the Southeast one-quarter (I/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; excepting the South 100 feet thereof; and The East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the Southwest one quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, excepting the south 100' thereof. PDF Page 15 of 264 Addie’s Corner MPUD Exhibit 3 Evaluation Criteria March 27, 2017 Page 1 of 3 Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative Code, staff’s analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission’s recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria. Narrative Statement Describing Request The Addie’s Corner MPUD is a previously approved PUD, which authorizes up to 135,000 square feet of commercial development and/or a retirement community/group housing and/or a 26 unit hotel/motel land uses on 23.33± acres. The property owner is proposing to amend the MPUD to revise the development plan, which would authorize a maximum of 349 dwelling units and up to 75,000 square feet of commercial uses, which is consistent with the densities permitted for Activity Centers under the Collier County Growth Management Plan. No modifications have been proposed to the commercial, retirement community/group housing or hotel/motel land uses, which were previously approved. The MPUD document has been modified in strikethrough and underline format to add residential dwelling units within the MPUD and residential development standards have been proposed for each residential dwelling unit type proposed. A conceptual PUD master plan has been prepared to reflect the addition of the residential uses and reduced commercial area within the MPUD. The master plan has also been amended to reflect a revised native vegetation preservation area, which has been based on recent vegetative mapping of the site. 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. Addie’s Corner MPUD lies within Activity Center #3. All infrastructure is in place to support the proposed commercial and residential dwellings. The project is adjacent to residential development to the west, therefore the addition of the residential option is consistent and compatible with the nearby development pattern. 2.Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. The applicant is the owner of three of the four parcels that make up the 23.33± acre MPUD. The fourth parcel is owned by Collier County and is intended to be developed with the relocation of the Cocohatchee Canal as part of the Collier Boulevard/Immokalee PDF Page 16 of 264 Addie’s Corner MPUD Exhibit 3 Evaluation Criteria March 27, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Road improvement project. No changes are being proposed for the parcel owned by Collier County. 3.Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. (This is to include identifying what Sub-district, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that Sub-district, policy or other provision.) Addie’s Corner MPUD is located in the Urban District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict of the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The Mixed Use Activity Center permits residential development at a maximum of 16 dwelling units per acre. The 349 units requested represents a gross density of 16 dwelling units per acre and is consistent with density permissible in a Mixed Use Activity Center. According to the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict of the Future Land Use Element, a mixed-use project, including freestanding commercial, are allowed. The description further states that the density is calculated based on the gross project acreage within the Activity Center. The entire MPUD is located within the Activity Center #3 boundary and therefore all acreage is eligible for calculation of the maximum permissible density. The maximum eligible density is as follows: Maximum density = 21.83 ac x 16 du/ac = 349.28 units Interconnections are provided to properties located east of the subject site, which furthers FLUE Objective 7 and implementing policies, which encourage interconnections between parcels where feasible. The interconnection shown to the west on the prior plan has been removed. An interconnection at this location is not feasible or necessary as the property has been developed as a gated community. 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. Properties located immediately to the north and west are under development and part of the Esplanade Golf and Country Club RPUD. To the south lies the Cocohatchee Canal and Immokalee Road. Property to the east is the Tree Farm MPUD, which is a mixed use PUD and is currently undeveloped. Access to the subject site will be via a bridge access on Immokalee Road with potential interconnection through the Tree Farm MPUD. Residential development standards have been established which insure compatibility of the proposed residential dwellings with surrounding properties. Additionally, native PDF Page 17 of 264 Addie’s Corner MPUD Exhibit 3 Evaluation Criteria March 27, 2017 Page 3 of 3 vegetation preservation areas have been established, which also serve as appropriate project buffers. 5.The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. Usable open space will be provided within the MPUD as required by the LDC for the commercial or residential development options. Native preservation areas are provided consistent with Section 3.05 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 project is subject to concurrency and adequate infrastructure must be in place to support future development on the site. There are no known capacity issues that will impact this project. 7.The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Addie’s Corner MPUD is an existing MPUD which is surrounded by zoned, developed and undeveloped land. Expansion of the MPUD boundary is not proposed. 8.Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. Addie’s Corner MPUD was originally approved April 12, 2011 by Ordinance Number 2011- 08. The proposed MPUD includes uses and development standards appropriate for the site and consistent with the policies expressed in the Growth Management Plan. Deviations are proposed in support of the development plan. PDF Page 18 of 264 PDF Page 19 of 264 PDF Page 20 of 264 PDF Page 21 of 264 PDF Page 22 of 264 PDF Page 23 of 264 PDF Page 24 of 264 PDF Page 25 of 264 PDF Page 26 of 264 PDF Page 27 of 264 PDF Page 28 of 264 PDF Page 29 of 264 K>>/ZKhEdz'KsZEDEd 'ZKtd,DE'DEdWZdDEd ǁǁǁ͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚ ϮϴϬϬEKZd,,KZ^^,KZ/s EW>^͕&>KZ/ϯϰϭϬϰ ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϮϰϬϬ&y ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϱϳϮϰ ADDRESSING CHECKLIST 3OHDVHFRPSOHWHWKHIROORZLQJDQGHPDLOWR*0'B$GGUHVVLQJ#FROOLHUJRYQHWRUID[WRWKH2SHUDWLRQV'LYLVLRQ DWRUVXEPLWLQSHUVRQWRWKH$GGUHVVLQJ6HFWLRQDWWKHDERYHDGGUHVV)RUPPXVWEHVLJQHGE\ $GGUHVVLQJSHUVRQQHOSULRUWRSUHDSSOLFDWLRQPHHWLQJplease allow 3 days for processing. 1RW DOO LWHPV ZLOO DSSO\ WR HYHU\ SURMHFW ,WHPV LQbold type DUH UHTXLUHGFOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED.)RUPVROGHUWKDQPRQWKVZLOOUHTXLUHDGGLWLRQDOUHYLHZDQGDSSURYDOE\WKH$GGUHVVLQJ6HFWLRQ PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) %/%ODVWLQJ3HUPLW %'%RDW'RFN([WHQVLRQ &DUQLYDO&LUFXV3HUPLW &8&RQGLWLRQDO8VH (;3([FDYDWLRQ3HUPLW )3)LQDO3ODW //$/RW/LQH$GMXVWPHQW 31&3URMHFW1DPH&KDQJH 33/3ODQV 3ODW5HYLHZ 3633UHOLPLQDU\6XEGLYLVLRQ3ODW 38'5H]RQH 5=6WDQGDUG5H]RQH 6'36LWH'HYHORSPHQW3ODQ 6'3$6'3$PHQGPHQW 6'3,,QVXEVWDQWLDO&KDQJHWR6'3 6,36LWH,PSURYHPHQW3ODQ 6,3,,QVXEVWDQWLDO&KDQJHWR6,3 6156WUHHW1DPH&KDQJH 61&6WUHHW1DPH&KDQJH±8QSODWWHG 7'57UDQVIHURI'HYHORSPHQW5LJKWV 9$9DULDQFH 9539HJHWDWLRQ5HPRYDO3HUPLW 956)39HJHWDWLRQ5HPRYDO 6LWH)LOO3HUPLW 27+(5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION RIVXEMHFWSURSHUW\RUSURSHUWLHV(copy of lengthy description may be attached) FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s)RIDERYH(attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) 675((7$''5(66RU$''5(66(6(as applicable, if already assigned) 352326('675((71$0(6(if applicable) 6,7('(9(/230(173/$1180%(5(for existing projects/sites only) ͳ LOCATION MAP PXVWEHDWWDFKHGVKRZLQJH[DFWORFDWLRQRISURMHFWVLWHLQUHODWLRQWRQHDUHVWSXEOLFURDGULJKW RIZD\ 352326('352-(&71$0((if applicable) 6'3RU$5RU3/ 6859(<FRS\QHHGHGRQO\IRUXQSODWWHGSURSHUWLHV &855(17352-(&71$0((if applicable) ■PUD Amendment See attached Exhibit D - Legal Description 00188200007, 00188360002, 00190040802 and 00190041500 N/A Addie's Corner PDF Page 30 of 264 K>>/ZKhEdz'KsZEDEd 'ZKtd,DE'DEdWZdDEd ǁǁǁ͘ĐŽůůŝĞƌŐŽǀ͘ŶĞƚ ϮϴϬϬEKZd,,KZ^^,KZ/s EW>^͕&>KZ/ϯϰϭϬϰ ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϮϰϬϬ&y ;ϮϯϵͿϮϱϮͲϱϳϮϰ 3OHDVH5HWXUQ$SSURYHG&KHFNOLVW%\(PDLO3HUVRQDOO\SLFNHGXS ASSOLFDQW1DPH 6LJQDWXUHRQ$GGUHVVLQJ&KHFNOLVWGRHVQRWFRQVWLWXWH3URMHFWDQGRU6WUHHW1DPH DSSURYDODQGLVVXEMHFWWRIXUWKHUUHYLHZE\WKH2SHUDWLRQV'LYLVLRQ FOR STAFF USE ONLY FROLR Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number )ROLR1XPEHU )ROLR1XPEHU Approved by: Date: Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED ʹ )D[ (PDLO)D[3KRQH 3URMHFWRUGHYHORSPHQWQDPHVSURSRVHGIRURUDOUHDG\DSSHDULQJLQFRQGRPLQLXPGRFXPHQWVLIDSSOLFDWLRQ LQGLFDWHZKHWKHUSURSRVHGRUH[LVWLQJ 00188200007 00188360002 00190040802 00190041500 8-6-2015by: : Addie's Corner PUD Ordinance 2011-08 ■ Sharon Umpenhour 947-1144 sumpenhour@gradyminor.com PDF Page 31 of 264 PDF Page 32 of 264 PDF Page 33 of 264 PDF Page 34 of 264 PDF Page 35 of 264 PDF Page 36 of 264 PDF Page 37 of 264 PDF Page 38 of 264 PDF Page 39 of 264 PDF Page 40 of 264 PDF Page 41 of 264 Certificate of Authorization #LB7866 •• www.stantec.comPhone 239-649-4040••Fax 239-643-57163200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200, Naples, FL 34105Digitally signed by Lance T Miller, PSM LS#5627 DN: cn=Lance T Miller, PSM LS#5627, o=Stantec Consulting Services Inc, ou=Digitally signed and sealed using a SHA-1 authentication code; and, Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the SHA-1 authentication code must be verified on any electronic copies., email=lance.miller@stantec.com, c=US Date: 2016.10.20 10:27:49 -04'00'PDF Page 42 of 264 Certificate of Authorization #LB7866 •• www.stantec.comPhone 239-649-4040••Fax 239-643-57163200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200, Naples, FL 34105Digitally signed by Lance T Miller, PSM LS#5627 DN: cn=Lance T Miller, PSM LS#5627, o=Stantec Consulting Services Inc, ou=Digitally signed and sealed using a SHA-1 authentication code; and, Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the SHA-1 authentication code must be verified on any electronic copies., email=lance.miller@stantec.com, c=US Date: 2016.10.20 10:28:07 -04'00'PDF Page 43 of 264 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): _______________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________ City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: ______________________ E-Mail Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ______________________________________________ City: _________________ State: ________ ZIP: _________ PROPERTY INFORMATION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: __________________________ d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): _________________________ e. Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: __________________________ d. Private System (Well) Total Population to be Served: ________________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water-Peak: _________ Average Daily: __________ B. Sewer-Peak: _________ Average Daily: __________ If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________________ 4/15/2015 Page 8 of 16 Creekside West, Inc. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples FL 34105 239.403.6804 dgenson@barroncollier.com Not available 22 48S 26E Please see Exhibit 2 attached 00188200007, 00188360002 and 00190040802 X X 75,000 sf commercial / 349 dwelling units 172,900 133,000 123,500 95,000 PDF Page 44 of 264 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Collier County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an agreement that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Statement of Availability Capacity from other Providers: Unless waived or otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. 4/15/2015 Page 9 of 16 N/A PDF Page 45 of 264 Addie’s Corner MPUD Exhibit 2 Legal Description The North one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (I/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; and The South one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (114) of the Southeast one-quarter (I/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; excepting the South 100 feet thereof; and The East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the Southwest one quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, excepting the south 100' thereof. PDF Page 46 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER COLLIER COUNTY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA PREPARED BY: COLLIER ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 MAY 2016 REVISED AUGUST 2016 REVISED DECEMBER 2016 BRUCE LAYMAN, CE, PWS PDF Page 47 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1. Vegetation Associations I FLUCCS Mapping ....................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Jurisdictional Wetlands .............................................................................................................................................. 3 1.3. Listed Plant and Animal Species .............................................................................................................................. 4 A. Survey Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 4 B. Listed Plant Species ................................................................................................................................................. 4 C. Listed Wildlife Species ............................................................................................................................................ 5 1.4. Soils .............................................................................................................................................................................. 6 1.5. Historical and Archaeological Resources .................................................................................................................... 7 2. PROPOSED CONDITIONS .................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1. Proposed Project ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 3. PROJECT IMPACTS ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1. Impacts to Wetlands & Other Surface Waters ........................................................................................................ 8 3.2. Impacts to Water Quality ......................................................................................................................................... 9 3.3. Impacts to Wetland Hydrology and Hydroperiod .................................................................................................. 9 3.4. Impacts to Listed Species ......................................................................................................................................... 9 3.5. Impacts to Historical and Archaeological Resources ............................................................................................... 10 TABLES Table 1 - Listed Species Survey Parameters ................................................................................................................... 4 Table 2 - Soils ................................................................................................................................................................. 6 Table 3 - Impacts to Wetlands and Other Surface Waters .......................................................................................... 9 APPENDICES Appendix 1 - FLUCCS Map Appendix 2 - FLUCCS Descriptions Appendix 3 - Soils Map Appendix 4 - Quad Map Appendix 5 - SHPO letter dated June 30, 2008 Appendix 6 - Listed Species Transect Map Appendix 7 - 2009 Listed Species Survey Appendix 8 - Wetland Impact Map Appendix 9 – Photographs of new 621E3 Area and Expanded 624E4 Area Appendix 10 – Resume of Environmental Data Author PDF Page 48 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 3 INTRODUCTION Creekside West. Inc. (the Owner) recently purchased the 23.33-acre property known as Addie’s Corner that had previously navigated approximately 95% of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) application review process as Application #080619-4. That application was withdrawn in February 2015. It is current the Owner’s intent to build upon the base environmental/ cultural information submitted during the previous application review and to revise the impact/ mitigation computations, as appropriate, for multifamily residential and commercial uses now proposed on the parcel. An ERP application was submitted to SFWMD on April 19, 2016, and the application materials were assigned to a US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Project Manager on May 10, 2016. The site plan and environmental data submitted to SFWMD and the Corps are reflected in this PUDA application. It should be noted that impact and mitigation quantities included in this document have yet to be finalized via state/federal permit. Quantities may change as the applications navigate the SFWMD and Corps permitting processes. The currently proposed amendment includes an optional development plan for 349 multi-family residential units, 4.1 acres of commercial use, 1.5 acres of dedicated Collier County R.O.W., 5.0 acres of roadway and parking, 0.8 acres of water management, 0.9 acres of treatment marsh, 3.49 acres of preserve, and relocation of 0.28 acres of the Cocohatchee Canal to accommodate the Addie’s Corner southern entrance relative to future Collier Boulevard/Immokalee Road interchange improvements. It is located within Section 22; Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. 1. EXISTING CONDITIONS 1.1. Vegetation Associations I FLUCCS Mapping Cover and vegetative association types were mapped, reviewed, and approved during prior ERP Application #080619-4 review. The land forms and vegetative communities were classified in accordance with the Department of Transportation's Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) manual (January 1999 edition). Since the map is consistent with current site conditions, based upon a field review conducted by Collier Environmental Services ecologist Bruce Layman in August 2015, it is the Owner’s intent to continue to use this map in the current review. The project site is composed primarily of pine-cypress-cabbage palm forest that is heavily infested by melaleuca. Secondarily abundant communities include pine flatwoods and cypress forest. A map illustrating FLUCCS boundaries is included as Appendix 1 and descriptions of each FLUCCS type are included in Appendix 2. 1.2. Jurisdictional Wetlands Wetland limits within the parcel were established, approved, and surveyed during ERP Application #080619-4 review. They represent current conditions and are illustrated on the attached FLUCCS Map, Appendix 1. The jurisdictional limits of the Cocohatchee Canal represent seasonal high water in the canal. A soils map and quad map are attached as Appendices 3 and 4, respectively. PDF Page 49 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 4 1.3. Listed Plant and Animal Species Collier Environmental Services (CES) conducted a biological survey of the project site using a field methodology in accordance with both Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and U. S. Fish and Wildlife (FWS) guidelines. The survey was performed to locate and document listed plant or wildlife species that may occur on site. Field surveys were conducted on October 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, 2015 by CES ecologist, Bruce Layman. A. Survey Methodology Prior to field investigations, the results of the listed species survey conducted in support of the ERP Application #080619-4 were reviewed. Additionally, Collier County color aerials were reviewed to identify the extent and condition of the various vegetative communities present on the project site. Based on the vegetative habitat types identified and a literature search, and the findings of the prior listed species survey, a suite of State and Federal listed flora and fauna that might occur on the project site was identified. The publication Florida's Endangered Species, Threatened Species and Species of Special Concern, November 2007 and Notes on Florida's Endangered and Threatened Plants, 2003, were used to determine the state status of listed wildlife and plant species. The federal status of listed species was obtained from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service web site. The field observer conducted meandering pedestrian transects in an east/west orientation across the site on approximately 100’ centers. With at least 30 feet of visibility either side of each transect, approximately 60% of the parcel was physically observed. Transect spacing was reduced within FLUCCS 411 (pine flatwoods) to increase survey coverage in that community type to approach 100%. Refer to Appendix 6 for approximate transect locations. The field observer was equipped with color aerials, binoculars and field notebooks for documentary purposes. During listed species transects, the ecologist periodically stopped, looked for wildlife, signs of wildlife, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. Survey dates, times, and weather conditions are described in Table 1. Table 1. Listed Species Survey Parameters Parameter Date 5 Oct. 15 6 Oct. 15 7 Oct. 15 8 Oct. 15 9 Oct. 15 Sunrise/Sunset 7:10 pm 7:08 pm 7:20 am 7:22 am 7:23 am Time 3:30 pm – 7:15 pm 3:30 pm – 7:15 pm 7:00 am – 10:30 am 7:00 am – 11:00 am 7:15 am – 11:00 am Temperature (qF) 79 84 75 73 73 Cloud Cover Mostly cloudy Partly cloudy Overcast Partly cloudy Clear Wind (direction/speed) SE, 0-5 mph SW, 0-5 mph NE, 0-5 mph SE, 0-5 mph NE, 0-5 mph Rain (yes/no) No No No No No B. Listed Plant Species During the course of field verifying vegetation associations and conducting surveys for listed wildlife species, Mr. Layman searched for plants listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture (FDA) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. PDF Page 50 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 5 The above-noted agencies have categorized the various plant species based upon their relative abundance in natural communities. Those categorizations include "Endangered", "Threatened", and "Commercially Exploited". "Endangered" means species of plants native to the State that are in imminent danger of extinction within the State, the survival of which is unlikely if the causes of a decline in the number of plants continue, and includes all species determined to be Endangered or Threatened, pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, Public Law No. 93-205 (87 Stat. 884). "Threatened" means species native to the State that are in rapid decline in number of plants within the State, but which have not decreased in such number as to cause them to be Endangered. "Commercially Exploited" means species native to the State which are subject to removal in significant numbers from native habitats in the State and sold or transported for sale. The protection afforded plants listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture entails restriction on harvesting or destroying plants found on private lands of another, or public lands, without permission and/or a permit from the FDA. There are no restrictions for landowners, unless the sale of plants is involved. These provisions are found in Section 581.185, FDA under State law. There were three (3) state-listed floral species observed: reflexed wild pine (Tillandsia balbisiana), common wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata), and butterfly orchid (Encyclia tampensis). No federally-listed floral species were observed within the project limits. C. Listed Wildlife Species No listed wildlife species were observed within the parcel during the listed species survey conducted in October of 2015. However, there is potential for listed wildlife to occur within the project footprint opportunistically based upon regional presence. Following are discussions of those species and their relative potential for occurrence. Florida Panther - The Florida panther (Felis concolor coryi) is listed as Endangered by FWS and FWC and is considered a "wetland dependent species" by SFWMD. The project is located within Primary panther habitat. Since no panthers, or signs of panthers, were observed during the listed species survey, and the parcel is isolated by development from nearby natural areas that may be used by the panther, there is little potential for this species to use the site. Eastern Indigo Snake - The Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais coupen) is listed as Threatened by both FWC and FWS. No indigo snakes, or indications of the potential presence of the species, such as gopher tortoise burrows where they are known commensal species, were observed within the project limits. The potential presence of this species is low. Big Cypress Fox Squirrel - The Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia) is listed as "threatened" by the FWC and is considered a "wetland dependent species" by SFWMD. They are not assigned a special status designation by the FWS. No fox squirrels or signs of fox squirrels were observed within the project limits during the current listed species survey. However, they were observed during listed species surveys conducted in support of the ERP Application #080619-4 review. Therefore, they are assumed to be potentially present on site. The listed PDF Page 51 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 6 species survey report submitted in support of the ERP application #080619-4 is attached as Appendix 7. Wood Stork – The wood stork (Mycteria americana) is listed as endangered by the FWS and is considered a “wetland dependent species” by SFWMD. They are not assigned a special status designation by the FWC. No wood storks were observed within the project limits during prior listed species surveys. However, the project falls within the Core Foraging Area of three wood stork colonies, so it is assumed, although unlikely due to the predominance of exotic vegetation, and the near complete absence of standing water in the peak of the 2015 wet season, that storks could use the on-site wetlands in their current condition to forage. Florida Bonneted Bat – The Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) is listed as endangered by FWS and is considered a “wetland dependent species” by SFWMD. They are not assigned a special status designation by the FWC. The parcel is located within the consultation area of the bonneted bat. No bonneted bats, or tree cavities with potential for bonneted bat roosting, were observed on site during the field surveys. Given the high canopy closure (approx. 70%) and absence of snags and tree cavities in the pine flatwoods, and the high (50-100%) exotic vegetation coverage in the midstory in the remainder of the property, it is very unlikely that there is potential for the bonneted bat to roost within the parcel. Bald Eagle - The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is no longer state or federally listed. It is, however, still regulated by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and it is considered a "wetland dependent species" by SFWMD. No bald eagles or nests of this species were observed on site during the field surveys and the nearest known eagle nest is over 1.5 miles to the southeast of the parcel. The potential for the bald eagle to nest on site is very low. 1.4. Soils According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey of Collier County Florida, two (2) surficial soil units are present within the project limits, as listed in Table 2, and further described, below. These units are depicted on the attached Soils Map, Appendix 3. Both are listed as hydric by the National Resources Conservation Service. Table 2 - Soils 02 - Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum This is a nearly level, poorly drained soil is in sloughs and broad, poorly defined drainageways. Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent. The surface layer is dark gray fine sand about 5 inches thick. The subsurface layer is fine sand to a depth of about 57 inches. The upper part of the subsurface layer is white, and the lower part is light gray and dark grayish brown. The subsoil extends to a depth of about 62 inches. It is dark grayish brown fine sandy loam. Limestone bedrock is at a depth of about 62 inches. Collier County Map Symbol Soil Unit Name 2 Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum - hydric 14 Pineda fine sand, limestone substratum - hydric PDF Page 52 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 7 Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is within a depth of 12 inches for 3 to 6 months. 14 - Pineda fine sand, limestone substratum This is nearly level, poorly drained soil in sloughs and poorly defined drainageways. Slopes range from 0 to 2 percent. The surface layer is dark grayish brown fine sand about 4 inches thick. The subsurface layer is light brownish grey fine sand to a depth of about 12 inches. The subsoil extends to a depth of about 55 inches. The upper part of the subsoil is brownish yellow and very pale brown fine sand, the next part is grayish brown sandy clay loam, and the lower part is light brownish gray and dark grayish brown fine sandy loam. Limestone bedrock is at a depth of about 55 inches. Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is within 12 inches of the surface for 3 to 6 months. 1.5. Historical and Archaeological Resources During ERP Application #080619-4 review, the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) provided a letter dated June 30, 2008, attached as Appendix 5, which proposed the following language be added as a special condition to the ERP permit since a review of the Florida Master Site File data indicated that no significant archaeological or historical resources are recorded within the project area, yet there were environmental conditions on site consistent with those found on other archaeological sites in Florida: If prehistoric or historic artifacts, such as pottery or ceramics, stone tools or metal implements, or any other physical remains that could be associated with Native American cultures, or early colonial or American settlement are encountered at any time within the project site area, the permitted project should cease all activities involving subsurface disturbance in the immediate vicinity of such discoveries. The permittee, or other designee, should contact the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, Review and Compliance Section at (850) 245-6333 or (800) 847-7278, as well as the appropriate permitting agency office. Project activities should not resume without verbal and/or written authorization from the Division of Historical Resources. In the event that unmarked human remains are encountered during permitted activities, all work shall stop immediately and the proper, authorities notified in accordance with Section 872.05, Florida Statutes. 2. PROPOSED CONDITIONS 2.1. Proposed Project The proposed project includes the construction of a bridged entry over the Cocohatchee Canal, 349 multifamily units, 4.1 acres of commercial outparcel, 5.0 acres of roadway and parking, 1.5 acres of Collier County R.O.W., 0.8 acres of water management, 0.9 acres of treatment marsh, 3.49 acres of upland/wetland preserve, and the relocation of 0.28 acres of the Cocohatchee Canal to accommodate the Addie’s Corner southern entrance relative to future Collier Boulevard/Immokalee Road interchange improvements on a 23.33-acre parcel. The treatment marsh will serve a dual purpose: to remove nutrients from the system via annual winter harvesting of vegetative biomass and to enhance wading bird foraging opportunity as the water table recedes during the dry season. The treatment marsh is not part of the 3.49-acre native vegetation preserve. PDF Page 53 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 8 Approximately 14.13 acres of wetlands will be permanently impacted and 1.78 acres will be secondarily impacted, due to proximity of adjacent development and conversion of forested wetland to treatment marsh. The relocation of the Cocohatchee Canal will result in no net change in canal surface area. The proposed mixed-use project is required to preserve a minimum of 25% of the existing native vegetation on site. As shown on Appendix 1, the 23.33-acre parcel contains 1.5 acres of dedicated Collier County right-of-way, which is not included in the native vegetation calculation because it is no longer under the applicant's ownership, and per LDC 3.05.07.B.2.c, right-of-way acquisitions by governmental entities are granted an exception from vegetation retention standards. The remaining 21.83 acres of the parcel includes 8.02 acres of non-native vegetation (0.69 acres of 422 FLUCCS and 7.33 acres of 624E4 FLUCCS). Therefore, the minimum native vegetation acreage required to be preserved is 3.45 acres (i.e., 25% of 13.81 acres). 3. PROJECT IMPACTS ASSESSMENT 3.1. Impacts to Wetlands & Surface Waters Table 3 , below, provides a summary of proposed impacts to wetlands and surface waters. Wetland and surface water direct impact location and extent are illustrated in the attached wetland impact map. The fill material proposed to be placed in wetlands and surface waters will be composed of various grades of sand and/or of crushed limerock. The treatment marsh may be over-excavated in order to bury rock encountered in project earth-moving. The marsh will be backfilled to the designed marsh elevation to cover the rock with organic soils obtained during marsh excavation, in order to promote marsh establishment. PDF Page 54 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 9 Table 3 - Impacts to Wetlands and Other Surface Waters WL ID FLUCCS EXISTING SIZE PROPOSED SIZE DIRECT/PERMANENT IMPACT SECONDARY IMPACT PRESERVE IMPACT SIZE Delta FL IMPACT SIZE Delta ** FL ** Size RFG Lift W-1 422 0.69 0.31 0.23 -0.40 -0.09 0.15 +0.09 +0.01 0.31 0.12 0.04 W-1 621E2 0.37 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 -0.07 0.00 0.34 0.05 0.02 W-1 624E3 9.78 0.66 8.60 -0.47 -4.04 0.52 +0.05 +0.03 0.66 0.07 0.05 W-1 624E4 7.44 1.06 6.18 -0.43 -2.66 0.20 +0.07 +0.01 1.06 0.10 0.11 Wetland Sub-Total 18.28 2.37 15.01 - -6.79 0.89 - +0.05 2.39 - +0.22 SW-1 * 512 0.28 0.28 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Surface Water Sub-Total 0.28 0.28 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A * - Surface water SW-1, the Cocohatchee Canal, is being partially re-aligned to correspond with its future proposed alignment when CR 951/Immokalee Road interchange improvements are in place. The re-alignment will result in no net change in canal surface area. * - The secondary impact of lacking a structural buffer was less functional loss than the function gained by the removal of the adverse effect of high exotic vegetation coverage. Therefore, the secondary impact resulted in lift of between 0.01 and 0.03 units for heavily infested areas (i.e., FLUCCS 422, 624E3, and 624E4). 3.2. Impacts to Water Quality The potential for water quality impacts will be minimized since Best Management Practices will be employed during construction and the stormwater management system has been designed to meet or exceed SFWMD water quality standards. Water quality standards will be fully met before the stormwater enters the on-site wetland preserve and discharges off site. 3.3. Impacts to Wetland Hydrology and Hydroperiod Since surrounding development has severed the site from regional hydrologic connections, on-site hydrology and hydroperiod are largely driven by direct rainfall. The on-site treatment wetland and wetland preserve are incorporated into the site’s water management system, and the control elevation of that system has been set to match the control elevations of both the Tree Farm property to the east and Immokalee Road to the south. As such, there are no anticipated adverse impacts to on-site wetland hydrology or hydroperiod. 3.4. Impacts to Listed Species Potential impacts to each of the species observed, or having the potential to use the project site, are discussed, below: Since the site falls within the Core Foraging Area of three wood stork colonies and the total proposed wetland impact for this project is above 5 acres, a wood stork foraging analysis, as outlined in the Wood Stork Foraging Habitat Assessment Methodology (that includes crayfish biomass), was executed to support federal environmental permitting. Based on the results of that assessment, there would be PDF Page 55 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 10 a net on-site loss of short hydroperiod biomass of 374 grams per year. However, wetland impacts are proposed to be compensated through the purchase of credits at Panther Island Mitigation Bank Expansion which afford 1060 grams of short hydroperiod biomass per credit per year. With the purchase of 6.52 wetland mitigation credits, the net on-site loss of 374 grams of short hydroperiod biomass will be more than fully off-set. The transition of 0.88 acres of forested wetland to marsh will also benefit the wood stork and other wading bird species. The marsh design, planting palate and management plan will include a deeper-water design that should dry out prior to the peak of the dry season, but will be deep enough to support primarily alligator flag, giant bull rush, or other deep-water vegetation in the wet season. The management plan includes the annual harvesting and removal of the deep-water herbaceous vegetation in late Fall or early Winter to serve two purposes: 1) to remove nutrients (tied up in the vegetation) from the system, and 2) to render the area more suitable for wading bird foraging. The project is located within Primary Florida panther habitat. Based upon a panther habitat impact analysis generated to support federal environmental permitting, approximately 280 panther habitat units (PHUs) would be required to off-set impacts resulting from the proposed project. A majority of the PHUs would be attached to the wetland credits proposed to be purchased from Panther Island Mitigation Bank Expansion. The remainder of the required PHUs are proposed to be purchased from a panther conservation bank. With the purchase of such off-site mitigation, there should be no net adverse impact on the panther as a result of the project. As with most projects, it was assumed that there was potential for the Eastern indigo snake to occur within the project limits. Through implementation of the standard FWS indigo snake construction precautions, it is anticipated that there will be no adverse impact on the indigo snake as a result of this project. There were Big Cypress fox squirrels observed on site near the northern parcel limit during fieldwork conducted in support of ERP Application #080619-4, so they are assumed to remain present. Since the proposed project includes removal of melaleuca from the preserve located in the same region of the property, said improvements are anticipated to make the preserve area more desirable to the species than currently exists. As such, it is not anticipated that the project will adversely affect the species. 3.5. Impacts to Historical and Archaeological Resources With inclusion of the special condition language suggested by the SHPO, it is not anticipated that cultural resources would be adversely affected by the proposed project. PDF Page 56 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 11 Appendix 1 FLUCCS Map (linework from ERP Application #080619-4, amended by CES) PDF Page 57 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 12 PDF Page 58 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 13 Appendix 2 FLUCCS Descriptions PDF Page 59 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 14 Pine Flatwoods - Palmetto Understory (FLUCCS 411, 4.32 acres) This upland community is composed of a slash pine ( Pinus elliotti) canopy over a saw palmetto ( Serenoa repens) groundcover. Brazilian pepper (FLUCCS 422, 0.69 acres) This wetland community is represented by a near monoculture of Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius). Little groundcover is present. Tropical Hardwoods (FLUCCS 426, 0.35 acres) This upland community is represented by a sparse canopy, with no species dominating, a dense and diverse midstory, and a rubust groundcover. Trees include the slash pine and cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto); the midstory includes the red stopper (Eugenia confusa), red mulberry (Morus rubra), Brazilian pepper, java plum (Syzygium cumini), redbay (Persea borbonia), myrsine (Rapania punctata), and Jamaican nettletree (Trema micrantha). The groundcover is dominated by swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum), giant sword fern (Nephrolepis biserrata), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), wild coffee (Psychotria nervosa), and velvetleaf wild coffee (Psychotria sulzneri). Cypress (FLUCCS 621E2, 0.37 acres) This wetland community is represented by a cypress ( Taxodium distichum) canopy over a midstory of primarily myrsine, and wax myrtle (Morella cerifera). Groundcover is composed predominantly of swamp f ern (Blechnum serrulatum). Exotic vegetation, melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), comprises between 25% and 49% coverage. Cypress (FLUCCS 621E3, 0.52 acres) This wetland community is represented by a cypress canopy over a midstory of primarily Brazilian pepper. Groundcover is composed predominantly of swamp f ern. Exotic vegetation, Brazilian pepper and melaleuca , comprises between 50% and 74% coverage. Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm (FLUCCS 624E3, 9.15 acres) This wetland community is represented by a canopy of predominantly cypress and slash pine with a minor component of cabbage palm. The midstory and canopy contain between 50% and 74% coverage of melaleuca. Groundcover is composed predominantly of a patch-work of swamp fern. Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm (FLUCCS 624E4, 7.55 acres) This wetland community is represented by a canopy coverage of less than 25% cypress and slash pine with a minor component of cabbage palm. The canopy contains greater than 75%, coverage of melaleuca. Groundcover is composed predominantly of a patch-work of swamp fern. Utilities (FLUCCS 830, 0.38 acres) This land use represents a recently-constructed utility easement that was permitted and installed by Collier County under Corps permit SAJ-2015-00302(NWP-BAH) and Florida Department of Environmental Protection file n. 338755-001-DS. Functional loss of wetlands within the easement was mitigated and 0.34 acres of the easement remains low-function wetland and 0.04 acres of the easement remains upland. PDF Page 60 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 15 Appendix 3 Soils Map (from ERP Application #080619-4 review) PDF Page 61 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 16 PDF Page 62 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 17 Appendix 4 Quad Map PDF Page 63 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 18 PDF Page 64 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 19 Appendix 5 SHPO Letter Dated June 30, 2008 (from ERP Application #080619-4 review) PDF Page 65 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 20 PDF Page 66 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 21 PDF Page 67 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 22 Appendix 6 Listed Species Survey Transect Map PDF Page 68 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 23 PDF Page 69 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 24 Appendix 7 2009 Listed Species Survey PDF Page 70 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 25 PDF Page 71 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 26 PDF Page 72 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 27 PDF Page 73 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 28 PDF Page 74 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 29 PDF Page 75 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 30 PDF Page 76 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 31 Appendix 8 Wetland Impact Map PDF Page 77 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 32 PDF Page 78 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 33 Appendix 9 Photographs of New 621E3 Area and Expanded 624E4 Area PDF Page 79 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 34 New FLUCCS 621E3 Area Looking West from Property Line PDF Page 80 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 35 Expanded FLUCCS 624E4 Area Looking North from Polygon Center PDF Page 81 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 36 Expanded FLUCCS 624E4 Area Looking West from Polygon Center PDF Page 82 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 37 Appendix 10 Resume of Environmental Data Author PDF Page 83 of 264 ADDIE’S CORNER PUDA APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 38 PDF Page 84 of 264 ǯ ȋȌ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ͕&> ϭϬͬϯϭͬϮϬϭϲ WƌĞƉĂƌĞĚĨŽƌ͗ WƌĞƉĂƌĞĚďǇ͗ Y͘'ƌĂĚǇDŝŶŽƌĂŶĚƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞƐ͕W͘͘dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕W ϯϴϬϬsŝĂĞůZĂǇϭϮϬϱWŝƉĞƌŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ͕^ƵŝƚĞϮϬϮ ŽŶŝƚĂ^ƉƌŝŶŐƐ͕&>ϯϰϭϯϰEĂƉůĞƐ͕&>ϯϰϭϭϬ WŚŽŶĞ͗ϮϯϵͲϵϰϳͲϭϭϰϰWŚŽŶĞ͗ϮϯϵͲϱϲϲͲϵϱϱϭ ŵĂŝů͗ŶƚƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬΛƚƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬ͘ďŝǌ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶDĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐǇ&ĞĞʹΨϱϬϬ͘ϬϬ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶZĞǀŝĞǁ&ĞĞʹ^ŵĂůů^ĐĂůĞ^ƚƵĚǇʹEŽ&ĞĞ PDF Page 85 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮ /ĐĞƌƚŝĨǇƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐdƌĂĨĨŝĐ/ŵƉĂĐƚŶĂůǇƐŝƐŚĂƐďĞĞŶƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚďǇŵĞŽƌƵŶĚĞƌŵǇŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞ ƐƵƉĞƌǀŝƐŝŽŶĂŶĚƚŚĂƚ/ŚĂǀĞĞǆƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĂŶĚƚƌĂŝŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚĞĨŝĞůĚŽĨdƌĂĨĨŝĐĂŶĚdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ EŽƌŵĂŶ:͘dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬ͕/W͕W͘͘ &>ZĞŐŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϰϳϭϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕W ϭϮϬϱWŝƉĞƌŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ͕^ƵŝƚĞϮϬϮ EĂƉůĞƐ͕&>ϯϰϭϭϬ ŽŵƉĂŶǇĞƌƚ͘ŽĨƵƚŚ͘EŽ͘Ϯϳϳϵϲ 7KLVLWHPKDVEHHQHOHFWURQLFDOO\VLJQHGDQG VHDOHGE\1RUPDQ-7UHELOFRFN3(XVLQJDSHA-1 DXWKHQWLFDWLRQFRGH 3ULQWHGFRSLHVRIWKLVGRFXPHQWDUHQRWFRQVLGHUHG VLJQHGDQGVHDOHGDQGWKHSHA-1 DXWKHQWLFDWLRQ FRGHPXVWEHYHULILHGRQDQ\HOHFWURQLFFRSLHV Norman J. Trebilcock P.E. 47116 Digitally signed by Norman J. Trebilcock P.E. 47116 DN: cn=Norman J. Trebilcock P.E. 47116, o=Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA, ou=Norman J. trebilcock, email=ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz, c=US Date: 2016.11.01 13:06:40 -04'00' PDF Page 86 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϯ TableofContents WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϰ dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϲ dƌŝƉŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƐƐŝŐŶŵĞŶƚ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϴ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚdƌĂĨĨŝĐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϵ ǆŝƐƚŝŶŐĂŶĚ&ƵƚƵƌĞZŽĂĚǁĂǇEĞƚǁŽƌŬ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϬ WƌŽũĞĐƚ/ŵƉĂĐƚƐƚŽƌĞĂZŽĂĚǁĂǇEĞƚǁŽƌŬʹ>ŝŶŬŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϬ ^ŝƚĞĐĐĞƐƐdƵƌŶ>ĂŶĞŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϭ /ŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϮ DŝƚŝŐĂƚŝŽŶŽĨ/ŵƉĂĐƚ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϮ WWE/^ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚDĂƐƚĞƌ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϯ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚDĂƐƚĞƌ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϱ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗/ŶŝƚŝĂůDĞĞƚŝŶŐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚ;DĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐǇDĞĞƚŝŶŐͿ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϳ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ĚŽƉƚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚƐʹdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘Ϯϯ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ/dϵƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘Ϯϲ PDF Page 87 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϰ ProjectDescription dŚĞ ĚĚŝĞ͛Ɛ ŽƌŶĞƌ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŝƐ ĂŶ ĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐ ĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚ DŝǆĞĚͲhƐĞ WůĂŶŶĞĚ hŶŝƚ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ;DWhͿƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇKƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞEŽ͘ϮϬϭϭͲϬϴ͕ĂƐŵĂǇďĞĂŵĞŶĚĞĚ͘dŚĞƐƵďũĞĐƚ ƉĂƌĐĞůŚĂƐĂƚŽƚĂůŐƌŽƐƐĂƌĞĂŽĨĂƉƉƌŽǆŝŵĂƚĞůǇϮϯ͘ϯϯĂĐƌĞƐ͘ dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŝƚĞŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚŝŶŶŽƌƚŚEĂƉůĞƐ͕ŝŶƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚǁĞƐƚƋƵĂĚƌĂŶƚŽĨ/ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZŽĂĚ ;ZϴϰϲͿĂŶĚŽůůŝĞƌŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ;ZϵϱϭͿŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ͕ŝŶ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶϮϮ͕dŽǁŶƐŚŝƉϰϴ^ŽƵƚŚ͕ZĂŶŐĞ ϮϲĂƐƚ͕ŝŶŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ͕&ůŽƌŝĚĂ͘ZĞĨĞƌƚŽ&ŝŐ͘ϭʹWƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶDĂƉ͘ &ŝŐ͘ϭʹWƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶDĂƉ dŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚŽƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇĂůůŽǁƐƚŚĞƐŝƚĞƚŽďĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚǁŝƚŚƵƉƚŽ ϭϯϱ͕ϬϬϬƐƋƵĂƌĞĨĞĞƚŽĨĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚͬŽƌƌĞƚŝƌĞŵĞŶƚĐŽŵŵƵŶŝƚǇͬŐƌŽƵƉŚŽƵƐŝŶŐ ĂƚĂ&ZŽĨϬ͘ϲϬĂŶĚͬŽƌĂŚŽƚĞůͬŵŽƚĞůŽĨĂŶŝŶƚĞŶƐŝƚǇŽĨϮϲƵŶŝƚƐƉĞƌĂĐƌĞ͘dŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌ PDF Page 88 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϱ WhZĞͲŽŶŝŶŐd/^ĚĂƚĞĚĂƚEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϲ͕ϮϬϬϵŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚƚǁŽĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽƐ͗^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϭ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚƐ ŽĨ ϭϯϱ͕ϬϬϬ ƐƋƵĂƌĞ ĨĞĞƚ ŽĨ ĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂů ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͕ ǁŚŝůĞ ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽ Ϯ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚƐ ŽĨ ϭϮϱ͕ϬϬϬƐƋƵĂƌĞĨĞĞƚŽĨĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĂĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞƐƚŽƌĞǁŝƚŚϭϲŐĂƐƉƵŵƉƐ͘ dŚĞĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDWhŵĂƐƚĞƌƐŝƚĞƉůĂŶŝƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚ DĂƐƚĞƌ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶ͘ dŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌWhƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞƚĂŝŶƚŚĞŽƉƚŝŽŶƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇĂůůŽǁĞĚďǇ ǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚĂĚĚĂƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽƉƚŝŽŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚŝŶŐŽĨϳϱ͕ϬϬϬƐĨĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƵƐĞƐĂŶĚ ϯϰϵƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŵƵůƚŝͲĨĂŵŝůǇĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐ͘dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDWhŵĂƐƚĞƌƐŝƚĞ ƉůĂŶŝƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚDĂƐƚĞƌ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶ͘ &ŽƌƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐŽĨƚŚŝƐĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶ͕ƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚďƵŝůĚͲŽƵƚǇĞĂƌŝƐĂƐƐƵŵĞĚƚŽďĞĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇϮϬϮϭƉůĂŶŶŝŶŐŚŽƌŝǌŽŶ͘ dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐĂŚŝŐŚĞƐƚĂŶĚďĞƐƚƵƐĞƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽǁŝƚŚƌĞƐƉĞĐƚƚŽƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͛ƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƚƌŝƉ ŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚĐŽŵŵŽŶƌĞĐƌĞĂƚŝŽŶĂŵĞŶŝƚŝĞƐĂƌĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚƉĂƐƐŝǀĞŝŶĐŝĚĞŶƚĂůƚŽ ƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂů͕ĂŶĚĂƌĞŶŽƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͘dŚĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ƉƌŽŐƌĂŵŝƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶdĂďůĞϭ͘ dĂďůĞϭ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚWƌŽŐƌĂŵ WŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ /d>ĂŶĚhƐĞ /d>ĂŶĚhƐĞ ŽĚĞdŽƚĂů^ŝǌĞ ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚWh ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϭ;ϭͿ^ŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĞŶƚĞƌϴϮϬϭϯϱ͕ϬϬϬƐĨ ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚWh ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϮ;ϭͿ ^ŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĞŶƚĞƌϴϮϬϭϮϱ͕ϬϬϬƐĨ ŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞDĂƌŬĞƚǁŝƚŚ 'ĂƐŽůŝŶĞWƵŵƉƐϴϱϯϭϲĨƵĞůŝŶŐƉŽƐŝƚŝŽŶƐ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWh KƉƚŝŽŶ ^ŚŽƉƉŝŶŐĞŶƚĞƌϴϮϬϳϱ͕ϬϬϬƐĨ ZĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂů ŽŶĚŽŵŝŶŝƵŵͬdŽǁŶŚŽƵƐĞϮϯϬϯϰϵĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗;ϭͿWĞƌĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌWhZĞͲŽŶŝŶŐd/^͕ĚĂƚĞĚEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϲ͕ϮϬϬϵ͘ ŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐǇ ŵĞĞƚŝŶŐ ǁĂƐ ŚĞůĚ ǁŝƚŚ ƚŚĞ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ WůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ƐƚĂĨĨ ŽŶ DĂǇϱ͕ϮϬϭϲ͕ǀŝĂĞŵĂŝů;ƌĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗/ŶŝƚŝĂůDĞĞƚŝŶŐŚĞĐŬůŝƐƚͿ͘ dƌĂĨĨŝĐ ĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶ ƚŽ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞ ZŽĂĚ ;Z ϴϰϲͿ ŝƐ ŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚ ǀŝĂ ŽŶĞ ƌŝŐŚƚͲŝŶͬƌŝŐŚƚͲŽƵƚͬĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂůůĞĨƚͲŝŶĂĐĐĞƐƐ͕ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚDWhŵĂƐƚĞƌƉůĂŶ͘ PDF Page 89 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϲ WƵƌƐƵĂŶƚ ƚŽ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ KƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞ EŽ͘ ϮϬϭϭͲϬϴ͕ ƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ ĂƌĞ ĂĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞĚ ĂŶĚ ŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚ ŝŶ ƚŚĞ ǌŽŶŝŶŐ ĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽ ŶďǇŽƚŚĞƌƐ͘ZĞĨĞƌƚŽ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ĚŽƉƚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽŵŵŝƚŵĞŶƚƐʹdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ TripGeneration dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͛ƐƐŝƚĞƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶŝƐďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞ/ŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞŽĨdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŶŐŝŶĞĞƌƐ;/dͿdƌŝƉ 'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ DĂŶƵĂů͕ ϵ ƚŚ ĚŝƚŝŽŶ͘ dŚĞ ƐŽĨƚǁĂƌĞ ƉƌŽŐƌĂŵ Kd/^^ ;KŶůŝŶĞ dƌĂĨĨŝĐ /ŵƉĂĐƚ ^ƚƵĚǇ ^ŽĨƚǁĂƌĞ͕sĞƌƐŝŽŶϰ͘Ϭ͘ϰͿŝƐƵƐĞĚƚŽĐƌĞĂƚĞƚŚĞƌĂǁƵŶĂĚũƵƐƚĞĚƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ dŚĞ/dĞƋƵĂƚŝŽŶƐĂŶĚͬŽƌƌĂƚĞƐĂƌĞƵƐĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ĂƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͘dŚĞ /dʹKd/^^ƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶǁŽƌŬƐŚĞĞƚƐĂƌĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚŝŶƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ ĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ/dϵƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͘ dŚĞŝŶƚĞƌŶĂůĐĂƉƚƵƌĞĂĐĐŽƵŶƚƐĨŽƌĂƌĞĚƵĐƚŝŽŶŝŶĞǆƚĞƌŶĂůƚƌĂĨĨŝĐďĞĐĂƵƐĞŽĨƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌĂĐƚŝŽŶ ďĞƚǁĞĞŶƚŚĞŵƵůƚŝƉůĞůĂŶĚƵƐĞƐŝŶĂƐŝƚĞ͘EŽŝŶƚĞƌŶĂůĐĂƉƚƵƌĞĚǁĂƐĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚ ƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽƐ;^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϭĂŶĚ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϮͿĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŝŶĨŽƌ ŵĂƚŝŽŶĐŽŶƚĂŝŶĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞ ĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌWhZĞͲŽŶŝŶŐd/^͕ĚĂƚĞĚEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϲ͕ϮϬϬϵ͘dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWh ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ŽƉƚŝŽŶ ƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐ ŝŶƚĞƌŶĂů ĐĂƉƚƵƌĞ ƚƌŝƉƐ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚ ǁŝƚŚ /d ĂŶĚ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ ŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐĂŶĚƉƌŽĐĞĚƵƌĞƐ͘ dŚĞƉĂƐƐͲďǇƚƌŝƉƐĂĐĐŽƵŶƚĨŽƌƚƌĂĨĨŝĐƚŚĂƚŝƐĂůƌĞĂĚǇŽŶƚŚĞĞǆƚĞƌŶĂůƌŽĂĚǁĂǇŶĞƚǁŽƌŬĂŶĚƐƚŽƉƐ ĂƚƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚŽŶƚŚĞǁĂǇƚŽĂƉƌŝŵĂƌǇƚƌŝƉĚĞƐƚŝŶĂƚŝŽŶ͘ /ƚƐŚŽƵůĚďĞŶŽƚĞĚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞĚƌŝǀĞǁĂǇǀŽůƵŵĞƐĂƌĞŶŽƚƌĞĚƵĐĞĚĂƐ Ă ƌĞƐƵůƚ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƉĂƐƐͲďǇ ƌĞĚƵĐƚŝŽŶ͕ŽŶůǇƚŚĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĂĚĚĞĚƚŽƚŚĞƐƵƌƌŽƵŶĚŝŶŐƐƚƌĞĞƚƐĂŶĚŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶƐ͘ƐƐƵĐŚ͕ƉĂƐƐͲďǇ ƚƌŝƉƐĂƌĞŶŽƚĚĞĚƵĐƚĞĚĨŽƌŽƉĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĂůͲĂĐĐĞƐƐĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ;ĂůůĞǆƚĞƌŶĂůƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŝƐĂĐĐŽƵŶƚĞĚĨŽƌͿ͘ WĂƐƐͲďǇ ƌĂƚĞƐ ĂƌĞ ĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚ ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚ ǁŝƚŚ /d ĂŶĚ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ d/^ ŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐ ĂŶĚ ƉƌŽĐĞĚƵƌĞƐ͘/ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͕ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚǁĞĞŬĚĂǇDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƉĂƐƐͲďǇƌĂƚĞƐĂƌĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚƚŽ ŵĂƚĐŚƚŚĞǁĞĞŬĚĂǇWDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƉĂƐƐͲďǇƌĂƚĞƐ͘ DĂǆŝŵƵŵĂůůŽǁĞĚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐƉĞƌĐƵƌƌĞŶƚĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚǌŽŶŝŶŐ ĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶƚŚĞĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚŽƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ;ĂƐƐŚŽǁŶŝŶƉƉĞŶĚŝǆͿ͕ƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝƐůŝŵŝƚĞĚƚŽŚŝŐŚĞƐƚWDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌ ƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĐŽƌƌĞƐƉŽŶĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞƚǁŽƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽƐƐŚŽǁŶŝŶƚŚĞĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌWh ZĞͲŽŶŝŶŐd/^͕ĚĂƚĞĚEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϲ͕ϮϬϬϵ͘/ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͕ĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞƐŽĨĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ ǁĞĞŬĚĂǇWDƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚŝƐWh͕ƚŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚ/dϵƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶƐŚĂůůďĞƵƚŝůŝǌĞĚ͘ PDF Page 90 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϳ dĂďůĞϮ dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ;ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹDĂǆŝŵƵŵůůŽǁĞĚͿʹǀĞƌĂŐĞtĞĞŬĚĂǇ DWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ WDWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂůŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂů ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϭ;ϭͿ /ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶϴƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ ϴϵ ϰϵ ϭϯϴ Ϯϴϰ ϯϬϬ ϱϴϰ ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϭ;ϮͿ /ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶϵƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ ϴϳϱϯϭϰϬϮϲϰϮϴϲϱϱϬ ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚDĂǆŝŵƵŵůůŽǁĞĚ;ϯͿ ϴϳ ϱϯ ϭϰϬ Ϯϲϰ Ϯϴϲ ϱϱϬ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗;ϭͿWĞƌĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌWhZĞͲŽŶŝŶŐd/^͕ĚĂƚĞĚEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϲ͕ϮϬϬϵ͘ ;ϮͿZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͘ ;ϯͿdĂďůĞƌĞĨůĞĐƚƐĞǆƚĞƌŶĂůŶŽŶͲƉĂƐƐͲďǇƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͘ dĂďůĞϮ dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ;ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹDĂǆŝŵƵŵůůŽǁĞĚͿʹǀĞƌĂŐĞtĞĞŬĚĂǇ DWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ WDWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂůŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂů ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϮ;ϭͿ /ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶϴƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ ϭϱϮ ϭϭϯ Ϯϲϱ ϯϰϲ ϯϲϮ ϳϬϴ ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϮ;ϮͿ /ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶϵƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ ϭϱϬϭϭϲϮϲϲϯϮϳϯϰϳϲϳϰ ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚDĂǆŝŵƵŵůůŽǁĞĚ;ϯͿ ϭϱϬ ϭϭϲ Ϯϲϲ ϯϮϳ ϯϰϳ ϲϳϰ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗;ϭͿWĞƌĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌWhZĞͲŽŶŝŶŐd/^͕ĚĂƚĞĚEŽǀĞŵďĞƌϲ͕ϮϬϬϵ͘ ;ϮͿZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͘ ;ϯͿdĂďůĞƌĞĨůĞĐƚƐĞǆƚĞƌŶĂůŶŽŶͲƉĂƐƐͲďǇƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͘ ƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚďǇdĂďůĞϮĂŶĚdĂďůĞϮ͕ƚŚĞŶŽŶͲƉĂƐƐͲďǇƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŽĨ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϮŝƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚŚĂŶƚŚĞ ŶŽŶͲƉĂƐƐͲďǇƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŽĨ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϭ͖ƚŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞ͕ƚŚĞƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌ^ĐĞŶĂƌŝŽϮŝƐƵƚŝůŝǌĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ ĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐŽĨƚŚŝƐƌĞƉŽƌƚĚƵĞƚŽŝƚƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŝŵƉĂĐƚ͘ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐƉĞƌƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWhĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐʹEĞƚEĞǁdƌĂĨĨŝĐ dŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWhĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚŽƉƚŝŽŶĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚƌŝƉŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶŝƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶdĂďůĞϮ͘ PDF Page 91 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϴ dĂďůĞϮ dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ;WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWhĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚKƉƚŝŽŶͿʹǀĞƌĂŐĞtĞĞŬĚĂǇ DWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ WDWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂůŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂů WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ KƉƚŝŽŶ;ϭͿ /ddƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶϵƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ ϳϰ ϭϰϭ Ϯϭϱ Ϯϰϰ ϮϬϯ ϰϰϳ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗;ϭͿdĂďůĞƌĞĨůĞĐƚƐĞǆƚĞƌŶĂůŶŽŶͲƉĂƐƐͲďǇƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͖ƌĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͘ dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚŶĞƚŶĞǁƚƌĂĨĨŝĐǀŽůƵŵĞƐŚŽǁŶŝŶdĂďůĞϮƌĞĨůĞĐƚƐƚŚĞŚŝŐŚĞƐƚŝŵƉĂĐƚWD ƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌĂĨĨŝĐƵŶĚĞƌƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWhĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ;dĂďůĞϮͿ͕ǀĞƌƐƵƐƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐ ĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚDWhĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐʹdĂďůĞϮ͘ dĂďůĞϮ dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ;ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹDĂǆŝŵƵŵůůŽǁĞĚͿʹǀĞƌĂŐĞtĞĞŬĚĂǇ DWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ WDWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂůŶƚĞƌǆŝƚdŽƚĂů WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWhĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ KƉƚŝŽŶϳϰ ϭϰϭ Ϯϭϱ Ϯϰϰ ϮϬϯ ϰϰϳ ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚWhDĂǆŝŵƵŵ ůůŽǁĞĚ;ϭͿϭϱϬϭϭϲϮϲϲϯϮϳϯϰϳϲϳϰ ƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚdƌĂĨĨŝĐ EĞƚ/ŶĐƌĞĂƐĞͬ;EĞƚĞĐƌĞĂƐĞͿ;ϳϲͿ Ϯϱ ;ϱϭͿ ;ϴϯͿ ;ϭϰϰͿ ;ϮϮϳͿ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗;ϭͿZĞĨĞƌƚŽdĂďůĞϮ͘ Ɛ ŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚ ŝŶdĂďůĞ Ϯ͕ ĨƌŽŵ Ă ƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ ƐƚĂŶĚ ƉŽŝŶƚ͕ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ĚĚŝĞ͛Ɛ ŽƌŶĞƌ Wh ĂŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚŝƐůĞƐƐŝŶƚĞŶƐŝǀĞĐŽŵƉĂƌĞĚƚŽǁŚĂƚǁĂƐŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůůǇĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚ͘ TripDistributionandAssignment dŚĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚǁĂƐĂƐƐŝŐŶĞĚƚŽƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƌŽĂĚǁĂǇƐƵƐŝŶŐƚŚĞ ŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŽĨƚŚĞĂƌĞĂĂŶĚĂƐĐŽŽƌĚŝŶĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWůĂŶŶŝŶŐƐƚĂĨĨ͘ dŚĞƐŝƚĞͲŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚƚƌŝƉĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶŝƐƐŚŽǁŶŝŶdĂďůĞϯ͕WƌŽũĞĐƚdƌĂĨĨŝĐŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĨŽƌWĞĂŬ ,ŽƵƌĂŶĚŝƐŐƌĂƉŚŝĐĂůůǇĚĞƉŝĐƚĞĚŝŶ&ŝŐ͘ϮʹWƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶďǇWĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞ͘ PDF Page 92 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϵ dĂďůĞϯ WƌŽũĞĐƚdƌĂĨĨŝĐŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶĨŽƌWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>ŝŶŬEŽ͘ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶŽĨ WƌŽũĞĐƚdƌĂĨĨŝĐ ŽůůŝĞƌůǀĚ͘ϯϬ͘ϭ^ŽƵƚŚŽĨ/ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϯϬй /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϰϯ͘Ϯ tĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌůǀĚ͘ ϱϬй /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϰϰ͘ϬĂƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌůǀĚ͘ϮϬй &ŝŐ͘ϮʹWƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶďǇWĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞĂŶĚďǇWDWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌ BackgroundTraffic ǀĞƌĂŐĞ ďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ ƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ ŐƌŽǁƚŚ ƌĂƚĞƐ ǁĞƌĞ ĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚĨŽƌ ƚŚĞƐĞŐŵĞŶƚƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ ŶĞƚǁŽƌŬŝŶƚŚĞƐƚƵĚǇĂƌĞĂƵƐŝŶŐƚŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ^ƚĂĨĨŐƵŝĚĂŶĐĞŽĨĂ ŵŝŶŝŵƵŵϮйŐƌŽǁƚŚƌĂƚĞ͕ŽƌƚŚĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐĂůŐƌŽǁƚŚƌĂƚĞĨƌŽŵĂŶŶƵĂůƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĐŽƵŶƚƐ;ĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚ ĨƌŽŵϮϬϬϴƚŚƌŽƵŐŚϮϬϭϱͿ͕ǁŚŝĐŚĞǀĞƌŝƐŐƌĞĂƚĞƌ͘ŶŽƚŚĞƌǁĂǇƚŽĚĞƌŝǀĞƚŚĞďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŝƐ ƚŽƵƐĞƚŚĞϮϬϭϱh/ZǀŽůƵŵĞƉůƵƐƚŚĞƚƌŝƉďĂŶŬǀŽůƵŵĞ͘dĂďůĞϰ͕ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚdƌĂĨĨŝĐǁŝƚŚŽƵƚ WƌŽũĞĐƚ͕ ŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞƐ ƚŚĞ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚ ŐƌŽǁƚŚ ƌĂƚĞƐ ƚŽ ŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚ ďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ;ǁŝƚŚŽƵƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚͿƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƉĞĂŬĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶƚƌĂĨĨŝĐǀŽůƵŵĞĨŽƌƚŚĞĨƵƚƵƌĞŚŽƌŝǌŽŶ ǇĞĂƌϮϬϮϭ͘ PDF Page 93 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϬ dĂďůĞϰ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚdƌĂĨĨŝĐǁŝƚŚŽƵƚWƌŽũĞĐƚ;ϮϬϭϱͲϮϬϮϭͿ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ h/Z >ŝŶŬ/ η ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ϮϬϭϱh/Z WŬ,ƌ͕WŬŝƌ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ dƌĂĨĨŝĐ sŽůƵŵĞ ;ƚƌŝƉƐͬŚƌͿ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚ dƌĂĨĨŝĐ ŶŶƵĂů 'ƌŽǁƚŚ ZĂƚĞ ;йͬǇƌͿΎ 'ƌŽǁƚŚ &ĂĐƚŽƌ ϮϬϮϭ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚ WŬ,ƌ͕WĞĂŬŝƌ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ dƌĂĨĨŝĐsŽůƵŵĞ ǁͬŽƵƚWƌŽũĞĐƚ ;ƚƌŝƉƐͬŚƌͿ 'ƌŽǁƚŚ &ĂĐƚŽƌΎΎ dƌŝƉ ĂŶŬ ϮϬϮϭ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚWŬ ,ƌ͕WĞĂŬŝƌ ĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ dƌĂĨĨŝĐsŽůƵŵĞ ǁͬŽƵƚWƌŽũĞĐƚ ;ƚƌŝƉƐͬŚƌͿdƌŝƉ ĂŶŬΎΎΎ ŽůůŝĞƌůǀĚϯϬ͘ϭ^ŽƵƚŚŽĨ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚϭ͕ϰϴϬϰ͘ϬϬйϭ͘Ϯϲϱϯϭ͕ϴϳϯϰϲϭϭ͕ϵϰϭ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞ ZĚϰϯ͘ϮtĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌ ůǀĚϭ͕ϵϲϬ ϰ͘ϬϬй ϭ͘Ϯϲϱϯ Ϯ͕ϰϴϬ ϱϮϳϮ͕ϰϴϳ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞ ZĚϰϰ͘ϬĂƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌ ůǀĚϭ͕ϲϱϬϮ͘ϯϲйϭ͘ϭϱϬϮϭ͕ϴϵϴϲϲϮϮ͕ϯϭϮ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗ ΎŶŶƵĂů'ƌŽǁƚŚZĂƚĞͲĨƌŽŵϮϬϭϱh/Z͕ϮйŵŝŶŝŵƵŵ͘ΎΎ'ƌŽǁƚŚ&ĂĐƚŽƌс;ϭнŶŶƵĂů'ƌŽǁƚŚZĂƚĞͿΔϲ͘ϮϬϮϭWƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚsŽůƵŵĞсϮϬϭϱ h/ZsŽůƵŵĞǆ'ƌŽǁƚŚ&ĂĐƚŽƌ͘ΎΎΎϮϬϮϭWƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚsŽůƵŵĞсϮϬϭϱh/ZsŽůƵŵĞнdƌŝƉĂŶŬ͘dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚϮϬϮϭWĞĂŬ,ŽƵƌʹWĞĂŬ ŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚdƌĂĨĨŝĐŝƐƚŚĞŐƌĞĂƚĞƌŽĨƚŚĞ'ƌŽǁƚŚ&ĂĐƚŽƌŽƌdƌŝƉĂŶŬĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐƵŶĚĞƌůŝŶĞĚĂŶĚďŽůĚĂƐĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͘ ExistingandFutureRoadwayNetwork dŚĞĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐƌŽĂĚǁĂǇĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐĂƌĞĞǆƚƌĂĐƚĞĚĨƌŽŵƚŚĞϮϬϭϱŶŶƵĂůhƉĚĂƚĞĂŶĚ/ŶǀĞŶƚŽƌǇ ZĞƉŽƌƚ;h/ZͿĂŶĚƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƌŽĂĚǁĂǇĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐĂƌĞďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇϱͲ zĞĂƌtŽƌŬWƌŽŐƌĂŵ͘ZŽĂĚǁĂǇŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐƚŚĂƚĂƌĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇƵŶĚĞƌ ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ Žƌ ĂƌĞ ƐĐŚĞĚƵůĞĚƚŽďĞĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚĞĚǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞĨŝǀĞǇĞĂƌdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ/ŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚWůĂŶ;d/WͿŽƌ ĂƉŝƚĂů/ŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƉƌŽŐƌĂŵ;/WͿĂƌĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚƚŽďĞĐŽŵŵŝƚƚĞĚŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ƐŶŽƐƵĐŚ ŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐǁĞƌĞŝĚĞŶƚŝĨŝĞĚŝŶƚŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇϮϬϭϰh/Z͕ƚŚĞĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂǇƐĂƌĞ ĂŶƚŝĐŝƉĂƚĞĚƚŽ ƌĞŵĂŝŶ ĂƐ ƐƵĐŚ ƚŚƌŽƵŐŚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ďƵŝůĚͲŽƵƚ͘ dŚĞ Ğ ǆŝƐƚŝŶŐ ĂŶĚ ĨƵƚƵƌĞ ƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐĂƌĞŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶdĂďůĞϱ͕ǆŝƐƚŝŶŐĂŶĚ&ƵƚƵƌĞZŽĂĚǁĂǇŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ͘ dĂďůĞϱ ǆŝƐƚŝŶŐĂŶĚ&ƵƚƵƌĞZŽĂĚǁĂǇŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬh/Z >ŝŶŬ/η ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ǆŝƐƚ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ DŝŶ͘ ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚ >K^ ǆŝƐƚWĞĂŬŝƌ͕ WĞĂŬ,ƌ ĂƉĂĐŝƚǇ sŽůƵŵĞ &ƵƚƵƌĞ WƌŽũĞĐƚƵŝůĚ ŽƵƚZŽĂĚǁĂǇ ŽůůŝĞƌůǀĚ͘ϯϬ͘ϭ^ŽƵƚŚŽĨ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϲϯ͕ϬϬϬ;EͿϲ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϰϯ͘ϮtĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌ ůǀĚ͘ϲ ϯ͕ϮϬϬ;Ϳ ϲ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϰϰ͘ϬĂƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌ ůǀĚ͘ϲϯ͕ϯϬϬ;Ϳϲ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗ ϮhсϮͲůĂŶĞƵŶĚŝǀŝĚĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ͖ϰ͕ϲ͕ϴсϰͲůĂŶĞ͕ϲͲůĂŶĞ͕ϴͲůĂŶĞĚŝǀŝĚĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ͕ƌĞƐƉĞĐƚŝǀĞůǇ͖>K^с>ĞǀĞůŽĨ ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ PDF Page 94 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϭ ProjectImpactstoAreaRoadwayNetworkǦLinkAnalysis dŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚ>ĞǀĞůŽĨ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ;>K^ͿǀŽůƵŵĞƐ ĨŽƌƚŚĞƌŽĂĚǁĂǇůŝŶŬƐŝŵƉĂĐƚĞĚďǇƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͕ǁŚŝĐŚǁĞƌĞĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĚƚŽĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚŽƚŚĞĂƌĞĂƌŽĂĚǁĂǇŶĞƚǁŽƌŬŝŶƚŚĞĨƵƚƵƌĞ͘dŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐŐƵŝĚĞůŝŶĞƐŚĂǀĞĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚƚŚĂƚĂƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŝůůďĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚƚŽŚĂǀĞĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĂŶĚ ĂĚǀĞƌƐĞŝŵƉĂĐƚŝĨďŽƚŚƚŚĞƉĞƌĐĞŶƚĂŐĞǀŽůƵŵĞĐĂƉĂĐŝƚǇĞǆĐĞĞĚƐϮйŽĨƚŚĞĐĂƉĂĐŝƚǇĨŽƌƚŚĞůŝŶŬ ĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐĐĞƐƐĞĚďǇƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚĨŽƌƚŚĞůŝŶŬĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞůŝŶŬĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĐĐĞƐƐĞĚďǇƚŚĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͖ϯйĨŽƌŽƚŚĞƌƐƵďƐĞƋƵĞŶƚůŝŶŬƐĂŶĚŝĨƚŚĞƌŽĂĚǁĂǇŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚƚŽŽƉĞƌĂƚĞďĞůŽǁƚŚĞ ĂĚŽƉƚĞĚ>K^ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚ͘ ĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞƐĞĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂ͕ƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĐƌĞĂƚĞĂŶǇƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĂŶĚĂĚǀĞƌƐĞŝŵƉĂĐƚƐƚŽƚŚĞ ĂƌĞĂƌŽĂĚǁĂǇŶĞƚǁŽƌŬ͘EŽŶĞŽĨƚŚĞĂŶĂůǇǌĞĚůŝŶŬƐĂƌĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚƚŽŽƉĞƌĂƚĞďĞůŽǁƚŚĞĂĚŽƉƚĞĚ >K^ ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚ ǁŝƚŚ Žƌ ǁŝƚŚŽƵƚ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ Ăƚ ϮϬϮϭ ĨƵƚƵƌĞ ďƵŝůĚͲŽ Ƶƚ ĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ͘ dĂďůĞ ϲ͕ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ >ŝŶŬ >ĞǀĞů ŽĨ ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ ŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞƐ ƚŚĞ >K^ ŝŵƉĂĐƚƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ŽŶ ƚŚĞ ƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ ŶĞƚǁŽƌŬĐůŽƐĞƐƚƚŽƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ dĂďůĞϲ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ>ĞǀĞůŽĨ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ;>K^ͿʹtŝƚŚWƌŽũĞĐƚŝŶƚŚĞzĞĂƌϮϬϮϭ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ h/Z >ŝŶŬ /η ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ>ŝŶŬ >ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ ϮϬϭϱWĞĂŬ ŝƌ͕WĞĂŬ,ƌ ĂƉĂĐŝƚǇ sŽůƵŵĞ ZŽĂĚǁĂǇ >ŝŶŬ͕WĞĂŬ ŝƌ͕WĞĂŬ,ƌ ;WƌŽũĞĐƚsŽů ĚĚĞĚͿΎ ϮϬϮϭWĞĂŬ ŝƌ͕WĞĂŬ ,ƌsŽůƵŵĞ ǁͬWƌŽũĞĐƚ ΎΎ йsŽů ĂƉĂĐŝƚǇ /ŵƉĂĐƚ Ǉ WƌŽũĞĐƚ DŝŶ>K^ ĞǆĐĞĞĚĞĚ ǁŝƚŚŽƵƚ WƌŽũĞĐƚ͍ zĞƐͬEŽ DŝŶ>K^ ĞǆĐĞĞĚĞĚ ǁŝƚŚ WƌŽũĞĐƚ͍ zĞƐͬEŽ ŽůůŝĞƌůǀĚ͘ϯϬ͘ϭ^ŽƵƚŚŽĨ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϯ͕ϬϬϬ;EͿEͬϭ͕ϵϰϭEͬEŽEŽ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϰϯ͘ϮtĞƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌ ůǀĚ͘ϯ͕ϮϬϬ;ͿEͬϮ͕ϰϴϳEͬEŽ EŽ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZĚ͘ϰϰ͘ϬĂƐƚŽĨŽůůŝĞƌ ůǀĚ͘ϯ͕ϯϬϬ;ͿEͬϮ͕ϯϭϮEͬEŽEŽ EŽƚĞ;ƐͿ͗ ΎEͬсŶŽƚĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ͖ĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĚŶŽŶĞƚŶĞǁƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŐĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚďǇƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWhĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ͖ΎΎϮϬϮϭWƌŽũĞĐƚĞĚsŽůƵŵĞсϮϬϮϭ ďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ;ƌĞĨĞƌƚŽdĂďůĞϰͿнWƌŽũĞĐƚsŽůƵŵĞĂĚĚĞĚ͘ SiteAccessTurnLaneAnalysis DĂŝŶĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶƚŽƐƵďũĞĐƚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚǀŝĂĂŶĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚƌŝŐŚƚŝŶͬƌŝŐŚƚŽƵƚͬĚŝƌĞĐƚŝŽŶĂů ůĞĨƚͲŝŶĂĐĐĞƐƐŽŶ/ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZŽĂĚ;ĂƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ƉƉƌŽǀĞĚDĂƐƚĞƌ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶͿ͘ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZŽĂĚ;ZϴϰϲͿŝƐƵŶĚĞƌŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŽĨdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶũƵƌŝƐĚŝĐƚŝŽŶ͘ dŚŝƐ ƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ ŝƐ ĂŶ ĞĂƐƚͲǁĞƐƚ ƐŝǆͲůĂŶĞ ĚŝǀŝĚĞĚ ĂƌƚĞƌŝĂů ƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ ƚŽ ƚŚĞ ƐŽƵƚŚ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƐƵďũĞĐƚ ƉĂƌĐĞů͘dŚŝƐƌŽĂĚǁĂǇŚĂƐĂƉŽƐƚĞĚůĞŐĂůƐƉĞĞĚŽĨϰϱŵƉŚŝŶƚŚĞǀŝĐŝŶŝƚǇŽĨƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ĂƐĞĚŽŶ PDF Page 95 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϮ &Kd ŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƚŝŽŶ ^ƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐ /ŶĚĞǆ ηϯϬϭ͕ ƚŚĞ ŵŝŶŝŵƵŵ ƚƵƌŶ ůĂŶĞ ůĞŶŐƚŚ ŝƐ ϭϴϱ Ĩƚ͘ ;ǁŚŝĐŚ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐĂϱϬĨƚ͘ƚĂƉĞƌͿƉůƵƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƋƵĞƵĞ͘ WƌŽũĞĐƚĂĐĐĞƐƐŝƐƚǇƉŝĐĂůůǇĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĚĨŽƌƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞǁĂƌƌĂŶƚƐďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇZŝŐŚƚͲŽĨͲ ǁĂǇDĂŶƵĂů͗;ĂͿƚǁŽͲůĂŶĞƌŽĂĚǁĂǇƐʹϰϬǀƉŚĨŽƌƌŝŐŚƚͲƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞͬϮϬǀƉŚĨŽƌůĞĨƚͲƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞ͖ĂŶĚ ;ďͿŵƵůƚŝͲůĂŶĞĚŝǀŝĚĞĚƌŽĂĚǁĂǇƐʹƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞƐƐŚĂůůĂůǁĂǇƐďĞƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĚ͘/ƚŝƐŶŽƚĞĚƚŚĂƚĂŶ ĞĂƐƚďŽƵŶĚůĞĨƚͲƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞĂŶĚĂǁĞƐƚďŽƵŶĚƌŝŐŚƚͲƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞĂƌĞǁĂƌƌĂŶƚĞĚŽŶ/ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZŽĂĚĂƚ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂĐĐĞƐƐ͘ dƵƌŶůĂŶĞůĞŶŐƚŚƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĂƚďƵŝůĚͲŽƵƚĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐĂƌĞƚŽďĞĂŶĂůǇǌĞĚďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨ ƚƵƌŶŝŶŐǀĞŚŝĐůĞƐǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞƉĞĂŬŚŽƵƌƚƌĂĨĨŝĐ͘ ĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶŽĨĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞĂĐĐĞƐƐƉŽŝŶƚƐʹƚƵƌŶůĂŶĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐǁŝůůďĞƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚĂƚ ƚŚĞƚŝŵĞŽĨƐŝƚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉĞƌŵŝƚƚŝŶŐͬƉůĂƚƚŝŶŐǁŚĞŶŵŽƌĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉĂƌĂŵĞƚĞƌƐ ǁŝůůďĞŵĂĚĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ͘ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ;ZϵϱϭͿĂŶĚ/ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞZŽĂĚ;ZϴϰϲͿŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶŝƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇƵŶĚĞƌĚĞƐŝŐŶ ďǇŽƚŚĞƌƐĂŶĚŝƚŝƐŶŽƚƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚŝƐƚƌĂĨĨŝĐĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͘ ImprovementAnalysis ĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞůŝŶŬĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐĂŶĚƚƌŝƉĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶ͕ƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐŶŽƚĂƐŝŐŶŝĨŝĐĂŶƚĂŶĚ ĂĚǀĞƌƐĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŐĞŶĞƌĂƚŽƌĨŽƌƚŚĞƌŽĂĚǁĂǇŶĞƚǁŽƌŬĂƚƚŚŝƐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘dŚĞƌĞŝƐĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞĂŶĚ ƐƵĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚ ƌŽĂĚǁĂǇ ĐĂƉĂĐŝƚǇ ƚŽ ĂĐĐŽŵŵŽĚĂƚĞ ƚŚĞ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ǁŝƚŚŽƵƚ ĂĚǀĞƌƐĞůǇ ĂĨĨĞĐƚŝŶŐĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƌŽĂĚǁĂǇŶĞƚǁŽƌŬůĞǀĞůŽĨƐĞƌǀŝĐĞ͘ ĂƐĞĚ ƵƉŽŶ ƚŚĞ ƌĞƐƵůƚƐ ŽĨ ƚƵƌŶ ůĂŶĞ ĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ ƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚ ǁŝƚŚŝŶ ƚŚŝƐ ƌĞƉŽƌƚ͕ ƚƵƌŶ ůĂŶĞ ŝŵƉƌŽǀĞŵĞŶƚƐ ĂƌĞ ƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ Ăƚ ƚŚĞ ŵĂŝŶ ƉƌŽũĞĐƚ ĂĐĐĞƐƐ͘ ĚĞƚĂŝůĞĚ ĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶ ŽĨ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ĂĐĐĞƐƐ ƉŽŝŶƚƐ ʹ ƚƵƌŶ ůĂŶĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ ǁŝůů ďĞ ƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚ Ăƚ ƚŚĞ ƚŝŵĞ ŽĨ ƐŝƚĞ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉĞƌŵŝƚƚŝŶŐͬƉůĂƚƚŝŶŐǁŚĞŶŵŽƌĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉĂƌĂŵĞƚĞƌƐǁŝůůďĞŵĂĚĞ ĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞ͘ MitigationofImpact dŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞƌƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƉĂǇƚŚĞĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇZŽĂĚ/ŵƉĂĐƚ&ĞĞĂƐďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ ƉĞƌŵŝƚƐĂƌĞŝƐƐƵĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ PDF Page 96 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϯ AppendixA:ApprovedMasterSitePlan ;ϭ^ŚĞĞƚͿ PDF Page 97 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϰ PDF Page 98 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϱ AppendixB:ProposedMasterSitePlan ;ϭ^ŚĞĞƚͿ PDF Page 99 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϲ PDF Page 100 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϳ AppendixC:InitialMeetingChecklist (MethodologyMeeting) ;ϱ^ŚĞĞƚƐͿ PDF Page 101 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϴ PDF Page 102 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϵ PDF Page 103 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϬ PDF Page 104 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϭ PDF Page 105 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϮ PDF Page 106 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϯ AppendixD:AdoptedDevelopmentCommitments– TransportationRequirements ;Ϯ^ŚĞĞƚƐͿ PDF Page 107 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϰ PDF Page 108 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϱ PDF Page 109 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϲ AppendixE:TripGenerationCalculations ITE9thEdition ;ϳ^ŚĞĞƚƐͿ PDF Page 110 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϳ PDF Page 111 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϴ PDF Page 112 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϵ PDF Page 113 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϯϬ PDF Page 114 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϯϭ PDF Page 115 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϯϮ PDF Page 116 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌʹWhŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚʹd/^ʹKĐƚŽďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϯϯ PDF Page 117 of 264 ǯ ȂȋȌ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ͕&> ϭϮͬϭϵͬϮϬϭϲ WƌĞƉĂƌĞĚĨŽƌ͗ WƌĞƉĂƌĞĚďǇ͗ ƌĞĞŬƐŝĚĞtĞƐƚ͕/ŶĐ͘dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕W ĐͬŽĂŶtĂƚĞƌƐϭϮϬϱWŝƉĞƌŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ͕^ƵŝƚĞϮϬϮ ϮϲϬϬ'ŽůĚĞŶ'ĂƚĞWĂƌŬǁĂǇEĂƉůĞƐ͕&>ϯϰϭϭϬ EĂƉůĞƐ͕&>ϯϰϭϬϱWŚŽŶĞ͗ϮϯϵͲϱϲϲͲϵϱϱϭ ŵĂŝů͗ĚǁĂƚĞƌƐΛďĂƌƌŽŶĐŽůůŝĞƌ͘ĐŽŵŵĂŝů͗ŶƚƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬΛƚƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬ͘ďŝǌ PDF Page 118 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮ /ĐĞƌƚŝĨǇƚŚĂƚƚŚŝƐWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇŚĂƐďĞĞŶƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚďǇŵĞŽƌƵŶĚĞƌŵǇŝŵŵĞĚŝĂƚĞ ƐƵƉĞƌǀŝƐŝŽŶĂŶĚƚŚĂƚ/ŚĂǀĞĞǆƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞĂŶĚƚƌĂŝŶŝŶŐŝŶƚŚĞĨŝĞůĚŽĨdƌĂĨĨŝĐĂŶĚdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ͘ EŽƌŵĂŶ:͘dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬ͕/W͕W͘͘ &>ZĞŐŝƐƚƌĂƚŝŽŶEŽ͘ϰϳϭϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕W ϭϮϬϱWŝƉĞƌŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ͕^ƵŝƚĞϮϬϮ EĂƉůĞƐ͕&>ϯϰϭϭϬ ŽŵƉĂŶǇĞƌƚ͘ŽĨƵƚŚ͘EŽ͘Ϯϳϳϵϲ 7KLVLWHPKDVEHHQHOHFWURQLFDOO\VLJQHGDQG VHDOHGE\1RUPDQ-7UHELOFRFN3(XVLQJDSHA-1 DXWKHQWLFDWLRQFRGH 3ULQWHGFRSLHVRIWKLVGRFXPHQWDUHQRWFRQVLGHUHG VLJQHGDQGVHDOHGDQGWKHSHA-1 DXWKHQWLFDWLRQ FRGHPXVWEHYHULILHGRQDQ\HOHFWURQLFFRSLHV Norman J. Trebilcoc k P.E. 47116 Digitally signed by Norman J. Trebilcock P.E. 47116 DN: cn=Norman J. Trebilcock P.E. 47116, o=Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA, ou=Norman J. trebilcock, email=ntrebilcock@trebilc ock.biz, c=US Date: 2017.01.13 08:43:26 -05'00' PDF Page 119 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϯ Table of Contents WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϰ WĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϱ ͘ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>WĂƌŬŝŶŐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϱ ͘ /dWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶĨŽƌ>ŽǁͬDŝĚͲZŝƐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϲ ͘ ^ŝƚĞͲ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚŶĂůǇƐŝƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϳ ŽŶĐůƵƐŝŽŶƐĂŶĚZĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϬ WWE/^ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗WƌŽũĞĐƚDĂƐƚĞƌ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϮ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>ŚĂƉƚĞƌϰ͘Ϭϱ͘Ϭϰ;ǆĐĞƌƉƚƐͿ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϰ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ǆĐĞƌƉƚƐĨƌŽŵ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶDĂŶƵĂů͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϭϲ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗^ŝƚĞ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƵƌǀĞǇ&Žƌŵ͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘͘ϮϮ PDF Page 120 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϰ Project Description dŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌƉƌŽũĞĐƚŝƐĂŶĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐĂƉƉƌŽǀĞĚDŝǆĞĚͲhƐĞWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ;DWhͿ ƉƵƌƐƵĂŶƚƚŽŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇKƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞEŽ͘ϮϬϭϭͲϬϴ͕ĂƐŵĂǇďĞĂŵĞŶĚĞĚ͘dŚĞƐƵďũĞĐƚƉĂƌĐĞůŚĂƐ ĂƚŽƚĂůŐƌŽƐƐĂƌĞĂŽĨĂƉƉƌŽǆŝŵĂƚĞůǇϮϯ͘ϯϯĂĐƌĞƐ͘ dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŝƚĞŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚŝŶŶŽƌƚŚEĂƉůĞƐ͕ŝŶƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚǁĞƐƚƋƵĂĚƌĂŶƚ ŽĨ /ŵŵŽŬĂůĞĞ ZŽĂĚ ;ZϴϰϲͿĂŶĚŽůůŝĞƌŽƵůĞǀĂƌĚ;ZϵϱϭͿŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶ͕ŝŶ^ĞĐƚŝŽŶϮϮ͕dŽǁŶƐŚŝƉϰϴ^ŽƵƚŚ͕ZĂŶŐĞϮϲ ĂƐƚ͕ŝŶŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ͕&ůŽƌŝĚĂ͘ZĞĨĞƌƚŽ&ŝŐ͘ϭʹWƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶDĂƉ͕ǁŚŝĐŚĨŽůůŽǁƐĂŶĚ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗WƌŽũĞĐƚDĂƐƚĞƌ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶ͘ &ŝŐ͘ϭʹWƌŽũĞĐƚ>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶDĂƉ dŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌWhĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇƐƵďŵŝƚƚĞĚƚŽŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇƉƌŽƉŽƐĞƐƚŽƌĞƚĂŝŶƚŚĞŽƉƚŝŽŶƚŽ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂƐĐƵƌƌĞŶƚůǇĂůůŽǁĞĚďǇǌŽŶŝŶŐĂŶĚĂĚĚĂƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽƉƚŝŽŶĐŽŶƐŝƐƚŝŶŐŽĨ ϳϱ͕ϬϬϬƐĨĐŽŵŵĞƌĐŝĂůƵƐĞƐĂŶĚϯϰϵƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůŵƵůƚŝͲĨĂŵŝůǇĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐ͘ PDF Page 121 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϱ KŶĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽƚŚĂƚŝƐĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞĚǁŝƚŚƚŚŝƐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƚƵĚǇŝƐŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚŝŶ dĂďůĞϭ͕ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞ/ŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞŽĨdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŶŐŝŶĞĞƌƐWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ͕ϰƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶůĂŶĚ ƵƐĞĚĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶƐ͘ dĂďůĞϭ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚWƌŽŐƌĂŵ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ /d>ĂŶĚhƐĞ>ĂŶĚhƐĞŽĚĞdŽƚĂů^ŝǌĞ WůĂŶĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚϮϮϭϯϰϵĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐ dŚĞƉƵƌƉŽƐĞŽĨƚŚŝƐĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐŝƐƚŽĞƐƚĂďůŝƐŚƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐƐŽƚŚĞƌĞŝƐƐƵĨĨŝĐŝĞŶƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ƚŽĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞůǇƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƚŚĞƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĚĞŵĂŶĚŝŶƚŚĞĞǀĞŶƚƚŚĂƚƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚ ǁŝƚŚĂŶĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƵƐĞ͘ Parking Demand Analysis WĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚƌĞĨĞƌƐƚŽƚŚĞĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚďĞƵƐĞĚĂƚĂƉĂƌƚŝĐƵůĂƌƚŝŵĞĂŶĚ ƉůĂĐĞ͘/ƚŝƐĂĐƌŝƚŝĐĂůĨĂĐƚŽƌŝŶĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŶŐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͘WĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚŝƐĂĨĨĞĐƚĞĚďǇǀĂƌŝŽƵƐ ĨĂĐƚŽƌƐƐƵĐŚĂƐƚǇƉĞŽĨƵƐĞ͕ƚƌŝƉƌĂƚĞƐ͕ƚŝŵĞŽĨĚĂǇ͕ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚƵƌĂƚŝŽŶĂŶĚŐĞŽŐƌĂƉŚŝĐůŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ͘ /Ŷ ƚŚŝƐ ƌĞƉŽƌƚ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĂĚĞƋƵĂĐǇ ŝƐ ƌĞǀŝĞǁĞĚ ĂŶĚĚĞƚĞƌŵŝŶĞĚ ďĂƐĞĚ ŽŶƚŚĞ ƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨ ƚŚƌĞĞ ĞǀĂůƵĂƚŝŽŶ ĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂ͗ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĐƌŝƚĞƌŝĂ͕ WĂƌŬŝŶŐĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ ďĂƐĞĚ ŽŶ /ŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞ ŽĨ dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌƐ ;/dͿ WĂƌŬŝŶŐ 'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ DĂŶƵĂů ĂŶĚ WĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ ďĂƐĞĚ ŽŶ ŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚƐŝƚĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐŽĨĂƐŝŵŝůĂƌƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;D>/ŽƌĂůƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ,ŽŵĞƐͿ͘ A. Collier County LDC Parking Criteria ƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ ĨŽƌ ŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĂƌĞ ŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚ ŝŶ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ >ĂŶĚ ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ŽĚĞ ;>Ϳ ʹ ŚĂƉƚĞƌ ϰ͘Ϭϱ͘Ϭϰ͕ WĂƌŬŝŶŐ ^ƉĂĐĞ ZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐ͘ dŚĞ ŵŽƐƚ ĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞƵƐĞŝŶƚŚĞƚĂďůĞŝƐDƵůƚŝͲĨĂŵŝůǇĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƐ͕ǁŚŝĐŚƐƚĂƚĞƐĂůůƵŶŝƚƐƐŚĂůůŚĂǀĞϭƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ƐƉĂĐĞƉĞƌƵŶŝƚƉůƵƐǀŝƐŝƚŽƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĐŽŵƉƵƚĞĚĂƚϬ͘ϱƉĞƌĞĨĨŝĐŝĞŶĐǇƵŶŝƚ͕Ϭ͘ϳϱƉĞƌϭďĞĚƌŽŽŵ ƵŶŝƚ͕ĂŶĚϭƉĞƌϮďĞĚƌŽŽŵŽƌůĂƌŐĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘dĂďůĞϮŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞƐƚŚĞ>ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƌĂƚĞƐƉĞƌ ŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇ͘ PDF Page 122 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϲ dĂďůĞϮ >ĂŶĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĚĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐZĂƚĞƐ dǇƉĞŽĨhŶŝƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌ hŶŝƚ sŝƐŝƚŽƌWĂƌŬŝŶŐWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƉĂĐĞZĂƚĞ ƉĞƌKĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇ ϭĞĚƌŽŽŵϭϬ͘ϳϱϭ͘ϳϱ ϮĞĚƌŽŽŵϭϭ͘ϬϮ͘Ϭ ϯĞĚƌŽŽŵϭϭ͘ϬϮ͘Ϭ ƐĂŶĞǆĂŵƉůĞ͕ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞŵĂǆŝŵƵŵƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŽĨϯϰϵĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐ͕dĂďůĞ ϯŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞƐĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚŝƐƚƌŝďƵƚŝŽŶďǇŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇ͘ dĂďůĞϯ ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ>WĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƉĂĐĞZĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐͲǆĂŵƉůĞ dǇƉĞŽĨhŶŝƚйŽĨWƌŽũĞĐƚhŶŝƚŽƵŶƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐZĂƚĞdŽƚĂůWĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĞŵĂŶĚ ϭĞĚƌŽŽŵϰϮйϭϰϲϭ͘ϳϱϮϱϲ ϮĞĚƌŽŽŵϰϱйϭϱϳϮ͘Ϭϯϭϰ ϯĞĚƌŽŽŵϭϯйϰϲϮ͘ϬϵϮ dŽƚĂůƐϭϬϬйϯϰϵͲϲϲϮ ^Ž͕ƉĞƌŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>͕ƚŚĞĞǆĂŵƉůĞƐŚŽǁŶƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐϭ͘ϵϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘&ŽƌƚŚĞ ŵĂǆŝŵƵŵƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚŝŶƚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ƚŚĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚǁŽƵůĚ ďĞϲϲϮ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ƐƉĂĐĞƐ͘ ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐ ŽůůŝĞƌ ŽƵŶƚǇ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞŵĞŶƚƐĂƌĞ ŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞĚ ŝŶ ƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>ŚĂƉƚĞƌϰ͘Ϭϱ͘Ϭϰ;ǆĐĞƌƉƚƐͿ͘ ŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>ƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĚŽŶŽƚĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇĂĚĚƌĞƐƐĂŶĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚůĂŶĚƵƐĞƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽƚŚĂƚ ŵĂǇ ŚĂǀĞ ĚŝĨĨĞƌĞŶƚ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĚĞŵĂŶĚƐ ƚŚĂŶ ƚŚĞ ŵƵůƚŝͲĨĂŵŝůǇ ĐĂƚĞŐŽƌǇ ;ŝ͘Ğ͘ ƚǇƉŝĐĂůůǇ Ă ĐŽŶĚŽŵŝŶŝƵŵͿƚŚĂƚŝƚŝƐĐĂƚĞŐŽƌŝǌĞĚǁŝƚŚ͘ B. ITE Parking Generation for Low/Mid-Rise Apartments dŚĞŵŝŶŝŵƵŵŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚĨŽƌĂƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůĂŶĚƵƐĞƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽƚŚĂƚ ŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐĂƚƚŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚĐĂŶĂůƐŽďĞĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞĚďǇĂƉƉůǇŝŶŐĂ ƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚůĂŶĚƵƐĞĐŽĚĞŽĨƚŚĞ/ŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞŽĨdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŶŐŝŶĞĞƌƐ;/dͿ͕WĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ DĂŶƵĂů͕ϰƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶƚŚĂƚŵĂǇŵŽƌĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂůůǇĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞƐƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘dŚĞ/d>ĂŶĚhƐĞŽĚĞ ;>hͿϮϮϭ͕>ŽǁͬDŝĚͲZŝƐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚŝƐĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞůǇƵƐĞĚ͘dŚĞǀĞƌĂŐĞWĞĂŬWĞƌŝŽĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĞŵĂŶĚĨŽƌtĞĞŬĚĂǇ^ƵďƵƌďĂŶĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐǁĂƐϭ͘ϮϯƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚ͘/d PDF Page 123 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϳ ƐƚƵĚǇŝŶĨŽƌŵĂƚŝŽŶŝŶĚŝĐĂƚĞƐƚŚĂƚƚŚĞǁĞĞŬĞŶĚŚĂƐĂůĞƐƐĞƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚƚŚĂŶƚŚĞǁĞĞŬĚĂǇƐ ĨŽƌƐƵďƵƌďĂŶƐŝƚĞƐ͕ƐŝŵŝůĂƌƚŽƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ ĐĐŽƌĚŝŶŐƚŽƚŚĞ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶDĂŶƵĂůĂƚĂďĂƐĞĞƐĐƌŝƉƚŝŽŶĨŽƌ>hϮϮϭ͕ƐƚƵĚǇƐŝƚĞƐ ǁŝƚŚĂŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞŽĨůĞƐƐƚŚĂŶϭ͘ϱďĞĚƌŽŽŵƐƉĞƌĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚŝŶƚŚĞĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚĐŽŵƉůĞǆ ƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚƉĞĂŬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚĂƚϵϮйŽĨƚŚĞĂǀĞƌĂŐĞƉĞĂŬƉĞƌŝŽĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚĨŽƌĂůů ƐƚƵĚǇƐŝƚĞƐǁŝƚŚďĞĚƌŽŽŵĚĂƚĂ;ϵϮйǆϭ͘ϮϯͿ͘ ^ŝŵŝůĂƌůǇ͕ƐƚƵĚǇƐŝƚĞƐǁŝƚŚĂŶĂǀĞƌĂŐĞŽĨϮ͘ϬŽƌŐƌĞĂƚĞƌďĞĚƌŽŽŵƐƉĞƌĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƌĞƉŽƌƚĞĚ ƉĞĂŬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚĂƚϭϯйŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƚŚĂŶƚŚĞĂǀĞƌĂŐĞƉĞĂŬƉĞƌŝŽĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚ;ϭϭϯйǆ ϭ͘ϮϯͿ͘ hƐŝŶŐ ƚŚĞ ƵŶŝƚ ĐŽƵŶƚƐ ĨƌŽŵ ƚŚĞ ƉƌĞǀŝŽƵƐ ĞǆĂŵƉůĞ ĂďŽǀĞ͕ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĚĞŵĂŶĚ ǁĂƐ ĐĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĚĨŽƌŽŶĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂŶĚϮŽƌŐƌĞĂƚĞƌďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ͘ &ŽƌŵŽƌĞĚĞƚĂŝůƐƌĞĨĞƌƚŽdĂďůĞϰĂŶĚƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ǆĐĞƌƉƚƐĨƌŽŵ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ DĂŶƵĂů͘ dĂďůĞϰ /dWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚʹ&Žƌ>ŽǁͬDŝĚͲZŝƐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ;>hϮϮϭͿ dǇƉĞŽĨhŶŝƚ/dZĂƚĞƐ ǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐZĞƋƵŝƌĞĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ ϭĞĚƌŽŽŵ Ϭ͘ϵϮǆ ϭ͘Ϯϯсϭ͘ϭϯ ƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌ ĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚ ϭϰϲϭϲϲ ϮĞĚƌŽŽŵƐŽƌŐƌĞĂƚĞƌ ϭ͘ϭϯǆ ϭ͘Ϯϯсϭ͘ϯϵ ƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌ ĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚ ϮϬϯϮϴϯ dŽƚĂůϯϰϵϰϰϵ dĂďůĞϯEŽƚĞ͗yсǁĞůůŝŶŐhŶŝƚƐ ĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞĚĂƚĂƐŚŽǁŶŝŶdĂďůĞϰ͕ƚŚĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐŝƐϭ͘ϮϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘&Žƌ ƚŚĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽŝŶǁŚŝĐŚĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌŝƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚǁŝƚŚĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ ŵĂǆŝŵƵŵĂůůŽǁĂďůĞŝŶƚĞŶƐŝƚǇ͕ƚŚĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚǁŽƵůĚďĞϰϰϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ ďĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞ/dƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚƐ͘ C. Site-Specific Parking Demand Analysis ƐŝƚĞͲƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚĨŝĞůĚƐƚƵĚǇǁĂƐƉĞƌĨŽƌŵĞĚĂƚƚŚĞD>/ŽƌĂůƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ,ŽŵĞƐ͕ŽƌĂů&ůŽƌŝĚĂ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂϯϱϮƵŶŝƚƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƚŚĂƚŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚ ŝŶĂƐƵďƵƌďĂŶƐĞƚƚŝŶŐ;ƐŝŵŝůĂƌƚŽƚŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌƐŝƚĞͿ͘ PDF Page 124 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϴ dŚĞD>/ŽƌĂůƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ,ŽŵĞƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƐϱϵϮŽĨĨͲƐƚƌĞĞƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ͕ ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐĂƚĂƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϲϴƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘dŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚŚĂƐĂŶŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇŽĨϵϱ͘ϰϭй͘ dŚĞ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶDĂŶƵĂůƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚƐƵƌǀĞǇĨŽƌŵǁĂƐƵƚŝůŝǌĞĚƚŽŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞƚŚĞ ŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚŽŶƐŝǆƐĞƉĂƌĂƚĞĚĂǇƐĂƐĨŽůůŽǁƐ͗tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂǇϬϵͬϬϳͬϮϬϭϲƚŚƌƵ ^ƵŶĚĂǇϬϵͬϭϭͬϮϬϭϲ͕ĂŶĚdƵĞƐĚĂǇϬϵͬϭϯͬϮϬϭϲ͘dŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĐŽƵŶƚƐǁĞƌĞƚĂŬĞŶĚƵƌŝŶŐƚŚĞ ƉĞĂŬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƚŝŵĞŽĨĚĂǇĨŽƌƚŚŝƐůĂŶĚƵƐĞ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐďĞƚǁĞĞŶϭϮ͗ϬϬĂŶĚϱ͗ϬϬĂŵĨŽƌ^ƵďƵƌďĂŶ tĞĞŬĚĂǇ;ZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗ǆĐĞƌƉƚƐĨƌŽŵ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶDĂŶƵĂů͕WĂŐĞϭϳͿ͘dŚĞ ƉĞĂŬŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚĚĞŵĂŶĚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁĂƐϱϬϰƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ͘ĚũƵƐƚĞĚĨŽƌŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇ͕ƚŚĞ ŚŝŐŚĞƐƚŽďƐĞƌǀĂƚŝŽŶĞƋƵĂƚĞƐƚŽĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϭ͘ϱϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘ƚϭϬϬй ŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇ͕ƚŚĞ>D/ŽƌĂůƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ,ŽŵĞƐǁŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞĂĚĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϱϮϴƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ͘ ZĞĨĞƌƚŽƉƉĞŶĚŝǆ͗^ŝƚĞ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƵƌǀĞǇ&ŽƌŵĨŽƌĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂůĚĞƚĂŝůƐŽĨƚŚĞ ŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚĚĂƚĂ͘ Ɛ ĂŶ ĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶĂů ĂŶĂůǇƐŝƐ ĂƉƉƌŽĂĐŚ͕ ǁĞ ůŽŽŬĞĚ Ăƚ ƚŚĞ ƉĞƌ ďĞĚƌŽŽŵĚĞŵĂŶĚĨŽƌƚŚĞ ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ͘/ĨǁĞĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞƚŚĞŽĐĐƵƉŝĞĚďĞĚƌŽŽŵƐ;ďĞĚƐͿĂŶĚƚŚĞŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚƉĞĂŬĚĞŵĂŶĚ͕ ǁĞĂƌƌŝǀĞĂƚĂĚĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϬ͘ϴϵϱϮƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌďĞĚƌŽŽŵ͘dŚŝƐĨŝŐƵƌĞĞƋƵĂƚĞƐƚŽϱϬϰ ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐĨŽƌƚŚĞŽďƐĞƌǀĞĚĚĞŵĂŶĚ͕ĂŶĚϱϯϮƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐĂƚϭϬϬйŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇ͕ǁŚŝĐŚ ĞƋƵĂƚĞƐƚŽĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϭ͘ϱϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘dĂďůĞϱŝůůƵƐƚƌĂƚĞƐƚŚĞŽĐĐƵƉŝĞĚ ďĞĚƌŽŽŵĐŽƵŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞD>/ŽƌĂůƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ,ŽŵĞƐ͘ PDF Page 125 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϵ dĂďůĞϱ D>/ŽƌĂůƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ,ŽŵĞƐĞĚƌŽŽŵŽƵŶƚ dǇƉĞŽĨhŶŝƚEƵŵďĞƌŽĨhŶŝƚƐEƵŵďĞƌŽĨ ǀĂŝůĂďůĞ ĞĚƌŽŽŵƐ EƵŵďĞƌŽĨ KĐĐƵƉŝĞĚhŶŝƚƐ EƵŵďĞƌŽĨ KĐĐƵƉŝĞĚ ĞĚƌŽŽŵƐ ϭĞĚƌŽŽŵϭϰϰϭϰϰϭϰϬϭϰϬ ϮĞĚƌŽŽŵϭϳϲϯϱϮϭϲϱϯϯϬ ϯĞĚƌŽŽŵϯϮϵϲϯϭϵϯ dŽƚĂůƐϯϱϮϱϵϮϯϯϲϱϲϯ EŽƚĞ͗WĞĂŬWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚƉĞƌZŽŽŵсWĞĂŬKďƐĞƌǀĞĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚͬKĐĐƵƉŝĞĚĞĚƌŽŽŵƐсϱϬϰͬϱϲϯ сϬ͘ϴϵϱϮ͕ZŽƵŶĚĞĚƵƉƚŽϬ͘ϵ͘ dŚĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐĐĞŶĂƌŝŽƚŚĂƚŝŶĐůƵĚĞƐĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐĂƚƚŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ ǁŽƵůĚŚĂǀĞĂŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨϭďĞĚƌŽŽŵ͕ϮďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂŶĚϯďĞĚƌŽŽŵƵŶŝƚƐ͘ŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĚĞŵĂŶĚĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>ĂŶĚƚŚĞ/dWĂƌŬŝŶŐ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶDĂŶƵĂů͕ƚŚĞ ĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐĂƌĞĐůĂƐƐŝĨŝĞĚĂƐϭďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂŶĚϮŽƌŵŽƌĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵƐ͘ ŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝǀĞůǇĂŶĚĨŽƌĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞ͕ƚŚĞĐĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĚWĞĂŬWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϬ͘ϴϵϱϮŝƐƌŽƵŶĚĞĚ ƵƉƚŽϬ͘ϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌďĞĚ͘ƉƉůǇŝŶŐƚŚĞϬ͘ϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌŽŶĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵƵŶŝƚƐĂŶĚ ϭ͘ϴƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐĨŽƌϮŽƌŵŽƌĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵƵŶŝƚƐ͕ƚŚĞĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌŵĂǆŝŵƵŵƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂů ĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƌĞƐƵůƚƐŝŶĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϰϵϴƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ͕ŽƌĂƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϰϯƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ ƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘ZĞĨĞƌƚŽdĂďůĞϲĨŽƌƚŚĞĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞĂǀĂŝůĂďůĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵƐĨŽƌĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌ͘ PDF Page 126 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϬ dĂďůĞϲ ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌĞĚƌŽŽŵŽƵŶƚ dǇƉĞŽĨhŶŝƚEƵŵďĞƌŽĨhŶŝƚƐWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƵƉƉůǇZĂƚĞĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĞŵĂŶĚ ϭĞĚƌŽŽŵϭϰϲϬ͘ϵϭϯϮ ϮŽƌŵŽƌĞ ĞĚƌŽŽŵƐ ϮϬϯϭ͘ϴϯϲϲ dŽƚĂůƐϯϰϵͲϰϵϴ Conclusions and Recommendations dŚĞŽůůŝĞƌŽƵŶƚǇ>ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚƐĐƌŝƚĞƌŝŽŶĨŽƌŵƵůƚŝͲĨĂŵŝůǇĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƐƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐĂƌĂƚĞŽĨ ϭ͘ϳϱƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚĨŽƌϭďĞĚƌŽŽŵĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐĂŶĚϮ͘ϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚĨŽƌϮ ŽƌŵŽƌĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐ͘dŚĞ>ƌĞƐƵůƚƐŝŶĂĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝǀĞ;ŚŝŐŚͿƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚ ĞƐƚŝŵĂƚĞĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƵƐĞǁŝƚŚĂŶŽǀĞƌĂůůƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϵϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚĨŽƌĂƚǇƉŝĐĂů ŵŝǆŽĨŽŶĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂŶĚƚǁŽĂŶĚŐƌĞĂƚĞƌďĞĚƌŽŽŵƵŶŝƚƐ͘dŚŝƐŽƉƚŝŽŶĚŽĞƐŶŽƚĂĐĐŽƵŶƚĨŽƌƚŚĞ ƵŶŝƋƵĞŶĞƐƐ ŽĨ ƚŚĞ ƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůǇ ƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚ ƵƐĞ ĂƐ Ă ůĞĂƐĞĚ ĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚ ĨĂĐŝůŝƚǇ ƵŶĚĞƌ ƐŝŶŐƵůĂƌ ŽǁŶĞƌƐŚŝƉ͘ŶŽƚŚĞƌĨĂĐƚŽƌŝƐƚŚĞŶƵŵďĞƌŽĨϭͲďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐŝŶƚŚĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůƉƌŽũĞĐƚ;ŽǀĞƌ ϰϭйͿƚŚĂƚǁŽƵůĚŝŶĨůƵĞŶĐĞƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚ͘dǇƉŝĐĂůŵƵůƚŝͲĨĂŵŝůǇĐŽŶĚŽŵŝŶŝƵŵƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐĂƌĞ ϮĂŶĚϯͲďĞĚƌŽŽŵƐǁŝƚŚĂŐƌĞĂƚĞƌŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŚĂƐĂŶŝŵƉĂĐƚŽŶƚŚĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚ͘ dŚĞ/ŶƐƚŝƚƵƚĞŽĨdƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƚŝŽŶŶŐŝŶĞĞƌƐ;/dͿŚĂƐĂƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůĂŶĚƵƐĞĐŽĚĞ;>hϮϮϭͲ >ŽǁͬDŝĚͲZŝƐĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐͿƚŚĂƚŵŽƌĞĚŝƌĞĐƚůǇƌĞůĂƚĞƐƚŽƚŚŝƐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͛ƐůĂŶĚƵƐĞ͘&Žƌ>ŽǁͬDŝĚͲƌŝƐĞ ƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ͕/dƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐĂƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϭϯƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚĨŽƌϭďĞĚƌŽŽŵĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐĂŶĚ ϭ͘ϯϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚĨŽƌϮŽƌŵŽƌĞďĞĚƌŽŽŵĚǁĞůůŝŶŐƵŶŝƚƐ͘dŚĞ/dŽǀĞƌĂůůǁĞĞŬĚĂǇƉĞĂŬ ƌĂƚĞĐĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůůĂŶĚƵƐĞŝƐϭ͘ϮϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘dŚŽƵŐŚŵŽƌĞƌĞůĞǀĂŶƚ͕ ƚŚĞ/dƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƌĂƚĞƐŵĂǇďĞĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĞĚŵŽƌĞŐĞŶĞƌĂůŝǌĞĚ͕ƐŝŶĐĞƚŚĞĚĂƚĂĐŽǀĞƌƐĂďƌŽĂĚĞƌ ƐƉĞĐƚƌƵŵŽĨƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐĂĐƌŽƐƐƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚƌǇ͘ ^ŝƚĞƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĚĂƚĂĐŽůůĞĐƚĞĚĨƌŽŵĂƐŝŵŝůĂƌĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ;D>/ŽƌĂůͿƉƌŽĚƵĐĞĚĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚ ŽĨϭ͘ϱϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ;ĂĚũƵƐƚĞĚĨŽƌŽĐĐƵƉĂŶĐǇͿ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞͲƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĚĂƚĂǁĂƐĂůƐŽƵƐĞĚƚŽ ĐĂůĐƵůĂƚĞĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĚĞŵĂŶĚŽĨϬ͘ϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌďĞĚƌŽŽŵ͕ƵŶĚĞƌĐƵƌƌĞŶƚĐŽŶĚŝƚŝŽŶƐ͕ǁŚŝĐŚ ĞƋƵĂƚĞƐƚŽϭ͘ϱϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘ hƐŝŶŐϬ͘ϵƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌďĞĚƌŽŽŵ͕ƚŚĞƉŽƚĞŶƚŝĂůĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚŝĂůƉƌŽũĞĐƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ ĚĞŵĂŶĚŝƐϰϵϴƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐǁŚŝĐŚƉƌŽĚƵĐĞƐĂƌĂƚŝŽŽĨϭ͘ϰϯƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚĨŽƌƚŚŝƐ ĞǆĂŵƉůĞƐŵŝǆŽĨƵŶŝƚƐ͘ƐƚŚŝƐĞǆĂŵƉůĞƐŵŝǆŚĂƐϰϮйŽĨƚŚĞƵŶŝƚƐĂƐϭďĞĚƌŽŽŵ͕ǁĞƐƵŐŐĞƐƚ͕ ĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝǀĞůǇ͕ƚŚĂƚĂŐĞŶĞƌĂůŝǌĞĚƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϱƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚďĞƵƐĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶ PDF Page 127 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϭ ŽĨƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐĨŽƌϭͲďĞĚƌŽŽŵƵŶŝƚƐ͘/ŶĂĚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͕ĂϭϬйƐĂĨĞƚǇĨĂĐƚŽƌŝƐƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĞĚ͕ƌĞƐƵůƚŝŶŐ ŝŶĂϭ͘ϲϱƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚĨŽƌϭͲďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ͘ tŚĞŶĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌŝŶŐϮͲďĞĚƌŽŽŵŽƌŐƌĞĂƚĞƌƵŶŝƚƐ͕ĐŽŶƐŝƐƚĞŶƚǁŝƚŚƚŚĞĂďŽǀĞĐĂůĐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐĨŽƌĚĚŝĞ͛Ɛ ŽƌŶĞƌĞĚƌŽŽŵŽƵŶƚ;ƐĞĞdĂďůĞϲͿ͕ǁĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϴƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘ &ŽƌϭͲďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƵŶŝƚƐ͕ǁĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϲϱƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ ĂƐĂŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ &ŽƌϮͲďĞĚƌŽŽŵĂƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƵŶŝƚƐ͕ǁĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϴϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ ĂƐĂŶĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞƐƚĂŶĚĂƌĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘ ĂƐĞĚŽŶƚŚĞƐĞƌĞĐŽŵŵĞŶĚĂƚŝŽŶƐ͕ƚŚĞĞǆĂŵƉůĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŽƵůĚƌĞƋƵŝƌĞϲϬϳƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐǁŝƚŚ ĂŶŽǀĞƌĂůůƌĂƚĞŽĨϭ͘ϳϰWĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐƉĞƌƵŶŝƚ͘ PDF Page 128 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϮ Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan ;ϭ^ŚĞĞƚͿ PDF Page 129 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϯ PDF Page 130 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϰ Appendix B: Collier County LDC Chapter 4.05.04 (Excerpts) ;ϭ^ŚĞĞƚͿ PDF Page 131 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϱ PDF Page 132 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϲ Appendix C: Excerpts from ITE Parking Generation Manual ;ϱ^ŚĞĞƚƐͿ PDF Page 133 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϳ PDF Page 134 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϴ PDF Page 135 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϭϵ PDF Page 136 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϬ PDF Page 137 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϭ PDF Page 138 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϮ Appendix D: Site ITE Parking Demand Survey Form ;ϭ^ŚĞĞƚͿ PDF Page 139 of 264 ĚĚŝĞ͛ƐŽƌŶĞƌDŝǆĞĚWůĂŶŶĞĚhŶŝƚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚʹ;DWhͿʹWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚǇʹĞĐĞŵďĞƌϮϬϭϲ dƌĞďŝůĐŽĐŬŽŶƐƵůƚŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƚŝŽŶƐ͕WWĂŐĞͮϮϯ PDF Page 140 of 264 ! " ! # $%&'%((')$*( +,- . / ,- 0 1 ,-23 4 ,-0 ,-0 5 ! %" 6# 7. / 4 5 .5 / 0 # 8 0 6./999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 5 0 . / # 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 799999999999999999999999999999!399999999999999999999999992 9999999999999999999999999 ! " ######################################################################################### $ 04: 4: 0; ; 5 : !#!#<0= : 05 : > 6 " $ 5 ?0 #:0 0 ))@AA$))))("))@AA%*)))$"))@&))B)A)$))@&))B@C)) 6 +1 0 D +1 0 D 0+ E" E5 " F=# 5 "5"%A))G 1"D "!4%B@%B $%&'&B('@@BB H I@%"$)@* 0 1 0 1 # 3::# 3:: %*A %C) PDF Page 141 of 264 PDF Page 142 of 264 %&$ 0 1 .J /"K 0 . / J " E 0 4.054/ 3 " 3 # 3 # 5! 3 "3 ! " '( ) 5 23 4 3 23 3 K K @AK K J 1 .0%A)"!/ I@"$))C 5 0 5 PDF Page 143 of 264 Immokalee RD PLATEAU RDESPLANADE BLVDBELLAIRE BAY DRCollier BLVDPebblebrooke DRBroken Back RD TOSCANA WAY WEATHERED STONE DR GERVAIS CIR GOODLAND BAY DRB i g A c o r n C I R Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community ´ Addie's Corner MPUD Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY PDF Page 144 of 264 Addie’s Corner MPUD Deviation Justifications April 6, 2017 Page 1 of 2 Deviation 1: Approved Ordinance No. 2011-08 Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.H.1.a., commercial and industrial districts, which require if located on a contiguous residentially zoned property, the wall and/or fence shall be a minimum of six (6) feet and a maximum of eight (8) feet in height and shall be located a minimum of six (6) feet from the residentially zoned district, to not require a wall within a Type B buffer along the east property line of this MPUD adjacent to the Tree Farm MPUD to the east. (See Exhibit C, MPUD Master Plan.) As mitigation for the wall, a 6-foot height hedge shall be required in addition to the requirements of a Type B Landscape buffer. (Also, see Exhibit B - Development Standards pertaining to Landscaping). Deviation 2: Approved Ordinance No. 2011-08 Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 to allow the floor area ratio (F.A.R.) to be increased from 0.45 to 0.60 for a Group Housing/Retirement Community. Deviation 3: Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G - Parking Spaces Required for Multi-Family Dwellings, which requires one parking space per residential unit plus 0.75 guest spaces for one- bedroom residential units and one guest space for two bedroom and larger units. In the event that Tract C is developed as leased multifamily units, this deviation proposes to establish the required number of parking spaces for apartment multifamily residential units as 1.65 spaces per one bedroom unit and 1.8 spaces per two bedroom and larger uses (inclusive of resident and guest parking spaces). Justification: The LDC standards do not distinguish between apartment and condominium multi-family land uses. Multi-family condominium projects generally have greater occupancy and as such a greater parking demand than rental apartment uses. In the event that the residential portion of the project is developed as a leased apartment development under single ownership, this deviation proposes to allow for a required parking ratio that is more appropriate for the parking demands associated with that use (based on Institute of Transportation Engineers guidelines and a site- specific parking analysis of similar uses). Deviation 4: Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.04.G - Dumpsters and Recycling, which requires that multi-family rental units provide dumpsters or a compactor to allow for rental units to have PDF Page 145 of 264 Addie’s Corner MPUD Deviation Justifications April 6, 2017 Page 2 of 2 the option for building staff to transport bulk containers from storage areas internal to the buildings to designated areas for pick up by the solid waste and recycling hauler. Justification: In the event that rental units are proposed within the project, the requested deviation would provide flexibility in the type of services provided to residents and the provision of solid waste and recycling pick up. Deviation 5: Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N – Street System Requirements and Appendix B, Typical Street Sections and Right-of-Way Design Standards. The LDC establishes a minimum 60-foot right of way width for local streets. This deviation proposes to reduce the required right- of-way width for local streets to 50 feet. Justification: The number of lanes and required lane width can be accommodated within the proposed 50-foot rights of way and the reduction in the minimum required width will provide for a more efficient and compact development project. Deviation 6: Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G – Parking Spaces Required for Multifamily Dwellings allows for a reduction of the number of required parking spaces for small-scale recreational facilities within multi-family developments based upon the proximity of the units to the small scale recreational facility. The LDC allows for the required parking at the recreational facilities to be calculated at 25% of normal requirements in cases where the majority of the multifamily units are located within 300 feet of the recreational facilities. This deviation proposes to increase the specified distance for the reduction of parking requirements for small-scale recreational facilities from 300 to 500 feet. Justification: The proposed project will have a system of connected pathways from the multifamily units to the small scale recreational facilities that will allow for efficient pedestrian access to recreational facilities and will encourage walking within the potential multifamily uses. PDF Page 146 of 264 12' TRAVEL LANE2'4'5'CONCRETESIDEWALK2'10' P.U.E.PROPOSEDMULTI-FAMILY12' TRAVEL LANE2'4'5'CONCRETESIDEWALK2'10' P.U.E.FUTURECOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT(CONCEPTUAL)41AVERAGE EXISTING GROUNDELEV. VARIESSTABILIZEDSUBGRADELIMEROCKBASEASPHALT CONCRETE(TYP)50' RIGHT OF WAYADDIE'S CORNERGradyMinorCivil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151Business LC 26000266 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144Fort Myers: 239.690.4380PDF Page 147 of 264 PDF Page 148 of 264 PDF Page 149 of 264 PDF Page 150 of 264 PDF Page 151 of 264 PDF Page 152 of 264 PDF Page 153 of 264 PDF Page 154 of 264 PDF Page 155 of 264 PDF Page 156 of 264 PDF Page 157 of 264 PDF Page 158 of 264 PDF Page 159 of 264 PDF Page 160 of 264 PDF Page 161 of 264 PDF Page 162 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 1 of 16 EXHIBIT “A” LIST OF PERMITTED USES ADDIES CORNER MPUD Regulations for development of the Addies Corner MPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this MPUD Document and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any site development plan or plat. Where this MPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: I. Tract A – Permitted Commercial Principal Uses: A. Commercial Professional Retail & General Office Permitted Use (Sic In Parenthesis) 1. Accident & Health Insurance Services (6321) 2. Accounting, Auditing and Bookkeeping Services (8721) 3. Adjustment services (7322) 4. Advertising (consultants) agencies (7311) 5. Advertising, not elsewhere classified (7319) 6. Agricultural uses (N/A) 7. Architectural services (8712) 8. Auto & Home Supply Stores (5531) 9. Bakeries, Retail (5461) 10. Banks, commercial: national (6021) 11. Banks, commercial: not chartered (6029) 12. Banks, commercial: state (6022) 13. Banks, savings: Federal (6035) 14. Banks, savings: not federally chartered (6036) 15. Barber Shops (7241) 16. Beauty Shops (7231) 17. Book Stores (5942) 18. Business Associations (8611) 19. Business Consulting Services, not elsewhere classified (8748) 20. Camera & Photographic Supply Stores (5946) 21. Candy, Nut & Confectionery Stores (5441) 22. Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning (7217) 23. Civic, Social and Fraternal Associations (8641) 24. Clothing & Accessory Stores, Men's & Boy's (5611) 25. Clothing Stores, Women's (5621) 26. Collection Services (7322) 27. Commodity Contracts Brokers & Dealers (6221) 28. Commercial Art & Graphic Design (7336) 29. Commercial Photography (7335) 30. Commercial Economic, Sociological & Educational Research (8732) 31. Computer & Computer Software Stores (5734) PDF Page 163 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 2 of 16 32. Computer Facilities Management Services (7376) 33. Computer Maintenance and Repair (7378) 34. Computer Processing & Data Preparation Services (7374) 35. Computer Programming services (7371) 36. Computer Rental & Leasing (7377) 37. Credit Reporting Services (1323) 38. Credit Unions, Federal (6061) 39. Credit Unions, State: not federally chartered (6062) 40. Dairy Products Stores (5451) 41. Data Processing Consultants (7379) 42. Dance Studios, Schools & Halls (7911) 43. Data Processing Services (7374) 44. Dental Laboratories (8072) 45. Dentist Office/Clinic (8021) 46. Direct mail advertising service (7331) 47. Direct Selling Establishments (5963) 48. Doctors - Medicine Offices & Clinics (8011) 49. Doctors - Osteopathy Offices & Clinics (8031) 50. Doctors - Chiropractors Offices & Clinics (8041) 51. Drapery, Curtain & Upholstery Stores (5714) 52. Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages); Bottle Clubs and Cabarets are not permitted (5813) 53. Drug Stores (5912) 54. Eating Places (5812) 55. Engineering services: industrial, civil, electrical, mechanical, marine and design (8711) 56. Executive Offices (9111) 57. Executive & Legislative Offices Combined (9131) 58. Fire, Marine & Casualty Insurance Services (6331) 59. Floor Covering Stores (5713) 60. Florists (5992) 61. Food Stores, Miscellaneous (5499) 62. Foreign Branches & Agencies of Banks (6081) 63. Foreign Trade & International Banking Institutions (6082) 64. Furniture Stores (5712) 65. Funeral home or parlor (7261) 66. Gasoline Service Stations (5541) 67. General Government, not elsewhere classified (9199) 68. Gift, Novelty & Souvenir Shops (5947) 69. Grocery Stores (5411) 70. Hair weaving or Replacement Services (7299) 71. Hardware Store (5251) 72. Health practitioners - not elsewhere classified (8049) 73. Hobby, Toy & Games Shops (5945) 74. Home health care services (8082) 75. Hotels & Motels (7011) 76. Household Appliance Stores (5722) 77. Hospital & Medical Healthy Services (6324) 78. Information Retrieval Services (7375) 79. Insurance Carriers, not elsewhere classified (6399) 80. Investment Advice (6282) PDF Page 164 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 3 of 16 81. Jewelry Stores (5944) 82. Land Subdividers & Developers (6552) 83. Landscape architects, consulting & planning (0781) 84. Laundries (Coin Operated) & Dry-cleaning (7215) 85. Legal services (8111) 86. Libraries (except regional libraries) (8231) 87. Life Insurance Services (6311) 88. Liquor Stores (5921) 89. Loan brokers (6163) 90. Luggage & Leather Goods Stores (5948) 91. Management Services (8741) 92. Management Consulting Services (8742) 93. Markets, Meat & Fish (Seafood) Markets (5421) 94. Markets, Fruit & Vegetable Markets (5431) 95. Medical Equipment Rental & Leasing (7352) 96. Medical Laboratories (8071) 97. Membership Organizations, not elsewhere classified (8699) 98. Miscellaneous amusement and recreational services not elsewhere classified. Only judo instruction, karate instruction, moped rental, motorcycle rental, rental of bicycles, scuba and skin diving instruction are permitted (7999) 99. Miscellaneous Business Credit Institutions (6159) 100. Miscellaneous General Merchandise Stores (5399) 101. Miscellaneous Home Furnishings Stores (5719) 102. Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified excluding massage parlors, steam baths, tattoo parlors and Turkish baths. (7299) 103. Miscellaneous Retail Stores, not elsewhere classified (5999) 104. Mortgage Bankers & Loan Correspondents (6162) 105. Musical Instrument Stores (5736) 106. News Dealers & Newsstands (5994) 107. Nondeposit Trust Facilities (6091) 108. Optical Goods Stores (5995) 109. Optometrists - offices & clinics (8042) 110. Paint, Glass & Wallpaper Stores (5231) 111. Pension, Health and Welfare Funds Services (6371) 112. Personal Credit Institutions (6141) 113. Photocopying & Duplicating Services (7334) 114. Photographic Studios, Portrait (7221) 115. Photofinishing Laboratories (7384) 116. Physical Fitness Facilities (permitted only when physically integrated and operated in conjunction with another permitted use in this district - no stand alone facility permitted) (7991) 117. Podiatrists - offices & clinics (8043) 118. Political Organizations (8651) 119. Professional Membership Organizations (8621) 120. Professional Sports Clubs & Promoters (7941) 121. Public Relations Services (8743) 122. Radio, Television & Consumer Electronics Stores (5731) 123. Radio, Television & Publishers Advertising Representatives (7313) 124. Real Estate Agents and Managers (6531) PDF Page 165 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 4 of 16 125. Record & Prerecorded Tape Stores; adult video rental or sales prohibited (5735) 126. Religious Organizations (8661) 127. Repair Shops & Related Services, not elsewhere classified (7699) 128. Retail Nurseries, Lawn & Garden Supply Stores (5261) 129. Secretarial and Court Reporting Services (7338) 130. Security Brokers, Dealers & Flotation Companies (6211) 131. Security and Commodity Exchanges (6231) 132.Sewing, Needlework & Piece Goods Stores Services Allied with the Exchange of Securities or Commodities, not elsewhere classified (62895949) 133.Sewing, Needlework & Piece Goods Stores Services Allied with the Exchange of Securities or Commodities, not elsewhere classified (59496289) 134. Shoe Repair Shops and Shoeshine Parlors (7251) 135. Short-Term Business Credit Institutions, except agricultural (6153) 136. Social Services, Individual & Family (activity centers, elderly or handicapped only; day care centers for adult & handicapped only) (8322) 137. Sporting Goods Stores & Bicycle Shops (5941) 138. Stationery Stores (5943) 139. Stores, Children's and Infants Wear (5641) 140. Stores, Family Clothing (5651) 141. Stores, Miscellaneous Apparel & Accessory (5699) 142. Stores, Shoes (5661) 143. Stores, Women's Accessory & Specialty (5632) 144. Surety Insurance Services (6351) 145. Surveying Services (8713) 146. Tanning Salons (7299) 147. Tax Return Preparation Services (7291) 148. Title Abstract Offices (6541) 149. Title Insurance Services (6361) 150. Tobacco Stores & Stands (5993) 151. Travel Agencies (no other transportation services) (4724) 152. Used Merchandise Stores (5932) 153. Veterinary services for animal specialties (0742) 154. Video Tape Rental, adult video rental or sales prohibited (7841) 155. Watch, Clock & Jewelry Repair (7631) II. Tract A or Tract C - Permitted Group Housing/Retirement Community/Principal Uses: (Group housing shall only be permitted on Tract C if no residential dwelling units are constructed on Tract C.) A. Group Housing, 8051 Skilled Nursing, Intermediate Care Facilities 8052, Nursing and Personal Care not else classified 8059. B. Independent Living Units C. Assisted Living Units D. Retirement Community III. Tract C – Permitted Residential Principal Uses: [If only residential dwelling units are constructed in Tract C] PDF Page 166 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 5 of 16 A. Dwelling Units - Multi-family and Townhouse B. Any other principal use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA”) or the Hearing Examiner. IIIIV. Tract A- Permitted Accessory Uses: Accessory Uses to Group Housing/Retirement Community Principal Uses in Tract A and C and Commercial Principal Uses in Tract A: Accessory uses customarily associated with the permitted principal uses, including, but not limited to: A. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the permitted uses within this MPUD document. B. Water management facilities to serve the project such as lakes. C. Clubhouses, Community administrative facilities intended to serve residents and their guests. D. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, gazebos and picnic areas. CE. Any other accessory and related use that is determined to be comparable in nature with the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, pursuant to the process outlined in the LDC. uses and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this MPUD as determined by the BZA or the Hearing Examiner. Tract C -– Accessory Uses to Residential Only Principal Uses: A. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the principal uses permitted in this MPUD, including but not limited to garages, carports, swimming pools, spas and screen enclosures. B. Water management facilities to serve the project such as lakes. C. Clubhouses, Community administrative facilities intended to serve residents and their guests, including leasing and construction offices. D. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, gazebos and picnic areas. E. Any other accessory and related use that is determined to be comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this MPUD as determined by the BZA or the Hearing Examiner. IV. Tract B - Permitted Principal and Accessory Preserve Area Uses: PDF Page 167 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 6 of 16 No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for the preserve area depicted on the MPUD Master Plan, that is required to be a minimum of 8.85 acres, other than those uses allowed by Section 3.05.07 H.1.h. of the LDC, or any successor provision. VI. Group Housing/Retirement Community Commitments: The developer of the group housing/retirement community, its successors or assigns, shall provide the following services and be subject to the following operational standards for the units in the retirement community, including but not limited to, independent living units, assisted living units or skilled nursing units: 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. 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 so that a resident can age in place. For example, kitchens may be easily retrofitted to lower the sink to accommodate a wheelchair bound resident or bathrooms may be retrofitted to add grab bars. PDF Page 168 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 7 of 16 EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ADDIES CORNER MPUD The tables below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Addies Corner MPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. I. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TRACT A, COMMERCIAL DISTRICTAND GROUP HOUSING AND TRACT C, GROUP HOUSING/RETIREMENT COMMUNITY (if no residential dwelling units constructed in Tract C only). PRINCIPAL USES ACCESSORY USES MINIMUM LOT AREA 10,000 Sq. Ft. N/A AVERAGE LOT WIDTH 100 ft. N/A MINIMUM YARDS (External) (See paragraph below)***** From Immokalee Road Canal ROW 25 ft. SPS From Eastern Project Boundary 25 ft. 15 ft From Western Project Boundary 25 ft. 15 ft. From Northern Project Boundary – As Shown 521 200 ft. Minimum 521 200 ft. Minimum MINIMUM YARDS (Internal)***** Internal Drives/ROW 15 ft. 10 ft Rear 10 ft. 10 ft. Side 10 ft. 10 ft. Lakes 25 ft. 20 ft.* Preserve 25 ft. 10 ft. MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES 1/2 the sum of building heights** 10 Ft. MAXIMUM HEIGHT ZONED ACTUAL Retail Buildings 45 ft. 65 ft. 35 ft. Office Buildings 55 ft. 65 ft. 35 ft. Group Housing/ Retirement Community 45 ft. 65 ft. 35 ft. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA (ground floor) 1,000 sq. ft. ** N/A MAXIMUM GROSS COMMERCIAL AREA 1375,000 sq. ft. *** N/A GROUP CARE FACILITIES INTENSITY Maximum 0.60 F.A.R. up to 26 units per acre***, & **** & ***** N/A HOTEL & MOTEL INTENSITY Maximum 26 units per acre ***, & **** & ***** (F.A.R. Not Applicable) N/A * No structure may be located closer than 20 feet to the top of bank of a lake (allowing for the required minimum 20 foot wide lake maintenance easement). ** Per principal structure, kiosk vendor, concessions, and temporary or mobile sales structures shall be permitted to have a minimum floor area of twenty· five (25) square feet and shall be subject to the accessory structure standards set forth in the LDC. *** Total allowable commercial square footage is 135,000 of commercial development. For each acre of Group Housing/Retirement Community or Hotel/Motel or fraction thereof developed, 10,914 S.F. of commercial development will be reduced on Tract "A". **** The maximum height and setbacks shall be the same as those for office buildings. PDF Page 169 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 8 of 16 ***** The preserve area shall not be used in calculating the F.A.R. for C.C.R.C.Group Housing/Retirement Community use or the density for Hotel/Motel. ***** Landscape buffer easements shall be separate tracts on the subdivision plat or SDP. II. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TRACT C RESIDENTIAL ONLY DISTRICT PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES TOWNHOUSE (PER UNIT) MULTI-FAMILY Minimum Lot Area 1,440 SF 43,560 SF Minimum Lot Width 18 feet N/A Minimum Lot Depth 80 feet N/A Minimum Front Yard Setback*2 25 feet 25 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback*1, 5 0/10 feet 0/10 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback*5 15 feet 15 feet Maximum Building Height Zoned Actual 45 feet 50 feet 55 feet 65 feet Minimum Distance Between Buildings 20 feet 20 feet Floor Area Min. (S.F.), per unit 750 SF 700 SF Minimum PUD Boundary Setback 20 feet 20 feet Minimum Preserve Setback 25 feet 25 feet ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Minimum Front Yard Setback*2 15 feet 15 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback*5 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback*5 10 feet 10 feet Minimum PUD Boundary Setback 15 feet 15 feet Minimum Preserve Setback 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Distance Between Buildings 0/10 feet 0/10 feet Maximum Height Zoned Actual 20 feet 25 feet 35 feet 40 feet AMENITY AREA PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES*3 Minimum Lot Area*4 21,780 SF Minimum Lot Width*4 140 feet Minimum Lot Depth*4 140 feet Minimum Front Yard Setback*2 20 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback 10 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback 15 feet Minimum PUD Boundary Setback 20 feet Minimum Preserve Setback 25 feet Minimum Distance Between Buildings 20 feet Maximum Height Zoned Actual 35 feet 40 feet *1 –Minimum separation between adjacent dwelling units, if detached, shall be 20’. PDF Page 170 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 9 of 16 *2 –Front yards shall be measured from back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavement (if not curbed) for private streets or drives, and from ROW line for any public roadway. *3- Accessory structures within the Amenity Area shall utilize the development standards for accessory structures in Tract C, Residential Only District. *4 – Minimum lot dimensional standards are only applicable if amenity area is platted as a separate tract. *5 – Landscape buffer easements shall be separate tracts on subdivision plats or separate tracts on SDP. Note: nothing in this MPUD Document shall be deemed to approve a deviation from the LDC unless it is expressly stated in a list of deviations. IIIII. DEVELOPMENT WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE EAST In the event amendments are made to the Tree Farm MPUD to the east of this MPUD to allow for a unified development plan of both properties, a zero setback shall be allowed along the common property line of this MPUD. IIIIV. ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPING EAST PROPERTY LINE A minimum 6-foot height hedge, minimum 3-foot in spread, planted a maximum 4-feet on center, 100% opaque at planting shall be installed along the east property line, in lieu of a wall, along with other requirements of a Type B Landscape buffer. IVV. A stipulation has been added that outside amplified music is prohibited. PDF Page 171 of 264 PDF Page 172 of 264 15' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER15' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER20' WIDE TYPE "D"LANDSCAPE BUFFERFUTURE SHARED ACCESSEDGE OF WATERTRACT CRESIDENTIAL, OR GROUP HOUSING(SEE EXHIBIT A, ITEM II OF THE PUD ORDINANCE)TRACT ACOMMERCIAL AND GROUP HOUSINGPOTENTIAL SHARED ACCESSBUFFER PER LDCWATERMANAGEMENTAREATRACT BPRESERVE15' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFERAMENITYAREA20'x232' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER25'x164' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER30'x110' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER15'x133' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER0200'100'SCALE: 1" = 200'GradyMinorCivil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151Business LC 26000266 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144Fort Myers: 239.690.4380NOTES1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND ISSUBJECT TO MINOR MODIFICATION DUE TOAGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.2. ALL ACREAGES, EXCEPT PRESERVE, AREAPPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TOMODIFICATION AT THE TIME OF SDP OR PLATAPPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LDC.3. PRESERVES MAY BE USED TO SATISFY THELANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTEREXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL INACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS 4.06.02AND 4.06.05.E.1. SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGSWITH NATIVE PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE INACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07.SITE SUMMARYGROSS SITE AREA 23.33± ACRESPUBLIC ROW/CANAL 1.50± ACRESNET SITE AREA 21.83± ACRERESIDENTIAL OR RETIREMENT COMMUNITY/GROUPHOUSING (TRACT C) - 9.82± ACRES (45%)COMMERCIAL (TRACT A) - 4.32± ACRES (20%)AMENITY AREA (PART OF TRACT C) - 0.59± ACRES (3%)PRESERVE (TRACT B) - 3.45± ACRES (16%)WATER MANAGEMENT - 0.95± ACRES (4%)BUFFERS/OPEN SPACE - 2.70± ACRES (12%)TRACT ACOMMERCIAL MAXIMUM 75,000 S.F.GROUP HOUSING 0.6 FARTRACT B - PRESERVEREQUIRED: 3.45± ACRES (13.81 ± ACRESNATIVE VEGETATION X 25%)PROVIDED: 3.45± ACRESTRACT CRESIDENTIAL MAXIMUM 349 D.U. (16 DU/AC)- IF ALL RESIDENTIALGROUP HOUSING 0.6 FAR - IF NO RESIDENTIALDWELLING UNITS IN TRACT COPEN SPACE: REQUIRED: 30%PROVIDED: 30%# DEVIATIONSESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES RPUDPRESERVEESPLANADEGOLF ANDCOUNTRY CLUBOF NAPLES RPUDRESIDENTIALESPLANADE GOLF ANDCOUNTRY CLUB OFNAPLES RPUDRESIDENTIALTREE FARM MPUDUNDEVELOPEDINGRESS/EGRESS13456PDF Page 173 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 11 of 16 EXHIBIT D LEGAL DESCRIPTION ADDIES CORNER MPUD The North one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; and The South one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; excepting the south 100 feet thereof; and The East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the Southwest one- quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1 /4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, excepting the south 100' thereof. PDF Page 174 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 12 of 16 EXHIBIT “E” LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC ADDIES CORNER MPUD 1. Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.H.1.a., commercial and industrial districts, which require if located on a contiguous residentially zoned property, the wall and/or fence shall be a minimum of six (6) feet and a maximum of eight (8) feet in height and shall be located a minimum of six (6) feet from the residentially zoned district, to not require a wall within a Type B buffer along the east property line of this MPUD adjacent to the Tree Farm MPUD to the east. (See Exhibit C, MPUD Master Plan.) As mitigation for the wall, a 6-foot height hedge shall be required in addition to the requirements of a Type B Landscape buffer. (Also, see Exhibit B - Development Standards pertaining to Landscaping). 2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 to allow the floor area ratio (F.A.R.) to be increased from 0.45 to 0.60 for a Group Housing/Retirement Community. 3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G - Parking Spaces Required for Multi- Family Dwellings, which requires one parking space per residential unit plus 0.75 guest spaces for one-bedroom residential units and 1 guest space for two bedroom and larger units. In the event that Tract C is developed as leased multi-family units, this deviation proposes to establish the required number of parking spaces for leased multifamily residential units at 1.65 spaces per one bedroom unit and 1.8 spaces for two bedroom and larger units (inclusive of resident and guest parking spaces). 4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.04.G - Dumpsters and Recycling, which requires that multi-family rental units provide dumpsters or a compactor to allow for rental units to have the option for building staff to transport bulk containers from storage areas internal to the buildings to designated areas for pick up by the solid waste and recycling hauler. 5. Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N – Street System Requirements and Appendix B, Typical Street Sections and Right-of-Way Design Standards. The LDC establishes a minimum 60-foot right of way width for local streets. This deviation proposes to reduce the required right-of-way width for local streets to 50 feet. See Typical 50’ ROW Cross Section Exhibit. 6. Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G – Parking Spaces Required for Multifamily Dwellings allows for a reduction of the number of required parking spaces for small-scale recreational facilities within multi-family developments based upon the proximity of the units to the small scale recreational facility. The LDC allows for the required parking at the recreational facilities to be calculated at 25% of normal requirements in cases where the majority of the multifamily units are located within 300 feet of the recreational facilities. This deviation proposes to increase the specified distance for the reduction of parking requirements for small-scale recreational facilities from 300 to 500 feet. PDF Page 175 of 264 12' TRAVEL LANE2'4'5'CONCRETESIDEWALK2'10' P.U.E.PROPOSEDMULTI-FAMILY12' TRAVEL LANE2'4'5'CONCRETESIDEWALK2'10' P.U.E.FUTURECOMMERCIALDEVELOPMENT(CONCEPTUAL)41AVERAGE EXISTING GROUNDELEV. VARIESSTABILIZEDSUBGRADELIMEROCKBASEASPHALT CONCRETE(TYP)50' RIGHT OF WAYADDIE'S CORNERGradyMinorCivil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151Business LC 26000266 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144Fort Myers: 239.690.4380PDF Page 176 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 14 of 16 EXHIBIT F DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT ADDIES CORNER MPUD l. TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS (Amended by Transportation Staff on 2/4/10) changes accepted on 3/26/10 and then CAO edits put in) 1. The Owner will has dedicated in fee right-of-way for the purpose of relocating the Cocohatchee Canal as depicted on Tract A on the MPUD Master Plan, that includes compensatory right-of-way for the turn lane into the project. This area comprises ± 1.62 5 acres and was based on the most current information available at the time of approval of this ordinance. The property owner will dedicate to Collier County this right-of-way within 90 days of written request of the County at no cost to the County. The County will be responsible to relocate the canal, except only those portions immediately adjacent to (approximately 100' each side of) the proposed bridge. Collier County Transportation will provide design direction to the developer as to the ultimate alignment of the relocated canal prior to the time of SDP approval. See O.R. Book 5087, Page 93. 2. The Owner, his successor or assigns shall provide a roadway connection available to adjacent properties to facilitate interconnection to the properties property to the east (the Tree Farm MPUD) and will reserve land for an optional roadway connection to the West (Mirasol PUD), at the time of submittal of the first development order application. 3. When Owner constructs the bridge providing connection to lmmokalee Road it shall be constructed in a location consistent with the future location of the Cocohatchee Canal to accommodate the ultimate canal configuration. This will include relocation of the canal immediately adjacent to (approximately 100' each side of) the proposed bridge. 4. The Owner, his successor, or assigns agrees to construct at no cost to the County a 12' multi-use pathway along the North side of the future location of the Cocohatchee Canal, within property owned by Collier County, which shall connect to the pathway to the West. A 10' pathway may be substituted at this location if consistent with the County's Comprehensive Pathway Plan. This pathway shall be constructed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The development within this project shall be limited to 1,044662 unadjusted twowaytwo-way PM peak hour trips (or 708 447 adjusted two-way, PM peak hour trips; correspondent to the highest trip generation scenario of those proposed in the updated traffic study information dated November 6, 2009); allowing for flexibility in the proposed uses without creating unforeseen impacts on the adjacent roadway network. The terms "adjusted" and "unadjusted" shall reference allowances for pass-by and internal capture trip reductions. For purposes of calculation of the weekday PM peak hour trip generation of this PUD, PDF Page 177 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 15 of 16 the lesser of the weekday PM peak hour trips as calculated in the Institute of Traffic Engineer's (ITE) Report, titled Trip Generation, 8th 9th Edition or the trip generation as calculated in the then current ITE Trip Generation Report shall be utilized. 6. The Owner, his successor, or assigns agrees to be responsiblehas paid for 2% of the construction costs (not to exceed $50,000) to be considered the PUD's proportionate share of the improvements to the intersection of C.R. 951 and Immokalee Road. Payment shall be due within 90 days of receipt of the County's written request. The term "improvements", in this paragraph, means the relocation of the canal, the at-grade improvement of turning movements and turn lanes, all other ancillary at-grade improvements (curbs, bike lanes, etc), construction of a relocated bridge over the Cocohatchee Canal, and signalization for all movements. The term does not refer to potential future, grade-separated intersection improvements. Check received 12/17/15. 7. The owner, its successors, or assigns, agrees to be responsible for permitting the impacts to wetlands within the 1.5 +/- acre right-of-way parcel that was dedicated to Collier County. As a part of the first development order submittal for the MPUD, the owner, its successors, or assigns will clear the 1.5 +/- right-of-way parcel of vegetation and place the sufficient fill required to impact the wetlands within the right-of-way parcel upon approval of right of way permit. Collier County will reimburse the owner for the reasonable cost of mitigation, clearing, and filling of the right-of-way parcel, upon submission and County approval of an engineer’s certification of costs after completion of the work. The construction activities that Collier County will be responsible for reimbursement of within the 1.5± acre right- of-way parcel include, but are not limited to: (1) costs for the purchase of mitigation credits to off-set wetland impacts to the 1.5± acre right-of-way parcel, (2) costs of clearing and grubbing within the 1.5± acre right-of-way parcel, (3) the costs for the import and final grading of fill material required to elevate the ROW grade of the 1.5± acre right-of-way parcel to an elevation sufficient to remove the area from SFWMD and ACOE wetland jurisdiction and (4) the costs of transferring the permits for the 1.5± acre right-of-way parcel to Collier County following the completion of the construction. Collier County will approve all construction plans pertaining to the 1.5± acre right-of-way parcel prior to owner’s commencement of work. The owner shall be allowed to clear vegetation within the 1.5± acre County owned portion of the project and maintain this property, upon approval of a right-of-way permit, until such time as Collier County proceeds with the planned right-of-way improvements. II. ENVIRONMENTAL 1. If no residential units are constructed: Based on total site acreage of 23.34 33 acres and 22.6513.81 acres of native habitat area, 3.42.07 acres (15% of habitat area) is required to be preserved pursuant to the Collier County Land Development Code. The MPUD Master Plan, Exhibit C, shall provide 8.852.07 acres (0.15 x 13.81) of preserve area. PDF Page 178 of 264 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 05/08/2017 Page 16 of 16 2. If residential units are constructed: Based on total site acreage of 23.33 acres and 13.81 acres of native habitat area, 3.45 acres (25% of habitat area) is required to be preserved pursuant to the LDC. The MPUD Master Plan, Exhibit C, shall provide 3.45 acres (0.25 x 13.81) of preserve area. 23. As a part of the Environmental Resource Permitting process of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), recommendations from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding impacts to protected wildlife species will be incorporated into the permits issued for this project. The developer shall comply with the guidelines set forth within those permits. Habitat management plans shall be provided for the Florida panther, Florida black bear, Big Cypress fox squirrel, wood stork, and any other protected species which inhabit or utilize the areas within the project. III. MISCELLANEOUS 1. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does 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. 2. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development IV. UTILITIES A stub-out to the Tree Farm MPUD property boundary shall be provided by owner if the water distribution system for Tree Farm MPUD is not available for interconnection at the time of construction. The location of the interconnection shall coincide with the future shared access depicted on the master plan exhibits. PDF Page 179 of 264 Immokalee RD ESPLANADE BLVDCollier BLVDPLATEAU RDQUARRY DRBurnt Pine DR BELLAIRE BAY DRAMOUR CTCORTONA WAY TO S C A N A W A YPebblebrooke DRSavannah DR Laurel Lakes BLVDWEATHERED STONE DR BE L L A N O C T NICKEL RIDGE CIRCRYSTAL LAKE DRCAVANO STBroken Back RDVACCARO CTSweet Bay LNSkipping Stone LNSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community, Esri, HERE, DeLorme, MapmyIndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community ´ Addie's Corner MPUD Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY 970 0 970485 Feet PDF Page 180 of 264 PDF Page 181 of 264 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 December 2, 2016 RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) PUDA-PL20150001776, Addie’s Corner 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., 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 23.33± acres, located near the northwest quadrant of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Creekside West, Inc. is asking the County to approve this application, which proposes to amend the previously approved PUD to permit up to 349 multi-family residential dwelling units, 135,000 square feet of commercial uses, hotel, and senior housing uses. You are invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting hosted by the applicant to inform nearby property owners, neighbors and the 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, December 21, 2016, 5:30 pm at Saint Monica’s Episcopal Church, 7070 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL 34119. 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. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. Sincerely, Sharon Umpenhour Senior Planning Technician PDF Page 182 of 264 PDF Page 183 of 264 PL20150001776500' BufferPage 1 of 111/9/2016RECKEY NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 SECT TWP RANGE LOTUNIT LEGAL66262021269 BENNETT, DONALD A JODI A BENNETT 8479 HOLLOW BROOK CIR NAPLES, FL 34119---9724 27 48 26 45 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 45 66262004464 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY 3301 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34112---4961 27 48 26 1 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES THAT PORTION OF TRACT R-1 AS DESC IN OR 2279 PG 1915 & LYING N OF TRACT 8 OF31347512987 COIT, HARLAN R & SUSAN J 10401 POND MEADOW DROKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73151---0000 22 48 26 45 ESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES LOT 45 190041403 COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 22 48 26 22 48 26 THOSE PORTIONS FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 4413 PG 3834 66262021722 CRIFASI III, JACK J 77 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---9759 27 48 26 68 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 68 66262021641 DINESEN, JESS W 69 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---9759 27 48 26 64 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 64 31347512945 FIX, DAVID W & ALAYNE A 8656 AMOUR CTNAPLES, FL 34119---0000 22 48 26 43 ESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES LOT 43 31347513009 FRED W FAUST REV TRUST BLACKFEATHER STOLATHE, KS 66062---0000 22 48 26 46 ESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES LOT 46 66262021667 GARCIA, PEDRO M & ERIN K 71 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---9759 27 48 26 65 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 65 66262021706 JARBO, JAMES W AMANDA JARBO 75 BURNT PINE DR NAPLES, FL 34119---000027 48 26 67 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 67 66262021285 MARSALLI, MICHAEL & NATALIE E 8483 HOLLOW BROOK CIRNAPLES, FL 34119---972427 48 26 46 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 46 66263000069 MCDONALD'S CORPORATION C/O MICHAEL LEE ADAMS1855 VETERANS PARK DR STE 203NAPLES, FL 34109---044627 48 26 2 PEBBLEBROOKE PLAZA LOT 2 66262002589 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES MASTER ASSOCIATION INC% SENTRY MANAGEMENT 2180 WEST SR 434 #5000 LONGWOOD, FL 32779---0000 27 48 26 2 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES THAT PORTION OF TRACT 8 AS DESC IN OR 2397 PG 2190 66262002084 PEBBLEBRROKE LAKES MASTER ASSOCIATION INC8610 PEBBLEBROOKE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---971527 48 26 1 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES TRACT 8, LESS THAT PORTION DESC IN OR 2397 PG 2190 66262021683 ROSICH, BRYAN & MANDY73 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---000027 48 26 66 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 66 66262021748 RUSSO, JOSEPH JBRITTNEY MARCHETTA79 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---975927 48 26 69 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 69 31347512961 SRIRAMAN, ROM & LAKSHMI 8660 AMOUR CTNAPLES, FL 34119---000022 48 26 44 ESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES LOT 44 66262021609 STEDMAN, DAVID74 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---975727 48 26 62 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 62 187360003 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE NAPLES LLC551 N CATTLEMAN RD # 200SARASOTA, FL 34232---0000 22 48 26 22 48 26 W1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SE1/4 20 AC. 66263000085 TINWOOD-PEBBLEBROOKE LLC C/O PROPERTY TAX DEPTPO BOX 790830SAN ANTONIO, TX 78279---0830 27 48 26 3 PEBBLEBROOKE PLAZA LOT 3 187400002 TREE FARM OF SW FL LLC1150 CENTRAL AVENAPLES, FL 34102---000022 48 26 22 48 26 E1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SE1/4, LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 4413 PG 383866262021586 TRICE, BARRY G76 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---975727 48 26 61 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 61 66262021625 UMEH, LEONARD67 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34105---000027 48 26 63 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 63 66262021764 UV CITE LLC1125 NE 25TH ST # 101NORTH MIAMI, FL 33161---0000 27 48 26 70 PEBBLEBROOKE LAKES PHASE 3 LOT 70 66263000027 WALGREEN COREAL ESTATE PROPERTY TAX PO BOX 1159DEERFIELD, IL 60015---600227 48 26 1 PEBBLEBROOKE PLAZA LOT 1 PDF Page 184 of 264 PROOF O.K. BY: _____________________________O.K. WITH CORRECTIONS BY:___________________________ PLEASE READ CAREFULLY • SUBMIT CORRECTIONS ONLINE ADVERTISER: Q. GRADY MINOR &ASSOCIA PROOF CREATEDAT: 11/29/2016 10:59AM SALES PERSON: Ivonne Gori PROOF DUE: - PUBLICATION: ND-DAILY NEXT RUN DATE: 12/04/16 SIZE: 3 col X 9.25 in ND-1379950.INDD NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Petition PUDA-PL20150001776, Addie’s Corner PUD The public is invited to attend a neighborhood meeting held 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., representing Creekside West, Inc. on: Wednesday, December 21, 2016, 5:30 pm at Saint Monica’s Episcopal Church, 7070 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL 34119 The subject property is comprised of approximately 23.33± acres, located near the northwest quadrant of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Creekside West, Inc. is asking the County to approve this application, which proposes to amend the previously approved PUD to permit up to 349 multi-family residential dwelling units, 135,000 square feet of commercial uses, hotel, and senior housing uses. Business and property owners, residents and visitors are welcome to attend the presentation. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only, it is not a public hearing. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor. com/planning. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone, fax or e-mail to: Sharon Umpenhour, Senior Planning Technician Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Phone: 239.947.1144 Fax: 239.947.0375 sumpenhour@gradyminor.com December 4, 2016 ND-1379950 PDF Page 185 of 264 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 TRANSCRIPT OF THE 10 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING 11 FOR ADDIE'S CORNER MPUD 12 DECEMBER 21, 2016 13 14 15 16 17 Appearances: 18 WAYNE ARNOLD 19 DAN WATERS 20 BRUCE LAYMAN 21 RICHARD YOVANOVICH, ESQ. 22 NORMAN TREBILCOCK 23 ERIC JOHNSON 24 SHARON UMPENHOUR 25 PDF Page 186 of 264 2 1 MR. ARNOLD: Everybody ready to get started? 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 3 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Good. Thank you all for 4 coming. 5 I'm Wayne Arnold. I'm with Grady Minor 6 Engineering, representing the property owner. And 7 the property owner group representative is in the 8 audience tonight. We have Dan -- we have Dan 9 Waters and Bruce Layman from the Barron Collier 10 Companies and Norm Trebilcock is our traffic 11 consultant. Rich Yovanovich is sitting over there, 12 our land use attorney on the team. 13 And this is Sharon Umpenhour who sent you all 14 the letter if you received it. And Sharon is from 15 our office and will be recording the meeting. The 16 county requires that we record neighborhood 17 information meetings. So that's our team. 18 In the back of the room over here in the nice 19 red shirt is Eric Johnson. Eric is a principal 20 planner with Collier County government, and he is 21 working as the reviewer and coordinator for our 22 project while it circulates through the county 23 hallways. And Eric is here to answer any general 24 questions you may have about process or something 25 specific, but it's the developer's meeting for us PDF Page 187 of 264 3 1 to share with you some of our plans and where we 2 are in the process and what we intend to do. 3 So with that, I'm going to start. The 4 property is called Addie's Corner. It's at the 5 northwest quadrant of Collier Boulevard and 6 Immokalee Road. It's an existing mixed use planned 7 development, obviously undeveloped. It was 8 previously approved for senior housing and about 9 135,000 square feet of many, many retail and 10 office-type uses. 11 Barron Collier Companies have acquired the 12 property and they're going to take it, hopefully, 13 in a little bit different direction. So the 14 principal changes that we're proposing to make are 15 reflected in our master plan that we have. 16 The property is about 23 acres and it's in the 17 activity center, which is where the county tells us 18 we should put some of the more intensive land uses. 19 So we are proposing to retain a commercial tract up 20 front and we're reducing the amount of commercial 21 in the project from 135,000 square feet down to 22 75,000 square feet. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Since we can't read 24 it, can you point out Immokalee and Collier 25 Boulevard? PDF Page 188 of 264 4 1 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. Immokalee is on the bottom 2 part of the page. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And Collier 4 Boulevard? 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Collier Boulevard is 6 right -- I'll reorient you. That's Collier 7 Boulevard to the east, Immokalee Road to the south. 8 And we will have a project entrance with a 9 directional left turn into our site from Immokalee 10 Road. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you. 12 MR. ARNOLD: So, again, we're reducing the 13 amount of commercial. The most significant 14 increases, we're creating a residential tract in 15 the back, which could also be an area for the group 16 housing. Group housing would also go on the 17 commercial tract. 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What housing 19 (indiscernible)? 20 MR. ARNOLD: But we're asking for multi-family 21 housing of multi-family and townhome-type housing 22 for 349 dwelling units on that property. 23 And so our master plan reflects our internal 24 access. We have an interconnection over to the 25 project that's immediately east of us, between us PDF Page 189 of 264 5 1 and The Quarry, which is called Tree Farm Road. 2 It's another undeveloped planned development. It's 3 zoned. It has not been developed, but we do have 4 an interconnection with them. 5 The county acquired some of the right-of-way 6 they're making for intersection and roadway 7 improvements from us. That's also included in our 8 property. We are making some provisions to put 9 some temporary signage in the county's right-of-way 10 until they need that. 11 But -- so the significant features for us, 12 commercial tract up front, a residential and group 13 housing tract in the back. Our preserve area is 14 going to be in the northwest corner and then we 15 have some water management areas in the northeast 16 portion of the site. So all of this area would be 17 where our residential units are going. 18 And then we have a small amenity-type area 19 located on the western part of our site. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: How many stories are 21 we looking at? 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Can you relate 23 that -- 24 MR. ARNOLD: Hang on just a second. I'll get 25 -- if you can just let me finish a few more things, PDF Page 190 of 264 6 1 and then we'll entertain questions. 2 So that's, in essence, what we're proposing to 3 do. We're in the process of amending the existing 4 planned development. We've made a submittal to 5 Collier County. They've issued comments back to us 6 and we're in the process of responding to them. 7 We don't have public hearing dates established 8 yet. Collier County requires that we go before the 9 Collier County Planning Commission, which is an 10 advisory board to the County Commission. They make 11 a recommendation then to the Board of County 12 Commissioners and then the County Commission can 13 take final action for us. 14 We don't have hearing dates set. We owe the 15 county another sufficiency response to some other 16 comments. So, likely for us, it will be sometime 17 early spring, at best, before we get to the 18 Planning Commission at the rate that we're headed. 19 That's kind of an overview. I hit on some 20 high points. If you want -- I know that a lot of 21 people like to ask questions about document -- I 22 can read from what we've actually submitted to the 23 county. 24 Hey, Rich, may I borrow your document, please? 25 I know I heard somebody mention height. Part PDF Page 191 of 264 7 1 of what we do for these planned developments, we 2 create a development standards table in which we 3 identify building heights, et cetera, that are 4 proposed for the project. 5 And for the multi-family project -- product, 6 we've asked for a zoned height of 55 feet and an 7 actual height of 65 feet. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: How many floors is 9 that? 10 MR. ARNOLD: It's probably in the neighborhood 11 of four to five. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What's 13 (indiscernible)? 14 MR. ARNOLD: And -- and the town homes, we're 15 asking for a zoned height of 45 feet, an actual 16 height of 50 feet. So keep in mind -- 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The multi-family, 18 are these apartments? 19 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the county doesn't really 20 distinguish between ownership. Multi-family is 21 considered a building consisting of three or more 22 attached structures. So three or more units. 23 So it could be condos, it could be apartments, 24 it could be town houses, which would be 25 individually sold units. PDF Page 192 of 264 8 1 (Multiple simultaneous speakers.) 2 MR. ARNOLD: One at a time. We're trying to 3 record it. So let's -- let's at least try to be 4 respectful so we can get -- hear everybody and then 5 respond. 6 Who is -- you had a question. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I was going to 8 suggest you ask for hands. 9 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Sure. This gentleman had 10 his hand up. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What is the allowed 12 height again by the county? 13 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the county doesn't set a 14 maximum height. I can tell you what's currently 15 allowed for the Addie's Corner PUD. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That just doesn't 17 sound right. I mean, you can't build unlimited 18 height there. 19 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the county has no height 20 maximums. Each PUD establishes its own building 21 heights. And that's based on factors of the 22 product type you're asking for, surrounding 23 property owners' heights. Keep in mind we're in an 24 activity center. It's -- 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What's the nearest PDF Page 193 of 264 9 1 building that has any type of height close to that 2 as far as a multi-family complex in this area? 3 MR. ARNOLD: I'm not certain. Right now, the 4 maximum building height for the office buildings 5 and the retail buildings are 65 feet in the Addie's 6 Corner PUD. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That's -- that's 8 crazy. 9 MR. ARNOLD: That's what can be built there 10 today. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I hope we got that 12 recorded. I think that's ridiculous and the county 13 shouldn't allow that. 14 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the county looks at a lot 15 of factors. And, you know, height is an issue that 16 we deal with on a lot of property, but the county 17 is going to keep in mind, too, that, you know, 18 we're dealing with a property that's in an activity 19 center. This is where the county has told us that 20 they want the most intense type of developments in 21 the county. 22 I don't know what community you live in, but, 23 you know, the chances are you probably have heights 24 that are approaching that as well. Your developer 25 may not have chosen to exercise that right, but you PDF Page 194 of 264 10 1 probably do have heights that are similar. 2 Yes, sir. You had your hand up. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. So these would 4 be elevatored buildings? 5 MR. ARNOLD: Well, I'm not sure. If they're 6 over three stories, I think they have to have 7 elevators by the Florida Building Code, so -- 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So they would 9 (indiscernible). Has anybody taken into any 10 consideration Immokalee Road, the extra traffic? 11 Right now, I live in Esplanade. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Getting out at 14 Esplanade right now is very difficult. 15 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And are you planning 17 on putting a light there? 18 MR. ARNOLD: I don't think there's going to be 19 a light at our entrance. It will be a directional 20 left. The county -- I think the developer has 21 already participated in some (indiscernible) 22 agreements with the county for the Collier 23 Boulevard and Immokalee Road intersection 24 improvements that are being made. 25 Yes, sir. PDF Page 195 of 264 11 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is the commercial 2 retail or office? 3 MR. ARNOLD: It allows both. It allows for 4 retail and/or office. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The other question I 6 have is the left turn lane, how does that 7 coordinate with the left turn lane that's already 8 there to turn into Broke Back Road? I mean, 9 wouldn't they be very close together? 10 MR. ARNOLD: Norm, I don't know, do you have 11 an answer to that? I don't know the details of the 12 turn lane details. 13 MR. TREBILCOCK: Yes. My name is Norm 14 Trebilcock. 15 And the left turn lane coming into the 16 property, there already is a left turn lane that 17 goes into Pebblebrooke right there. 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: A left turn lane? 19 MR. TREBILCOCK: Yes. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Or a right turn 21 lane? 22 MR. ARNOLD: No, a left turn lane. 23 MR. TREBILCOCK: No, there's a left turn lane 24 that goes into Pebblebrooke. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. Right. PDF Page 196 of 264 12 1 MR. TREBILCOCK: And so then our turn lane 2 would just be opposite that one. There would be 3 like a little separator island. So there wouldn't 4 be full movements out of our site. 5 So it's spaced adequately, this is what I'm 6 getting at, based on the county's spacing criteria. 7 There's a left in that you go into Pebblebrooke, 8 and so then we would have a left into our site 9 here. 10 So it would be -- it would be as far to the 11 west as possible. 12 Here's the intersection of Collier Boulevard 13 here. So it's a ways over. It's separated by the 14 Tree Farm project right here as well. 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It seems to me that 16 with retail -- commercial and that level of 17 density, you need a pretty long left-hand lane. 18 MR. TREBILCOCK: Yes. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Or somebody is going 20 to end up being parked on Immokalee Road to try to 21 make a left -- 22 MR. TREBILCOCK: No, exactly. And what we do 23 when we size the turn lanes is you size them for 24 what we call the cue, the storage lane, and then 25 plus you'd have what we call a deceleration lane. PDF Page 197 of 264 13 1 So it gets to be a pretty good size turn lane. 2 So that way you contain all your traffic in 3 the turn lane and it does -- it's not in the 4 through lane of Immokalee Road. But, yes, you're 5 right. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And that would 7 affect the turn lane into Broke Back Road. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No. Broke Back is 9 over here. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes, that's right. 11 MR. TREBILCOCK: It's way over here. This 12 turn lane, it's a left turn lane coming into here, 13 okay. And then there's going to be a right turn 14 lane that won't be as long because they call it 15 kind of -- it's uninterrupted flow, because you can 16 just flow right into the site. So there will be 17 length in there for some cue and also for 18 deceleration. But it won't impact at all Broke 19 Back or -- 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: This would be more 21 traffic going left. 22 MR. TREBILCOCK: -- this is -- this is Collier 23 Boulevard here. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I'm sorry. It would 25 be much more traffic going left after they finish PDF Page 198 of 264 14 1 with the Collier extension. 2 MR. TREBILCOCK: Yeah. This is all -- 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So the lineup to get 4 onto that is just going to be the same size as it 5 is now; is that right? So they're going to be 6 backed up there. 7 MR. ARNOLD: I think a dual left, too. 8 MR. TREBILCOCK: No, there's -- there's all 9 sorts of improvements taking place here. 10 Just so you understand, the county is putting 11 in a triple left this direction, okay? 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. 13 MR. TREBILCOCK: And then there's significant 14 improvements to -- we'll call this Collier 15 Boulevard extension, okay? And there's significant 16 improvements being put in there. The bridge is 17 being expanded. They're going to have it, as Wayne 18 said, I believe it is dual lefts, through 19 movements, two throughs, and then they're going to 20 have a right-hand turn lane. 21 So this is going to be significantly improved 22 when they're done with this work here for the area 23 right here. 24 Our project, though, is way over here. The 25 only time we would have any impacts with that is PDF Page 199 of 264 15 1 when it eventually, say, gets interconnected with 2 Tree Farm development here, but we're going to be 3 self-contained over here. 4 And a part of the land use plan that we're 5 seeking actually reduces the traffic intensity by 6 about 30 percent of what's currently approved. So 7 it's a significant reduction, because when you do 8 the residential -- because, again, as Wayne 9 mentioned, it's 135,000 square feet of commercial. 10 And if you do the residential, because -- and the 11 residential takes up area, you're going to reduce 12 the amount of commercial. 13 So then your commercial goes down to 75,000 14 square feet. So your overall trip generation will 15 be reduced when you do that mixed use of land. And 16 that's really what we're seeking. 17 So, in essence, it will be a reduction, 18 actually, of what's currently approved out there. 19 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir, in the back there. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, first of all, 21 thanks again for this information. 22 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. Thanks for coming. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: More information is 24 better than less information. 25 And it comes to me, and I can only state PDF Page 200 of 264 16 1 (indiscernible) come to me as no surprise that this 2 land is going to be developed. I mean, I think 3 everyone should have known that is a valuable piece 4 of property so it's going to be developed. 5 But I'd like for you guys to help me 6 understand maybe some details or specifics as 7 compared to precisely what it's I'll say zoned for. 8 And that may be a bad term, which is that's my 9 language (indiscernible) precisely as to what it's 10 zoned for now and precisely what you're asking to 11 be zoned for. 12 I thought I heard you say earlier it's got the 13 135,000 commercial. You're going to reduce that to 14 about 70,000? 15 MR. ARNOLD: 75,000. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But is it my 17 understanding that currently it's also approved for 18 349 units of senior housing? Did I hear you say 19 that? 20 MR. ARNOLD: No. It didn't specify a number 21 of senior housing units that's been approved. The 22 county used a floor area ratio requirement for 23 that. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, what is it 25 approved for if it's not (indiscernible)? PDF Page 201 of 264 17 1 MR. ARNOLD: It's approved for 135,000 square 2 feet of retail and senior housing. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And senior housing? 4 MR. ARNOLD: And senior housing, yes, sir. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But no definition of 6 the amount that's the quantity of senior housing? 7 MR. ARNOLD: Of the senior housing, no. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. So I think 9 what I read, though, one time, the senior housing 10 was going to be like assisted living or something 11 like that and so you're now proposing to remove 12 that and -- I'm putting words in your mouth. 13 MR. ARNOLD: No. We're retaining the right to 14 have senior housing as well. 15 So, in essence, the big change that we're 16 really making, we're keeping all the same retail 17 and office uses that were there, but we're reducing 18 the square footage of that. We're keeping the 19 senior housing component across the entire site as 20 an option, and then the most significant change 21 we're making is with a reduction in the retail and 22 office. We're increasing and adding a residential 23 component on -- 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So am I hearing that 25 we're going -- what you're asking is going from an PDF Page 202 of 264 18 1 unspecific amount of senior housing, going up to 2 349? 3 MR. ARNOLD: No. The residential -- the 4 county doesn't measure senior housing. They 5 consider it to be a group housing use and it -- I 6 apologize for trying to distinguish them, but 7 because it's for housing of people 55 and over, 8 it's considered group housing and the county 9 assigns a floor area ratio as the determination of 10 your intensity. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I guessed that. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But then help me 14 understand the distinction between how many 15 doorknobs is it now to how many doorknobs 16 (indiscernible). 17 MR. ARNOLD: We're adding 300 -- the 18 opportunity for 349 new doorknobs, in essence. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: In addition to 20 what's already on there? 21 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, except for the amount of 22 intensity in commercial. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Reducing the amount 24 of commercial product. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you want to PDF Page 203 of 264 19 1 increase the doorknobs by whatever it's approved 2 for currently. You (indiscernible). 3 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, but we're reducing the 4 amount of commercial significantly. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I get that. I get 6 that. 7 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Yeah. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What would -- 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I'm sorry 10 (indiscernible). 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But I didn't really 12 get that with what you said earlier. 13 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Now I'm 15 understanding (indiscernible) from here it is. 16 MR. ARNOLD: Good. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: To that 18 (indiscernible). 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But it's not truly a 20 plus because we're limited to the traffic that's 21 already allowed in the property. So you can't 22 throw all of that on the parcel. You're still 23 capped at your maximum number of trips. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Then why are you 25 asking? PDF Page 204 of 264 20 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, because we're 2 giving it some option to do multi-family use on the 3 property versus the senior housing use on the 4 property versus the already approved retail. 5 MR. ARNOLD: Approved commercial. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But we're capped at 7 the same traffic impact that has already been 8 approved for the PUD. It's giving enough 9 housing -- 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're going to 11 swap traffic like two for one on the retail to get 12 in your (indiscernible) by reducing the retail, 13 which has a higher traffic, you can jam a lot more 14 doorknobs in (indiscernible). That's what I'm 15 asking. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You put 17 (indiscernible) you can put housing on that 18 property. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: When you swap -- 20 when you're doing the swap (indiscernible). 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Correct. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You can keep the 23 traffic at the current level, but you have a lot 24 more doorknobs then. 25 MR. TREBILCOCK: The scenarios we propose, PDF Page 205 of 264 21 1 though, it does create a reduction, is what it 2 does, in that scenario. 3 MR. ARNOLD: The gentleman in the back row 4 back there. 5 (Multiple simultaneous speakers.) 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I'm sorry. Can I do 7 one thing here? Because I don't have my glasses 8 and I can't see real well. 9 This is where the housing is being proposed? 10 MR. ARNOLD: Multi-family housing to be here 11 in this area. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. And this is 13 commercial. 14 MR. ARNOLD: Commercial down here. And the 15 group housing could be in either tract. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And this day -- this 17 is currently in preserve and it stays in preserve? 18 MR. ARNOLD: None of it's in preserve today. 19 We're designating that as preserve. The county has 20 certain preservation requirements. And even the 21 other PUD showed an area back here as preserve, but 22 it's not a preserve yet. It will be. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, I read 24 something that I've got (indiscernible) in my 25 laptop. I've got something -- Collier County, the PDF Page 206 of 264 22 1 current PUD, that talks about this land and says 2 that some of it should be retained in preserve. 3 MR. ARNOLD: And it was, yes. And it still 4 will be. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So that -- but you 6 said it's not a preserve. Some of it currently is 7 in preserve. 8 MR. ARNOLD: No, it is not. 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Its current -- 10 MR. ARNOLD: It's designated to become 11 preserve, but today it's not preserve. The county, 12 when you go through the act of creating a 13 preserve -- 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But there is 15 designated preserve in it today? We're maybe 16 mincing words? 17 MR. ARNOLD: I think we are, but there will be 18 preserve. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I agree with that. 20 I agree with that. It is preserve. That's what we 21 were told when we were going in Esplanade. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But more than we 23 were told. I've got it on my computer. I got it 24 from Collier County. And there's preserve in 25 there. PDF Page 207 of 264 23 1 But let me finish up my thought process here. 2 When you say that this is what you're asking, this 3 would be put into preserve? 4 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. Does that 6 mean what is there today would be left untouched or 7 is it torn down and then replaced? 8 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the county requires that 9 for any area that -- before they accept it as 10 preserve, we have to take all the exotic vegetation 11 out of it and then we have to place a conservation 12 easement over it and then retain it exotic free. 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Would you repeat 14 that? We couldn't hear. 15 MR. ARNOLD: The county requires that we -- 16 when we put land into a preserve designation, we 17 have to clear it of all exotics, just -- I'm not 18 sure which community you live in. The chances are 19 your homeowners association has done the same thing 20 and then some of your ongoing money pay for the 21 continued maintenance of that area exotic free. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But the trees -- 23 apart from the exotic stuff, poison ivy and such, 24 maybe, but the trees, as they are today, would 25 remain? PDF Page 208 of 264 24 1 MR. ARNOLD: Any of the native vegetation 2 that's there would be retained. 3 Yes, sir, in the back. 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Do you agree with 5 that, Mr. Johnson? 6 MR. ARNOLD: Can we take one at a time, 7 please? 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I'm the one right 9 now. Do you agree with that, Mr. Johnson? 10 MR. JOHNSON: I'm not the expert when it comes 11 to preserves. That's another staff member, but I 12 think what Mr. Arnold said, removing the exotic 13 vegetation is absolutely correct. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: How do you define 15 exotic vegetation? 16 MR. JOHNSON: I believe the county has a list 17 of exotic vegetation. I can give you a name and 18 phone number of someone to contact at the county if 19 you want to talk to the expert in that particular 20 discipline. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You don't have that 22 (indiscernible) number do you? 23 MR. ARNOLD: Eric, maybe you can get that 24 number for him separately. 25 Did you have another question related to that? PDF Page 209 of 264 25 1 I can tell you that (indiscernible). 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) ask 3 it again. 4 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. You just asked a question. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 6 because I have something for you. 7 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Go ahead. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The -- if it's all 9 right, I have three questions. 10 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The article that was 12 in the paper referred to a hotel. 13 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Are you at liberty 15 to say which hotel? 16 MR. ARNOLD: There's -- I don't believe 17 there's any hotel chain that's associated with it. 18 It was -- it was a use that was previously approved 19 as part of Addie's Corner, and it's one that's 20 being retained as part of this amendment. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What's your estimate 22 on when you would start construction? 23 MR. ARNOLD: Well, Mr. Waters back there is 24 right now involved with the Water Management 25 District permitting and the Army Corps of PDF Page 210 of 264 26 1 Engineers, and I don't know if we have a definitive 2 time frame. 3 MR. WATERS: We don't have a definitive time 4 frame. It's -- we're in the permitting process. 5 We're probably (indiscernible). 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're looking to 7 start construction in 2017? 8 MR. WATERS: Possibly, if we have permits, 9 yes. There are other (indiscernible). 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And the last 11 question, can I approach to -- 12 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- that aerial map? 14 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Because we live on 16 the street facing -- this is our view and we look 17 across the golf course and we see these beautiful 18 trees that are right here. And so we're worried 19 that these trees are going to get cut down and 20 that's why I asked about exotic vegetation. 21 MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And as far as the 23 height, 40 and 50 feet, those trees are pretty 24 tall. So we're hoping that if the trees remain, 25 even if you do build that high, we still will have PDF Page 211 of 264 27 1 our view. 2 We don't wish any harm on your development. 3 We're not trying to get against it, but, you know, 4 we have a nice. 5 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We were told that 7 was a preserve. So can you address that question? 8 Where is this buffer? You showed it on this other 9 map, but where would it be on this? A lot of us -- 10 a lot of us through here live right on this side of 11 the street. 12 MR. ARNOLD: It's roughly along part of our 13 northern boundary and on our western boundary. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That doesn't do us a 15 bit of good. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right here. Right 17 here. 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're going to 19 cut down all these trees over here? 20 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. It would be for the 21 commercial tract in the front. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So it -- 23 MR. ARNOLD: That was always the intent 24 (indiscernible). 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We're going to look PDF Page 212 of 264 28 1 at golden arches and Wendy's? 2 MR. ARNOLD: Well, under the existing PUD 3 that's there today, that was always the intent, 4 that the whole site was not going to be preserved. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is there any way 6 that you can avoid that? 7 MR. ARNOLD: I would like to say 8 (indiscernible). 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The answer is 10 probably no. 11 MR. ARNOLD: Right. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're going to 13 cut down all these trees. And then what -- there's 14 no requirement for a buffer here? 15 MR. ARNOLD: There are buffering requirements 16 for the county. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're going to 18 plant new trees? 19 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, the county requires the 20 minimum buffering standards between all projects. 21 So the vegetation would have to be replanted to at 22 least meet that minimum criteria for buffering. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And what's -- is 24 there any height -- 25 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the county has heights. PDF Page 213 of 264 29 1 It's certainly not -- 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's not 65 feet. 3 MR. ARNOLD: It's not 65 feet. 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So probably 12, 5 14-foot trees (indiscernible)? 6 Is there any way -- and maybe I'm addressing 7 this to the gentleman from Collier County, if 8 you're going to plant new trees, why go to the 9 expense of cutting down these beautiful tall trees 10 that are giving us some privacy and then having to 11 go to the expense to plant a shorter tree? Can 12 something be worked out? I don't see any 13 disadvantage to the developer. 14 MR. ARNOLD: Well, one of the difference, and 15 Dan is probably the guy that can address it in much 16 more detail, but the challenge that we have for a 17 lot of sites is that a lot of fill has to be 18 brought in and the existing vegetation can't be 19 retained where you have to place so much fill 20 material on the site. 21 Do you live in Esplanade? 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. 23 MR. ARNOLD: That was probably one of the 24 hardest fought environmental battles that occurred 25 in Collier County since I've been here, and I know PDF Page 214 of 264 30 1 Rich and I both had some involvement in that over 2 the years, but, you know, you have to keep in mind 3 that all of your property that's now developed 4 looked just like that. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So what I'm hearing 6 is within six months all those trees are going to 7 be gone. 8 MR. ARNOLD: A lot of the portion of -- you 9 know, the southerly portion, that's certainly the 10 intent, yeah. 11 Ma'am, you've been very patient. 12 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Yes. I have two 13 questions. 14 The first one is, coming out of the 15 Pebblebrooke mall, most people go to Publix there, 16 it is absolutely impossible because you have to 17 take a left turn and then -- I'm sorry -- a right 18 turn and another left turn getting into the far 19 left lane. 20 This is going to cause even more trouble 21 because more of those cars are going to have to 22 make that left. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No, see, we're -- 24 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: No. When you're 25 coming out of Pebblebrooke, how are you going to PDF Page 215 of 264 31 1 get from Pebblebrooke mall? 2 MR. TREBILCOCK: One thing to understand is 3 the improvements for this intersection, they're 4 actually -- they're improving this condition. 5 They're going to make dual lefts here. 6 So instead of having a single left that you 7 have today, you're actually going to have another 8 left turn. 9 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: But you still have 10 to go from Pebblebrooke over to a left or dual left 11 lane. 12 MR. TREBILCOCK: Sure, sure. 13 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: That new 364 doors 14 is going to cause more (indiscernible). 15 MR. TREBILCOCK: No, because we're down here. 16 See, our folks coming into our site are going to 17 come in here. 18 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: I understand that, 19 but what if they're shopping at Publix in 20 Pebblebrooke? Do you understand what I'm saying. 21 MR. TREBILCOCK: No, I understand exactly, 22 yeah. 23 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Okay. 24 MR. TREBILCOCK: No, I understand your point. 25 And thank you. PDF Page 216 of 264 32 1 The -- this turn lane here, they're increasing 2 that, the size of that turn left. This -- just so 3 you understand it, there's going to be a better 4 opportunity for everybody to make those turns 5 because there's going to be more available turning 6 area for the folks to be able to make those turns 7 there than exist today. 8 This project, as others, helped contribute to 9 those improvements, to make those improvements. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Norm, one other 11 point to make on that is from our project, you 12 won't actually have the ability to make a left onto 13 Immokalee Road. So you will not have the ability 14 to make a left and go eastbound on Immokalee. 15 Traffic -- we, our site, wouldn't contribute 16 to that conflict that you're seeing at 17 Pebblebrooke. And, likewise, anybody leaving our 18 site would have to go east. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: She's just saying -- 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) we 21 have no left (indiscernible). 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: She's just saying if 23 someone is a customer of Publix and lives in our 24 community, that they would have to make that same 25 turn. You're right. PDF Page 217 of 264 33 1 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: My second question 2 is, I'm sorry, what have (indiscernible) developed 3 (indiscernible) locally in this community so we can 4 see the type of buildings that they're going to 5 build? I think some of the things that are being 6 built over on the other side, Cameron Commons, poor 7 landscaping, poor -- you know, a lot of neon. 8 I guess I'd just like to know where the 9 developers have developed previously. 10 MR. ARNOLD: Well, Dan and Bruce are with the 11 Barron Collier Companies, the Barron Collier family 12 that's developed multiple projects in Collier 13 County. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. Are they 15 going to do anything to improve the esthetics and 16 the shading of the trees for people who, you know, 17 don't happen to like to look at neon lights? 18 MR. ARNOLD: I really can't address neon 19 lights comment but I just know that, you know, 20 they're going to be -- they're quality developers 21 who are joint venturing with a quality developer to 22 develop the site. 23 Sir, you've been really patient. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Some of the 25 terminology, I was confused when you first gave the PDF Page 218 of 264 34 1 introductory information on the project. One of 2 them was, I believe, multi-family home, another 3 one, perhaps group home. 4 Federal low-income housing, is that a 5 possibility or probability for that location, 6 federal low-income housing? And the reason I 7 mention that is that it's been relatively well 8 known that in Collier County there was a need for 9 people who work in the service industry to have a 10 place to reside in the county and serve the 11 community. Presently, it's underserved need. 12 I'm curious as to whether what you have 13 described here could, in essence, be federal 14 low-income housing. 15 MR. ARNOLD: Rich, want to take a shot at it? 16 MR. YOVANOVICH: The short answer is this will 17 not be federal low-income housing. It will be 18 market rate housing. We're not looking for any 19 grants or subsidies from the federal government to 20 reduce the rents or purchase prices of these units. 21 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir? 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What's the total 23 number of doors, again, that you said? 24 MR. ARNOLD: It's 349 multi-family or 25 townhouse dwelling units. PDF Page 219 of 264 35 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So where will the 2 parking be for these units? Is it underneath them? 3 I mean -- 4 MR. ARNOLD: I mean, it could be an option to 5 have under-building parking. It could be just 6 surface parking, parking lots for -- 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Because it seems 8 like they have to provide like 500 parking spaces, 9 right? 10 MR. ARNOLD: It depends on what size unit you 11 build. The county has its parking calculation 12 based on one bedroom, two bedroom, three bedroom, 13 et cetera. So depending on what that ultimate mix 14 is. 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Even if it's a one 16 to one, that's 350 parking spaces. That seems like 17 a huge amount of the land being taken up by a 18 parking lot. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: They can't go 20 underground with it. There's water 21 (indiscernible). 22 MR. ARNOLD: I mean, we'll have to park it to 23 code. I mean -- Dan, did we ask for a parking 24 deviation at all to provide a little bit less? We 25 did, didn't we? Yeah. PDF Page 220 of 264 36 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So does any of those 2 require a variance? 3 MR. ARNOLD: Well, we have a plan 4 (indiscernible) process. We asked for deviations. 5 For instance a deviation that was previously 6 approved that we're carrying forward was for the 7 senior housing. It allows it to have a floor area 8 ratio of a .6. The county's typical standard is a 9 .45. So that was a deviation to increase the floor 10 area ratio for that project. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're 12 grandfathered in on that? 13 MR. ARNOLD: Well, I mean, it's -- we could 14 either develop it today, but we're asking to carry 15 forward that deviation. And we have others. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Do you know who owns 17 the other land there and what -- 18 MR. ARNOLD: This property here? 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No, I don't know the 20 entity that owns it. I think it was recently sold, 21 but I don't know who owns it. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It was 23 (indiscernible). 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 25 called Tree Farm of Southwest Florida. PDF Page 221 of 264 37 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Tree Farm? 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That's -- the name 3 of the property is the Tree Farm PUD. So the 4 entity that owns the land is Tree Farm of Southwest 5 Florida, LLC, or something along those lines. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And that's zoned the 7 same as that 20 acres? 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Similarly. I can't 9 -- it's not the same, but it (indiscernible) both 10 retail and residential development on the Tree Farm 11 PUD. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I'm just curious, 13 you know, this is sort of a -- there's so many 14 retail spaces being built along Immokalee Road 15 further down there. You know, at one end is the 16 Goodwill and the other end is the gas station or 17 whatever. 18 How many retail spots can this area absorb? I 19 mean, you can only have so many nail salons or -- 20 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. Well, it's all based on 21 the number of people. I mean, the commercial guys 22 don't build it until there's enough residential 23 people to spend their money to patronize the 24 businesses. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But there's, you PDF Page 222 of 264 38 1 know, there's retail space that's been sitting 2 empty for years. 3 MR. ARNOLD: Well, keep in mind, we're 4 reducing the amount of retail and office we're 5 asking for from 135,000 down to 75,000. So that 6 may help address some of your concerns. 7 Ma'am, you had your hand up earlier. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 9 MR. ARNOLD: Can we ask somebody else who 10 hasn't had a chance to speak? 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Sure. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. Thanks. 13 Yes, ma'am. 14 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Is there going to 15 be a light to turn into your plaza on -- 16 MR. ARNOLD: No, there will not be. There 17 will not be a light -- 18 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: So everybody will 19 basically be doing -- because I turn -- I live down 20 in The Quarry. 21 MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. 22 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: So I go down 23 Collier Extension. 24 MR. ARNOLD: Right. 25 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Or Broken Back PDF Page 223 of 264 39 1 Road, or whatever you want to call it. 2 MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. 3 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: So, basically, 4 three-quarters of the cars do U-turns now, so 5 that's basically what it's going to be, U-turns, 6 because no one is going to wait for traffic to pull 7 into there. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's too dangerous. 9 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: It's too -- yeah. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I mean, they're 11 going to go up and do a U-turn (indiscernible). 12 (Multiple simultaneous speakers.) 13 MR. ARNOLD: Are you talking (indiscernible) 14 an east -- 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) left 16 hand. 17 MR. ARNOLD: We have a directional left hand 18 with a turn lane. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible). 20 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: That's what I 21 asked, is there going to be -- is there going to be 22 a light? 23 (Multiple simultaneous speakers.) 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- dedicated turn 25 lane. PDF Page 224 of 264 40 1 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: But no one -- you 2 can't -- you can't cross there. So everybody is 3 going to go up and do a U-turn and so now with all 4 the improvements that you're doing on that road are 5 going to be back to where we are. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Which is far worse. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No, it won't, no. 8 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Yeah, yeah. Do 9 you -- do you turn in there like five times a day? 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I don't. 11 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: I do. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. No, I understand, but what 13 happens is with this, the signal will give you some 14 gaps for folks. You know, it's just like the folks 15 that would come in here today. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We still -- 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you will look for 18 gaps and that's what you get. And, again, this 19 turn lane is essentially going to be -- it's going 20 to be double to what it is today. 21 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: It's still -- it's 22 still not going to be able to handle what is in 23 existence now. Never mind all that property and 24 the other property. I live there and I deal with 25 this every single day. PDF Page 225 of 264 41 1 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 2 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: It's horrible. So 3 I know that there's going to be another lane, but 4 it's not going to -- with all this added stuff, 5 we're going to be probably worse than we are right 6 now (indiscernible). 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Far, far too 8 dangerous to do an uncontrolled left. People are 9 going to go up and do a U-turn and that 10 intersection is going to get overloaded. 11 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Backed up again. 12 So, whatever. 13 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: May I approach the 15 (indiscernible)? 16 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You're going to put 18 more traffic turning onto Immokalee. Down here, we 19 have a left -- a U-turn lane, very, very short 20 (indiscernible) come out of here (indiscernible) 21 for us to come out to go the other direction on 22 Immokalee, and not even (indiscernible) accident 23 happen, this is not going to handle that. 24 The next is the light by the high school. And 25 that's the next one to that. That's not going to PDF Page 226 of 264 42 1 handle that either. It doesn't handle it now. 2 You've got -- 3 MR. ARNOLD: One of the things -- not to 4 interrupt you, but just keep in mind that we also 5 have an interconnection with the Tree Farm Road 6 property that will get us over to the Collier 7 extension, and that develops -- that's part of the 8 reason why we needed to contribute to the 9 improvements here at the intersection, which we 10 did, is to have that interconnect to kind of take 11 care of some of the things you're saying. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's still under -- 13 it's still underdeveloped, this road is 14 underdeveloped for that size of a property, 15 completely underdeveloped. 16 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible). 18 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The infrastructure 20 on Immokalee Road is woefully inadequate. It's 21 becoming worse by the month. 22 I'm wondering if the county has made any 23 evaluations on the capacity of Immokalee Road to 24 support your project. That's number one. That's a 25 question for the county. PDF Page 227 of 264 43 1 Number two, you're going to run into 2 significant resistance with a 65-foot structure. 3 It doesn't fit in with this end of Collier County. 4 It doesn't fit in with the quote, unquote, 5 neighborhood. It's way too visible. 6 And you can plow ahead with 65 feet, but I 7 guarantee you there's going to be significant 8 resistance from everybody living in the area. 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You got it. 10 MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. 11 Yes, sir. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Just to ask a 13 question to clarify that 65 feet. Is that 14 restricted to just the commercial buildings in the 15 front or is that restriction -- does that go for 16 the residential buildings in the back, 65 feet? 17 MR. ARNOLD: Right now, the Addie's Corner 18 PUD, as it's approved and can be constructed today, 19 allows the commercial areas to be developed at 65 20 feet. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So the 22 residential -- 23 MR. ARNOLD: The residential that we're 24 proposing, and I read it, I'll read from what we've 25 submitted, a zoned height of 55 feet, which is kind PDF Page 228 of 264 44 1 of to the midpoint of a roof as we commonly would 2 refer to it. We have to establish now an actual 3 height as well, and the actual height is the 4 maximum height of the top of anything on that 5 building, then that would be 65 feet for the 6 multi-family. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So 65 feet 8 multi-family? 9 MR. ARNOLD: Correct. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And also 65 feet for 11 the commercial buildings up front? 12 MR. ARNOLD: Correct. We have a zoned height 13 for the retail buildings of 45 feet with an actual 14 height of 65. Office buildings, 55 feet, with a 15 zoned height, actual height of 65 feet. Group 16 housing, unfortunately (indiscernible). 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So the commercial 18 buildings are like multi -- multi-purpose? 19 MR. ARNOLD: They could be, yes. They could 20 be multi-purpose buildings. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Gotcha. 22 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, ma'am. 23 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: I'd like you to 24 clarify the definition of preserve land. 25 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. PDF Page 229 of 264 45 1 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: We're from the 2 midwest and, you know, we bought (indiscernible) 3 development forwards and preserve land behind us, 4 and within two months, they began to 5 (indiscernible) out there. 6 It seems to me that this is an endless 7 definition. It doesn't seem to hold water. Around 8 Esplanade, it says preserve land. There's a buffer 9 between Quarry and Esplanade that says preserve 10 land. 11 You made some allusion to the fact there's 12 going to be some change at The Quarry, but I didn't 13 quite get it. 14 Are they planning on destroying that preserve 15 land as well? I mean, I just don't get it. 16 MR. ARNOLD: If I -- if I spoke anything of 17 The Quarry, I misspoke, because I didn't intend to. 18 We're not making any changes outside the four 19 corners of this property. 20 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Can you define 21 this preserve land? 22 MR. ARNOLD: The preserve area that we're 23 proposing as shown on our master plan is this 24 L-shaped area. 25 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: What is PDF Page 230 of 264 46 1 (indiscernible). 2 MR. ARNOLD: Here's how it works. Collier 3 County, once we go in and plot this property, we'll 4 get a site development plan (indiscernible) 5 development (indiscernible). It's going to require 6 us to give the county a conservation easement over 7 this property. And essentially what that 8 conservation easement says is you can't do anything 9 (indiscernible). 10 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Okay. 11 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. So there will be -- there 12 will be a land -- there will be a document, an 13 easement placed on that property that prohibits the 14 development of that property. 15 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: In perpetuity 16 or -- 17 MR. ARNOLD: In perpetuity. 18 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: -- for two or 19 three months? 20 MR. ARNOLD: It's in perpetuity because the 21 way the Collier County code works is based upon the 22 amount of native vegetation you have on your 23 property today, a percentage of that native 24 vegetation has to be put into a preserve. The Land 25 Development Code says preserve means preserve. You PDF Page 231 of 264 47 1 don't get to develop it. And that's what will 2 happen, similar to Esplanade, which was the Mirsol 3 (phonetic) PUD, which I got to spend about ten 4 years of my life going through to get that 5 approved. If you're living in Esplanade, I don't 6 know where you live, but if you live in Esplanade, 7 they did place either a conservation easement on 8 the property or they did it through a 9 (indiscernible) dedication on the property and your 10 zoning document, your PUD prohibits uses in that 11 area in perpetuity, just like will happen for us. 12 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Thank you. 13 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: So can you tell us 14 what we would see, the people that look directly at 15 that property? 16 MR. ARNOLD: Which property? 17 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 18 your little piece of land there. 19 MR. ARNOLD: From where? 20 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: I mean, we're 21 looking (indiscernible). 22 MR. ARNOLD: I don't know where you live, 23 so -- 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Most of us live 25 right in here. PDF Page 232 of 264 48 1 MR. ARNOLD: Well, this is your entry road 2 into Esplanade. 3 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Yeah 4 (indiscernible) right there. 5 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah. So you're going to be 6 separated from us by a golf hole, a small preserve 7 area and then your internal road system. So, I 8 mean, we already have a big, nice (indiscernible). 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We can see for 10 miles. 11 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 12 return, our road is what I'm trying to say, 13 Esplanade Boulevard. 14 MR. ARNOLD: I mean -- 15 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: So what is going 16 to be down that, that we're going to see? Is there 17 a preserve there? 18 MR. ARNOLD: This area is going to be our 19 preserve. 20 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: I mean, a 21 preserve, but what (indiscernible) sale of -- 22 MR. ARNOLD: And most of this area -- 23 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: -- Morrison's 24 (phonetic) land are you going to -- I mean -- 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We're not touching PDF Page 233 of 264 49 1 any of your land. 2 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: No. But I mean, 3 what is the footage there between that yellow line 4 and Esplanade Boulevard? 5 MR. ARNOLD: Is that to scale in our plan? 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Let's see. 7 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Do you see what 8 I'm talking about? 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It should be a 200 10 scale there. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We're getting the 12 scale out (indiscernible). 13 MR. ARNOLD: Do you want to know the width of 14 our preserve area? 15 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: No, no. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: She wants to know 17 the distance between our property -- 18 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Esplanade 19 (indiscernible). 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- our property line 21 and Esplanade (indiscernible), right? 22 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Right. The trees 23 that you can't cut down. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. From here to 25 here, you want to know that distance? PDF Page 234 of 264 50 1 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: No. I want to know 2 the distance between the -- yeah. 3 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. That's about 700 feet 4 from -- 5 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: I want to know the 6 distance between the road -- 7 MR. ARNOLD: Okay. 8 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: -- and our trails. 9 There's room right here. 10 MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. 11 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: And what you're 12 going to cut down. 13 MR. ARNOLD: Well, from your trail, it looks 14 like it's at least 50 feet in most places to the -- 15 and then it extends to a greater amount than that. 16 These lines are not exact, exact. I mean, they're 17 approximate property lines for the purposes of our 18 aerial, but -- and you've got anywhere from, it 19 looks like, roughly 50 feet from your trail to 20 certainly well over 100. That (indiscernible) an 21 existing condition to our property line. 22 Yes, sir. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: There must be a code 24 where you cannot do anything with a certain number 25 of feet on your property to the property line. PDF Page 235 of 264 51 1 What is that code number? How many -- like in 2 Massachusetts, by law, it's 20 feet. 3 MR. ARNOLD: Uh-huh. 4 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I can't do anything 5 to my neighbor, in between my neighbors like that. 6 What is it there? 7 MR. ARNOLD: In the PUD that we're proposing, 8 for the residential tract, there's a minimum PUD 9 setback of 15 feet. So from the boundary of our 10 PUD, for the residential, it's 15 feet. 11 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: 65 feet 12 (indiscernible). 13 MR. ARNOLD: And on the commercial, it does 14 not express it as a minimum setback. It says from 15 our western project boundary is a 25-foot minimum 16 setback. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: 15 feet from the 18 proposed preserved area? 19 MR. ARNOLD: No. The county requires that any 20 building from -- on our side has to be 25 feet from 21 a preserve. It's a county standard. 22 But what I'm suggesting -- 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible). 24 MR. ARNOLD: The question was how far from our 25 PUD boundary, and the answer is 25 feet from the PDF Page 236 of 264 52 1 commercial tract on our western boundary and 15 2 feet for the residential, but keep in mind the 3 residential is going to be largely east of 4 (indiscernible). 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So in the front 6 area, you're going to cut down right to the 7 property line? 8 MR. ARNOLD: No. Probably -- well, we may in 9 some places have to, depending on fill placement, 10 and like I said, Danny would know best because he's 11 doing the physical engineering of the site. 12 But, yeah, there's not necessarily -- I mean, 13 keep in mind, a lot of that may be exotic 14 vegetation that exists today that we're required by 15 law to take down before we can develop the 16 property. 17 Yes, sir. 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Have you gone so far 19 in your planning to indicate which way the fronts 20 of the buildings face versus the back and 21 presumably less attractive facade or 22 (indiscernible). 23 MR. ARNOLD: Well, Dan's probably the most 24 knowledgeable, because he's got to do at least a 25 conceptual plan for the Water Management District, PDF Page 237 of 264 53 1 but it's that, it's a conceptual plan. 2 Keep in mind the residential component is 3 behind the commercial from Immokalee Road. So this 4 is all the commercial tract, where the commercial 5 uses, senior housing could go. This is where the 6 residential buildings would be constructed. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What about security? 8 Right now, we have a security gate that restricts 9 people coming into our development. 10 Is there going to be any fencing on your 11 property that abuts Esplanade? 12 MR. ARNOLD: I'm not certain I know the answer 13 today. 14 Dan, do you have a feel for that? 15 MR. WATERS: I don't think we've gotten that 16 far yet. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: At first, I was 18 under the impression that the trees were definitely 19 going to be cut down. And I heard some discussion 20 about the fill. We don't expect that we can stop 21 you guys from doing what you're going to do, but if 22 there's any way you can sympathize with our 23 situation. 24 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We bought homes. We PDF Page 238 of 264 54 1 were told by Taylor Morrison (phonetic) that our 2 homes were facing the preserve. We're not the only 3 homeowners that were told that. Several of our 4 neighbors were told that. 5 And if you could please accommodate us. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Sure. No, I 7 appreciate that. Anything we could possibly say if 8 we would (indiscernible) of having it filled to get 9 to different road elevations and be above flood 10 stages, it makes that problematic. 11 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You have two shared 13 access exits there? 14 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I mean, how 16 (indiscernible) know the people who own that other 17 land, so how can you -- 18 MR. ARNOLD: These were previously approved 19 and the county has asked us to retain the potential 20 interconnections. Right now, they're showing an 21 interconnection to Esplanade, which I'm guessing 22 probably is not likely to occur but I mean, with 23 regard to the access to Tree Farm to the east, that 24 gets us out to the Collier Boulevard extension, and 25 I -- PDF Page 239 of 264 55 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, I can tell you 2 about a situation we have in The Quarry right now. 3 When Heritage Bay was originally created and 4 The Quarry, there's shared access within the 5 communities between Heritage Bay and The Quarry. 6 And we have -- we have conducted observations 7 there, and we've seen, on some weekends, almost 300 8 cars from Heritage Bay coming into The Quarry to 9 either go down to (indiscernible) back road, our 10 rear entrance, or to go out our front entrance. 11 And we've requested -- and that's the way the PUD 12 was originally submitted. 13 So we've requested from the county that we 14 would like to put a gate up there and stop that 15 from happening because they're two separate 16 communities. 17 Our board of directors was told by the county 18 that they were not in favor of doing that by the 19 commissioners, because it would affect the traffic 20 flow on Immokalee Road. 21 So it seems to me that if they're willing -- 22 they're not willing to allow us to put a gate up, 23 Heritage Bay already has an exit on Immokalee Road, 24 that they may push putting those exits in there, 25 and you may have people going through Esplanade to PDF Page 240 of 264 56 1 get out onto Immokalee Road. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, first of all, 3 our PUD is written to where this only happens if 4 Esplanade wants it to happen, which I'm guessing 5 will never happen, if I'm a betting man. 6 I remember -- I remember being required to 7 show that and limiting it to if Esplanade wants it, 8 and it would be controlled purely for Esplanade if 9 they wanted to have the ability to get to this 10 commercial area without having to go on Immokalee 11 Road. Again, as a betting man, I don't think 12 that's ever going to happen. 13 This one will happen because the county does 14 want projects to interconnect and get them to where 15 they have multiple access points and to get us to 16 our traffic -- get us to the future Collier 17 Boulevard extension that someday, probably not in 18 anybody in this room's lifetime, they will actually 19 build the continuation of Collier Boulevard. 20 So this interconnection will happen when this 21 project comes in to development, which I think is 22 going to be fairly soon. So that interconnection 23 will happen. If I'm a betting man, that's never 24 going to happen because I can't imagine that the 25 residents of Esplanade are going to vote to build PDF Page 241 of 264 57 1 an access point to go through (indiscernible). 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Does that mean 3 you've had negotiations with the owners of that 4 property and they're going to allow you to do that? 5 MR. ARNOLD: This one here? Their PUD came in 6 first, and they're absolutely required to do that. 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. Any 8 (indiscernible). 9 MR. ARNOLD: It is in their zoning documents 10 that absolutely requires it, and I've worked on 11 this site for I don't know how many years now, a 12 lot, and I know I had to coordinate with these 13 people in getting this zoning approved, and I know 14 that's why that's lined up the way it is, to make 15 sure that that interconnection happens. 16 So they will also have the ability to avoid 17 this intersection and come out this way to go west 18 instead of having to come down this intersection to 19 -- if it becomes congested. This project will have 20 the ability to do this, to go west to avoid the 21 intersection at Collier Boulevard and Immokalee 22 Road. 23 So there was some planning that went into this 24 through the Collier County Transportation 25 Department, and that's why you see those PDF Page 242 of 264 58 1 interconnections. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Just one other 3 thing. I read in the paper or somewhere that the 4 county was going to restrict making a right-hand 5 turn coming out of the shopping center where the 6 McDonald's is, because even if you have a double 7 turn lane there, you still have to cross Immokalee 8 Road to get into it. 9 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Right. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Personally, I go 11 down, and I go all the way down Immokalee -- 12 Collier Boulevard. And I make a U-turn where the 13 RV park is because it's so dangerous to try and 14 cross Immokalee Road. 15 So I think that probably becomes kind of a 16 moot point (indiscernible). 17 MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. 18 Yes, sir, in the back. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is there an active 20 PUD for that property to your west? 21 MR. ARNOLD: To the west or east? 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The east on here. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: The east, yeah. 24 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, it is. It's called the Tree 25 Farm PUD. PDF Page 243 of 264 59 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What's in that PUD 2 right now? 3 MR. ARNOLD: I think a mix of commercial and 4 residential land uses. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Similar to yours? 7 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 8 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: How wide is that 10 property? 11 MR. ARNOLD: This property? 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. From the edge 13 of your property to Collier, how many feet is that 14 going to be? 15 MR. ARNOLD: The distance of the Tree Farm 16 project? 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah, yeah. 18 MR. ARNOLD: Well, that's 1 to 200 scale, so 19 what is that, four inches? 800 feet, plus or 20 minus? 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That's about 800 22 feet. 23 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah, it's 800 900 24 feet there. At least 1,000 with the center line as 25 well (indiscernible). PDF Page 244 of 264 60 1 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, ma'am. 2 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Can I ask what's 3 behind Addie's Corner, whatever you call it? 4 MR. ARNOLD: Here? 5 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Is that another 6 PUD? 7 MR. ARNOLD: I think that's part of the 8 Esplanade property, if I'm not mistaken 9 (indiscernible). 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 11 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Does Esplanade -- 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Do they require that 13 -- there was some -- okay. There was some -- 14 (Multiple simultaneous speakers.) 15 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is your property 17 going to be elevated? Because right now, you -- I 18 see you've cleared it all out. And when you refill 19 the earth, is it going to be higher than it was? 20 MR. ARNOLD: I don't think our property has 21 been cleared yet. It's a (indiscernible). 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What you're probably 23 looking at is over here. 24 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No, I'm talking in 25 the back. PDF Page 245 of 264 61 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Way in the back 2 here? 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You take the little 4 road (indiscernible). 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Back here? 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. You take the 7 -- yeah, that. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That's Taylor Road. 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Oh, that's -- 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's beyond us. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: But I'm just 12 wondering, are you going to have an -- are you 13 going to have to elevate, put more earth on your 14 property? 15 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Well, typically -- 16 that was -- that's kind of the issue related to 17 like the vegetation, because normally you do need 18 to fill up a bit to contain like stormwater so you 19 don't put water on your neighbor's property. 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And that, 22 unfortunately, is what causes, oftentimes, to not 23 be able to preserve all the vegetation, and that's 24 why we'd have to replant in those cases. 25 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So that would be -- PDF Page 246 of 264 62 1 do you have the 65-foot building on top of an 2 elevated earth base to begin with? Do you know 3 what I'm saying? You're going up and then you're 4 going to go up another 65 feet, it may even be more 5 than that. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It will be -- well, 7 it would probably be a few feet of fill. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Just a couple of 9 feet. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: A few feet. 11 MR. ARNOLD: Keep in mind, the 65 feet was our 12 maximum height, and it's actually measured -- the 13 actual height's measured from the center line 14 height of the nearest arterial road, which is 15 Immokalee Road. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So we've changed 17 that, yeah. 18 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: In order for Taylor 20 Morrison, in the back that you were just talking 21 about there, they had to make a drainage pond or 22 blast through the limestone. 23 Are you going to have to make a lake up in 24 front for your drainage? 25 MR. ARNOLD: Well, we're proposing our water PDF Page 247 of 264 63 1 management system (indiscernible) the northeast 2 corner of the site. And I don't know whether or 3 not blasting is going to be required for that. I 4 don't really have a feel for the geology there to 5 know if we're going to have to do that. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's up here on the 7 aerial. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Uh-huh. 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 10 preserve -- 11 MR. ARNOLD: Correct. 12 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: This is preserve 13 right here. You have the -- what he's shown is the 14 preserve kind of -- it's an L-shaped preserve area 15 that then comes down here and then the water 16 management just right here in the corner there in 17 the northeast corner. 18 You can see it good on this map. Anyone 19 (indiscernible) look at. 20 MR. ARNOLD: Anybody else? Anybody not have a 21 chance to ask questions or -- yes, sir. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: You mentioned 23 (indiscernible) area ratio of decimal. How does 24 that work? What does that mean? 25 MR. ARNOLD: That is a simple calculation that PDF Page 248 of 264 64 1 you take the area that you control within the four 2 corners of your site. You multiply that times .6 3 times acres, and you convert those to feet, and 4 that gives you how many total square feet of 5 building area that you can have. 6 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Building area -- 7 MR. ARNOLD: Building area. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- including all 9 floors, correct? 10 MR. ARNOLD: It includes all floors. The only 11 thing it excludes, the five (indiscernible) parking 12 underneath the building a parking garage format 13 that gets excluded from my calculation. 14 I think it -- the Addie's Corner PUD also has 15 a standard in there. I think it says or 26 units 16 per acre for the -- but that's really not a good 17 judge of most of the senior housing that we worked 18 on, so. 19 Did I see another hand up over here? Yes, 20 ma'am? 21 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Just one question. 22 Does the county require you to plant a certain 23 number of plants, a certain, you know, not all 24 skinny, little runty plants? 25 MR. ARNOLD: The county requires buffers for PDF Page 249 of 264 65 1 every project, and we've identified the landscape 2 buffer that would be around the perimeter. 3 The preserve area has to have vegetation 4 supplemented if when we -- 5 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: No, I understand, 6 but from Immokalee Road -- 7 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. 8 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: -- will there be 9 some -- 10 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, there will be. 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Screening? 12 MR. ARNOLD: Yep. We're required to have a 13 20-foot wide buffer, at least, along Immokalee 14 Road, and part of that (indiscernible) is the 15 county widening in that location, Dan? 16 MR. WATERS: It's sort of -- it's going to bow 17 out where (indiscernible). 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: In the future, it 19 will (indiscernible). 20 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, the county's getting ready 21 to do some improvements that affect a portion of 22 the property that they own that is within our PUD. 23 So there are going to be some changes out there 24 when they start with all of their road 25 improvements. PDF Page 250 of 264 66 1 Yes, sir. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So exactly what kind 3 of a buffer is going to be between -- on that 4 border, on that property around there to Esplanade 5 in the front where you're going to cut all the 6 trees down to be able to come across -- 7 MR. ARNOLD: The county, in that area, 8 requires us to be a ten-foot wide buffer. 9 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: A ten-foot wide. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Probably the same 11 they have. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Yeah, probably the same 13 (indiscernible) as a minimum. 14 Anybody else? 15 Well, just to summarize. Again, we don't have 16 hearing dates, but if you received notice for this 17 meeting, you should get another public notice for 18 the upcoming Planning Commission meeting when we 19 have an advertised hearing date for that. You'll 20 also see the four-by-eight zoning signs go up on 21 the property when that hearing is scheduled. So it 22 will give you an indication that we're moving 23 forward in the public hearing process, and then 24 probably four weeks, a minimum, between the 25 Planning Commission, we would make it to the Board PDF Page 251 of 264 67 1 of County Commissioners for their final action. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Who was Addie? 3 MR. ARNOLD: I don't know the answer to that. 4 Rich, you've been around long enough to know 5 who the project -- 6 MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah, you've been around 7 long, too. 8 I don't remember if it was -- if it was a 9 daughter or a granddaughter of the original family 10 that owned the property or not. I don't know the 11 significance of that name, but it was originally -- 12 the people bought this from -- I think they're from 13 Pittsburgh. Their father bought this property 100 14 years ago as an investment, and when he passed away 15 a few years ago, they went through and finished up 16 the zoning to get rid of the property so it could 17 be distributed to the heirs. 18 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I have one more 19 question. 20 MR. ARNOLD: Sure. 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Are you far enough 22 along that you -- whoever is actually designing it, 23 that would know how far back the 65-foot buildings 24 might be? 25 MR. ARNOLD: I don't have an answer to that PDF Page 252 of 264 68 1 for you tonight. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Because this is 3 probably 1,200 feet? 4 MR. ARNOLD: Give or take. 5 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: 1,300 feet? But 6 this is 800? 7 MR. ARNOLD: Right, sure. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: This is probably 9 1,200. It's -- does anybody have any idea where -- 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No. We're -- 11 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- it's likely to 12 be? 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: No. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Since you're 15 designing it? 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: We've got to kind of 17 get through this first before you start to get into 18 something (indiscernible). 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Really? 20 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. They -- you 21 know, we'll take the feedback we got here, what the 22 concerns are into account, but, no, we're not there 23 yet. 24 MR. ARNOLD: He had his hand up first. Sorry. 25 I'm pointing to you. PDF Page 253 of 264 69 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible) 2 question. Is there any kind of timeline? Let's 3 say everything goes through smoothly 4 (indiscernible) is there any kind of timeline to 5 break ground and project finishing? 6 MR. ARNOLD: Well, you might not have it, but 7 Dan tried to address that. We're going through 8 concurrently with the South Florida Water 9 Management District permitting process. 10 Dan hopes to wrap that up in the next few 11 months. That would kind of coincide with us 12 getting through this public hearing process, 13 hopefully, in the next several months so they can 14 start breaking ground sometime -- the earliest is 15 probably late spring of 2017, Dan, if everything 16 goes great? 17 MR. WATERS: Right. 18 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 19 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So the retail near 20 the front -- 21 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- if you will, the 23 south of the property, is not going to be the 24 classic one-story shopping center that we see all 25 over. It's going to look like the Mercato. It's PDF Page 254 of 264 70 1 going to have retail on the first floor and perhaps 2 office above? Housing above? 3 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the only housing that's 4 allowed on the commercial tract would be senior 5 housing, and that's probably if senior housing 6 decided to develop most of the site. It's probably 7 not going to be a combination on the front. It's 8 going to be retail, office and maybe a hotel use 9 that's also permitted. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah, but that would 11 be the 45 feet. That's -- or whatever the 12 (indiscernible) was -- 13 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- of the retail. 15 That's what we're going to see along Immokalee? 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right. 17 MR. ARNOLD: You're going to see -- let me go 18 back and read them to you (indiscernible) speak. 19 On the development standards for the commercial 20 tract, retail buildings would be a zoned height of 21 45 feet maximum with a 65-foot actual height, 22 office buildings, 55-foot zoned height, 65-foot 23 actual. And if group housing got developed on that 24 portion of the site, it would have a 45-foot zoned 25 height with 65-foot actual. PDF Page 255 of 264 71 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: When you give two 2 numbers, 45 and then 65 what is the purpose of the 3 smaller number? 4 MR. ARNOLD: The zoned height is defined 5 differently than an actual height. The actual 6 height is the top of the highest part of your 7 building. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: That's what you see. 9 MR. ARNOLD: Well, it could be a spire on top 10 of your building. It could be the elevator shaft 11 for a building. Any of those things that produce 12 above, that's the maximum height that part of the 13 building can be. 14 Yes, ma'am? 15 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: You said the word 16 "hotel" at the end and then you had started the 17 meeting by saying you probably won't do a hotel. 18 MR. ARNOLD: No. I said I didn't know who a 19 hotel provider was. 20 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Oh. 21 MR. ARNOLD: We don't have that defined. 22 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: So we might have a 23 hotel there? 24 MR. ARNOLD: We could have a hotel there, yes. 25 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: That would be a PDF Page 256 of 264 72 1 totally inappropriate use of that site. 2 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. 3 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So that six-story 4 building that you're planning could possibly be a 5 hotel? 6 MR. ARNOLD: That's one of the permitted 7 principal uses in the commercial tract, yes, sir. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay. So that's the 9 residence that you're saying, could possibly be a 10 hotel and not a residence? 11 MR. ARNOLD: Well, the county considers that 12 to be a commercial land use. 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So that's 14 (indiscernible). So it could be a hotel. 15 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: Do we have any say 16 at some point? 17 MR. ARNOLD: Sure, you do. The public 18 hearings. 19 UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE VOICE: What's the process 20 us for us to say (indiscernible)? 21 MR. ARNOLD: At the Collier County Planning 22 Commission, any member of the public who attends or 23 if you want to write an e-mail, it's made part of 24 the record, and they take into consideration your 25 comments. They may agree with you and think it's a PDF Page 257 of 264 73 1 grand idea and make that recommendation or they may 2 say we disagree with you. 3 I mean, we're in the same position that you 4 are in that regard, but, you know, we make our best 5 case of why we think it's the appropriate use. And 6 keep in mind, it's already an approved use, the 7 hotel. It could be built there today. 8 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And I want to 9 clarify one thing. You're not going to put six -- 10 a six-story building in a 45-foot height zone 11 (indiscernible) that building. 12 MR. ARNOLD: Right. 13 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So you're probably 14 talking four stories -- 15 MR. ARNOLD: At the most. 16 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- in a 45-foot 17 zoned height. The history of zoned height, just so 18 you know, is we used to just say zoned height. 19 And when you're in certain places, that zoned 20 height is measured from the minimum floor 21 elevation. So when you get closer to the coast, 22 because you're closer to the coast, you'd have to 23 (indiscernible) you'd have to raise the building up 24 to a certain height before you could actually start 25 measuring how tall the building is. PDF Page 258 of 264 74 1 So if I were to tell you I was going to build 2 a 50-foot tall building, you would think it's going 3 to be 50 feet, but in reality, you're on the coast, 4 you've got to probably go up 15 feet-ish to get to 5 the minimum elevation. So it's really 65 feet. 6 So what the county says, let's be honest with 7 everybody. Tell them what it's going to be to the 8 tippy-top, and that's why you have the two 9 measurements, zoned height and actual height, so 10 the tippy-top -- so everybody knows what we're 11 talking about there was -- there was not -- zoned 12 height didn't accurately represent the total height 13 of the building. That's why you have both of those 14 measurements in the documents. And that started 15 about 15 years ago. 16 MR. ARNOLD: Has it been that long? 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: I don't know. 18 Commissioner Halas was around back then. So that's 19 why you have the two heights. It's not to confuse 20 you, but to actually tell you exactly what you've 21 got. 22 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: What's zone type 23 ALS? 24 MR. ARNOLD: It's probably ALF you saw. It 25 stands for assisted living facility, senior PDF Page 259 of 264 75 1 housing. 2 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Is there any height 3 restrictions on those structures? 4 MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir. I read them. The 5 group housing and the -- on the -- and I can read 6 them to you again. Let's see. Find my group 7 housing uses here. 8 Group housing. It is 45 feet, zoned height, 9 65 feet actual height. 10 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: For ALS? 11 MR. ARNOLD: Yes. It's considered group 12 housing. You've probably heard the term ALF, F, as 13 in -- 14 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yes. 15 MR. ARNOLD: -- assisted living facility, is 16 what that commonly stands for. 17 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And that could be 65 18 feet or what you described? 19 MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. 20 Going once, twice. Anybody else? 21 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you. 22 MR. ARNOLD: Then adjourn the meeting. Thank 23 you all for attending. 24 Here's the helicopter pad and (indiscernible). 25 (Multiple simultaneous speakers.) PDF Page 260 of 264 76 1 UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (indiscernible) 2 tallest building? 3 MR. ARNOLD: I'm not certain. I don't think 4 that height is (indiscernible) a tall structure 5 permit to tell you right now. It's not considered 6 a tall structure. 7 (End of recording.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PDF Page 261 of 264 77 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 76 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 DATED: January 2, 2017 16 17 SIGNED AND CERTIFIED: 18 19 ________________________ Joyce B. Howell 20 21 22 23 24 25 PDF Page 262 of 264 PDF Page 263 of 264 PDF Page 264 of 264 1 JohnsonEric From:Jane Rollins <naplesjane1@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, June 13, 2017 11:15 AM To:JohnsonEric Cc:SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; StrainMark; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph Subject:Re: Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. Dear Mr. Johnson: I have been looking over the many changes for this property (Barron Collier’s Addison Place) over many years. One of the revisions, I believe on 7/9/10, was dramatic. If I’m reading the document “Addie’s Corner Exhibit C CPUD Master Plan” correctly, prior to this date, Barron Collier had not planned residential units for this parcel. If I followed the documents correctly, Addison Place was a 726 acre parcel and Addie’s Corner was just a small (23.3 acre) portion to be developed for commercial uses at the corner of Immokalee Rd and the extension of 951 north. Can you direct me to view a map of the entire 726 acre parcel? There has been so much information going around about assisted living facilities and more commercial uses to be built in front of the Quarry as well as a large commercial project at the SE corner of Immokalee Rd and 951 that will generate a tremendous amount of traffic. We need to know all of the impact these developments will have on this intersection before the June 27th Collier County Commissioners Meeting. As stated in our May 8th email to you, our major concerns are traffic and safety, sights and sounds and the impact on our property value with all of these building plans. If this plan is approved, why would the county want to create so much congestion? What plans are there for road improvements and traffic flow if all these projects get the green light. You, the Planning Commission and the County Commissioners have the chance to plan responsibly. Please reconsider these changes requested. Sincerely Yours, Jane & Mike Rollins On May 8, 2017, at 9:26 AM, JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> wrote: Thank you for your email. I will include it in the packets that will be reviewed by the decision- makers. Respectfully, Eric L. Johnson, AICP, CFM, LEED Green Associate Principal Planner From: Jane Rollins [mailto:naplesjane1@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 9:02 AM To: StrainMark <MarkStrain@colliergov.net>; EbertDiane <DianeEbert@colliergov.net>; ChrzanowskiStan <StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net>; SchmittJoseph <JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; TaylorPenny <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry 2 <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject: Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. May 8, 2017 Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Collier County Planning Commissioners Diane Ebert, Stan Chrzanowski, Joseph Scmitt, Mark Strain Collier County Commissioners Burt Saunders, Donna Fiala, Penny Taylor, Bill McDaniel, Andy Solis, cc: Dave Lykins, Michael Brownlee, Angela Goodner, Sherry Greco, Sue Filson Re: Addie’s Corner development Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. We are homeowners who live in in Esplanade Golf & Country Club full time and registered voters in Collier County. We have several primary concerns about our home investment as it will be impacted by the Addie’s Corner Development: 1. Safety and Traffic. We are a gated community. We are requesting that the density be lowered considerably below the proposed plan. 349 living units plus a possible group house would have a sizable impact for all of us currently living off Immokalee Rd.if we needed to evacuate in the event of a hurricane. We have no north bound route until I-75, about 4.5 miles from Collier Blvd. We have only one paved entrance and exit from our neighborhood and it is Immokalee Rd. To leave, we have to share the turn out with cars making U turns in the same space as us. People don’t realize who has right of way and this makes for a dangerous situation. The impact of adding as many as 349 living units, a group home and an unknown number of businesses to the traffic flow west of the Collier Blvd traffic light so close to our exit from Esplanade will make this dangerous situation even worse. We would like to see a traffic light installed at our entrance. We would like to see Barron Collier keep this project on hold until Collier Blvd is widened and operational and require them to direct most of its traffic out the Collier Blvd. side. 2. Sight and Sound. We would request the developer put an opaque wall around their property. To reduce the impact of this development, Barron Collier should not be allowed to reduce the acreage devoted to preserve by 61% (8.85 acres to 3.45) as they have requested, rather keep it as originally stated. We request the buffer areas be enlarged and exotic trees replaced with trees of similar size. We request that outdoor lighting be pointed away from our neighborhood and facing downward. We request living units be no more than 2 stories in height. We request no business or living unit amenity have outside amplified noise (there is a water management area at the north end of the property and water does amplify noise). 3. April 28, 2017 Amendment To The Master Plan. The revision calls for even more housing than the original plan. It asked for a group home in Tract A with only a slight reduction in commercial space in addition to the requested 349 living units in Tract C. This is a large change from the September 2015 Master Plan done by Grady Minor Engineers. Respectfully, please do not grant these changes. We would like to attend the Planning Commission Meeting but unfortunately we will be out of the country on May 18th. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 3 Michael & Jane Rollins 9368 Terresina Dr., Naples, FL 34119 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 JohnsonEric From:Amy Lawlor <amylawlor.interiors@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, May 22, 2017 4:33 PM To:TaylorPenny; SolisAndy; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; StrainMark; HomiakKaren; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; FryerEdwin; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; BellowsRay; JohnsonEric; BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Cc:Robert Lawlor; Amy Lawlor; Barbara Coffey Subject:Addie's Corner Development Collier County Commissioners & Planning Commissioners Mr. Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mr. Mark Strain, Chair of Planning Commission and Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development Planning Commission Project # PL20150001776 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: We are homeowner’s in Esplanade Golf and Country Club which is situated along Immokalee Road in Naples. One of the major factors in deciding to build our home in Esplanade was the fact that there were significant preserves bordering most of the property. We believe the proposed ‘Addie’s Corner’ development will significantly decrease the desirability of the community and decrease property values. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a preserve area to the East of Esplanade Boulevard, with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. This will clearly decrease the overall appeal of the community. Even with the existing tree line, 4 story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values. We encourage you to require the following: 2 • Do not permit a reduction of the existing preserve • Limit the project to no more than the number of units that current zoning allows for • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • A buffer of at least 100 feet • Locate their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property If you would like to discuss any matters relative to this proposed development we can be reached through email at: drboblawlor@gmail.comor via cell phone at: 610-48-2629. Thank you for your consideration and I hope you can appreciate our concerns. Sincerely, Bob and Amy Lawlor 8810 Vaccaro CT. Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Layton Elliott <laytonelliott4@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 17, 2017 3:23 PM To:TaylorPenny; SolisAndy; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; StrainMark; HomiakKaren; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; FryerEdwin; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; BellowsRay; JohnsonEric; BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Cc:Bobbi Elliott Subject:Addie's Corner Development May 17, 2017 Collier County Commissioners & Planning Commissioners Mr. Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mr. Mark Strain, Chair of Planning Commission and Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development Planning Commission Project # PL20150001776 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: We are homeowner’s in Esplanade Golf and Country Club which is situated along Immokalee Road in Naples. One of the major factors in deciding to build our home in Esplanade was the fact that there were significant preserves bordering most of the property. We believe the proposed ‘Addie’s Corner’ development will significantly decrease the desirability of the community and decrease property values. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a preserve area to the East of Esplanade Boulevard, with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. This will clearly decrease the overall appeal of the community. Even with the existing tree line, 4 story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values. We encourage you to require the following: 2 • Do not permit a reduction of the existing preserve • Limit the project to no more than the number of units that current zoning allows for • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • A buffer of at least 100 feet • Locate their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property If you would like to discuss any matters relative to this proposed development we can be reached through email at: antiochhm@yahoo.com. Thank you for your consideration and I hope you can appreciate our concerns. Sincerely, Layton and Bobbi Elliott 9110 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Irene Bond <ibond2010@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 17, 2017 10:15 AM To:TaylorPenny; andysolis@collier.net; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; StrainMark; HomiakKaren; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; FryerEdwin; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; BellowsRay; JohnsonEric Cc:BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject:5-18-17 Meeting Addie's Corner Development May 16, 2017 Collier County Commissioners & Planning Commissioners Mr. Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mr. Mark Strain, Chair of Planning Commission and Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development Planning Commission Project # PL20150001776 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: As Canadians who winter in Florida, we understand and accept our limited influence on local governance. We would,however, like to pass along why we chose Naples, Collier County and the new Esplanade Golf and Country Club situated along Immokalee Road to purchase our home vs. other areas in Florida. Collier County is beautiful in its design because of its green spaces and low-density building. It doesn't feel like a concrete jungle as many Cities do. The preserve areas are what make Collier County special in our eyes and are the major reason we chose this community. We believe the proposed ‘Addie’s Corner’ development will significantly decrease the desirability of the community, decrease property values and add to possible safety risks due to the pressures on an already extremely busy Immokalee Road (with the additional development at the Collier Corner). We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres with 4 story buildings much larger than anything in the area. We encourage you to: · Not permit a reduction of the existing preserve · Limit the project to no more than the number of units that current zoning allows for · Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories · Require a buffer of at least 100 feet · Locate their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property Please vote to maintain what, in our eyes, makes Naples, Collier County and Esplanade Golf and Country Club a beautiful and desirable place to stay, play and invest. We can be reached through email at: ibond2010@gmail.com or via cell phone at: 807-633-7269. 2 Thank you for your consideration. Irene and Ward Bond 9158 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 Sent from my iPad 1 JohnsonEric From:Phyllis Giuffrida <pgiu22@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 16, 2017 11:21 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's corner developement- collier county planning comm project 20150001776 We are residents of Esplanade , along Immokalee road in Naples. The current view entering the developement is enhanced by the wooden area to the east, with exotic beautiful trees. We are all under the impression the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. That is a major reduction. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15' to 25' in width with a small area at 30' in width. We understand that 2 types of these beautiful exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. Also, the thinner tree line will increase the sound and light affecting the peacefulness of properties on Armour Court. Other residents met with members of the planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Baron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request him to step back the building away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Mr. Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property. Provide landscaping and planting seeds to screen new buildings comparable to the current view limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units Thank you Sincerely, Phyllis and John Giuffrida 8826 Vaccaro Court Naples, Fl 34119 Sent from my iPad 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- s36s ejsone@aol.com May 10, 2017 Ray Bellows Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 This will address the proposed rezoning and development ofthe property known as "Addie's Corner", which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. lwould encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developing into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example ofthoughtful planning. More than half of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure I don't have to tell you it would be short-sighted not to consider what the future holds for the southeast corner of the intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is ofgreat concern. As it exists now, pulling out ofthe community can be challenging because ofthe high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement ofthe developer of the property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. We askthatyou givethe proposed development your most thoughtful consideration. Donot reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards of the beauty that is Collier County and its sensible development. Sincerely, S' Edmund J. Staley, Esq.Carol A. Staley tu% Dear Mr. Bellows: !r^X a PEtfrcl a5iia o- -.ao Et! z |* \o \ F,LED 0:0LLitn COUNIY, FL 0Rl ?017t{AY tZ ptlt2:tt 'li-tiin 0i 08uii i5 8Y --__..--_*0.c r $r e)f OJ3 3-.)w v1 s, r-.t]J J ; G, et \r-\f, J \ { ---ir I = ll t =N',o \ :-\ d =/ *rxl J I -:{J .)Z.r ) ={-23- --,2 \-- \ - \'_-trq,,/ -, ) =l \ --++ ^, = + "tl.-l fii :.!: i'tl l.'1 -l!t., lri i* iri *4 15 ts f- <" t 1 d C t4 E .\ e) o,c -> n O-..- $t' At)oc \Nva _j fl $e fiD ,F5 fi\q 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- s35s ejsone@aol.com May lO, 2Ol7 Stan Chrzanowski Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 Dear Mr. Chrzanowski: This will address the proposed rezoning and development ofthe property known as "Addie's Corner", which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. I would encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developing into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example of thoughtful planning. More than half of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure I don't have to tell you it would be short-sighted not to consider what the future holds for the southeast corner of the intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is of great concern. As it exists now, pulling out ofthe community can be challenging because ofthe high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement of the developer of the property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. We ask that you give the proposed development your most thoughtful consideration. Do not reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards of the beauty that is Collier County and its sensible development. Sincerely, V ,Jr Edmund J. Staley, Esq n O^r*<Q k^!"- carol A. Staley / / ffiz 'o nr. \o \o ml7 HAY 12 Pl1l2: \0 lli- arin ui ruuii I S YB ?4 bf a) i ,'-4. A \No',o \) =-$ 11'' d Ao(^ \ J ) Fo a J D {' .--\ \ + \N )' .<- =_lv ;''l Z 5a. $ 1rY 0!lx hl ItIl-"t r"'(rr 'rl tI, "T i ,1. r: rdI,ih t.t u a ln ql I , a 7 c PEI30.55 ilUAa\-o(, tt G FILED 08 COLLIEit COUHTY FLORIDA 0.c. 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- s36s ejsone@aol.com May 10, 2017 Joseph Schmitt Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 Dear Mr. Schmitt: This will address the proposed rezoning and development ofthe property known as "Addie's Corner", which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. I would encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developing into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example of thoughtful planning. Morethanhalf of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure I don't have to tell you it would be short-si8hted not to consider what the future holds forthe southeast corner ofthe intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is of Sreat concern. As it exists now, pulling out ofthe community can be challenging because ofthe high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement ofthe developer ofthe property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. We askthatyou givethe proposed development your most thoughtful consideration. Donot reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards ofthe beauty that is collier County and its sensible development. Sincerely,c M<a Carol A. Staley ?{,F., Edmund J. StaleY, Esq. lno.Ic o og (D oo FILED 08I.UI.LILH C(]UNTY, FLONID ?0r7 HAY t2 ?fitl: \0 ilL tlih irf: auUi( i.., 8Y.-*_ _-*-0.c. .\; 9-s -\ch (,/)1p ,c$ ffi.t q 'nA5- D c. 1$Nr (^\b' - x ,+ ,T iii t\rr t"{il )r \ &s * k,t 01 al ts 9f ar- ] , ;{ r\ .JO s") a) \sI + at I -1a S, '=_ | 5\J3J:--a'-+- * .r,.J,' __\ It I,lt ri tt t, t z .o 6 \o .o \l I 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- s36s ejsone@aol.com May 10, 2077 Mr. Mark Strain, Chairman Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 Dear Mr. Strain: The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure I don't have to tell you it would be short-sighted not to consider what the future holds for the southeast corner ofthe intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is of great concern. As it exists now, pulling out of the community can be challenging because of the high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement of the developer ofthe property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. Sincerely, >il15_ Edmund J. StaleY Cr"t?. Carol A. Staley This will address the proposed rezoning and development ofthe property known as "Addie's Corner", which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. lwould encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developing into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example of thoughtful planning. More than half of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. We ask that you give the proposed development your most thoughtful consideration. Donot reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards ofthe beauty that is Collier County and its sensible development. fB I \o tl 0 d ilt,;, coLLrEir Sfht?., 70t7 t[At t2 Pt|t Ci.LfrIi UT OOU dl = =f, ^s?, t .J :D2 _l3 fp ) oc ,9+ A\3sj ,$:; 7 .) e, l-a\ I ) C. Cr_ : ) o4 5 3 1 _)'sts \, Ps -s lo'! P J --1 1r ),' <. ( Jd.n+ (N 12{F$\ Ol \m J!- = fsJ!+ = =t,Sl\b/S.$ == =I+:- (-\ C' T -1 AJ U 7 g s\ DL 5 h* ,t r.rit* iC Sr!'3 #i'1 'f .tr :' ;lH t'. 1I r{ t, ,/ t il l, { 1, I f t ) I ! QO P. ,,€ I, 'I ,,,.i I, Diane K. Ebert, Secretary Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 Dea r Ms. Ebert: This will address the proposed rezoning and development of the property known as "Addie's Corner", which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. I would encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developint into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example of thoughtful planning. More than half of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure I don't have to tell you it would be short-sighted not to consider what the future holds for the southeast corner of the intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is of great concern. As it exists now, pulling out of the community can be challenging because of the high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement of the developer of the property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. We ask that you give the proposed development your most thoughtful consideration. Do not reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards of the beauty that is Collier County and its sensible development. Sincerely, Car"< Q Carol A. Staley 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- s36s ejsone@aol.com May 10, 2017 'W\ Edmund J. Staley, Esq. ffi z*m .,sE '!,'o :QOEEot!;< coLLr[R rt',h,i?,r.ffi, ?0t7fiAY t2 Pfit2:\0 tlr- tiiti Ci UiiUnl,l iJY 0.c dv,E J h. ? ( 4 q\t-I a\ cn ,,r1 i.l !! I t I i T a^\ (3 t^.. T -3 o\ue ?r \ J Qi + 7 t^ \ ) Tno 5 \a /-) F =,, ir)s F.u u F J.){s ; ) fl \ Karen Homiak, Vice Chairman Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 Dear Ms. Homiak This will address the proposed rezoning and development ofthe property known as "Addie's Corner", which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. I would encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developing into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example ofthoughtful planning. Morethanhalf of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure I don't have to tell you it would be short-sighted not to consider what the future holds forthe southeast corner ofthe intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is of great concern. As it exists now, pulling out ofthe community can be challenging because ofthe high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement of the developer of the property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. We ask that you give the proposed development your most thoughtful consideration. Do not reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards ofthe beauty that is collier county and its sensible development. Sincerely, S'O*p o Carol A. StaleyEdmund J. Staley, Esq 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- s36s ejsone@aol.com May 70,2OL7 ffi P=HE 'o-E-e aB5-. =to€E;< FILEO OB'- r,/t_L I Iii c0uHI Y, FL0Rr0 ?017 t{AY t2 Pfi12: \0 tli. I nr, rrr" (]0Uii iS B Y-_-'-_.-_ 0.c. ,< .o P\ $rO,5'x =0, CN ^ -s-v<,t 5 ) o) : not : T \,q,) $ _0 I u,$IS h, I tfl -.t (\r rA -\ Y :.r =1\):v--/ :1 =\./-l ,, /4,2 +iOr'rl 0, T ,i i-1, T: in :tl i{ F'rr. i.tg ii ,..1 a F t- \i wv\ s ) I i I ! 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- 5365 ejsone@aol.com May 10, 2017 Edwin Fryer Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 Dea r Mr. F ryer: This will address the proposed rezoning and development ofthe property known as "Addie's Corne/', which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. I would encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developing into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example of thoughtful planning. More than half of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure ldon't havetotell you it would be short-sighted not to consider what the future holds forthe southeast corner ofthe intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is of great concern. As it exists now, pulling out of the community can be challenging because of the high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement ofthe developer of the property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. We ask that you give the proposed development your most thoughtful consideration. Do not reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards of the beauty that is Collier County and its sensible development. Sincerely, Sr Edmund J. Staley, Esq.Carol A. Staley S -J:J CN AU ( -r ) $ .\ fr ^\ot+ a\ C\o' o\ 5 $iE;I 1'n r3 fr5,, a 1 s5 VSJ\ G\ E ] l 4s ) )(_ ts *\ nr fi'lr tA'(rv --ltl h, 1\tr -aFIt1 I -{ =-€--2 E/F == = ':fl :{ rTi'Jt rn r:lt tJ" r* a/, Fd i-,i,J 15 P , ) t tlLi. c oLL r ER Io'rhtt?, tr&% o ?01? HAY l2 Plt 12: !0 ctliih l,l c0uiil5 BY_---0,C. -E=fiE s-: I :!a :,'Li o =QUlY!r (,r l!d< 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 953- s36s ejsone@aol.com May tO,2OL7 Dear Mr. Eastman The intersection of 951 and lmmokalee Rd, and the areas within proximity to it as it develops further, could become a density and traffic nightmare if intelligent planning is not the first priority. l'm sure I don't have to tell you it would be short-sighted not to consider what the future holds for the southeast corner of the intersection (Pelican Nursey) as well as the existing development on the southwest corner (i.e. how difficult it is to exit the Pebblebrooke Shopping Center if your intent is to go east or west). The increased amount of traffic due to another right turn only access point onto lmmokalee between 951 and the Esplanade entrance is of great concern. As it exists now, pulling out ofthe community can be challenging because ofthe high volume of traffic going east on lmmokalee and the number of cars making a U- turn opposite our entryway. The point is that every effort should be made to minimize the impact of Addie's Corner on the entire area as it is now and will be in the future. And, yes, that includes its impact on Esplanade. For example, given all the preserve restrictions placed on the developer of Esplanade, why would you ever consider reducing the preserve acreage requirement ofthe developer ofthe property adjacent to it? Landscaping, buffers, height, light and noise are all related to the density issue. We recently had occasion to begin at the corner of 951 and lmmokalee and drive a distance of 3 miles in every direction. There are no four-story buildings, commercial or residential, visible from either road. And, frankly, there are very few three-story buildings. We askthatyou givethe proposed developmentyour most thoughtful consideration. Donot reduce the preserve acreage, require substantial buffers, limit building height to two-stories, substantially reduce the number of units, provide for light and sound restrictions and, most importantly, act as prudent stewards of the beauty that is Collier County and its senslble development. Sincerely,0r*{0 I4"!,! Thomas Eastman Collier County Planning Commission Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail Naples Florida 34112 This will address the proposed rezoning and development ofthe property known as "Addie's Corner", which abuts the southeast corner of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have watched Esplanade grow into one of the premier bundled golf communities in all of southwest Florida and are among its earliest members. I would encourage you to visit Esplanade to see for yourself how it is developing into a community Collier County can be proud of and point to as an example ofthoughtful planning. Morethanhalf of its 1700+ acres are set aside and dedicated as lakes and preserves. Z*-\: Fe=) Edmund J. Staley, Esq.Carol A. Staley e=ff8 t9 -a 'iJoB6-.:aoIE$€ FILED 08 COLLIER COUNIY. FLORIO mlt ilAy I 2 p; t2: tr 0 rl-[iir, r,i i;i]Ulll :, BY 0.c. 3 5 -\_5ta3 ts n^ u {\s e T ;\, o-il' t ) \ oo,- - A., E\' 1' AE EAtNd \ o \-t --s G:o \ $sj }r l\) I ul-'r s' =\P i =r\:-t .Y ,s i{l{ {J.r '11 t.,j it ki, rl ilt* i.j J)l 1 J ) ao?-f =1(r-- {ts. ) t' t I it 1 JohnsonEric From:ww <hrich33103@aim.com> Sent:Monday, May 15, 2017 7:43 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner development To whom it may concern, We were the second home to be built at the Esplanade Golf and Country Club. The bundled golf, wonderful preserve areas, and the promise of very appealing amenities was everything we wanted in a Naples community. However the beauty of the community will be marred by the proposed commercial Real Estate development proposed by Baron Collier. Four four story mixed use buildings will compromise our beautiful views of the natural landscape and preserve areas. The traffic on Immokolee Road will be insane. There are NO four story mixed use buildings on Immokolee Road until you get to Livingston Road going west. If this proposed development goes forward our pristine community will NEVER EVER be the dream we were promised. Noise, traffic congestion, air quality, and loss of our natural preserve areas will impact our quality of life. We appeal to those of you receiving this letter to negotiate on our behalf in order to mitigate the negative effects of this development on our community. We reside at 8846 Vaccaro Court Naples, FL. 34119. Our suggestions are as follows; .Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100 feet from The Esplanade . Limit the height of buildings to two stories . Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view . Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units We have faith that as our representatives you will understand the rational and concerns we have regarding our community. Sincerely yours, Harriett and Rene Richard 1 JohnsonEric From:Diane Ford <forddiane@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, May 15, 2017 11:10 AM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Cc:Zack Stamp Subject:Addie's Corner development Project # 2015000177 We are registered voters residing at Esplanade Golf and Country Club. We have been informed that the developer of the new proposed development “Addie’s Corner” proposes to significantly reduce the wooded preserve to the west of the current entrance to Esplanade. The reduced buffer will greatly increase the light and noise for certain residents of Esplanade. We ask that you require the developer Barron Collier to screen their development with appropriate landscaping to limit this light and noise. We also request that you require the developer to move their buildings farther away from Esplanade and that you limit the height and size of the new buildings. Thank you. Diane Ford and Zack Stamp 8899 Savona Ct Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, May 15, 2017 10:16 AM To:StrainMark; Patrick DearbornLLC; JohnsonEric; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph Subject:Addie's Corner Ladies and Gentlemen of the Collier County Planning Commission: My name is Ron Miller 8670 Amour Ct., Naples, FL. 34119 816-507-0164 ronmiller052645@gmail.com This message is about the re-zoning proposal for Addie's Corner which will come before you at the May 18th planning meeting. I will be unable to attend the meeting. I ask that this message be read during the meeting. I would first like to thank Collier County personnel for their assistance in the exchange of information and education during this process, in particular, Eric Johnson and Mark Strain. While such personnel cannot take an advocate position, their transparency was very helpful. In three prior communications I asked Collier County to reject this re-zoning proposal in it's entirety. I continue to believe that is an appropriate action for all of the objective reasons stated in those communications. Despite those objections, this proposal seems to be heading down the path of approval. Collier County personnel have issued a report which essentially states the proposal meets code. This report also essentially approves several non-code deviations. In layman's terms, I suppose the requested deviations are reasonable. This re-zoning proposal is a request for much much more than the current zoning. The current zoning, which surrounding residents such as myself relied upon requires 8.85 acres of preserve and prohibits residential housing. This re-zoning proposal seeks to retain the existing allowances plus 349 residential units while reducing the preserve to 3.45 acres. Again, this is asking for much much more. The existing zoning was unanimously approved by the CCPC in 2011. I submit that it is incumbent on the CCPC to stipulate a few mitigations to now approve such a request after other contiguous development has occurred. I pray that the CCPC will do so. Specifically, I ask for three mitigations as follows. 1) The existing preserve has gone from 8.85 acres to 3.45 acres. This reduction is partially dependent upon an environmental report prepared by the developer which reduces the preserve code requirement by stipulating that a significant portion of the property is non-native habitat. Please refer to page 12 of that report. It states that the property is about 65% native habitat but tediously and tortuously finds a portion of the property to be non- native. In layman's terms, this is clearly just another deviation in disguise to create more land to build more residential units. I ask that the developer be required to keep 25% of the entire property as preserve as required under code, approximately 5.7 acres vs. the 3.45 acres requested. 2 2) Where preserve is required the proposal requests that such preserve be allowed as the required buffer. While that seems reasonable, there should be a stipulation that such buffer be maintained at 100% opacity within one year. 3) Other buffers are proposed at code minimums. In compensation for the request for much much more, more should be provided. Buffers should be doubled at a minimum with 100% opacity within one year. Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to your help in this matter. 1 JohnsonEric From:Jean Welsh <welshj@lcc.edu> Sent:Monday, May 15, 2017 8:55 AM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Addie’s Corner Development agenda item for May 18th meeting Mr. Eric Johnson, Planning Commissioner Growth Management Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL. 34104 RE: Addie’s Corner Development agenda item for May 18th meeting Dear Mr. Johnson: We recently selected to in live in Esplanade in North Naples because of the beauty and quality of life the location has to offer. The high-density, high rise buildings proposed for development on the Addie’s Corner parcel would affect us negatively in these ways: View: Our new home directly faces a beautiful preserve along Esplanade Boulevard. That view was the primary reason for selecting our home site, with nearly $100,000 lot premium. We are devastated at the potential loss of this view and the resulting lower valuation of our property. Traffic Noise: Allowing a road access to Immokalee Rd adjacent to the Esplanade property would increase traffic noise that is already bothersome. Apartment buildings often attract motorcyclists that would compound the current noise pollution problem. Traffic Congestion: We currently use the traffic light change at the corner of Immokalee and Collier to allow us to make left-hand turns into the Esplanade. Traffic coming from that parcel would result in longer traffic lines than the current left-hand turn lane provides. We were told that no additional entrances would be allowed over the canal onto Immokalee Rd. Please do not allow zoning changes to reduce preserve acreage or new construction to reduce current homeowner property values. Keep in mind the quality of life of the current residents and local voters when making recommendations to the board concerning this development. Trees are beautiful and their preservation contribute to the environment and everyone’s enjoyment of life. Respectfully, Jim and Jean Welsh 8648 Amour Crt. Naples, Florida, 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:David Jablon <djablon@aol.com> Sent:Saturday, May 13, 2017 1:18 PM To:JohnsonEric; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; StrainMark Subject:Addies Corner Development, Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 Attachments:current view and with buildings.pdf; Esplanade-Plan plan view.pdf Hello Members of the Planning Board: My name is David Jablon. I am 54 years old. My home at Esplanade is currently under construction scheduled for a July 15, 2017 completion date. My wife and I are selling our home in NY, and spending $800,000 to build not just our new home but also our new life adventure for the next 30 years in Naples, Florida. I implore you to take a moment to imagine yourselves in my position when you first found out, and saw the attachments I have included for your view, that shows the area immediately abutting the front gate entry and main access road(Esplaanade Blvd.) to your new home. Further imagine the feeling of knowing an eight acre preserve was forever going to be altered to include a 3.5 acre preserve,7500 feet of commercial retail space and four apartment buildings containing up to 349 units , whereby the retail space is to contain merely a 15-25 foot setback from the Esplanade main road. It appears that developers of property zoned commercial can easily obtain variances necessary to change the use to commercial and residential. Basic research of the developer, Barron Collier, told me of the history that Collier has in the region(hence the name Collier County) and the many retail projects they currently own and manage. So, I geuss this project will go through in some form. The scope,shape, and form this development in which this development unfolds rests in your hands. Please be mindful of how many families in Esplanade(1100+ upon completion) who make a significant financial investment into the community will be effected by your decisions. While we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, it is the Collier County Planner and affiliated agencies who have the authority and the responsibility to make decisions that protect EVERYONE'S interests. Please consider the following: 1. Require Baron Collier to step back the buildings further away from its western boundary adjacent to Espalande., both the residential AND the retail. 2. Condition Baron Collier approval upon its providing of sufficient landscaping, mature enough in nature to screen the new buildings so as to preserve a view similar to current status. 3. Limit the height of the apartment buildings to two stories. 4. . Reduce the number of apartment units so as to limit negative effect of increased traffic on Collier Blvd and Immokalee Road. I believe current zoning allows far less units than 349. I appreciate you have a difficult job to do in these situations. I have worked my entire career in hopes of enjoying a future in a place like this. Please help preserve the integrity of my community going forward for today and the future. Please send me a reply simply confirming you have both received and read my message. yours truly, David Jablon David Jablon Esplanade 9271 Rialto Lane Naples, Florida 34119 516-353-7467 Cell 2 djablon@aol.com X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X LOT 38F.F.E. = 17.07 NAVDCART PATHELEV. = 17.27 NAVDROADWAYELEV. = 15.50 NAVDLANDSCAPE ISLANDELEV.= ± 19.77 NAVDLAKEC.E. = 12.17 NAVDPERIMETER BERMELEV.= ± 19.7 TO 24.7 NAVDAAEXISTING TREESTO REMAIN(TYP.)EXISTING PRESERVE AREATO REMAINLAKEC.E. = 12.17 NAVDIMMOKALEE ROAD835 LF TOTAL30'COMMON AREAS TOPOTENTIALLY SUPPLEMENTWITH SABAL PALM PLANTINGS(TYP.)PROPOSEDBUILDINGF.F.E.= 16.30 NAVDOWNER/CLIENT/CONSULTANT:PROJECT:TITLE:PROFESSIONAL SEALS:Sheet Number: ofFile Number:Project Number:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC:B11EDCARGE:TWP:[Save Date: 5/1/2017 2:05:13 PM] [Saved By: LBolivar] [Plot Date: 5/1/2017 2:07:20 PM] [Plotted By: Luis Bolivar] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-CRKW-005\005_AddisonPlace_SDP\Design_Permit\Drawings-Civil\Exhibits\X10-Esplanade-Cross-Section\P-CRKW-005-005-X10.dwg]2233445566PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER:FLORIDA LICENSE NUMBER:NOTES:2600 Golden Gate ParkwayNaples, Florida 34105Phone: 239.403.6700 Fax: 239.261.1797Email: info@pen-eng.com Website: www.pen-eng.comFlorida Certificate of Authorization #28275ofCCC ADDISON,LLCADDISON PLACEWESTBOUNDARYEXHIBITDANIEL WATERS, P.E.6074622 48S 26ELUIS M BOLIVAR, EILUIS M BOLIVAR, EIAPRIL, 20171" = 60'N/AP-CRKW-005-005P-CRKW-005-005-X10C-X10110010' 20' 40' 80'120'REVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:SCALE: 1" = 60'Entrance toEsplanadeGate 1 JohnsonEric From:Tom Coffey <t1coffey@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, May 13, 2017 9:01 AM To:TaylorPenny; SolisAndy; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; StrainMark; HomiakKaren; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; FryerEdwin; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; BellowsRay; JohnsonEric Cc:BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; Barbara Coffey Subject:5-18-17 Meeting Addie's Corner Development May 13, 2017 Collier County Commissioners & Planning Commissioners Mr. Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mr. Mark Strain, Chair of Planning Commission and Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development Planning Commission Project # PL20150001776 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: We are homeowner’s in Esplanade Golf and Country Club which is situated along Immokalee Road in Naples. One of the major factors in deciding to build our home in Esplanade was the fact that there were significant preserves bordering most of the property. We believe the proposed ‘Addie’s Corner’ development will significantly decrease the desirability of the community and decrease property values. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a preserve area to the East of Esplanade Boulevard, with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. This will clearly decrease the overall appeal of the community. Even with the existing tree line, 4 story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values. We encourage you to require the following: 2 • Do not permit a reduction of the existing preserve • Limit the project to no more than the number of units that current zoning allows for • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • A buffer of at least 100 feet • Locate their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property If you would like to discuss any matters relative to this proposed development we can be reached through email at: t1coffey@gmail.com or via cell phone at: 610-716-7915. Thank you for your consideration and I hope you can appreciate our concerns. Sincerely, Thomas & Barbara Coffey 9114 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Lois Pogyor <lpogyor@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, May 13, 2017 12:25 AM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Development of Addie's Corner Dear Mr. Johnson: We are residents in the Esplanade community and are deeply concerned about the planned development for the property to the east of Esplanade along Immokalee Road, known as Addie’s Corner (for clarity I will reference the property by this name). One of the things that attracted us to the Esplanade development was the large amount of both natural and planned landscaping. This would include the wooded area to the east of the entrance to the community that adjoins Addie’s Corner property. With the proposed development of Addie’s Corner, much of this natural landscape would disappear, leaving a few trees and a view of 4-story apartment buildings instead. This is not a view that I would like to have on entering my home community. If we had wanted a view of tall buildings, we would have purchased property in one of the many high rise communities in Naples. I understand that an owner has the right to develop property, but not necessarily to change the zoning to fit his or her needs and financial parameters. Just as we purchased property zoned and developed with a certain ambiance, we expected that adjoining properties would be developed in a similar manner, not changed to to suit the needs of a developer. I believe that this is referred to as “spot zoning”. After destruction of natural landscape, this developer wants to build four story buildings that do not fit in with any of the surrounding communities. This density will severely impact both the views of the surrounding communities and the traffic on Immokalee Road, which is already very heavy. I am not certain where this development’s entrance and exit would be placed, but certainly hope it is NOT approved for Immokalee Road. In summary, I would ask that the Zoning Commission would only change the zoning of this property to require: 1 - A dense buffer of at least 100 feet 2 - Locate any buildings at least 100 feet from the Esplanade property 3 - Limit the height of the buildings to TWO stories in keeping with the surrounding communities 4 - Limit the project to a maximum of 200 residential homes / units in keeping it more in line with current zoning. In closing, I would suggest that property owners have a right to expect a consistent zoning in the area in which they purchase a home. That is one purpose of zoning regulations. An investor should not be allowed to purchase property with the intent of changing the zoning to suit his or her financial needs. This would be unfair to current property owners and would defeat the purpose that zoning laws and regulations serve. Sincerely, Lois and Bob Pogyor, Home Owners in the Esplanade Community 1 JohnsonEric From:Lilliston, Brent <brent@lilliston.com> Sent:Friday, May 12, 2017 12:10 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner Plea May 12, 2017 Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net ericjohnson@colliergov.net I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. We will be attending the May 18th meeting. Sincerely, Brent F Lilliston Charles J Weller 2 8682 Amour Court Naples, Florida 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Barney & Nancy Barrett <fgbarrett@aol.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 11:46 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Addies Corner Concern Thanks for reading my note. I am a resident of Esplanade Golf & Country Club. We are concerned about the integrity of our Community, which I'm sure you agree, is an ASSET to the tropical lifestyle that makes Collier Co. such an amazing place. We would like you to consider these wishes for the Addies Corner development: 1) limit building to 2 stories in height, 2) for safety and traffic have no more residential units than 200, 3) build these buildings 100' from our Esplanade Community property line, 4) reducing the preserve from almost 9 acres to approx 3.5 acres just east of our entrance is alarming and ask you to consider leaving the greenery and if some is removed--please replace top quality greenery for sound and aesthetics. Collier County is one of the greatest places around - please consider the integrity of our beautiful Community within Collier Co ! Nancy and Fred Barrett 8760 Bellano Ct, Unit 103 Naples, FL. 34119 but we are moving... Our new address as of 6-6-2017 will be 8772 Bellano Ct., Unit 203 Sent from my iPhone 6S Plus 1 JohnsonEric From:dhbogus@aol.com Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 11:23 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner Proposed Development Attachments:Addies Corner.docx Please consider the attached input. Thank you. May 11, 2017 Re: Proposed Development of Addie’s Corner at the corner of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard Dear Collier County Planning Commissioners: Our understanding is that you are scheduled to consider the Addie’s Corner proposed development on May 18. Unfortunately, we will not be able to attend. Please consider this written input as part of your decisions and recommendations. We are residents and registered voters of Florida, Collier County, and Naples. We also own a home in the Naples Esplanade community which is adjacent to and affected by the proposed development of Addie’s Corner. We strongly support local commercial development when the adverse impacts on natural and human environments are eliminated or substantially addressed. If your commission is inclined to support the Addie’s Corner proposed development, we respectfully ask that the approvals (or recommendations to approve) be contingent upon the restrictions and requirements noted below. First, please require the developer to address local concerns with the view scape, lighting, and noise. If the apartment buildings being proposed are four stories tall and most of the existing trees are removed, the impacts on our community will be extreme. Some of the impacts can be partially mitigated by designing the Addie’s Corner development to coexist most effectively with its neighbors, e.g., by locating the buildings further from the Esplanade community. Second, require the developer to address local traffic and safety concerns. Third, require the developer to provide a plan to minimize and/or mitigate impacts on the natural environment. Ideally, existing preserves would be maintained. We ask that your recommendations and decisions strive to balance the interests of the developer and the affected. Thank you for your consideration. Dave and Jane Boguslawski 8802 Vaccaro Court, Naples 1 JohnsonEric From:Ronald Fischer <rfischer@certitudegroup.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 7:29 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Cc:SaundersBurt Subject:Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner We are residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. After living in Kensington for 15 years, we wanted to move into a newer community that had a bigger preserve area and noticeably less commercial noises and development. We found this in Esplanade and have been quite impressed with the ongoing commitment to the preserve principle and limited adjacent commercial development. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer of this parcel has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan also shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must also be removed as a result of this development. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on our road, Amour Court. We understand that members of our Community have met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, they were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much for your consideration Sincerely, 2 Ron and Lynn Fischer 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 1 JohnsonEric From:Ronald Fischer <rfischer@certitudegroup.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 7:42 PM To:McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc:BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; StrainMark; JohnsonEric Subject:We are asking for your support on the proposed adjustments to Collier County Planning Project # 20150001776 To: Collier County Commissioners & Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner We are residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. After living in Kensington for 15 years, we wanted to move into a newer community that had a bigger preserve area and noticeably less commercial noises and development. We found this in Esplanade and have been quite impressed with the ongoing commitment to the preserve principle and limited adjacent commercial development. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer of this parcel has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan also shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must also be removed as a result of this development. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on our road, Amour Court. We understand that members of our Community have met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, they were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely, 2 Ron and Lynn Fischer 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 1 JohnsonEric From:Terry Daniel Knause <tknause@clemson.edu> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 8:58 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Proposed Development at Collier & Immokalee Road Attachments:Esplanade Safety.docx Dear Mr. Johnson, Attached is a letter that I hope you will read as it relates to the proposed development at Collier & Immokalee Road and the safety and other concerns that we have about this proposed development. Regards, Terry Knause tknause@gmail.com (864) 915-4426 Terry & Linda Knause 8888 Savona Court Naples, FL 34119 tknause@gmail.com (864) 915-4426 May 11, 2017 Dear Mr. Johnson: My wife, Linda, and I have been coming to Naples for about 20 years, purchasing our first vacation home in Heritage Bay in 2012 and then in Esplanade in 2016. Like you, we have seem “dramatic” growth in Naples and the traffic and road safety over this period seems to have become more than proportionately worse. “In season” (which seems now to be all but a couple of months) traffic and road safety is hazardous, with lengthy delays, multiple accidents, and frayed nerves and patience on the part of all drivers. In January through March, from our Esplanade exit west (a right hand turn) onto Immokalee Road, it was not unusual for it to take more than a half hour to reach the I-75 intersection! I find this as unbelievable as you, but unfortunately my wife and I regularly encountered these types of delays. Would you believe that it often takes us over 10 minutes just to exit Esplanade, and then the conditions to do so are often very hazardous? How can this be? We generally have a “narrow” window to exit onto Immokalee Road because when the traffic light at the corner of Collier and Immokalee Road changes, it is “off to the races” with hundreds of vehicles speeding past us at speeds of 50pmh to 60mph (or more). We still can’t figure out where all of this traffic is coming from but it is very real, very fast and very dangerous. What further destroys our ability to exit west onto Immokalee Road is that there is a U-turn location just across from our entrance/exit where those going east on Immokalee Road can turn and go west on Immokalee Road. Those turning at the U-turn have the “right of way”. It is not unusual to have 6 or more vehicles lined up there for the U-turn, and by the time 3 vehicles do the U-turn, there are 3 new ones in line to take their place. This is extremely dangerous and time-consuming for those of us wanting to exit Esplanade. By the time most make their U-turn, the light at Collier has changed again and there is another wave of hundreds of vehicles. Press “replay” because the cycle just repeats itself. 2 That U-turn location is also our entrance into Esplanade when we are headed east on Immokalee Road (i.e., this is a quite regular route for all of us). Turning across those 3 lanes will tighten your sphincter, particularly because the trees/shrubbery on our right are overgrown/too high and the visibility to our right of the traffic speeding west on Imokalee Road is very limited. Keeping this landscaping low and trimmed is, in my opinion, a very important, but totally neglected, safety priority! I understand that the Planning Commission is considering whether to allow another development adjoining Esplanade to the east. I’ve been the President of my Home Owners Association and that is a tough job, but I suspect serving on a Planning Commission is even more difficult in trying to balance conflicting goals of developers and established communities and residents. We all know that the developers in every community, including Naples, have the big money and they always get their way with Planning Commissions, and even when rejected, they have the money to make minor modifications to their plans and keep coming at Planning Commissions until they “wear them out” and they cave in. I’ve seen it everywhere that I’ve ever lived. I would think that a true, independent, Planning Commission would place their priorities on:  Safety; I wouldn’t want to do anything which would put people in increased jeopardy of injury or death.  Standard of Living; I wouldn’t want to do anything which would significantly interfere with someone’s current standard of living to benefit some development that doesn’t yet exist and is just on the “drawing board”. If this planned development to the east of Esplanade has an exit onto Immokalee, those of us in Esplanade will have our safety put at even greater jeopardy. This would not be a responsible action on part of the Planning Commission. If you don’t comprehend the issue that we have exiting right out of Esplanade, even though we are out of busy season, go sit at Esplanade some morning or afternoon and you will grasp the significance and danger that we face just simply making a right hand turn out of Esplanade onto Immokalee Road. Serious injuries and deaths will occur at our exit/entrance unless these issues are corrected. I also understand that multi-story buildings are being planned / considered for this new adjoining development. How is that fair to people in Esplanade who purchased homes, paying premiums for lots because of their location and natural beauty, and now they will have multi-story buildings in their view (and more than 2 story buildings are totally out of character with all surrounding development)? To protect the rights of the existing community and residents, it seems like the Planning Commission should take reasonable steps to protect the existing community and residents so not to significantly interfere with their standard of living, including: 3  Ensuring that the buildings are not more than 2 stories high.  Providing a spacious setback of these buildings from the Esplanade property line.  Requiring that fencing and landscaping be put in by the developer to perhaps “enhance”, rather than destroy, the view of the residents in Esplanade.  Prohibit or significantly limit any residents in this development.  As mentioned above, an additional exit onto Immokalee Road east of Esplanade should not be permitted because this significantly puts our safety at risk. I understand that Barron Collier and the Collier family is very important to the history and development of Naples. However, it is totally inappropriate for Barron Collier and the Collier family to come in with their plans and development and steam roll the Planning Commission and existing residents and communities. The Planning Commission has a significant fiduciary responsibility to protect communities and residents, and taking these steps above are the minimum things that I believe you should do to protect the safety and standard of living for us in Esplanade and other neighboring communities. Regards, Terry D. Knause 1 JohnsonEric From:Lori Vanderlaan <lori.a.vanderlaan@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 6:51 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 Attachments:Letter to Planning Commission.docx Please see attached letter in relation to the above Project. May 11, 2017 Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net ericjohnson@colliergov.net Dear Collier County Planning Commissioners: I am a current purchaser and building a home in Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. One of the reasons we purchased within Esplanade was because of its location, fantastic design and the established zoning of surrounding property which provided indications of the limitations on future development. It is our understanding that changes to said zoning, at the request of the developer’s of Addie’s Corner, is being considered. If approved, said zoning changes will negatively affect the value of our property and the Esplanade development generally. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand this is a preserve. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. This alone seems to be contrary to the very purpose and intentions behind preserving these types of natural habitats. In addition, the proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. In addition to reducing the size of the preserve, we understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. We feel that the reduction of this preserve and the current proposed buffer is contrary to the reasons why the property has its current zoning designation. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. In the event that this parcel is rezoned, which we object to, we encourage you to:  Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property  Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view  Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories  Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. Sincerely, Lori A. Vanderlaan Livorno Ct Naples, FL 1 JohnsonEric From:Bob Chervenak <bchervenak@geltrude.com> Sent:Friday, May 12, 2017 7:00 AM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:re Addie's Corner Development Attachments:SCAN0199.PDF Ladies and Gentlemen My wife Linda and myself are residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club along Immokalee Road in Naples and submit the attached letter for consideration by the Collier County Planning Commission. Robert Chervenak, CPA 9118 Trivoli Terrace Naples, Fl 34119 Ph (973) 997 6129 Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and protected from disclosure and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or any employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 1 JohnsonEric From:Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 6:57 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Re: Addies Corner (staff report) Thank you for this information. I'm doing this message on my cell phone, please excuse spelling and punctuation. To follow up questions please. The report cites 15.98 units per acre for density. How does this equate with track C in 349 Apartments which have been requested? I don't understand the math on that. It seems like the density would be much much greater, something I just don't understand. Second thing is just a question. The last proposal that you sent to me was on April 21st. Is that still the latest proposal that Baron Collier has submitted? Or is there a more recent proposal, if so please send me the most recent proposal. Thanks for your continued help. On May 10, 2017 1:05 PM, "JohnsonEric" <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> wrote: Ron, If I recall correctly, you wanted a copy of the staff report when it became available. Please see attached. Thank you. Respectfully, Eric L. Johnson, AICP, CFM Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Division – Zoning Services Section 2800 Horseshoe Drive North Naples, FL 34104 (239) 252-2931 office (239) 252-6503 fax 2 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Wednesday, May 10, 2017 2:49 PM To:JohnsonEric; StrainMark Cc:john.grandoff@hwhlaw.com Subject:Attached drawing showing Building 4 & Clubhouse Stepped back from Western Boundary Attachments:Step Back Buildings from Western Boundary.pdf To: Eric Johnson, Mark Strain Eric and Mark, We had received suggestions that we attempt to negotiate a “step back” of the buildings from the boundary with Esplanade. Barron Collier has been very cordial and cooperative in our discussions. However, they have not accepted our suggestion to step back buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade, as depicted in the attached drawing. In the spirit of cooperation, we have submitted our drawing to Barron Collier that I am now submitting to you. We hope this can be worked out fairly for all parties. Thank you for your understanding. Sam Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 2:33 PM To: 'Dan Waters' <dwaters@barroncollier.com> Cc: john.grandoff@hwhlaw.com Subject: Attached drawing showing Building 4 & Clubhouse Stepped back from Western Boundary Dan, Although I acknowledge there are some advantages to residential vs commercial, we are still concerned with rental units being so close to Esplanade’s property line. I’m sure the landscape architects will do their best to screen the new buildings, but your proposed buffer area is very narrow (weighted average of < 22’). Since the preserve would be reduced from 8.85 to 3.45 acres, we hope you can still have room to build a profitable project without having the buildings being so close to Esplanade. I am attaching a markup to your drawing that would show moving building 4 and the clubhouse further east. I will be sending that drawing to Collier County for their consideration. As a courtesy, I am sending you a copy. I very much appreciate your cooperation and am hopeful something can be worked out acceptable to all parties. Thank you. Sam Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Dan Waters [mailto:DWaters@barroncollier.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2017 1:33 PM 2 To: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Cc: john.grandoff@hwhlaw.com Subject: Existing Approvals for Addie's Corner Sam, As we discussed yesterday, attached are a couple of files showing the previous development plan that was submitted for the Addie’s Corner site by the previous property owner. The first pdf file is an overlay of the previously submitted plan on an aerial that is zoomed out to show the Addie’s Corner site in relation to your street. The second pdf file attached is the complete set of plans that were submitted by the previous property owner under the existing zoning approval. The previously submitted plan is consistent with the existing approved zoning and could be constructed without additional approvals for the Board of County Commissioners. The existing PUD allows for the commercial buildings to have a maximum height of 65 feet and didn’t propose to save any of the native vegetation on the western property line outside of the preserve area. In the previously submitted plan (the second pdf file), I clouded the cross section along the western property line that shows that, outside of the preserve area, the existing vegetation along the western property boundary was proposed to be cleared under that development scenario and replanted as a landscape buffer (reference sheet 7 of the pdf file for the cross section). The minimum county requirements for installed vegetation within that landscape buffer would be a five foot tall hedge and ten foot tall trees planted at 25 feet of spacing between trees. We obviously think that our proposal to save the existing native vegetation on the western property line plus the installation of supplemental landscaping in that area provides a better landscape buffer than what is allowed under the current zoning. We are hoping to meet with Waldrop Engineering tomorrow to discuss this further and will forward the visualization to you once we have it. Give me a call if you have questions or want to discuss. Dan Waters, P.E. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 Phone: 239.262.2600 Direct: 239.403.6830 Cell: 239.206.7804 dwaters@barroncollier.com This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X LOT 38F.F.E. = 17.07 NAVDCART PATHELEV. = 17.27 NAVDROADWAYELEV. = 15.50 NAVDLANDSCAPE ISLANDELEV.= ± 19.77 NAVDLAKEC.E. = 12.17 NAVDPERIMETER BERMELEV.= ± 19.7 TO 24.7 NAVDAAEXISTING TREESTO REMAIN(TYP.)EXISTING PRESERVE AREATO REMAINLAKEC.E. = 12.17 NAVDIMMOKALEE ROAD835 LF TOTAL30'COMMON AREAS TOPOTENTIALLY SUPPLEMENTWITH SABAL PALM PLANTINGS(TYP.)PROPOSEDBUILDINGF.F.E.= 16.30 NAVDOWNER/CLIENT/CONSULTANT:PROJECT:TITLE:PROFESSIONAL SEALS:Sheet Number: ofFile Number:Project Number:Vertical Scale:Horizontal Scale:Date:Drawn by:Designed by:SEC:B11EDCARGE:TWP:[Save Date: 5/1/2017 2:05:13 PM] [Saved By: LBolivar] [Plot Date: 5/1/2017 2:07:20 PM] [Plotted By: Luis Bolivar] [Original Size: 24x36] [Drawing Path: P:\Active_Projects\P-CRKW-005\005_AddisonPlace_SDP\Design_Permit\Drawings-Civil\Exhibits\X10-Esplanade-Cross-Section\P-CRKW-005-005-X10.dwg]2233445566PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER:FLORIDA LICENSE NUMBER:NOTES:2600 Golden Gate ParkwayNaples, Florida 34105Phone: 239.403.6700 Fax: 239.261.1797Email: info@pen-eng.com Website: www.pen-eng.comFlorida Certificate of Authorization #28275ofCCC ADDISON,LLCADDISON PLACEWESTBOUNDARYEXHIBITDANIEL WATERS, P.E.6074622 48S 26ELUIS M BOLIVAR, EILUIS M BOLIVAR, EIAPRIL, 20171" = 60'N/AP-CRKW-005-005P-CRKW-005-005-X10C-X10110010' 20' 40' 80'120'REVISIONS:No: Revision: Date:SCALE: 1" = 60'Entrance toEsplanadeGateFutureCommercial/RetailMove building 4here.Also step back pool &clubhouse.CHPool ClubhouseStep back east 1 JohnsonEric From:kyle <kfitzpatrick@acegroup.cc> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 2:00 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:attached Attachments:Letter to Planning Commissioners, Step back buildings.docx May 11, 2017 Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net ericjohnson@colliergov.net I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to:  Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property  Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view  Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories  Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. Sincerely, Patricia K. Fitzpatrick 8827 Vaccaro Court 1 JohnsonEric From:Lori O'Gorman <logorman@wi.rr.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 1:46 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner Development Attachments:esplanade letter to Collier County.docx Dear Planning Commission: As residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples, we have been informed that a meeting regarding the above development will be held on May 18th, at which time recommendations from this Planning Committee will be made to the Board of County Commissioners. We would like to take this opportunity to voice our concerns regarding the proposed development and ask that you reference the attached letter. We thank you for giving consideration to the concerns of all Esplanade residents, including ourselves, and hope that this matter can be resolved in the best interest of all who will be impacted by it. Thank you. Casey and Lori O’Gorman 8760 Bellano Court #204 Naples, FL 34119 May 10, 2017 Collier County Planning Commission Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net, StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net, ericjohnson@colliergov.net My husband and I are residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples and wish to express to you our concerns regarding the Addie’s Corner development. Currently, the view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees which are part of the beauty of the neighborhood and one of the factors considered when purchasing our current home. It is our understanding that the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres with the removal of many trees including two types that are deemed exotic. The master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. This narrow buffer and the removal of the trees will likely result in residents, including ourselves, being able to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. Additionally, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of our property and those in and around Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We, therefore, encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) We thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, Casey and Lori O’Gorman 8760 Bellano Court #204 Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Kerry Howard <klhoward50@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 1:40 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Fwd: Addie's Corner Development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 From: Kerry Howard <klhoward50@comcast.net> Date: May 11, 2017 at 1:37:40 PM EDT To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DieaneEbert@colliergov.net, StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net, ericjohnson@collier.net Cc: JD Murray <jdmurray@popegolf.net> Subject: Addie's Corner Development, Collier County Planning Commission Project #20150001776 Dear County Planning Commissioners, My husband and I are Florida voters living in Esplanade Golf and Country Club Naples, along Immokalee Rd. In Naples. The current view entering our community is lined with a wooded area to the east. We understand the developer, Barron Collier, has proposed to remove trees and add a building with several floors. This will change our community drastically in terms of value, sound, light, and ascetics. It is our hope that during the future meetings that the commissioners and Barron Collier can come to some type of agreement that would screen the new buildings from our community i.e., provide landscaping comparable to current view, buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property, limit height of buildings, and no more than 200 residential units. We appreciate your help in negotiating terms for our community. Tom and Kerry Howard 9134 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Karen Iuliano <kareniuliano@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 9:38 AM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Subject: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 May 11, 2017 Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net ericjohnson@colliergov.net I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. 2 We encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. Sincerely, Karen Iuliano 9146 Trivoli Ter Naples, Florida 34119 NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY The information contained in this message is intended only for the confidential use of the persons or entities to whom it is addressed. This message, together with any attachments, is proprietary and confidential, may contain inside information, and may be subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or the attorney work product doctrine. If the reader of this message is not one of the addressees set forth above: (a) the reader has received this message in error and is directed to destroy this message, together with any attachments, and notify the sender, and (b) any review, dissemination, use, or distribution of this message or any attachments is prohibited. Thank you. 1 JohnsonEric From:John Iuliano <jviuliano81@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 9:31 AM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 May 11, 2017 Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net ericjohnson@colliergov.net I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. Sincerely, John Iuliano John Iuliano 9146 Trivoli Ter Naples, Florida 34119 John Iuliano Cell 860 657 5040 2 Jviuliano81@gmail.com 1 JohnsonEric From:Thomas Kleck <tkleck@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 4:03 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Addies Corner Plan Commission Project 20150001776 Attachments:addie corner.pdf 1 JohnsonEric From:Teri Martin <terimartin@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 2:16 PM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 May 11, 2017 Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net ericjohnson@colliergov.net I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. Sincerely, Doug & Teri Martin 9086 Sorreno Court Naples, Fl 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Sheila Petras <golftime1000@hotmail.com> Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 9:55 AM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addies Corner proposed developement on Immokalee Road next to Esplanade Development Attachments:Esplanade Letter to Comissioners.pdf Dear Collier County Planning Commission, I live in Esplanade and have been keeping apprised of the proposed development of Addie's Corner next to our development. I strongly encourage the commission to require the developer to move the building further away from the esplanade line and leave/replant as many trees as removed. The development in Collier County although beneficial is reaching a point of saturation at the Collier Blvd. and Immokalee intersection. Please consider ther ecommendations in the attached letter. Thank you Sheila and Charles Petras May 11, 2017 Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development, Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776 To: markstrain@colliergov.net, pdearborn@johnrwood.com, DianeEbert@colliergov.net StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net, JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net ericjohnson@colliergov.net I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: •Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property •Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view •Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories •Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. Sincerely, Charles and Sheila Petras 9262 Rialto Lane, Naples FL, 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Tanatoo@aol.com Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 9:00 AM To:StrainMark; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner Suggestions I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country Club, along Immokalee Rd. in Naples. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the east of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through and above the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Other members of our Community met with members of the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners in March and April. In both cases, we were encouraged to negotiate with the developer, Barron Collier. It was specifically recommended that we request Barron Collier to step back the buildings away from the western boundary with Esplanade. Although Barron Collier has been cooperative and is discussing ways to screen their buildings from our community, they have not welcomed Commissioner suggestions to step back their buildings from Esplanade. We encourage you to: • Require the developer to step back their buildings no closer than 100’ from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the new buildings comparable to the current view • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Thank you very much. Sincerely, Karl & Tana Wolf 9278 Rialto Lane 1 JohnsonEric From:Jane Rollins <naplesjane1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, May 08, 2017 9:02 AM To:StrainMark; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; JohnsonEric Subject:Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. May 8, 2017 Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Collier County Planning Commissioners Diane Ebert, Stan Chrzanowski, Joseph Scmitt, Mark Strain Collier County Commissioners Burt Saunders, Donna Fiala, Penny Taylor, Bill McDaniel, Andy Solis, cc: Dave Lykins, Michael Brownlee, Angela Goodner, Sherry Greco, Sue Filson Re: Addie’s Corner development Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. We are homeowners who live in in Esplanade Golf & Country Club full time and registered voters in Collier County. We have several primary concerns about our home investment as it will be impacted by the Addie’s Corner Development: 1. Safety and Traffic. We are a gated community. We are requesting that the density be lowered considerably below the proposed plan. 349 living units plus a possible group house would have a sizable impact for all of us currently living off Immokalee Rd.if we needed to evacuate in the event of a hurricane. We have no north bound route until I-75, about 4.5 miles from Collier Blvd. We have only one paved entrance and exit from our neighborhood and it is Immokalee Rd. To leave, we have to share the turn out with cars making U turns in the same space as us. People don’t realize who has right of way and this makes for a dangerous situation. The impact of adding as many as 349 living units, a group home and an unknown number of businesses to the traffic flow west of the Collier Blvd traffic light so close to our exit from Esplanade will make this dangerous situation even worse. We would like to see a traffic light installed at our entrance. We would like to see Barron Collier keep this project on hold until Collier Blvd is widened and operational and require them to direct most of its traffic out the Collier Blvd. side. 2. Sight and Sound. We would request the developer put an opaque wall around their property. To reduce the impact of this development, Barron Collier should not be allowed to reduce the acreage devoted to preserve by 61% (8.85 acres to 3.45) as they have requested, rather keep it as originally stated. We request the buffer areas be enlarged and exotic trees replaced with trees of similar size. We request that outdoor lighting be pointed away from our neighborhood and facing downward. We request living units be no more than 2 stories in height. We request no business or living unit amenity have outside amplified noise (there is a water management area at the north end of the property and water does amplify noise). 3. April 28, 2017 Amendment To The Master Plan. The revision calls for even more housing than the original plan. It asked for a group home in Tract A with only a slight reduction in commercial space in addition to the requested 349 living units in Tract C. This is a large change from the September 2015 Master Plan done by Grady Minor Engineers. Respectfully, please do not grant these changes. We would like to attend the Planning Commission Meeting but unfortunately we will be out of the country on May 18th. Thank you for your consideration. 2 Sincerely, Michael & Jane Rollins 9368 Terresina Dr., Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, April 11, 2017 2:51 PM To:StrainMark Cc:Bill McGee; Robert Knuppel; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner Mark, we thank you for the generosity of your time and expertise. Please also thank Mrs. Ashton (spelling?) on our behalf. We listened and learned. Before our neighborhood group proceeds with anything specif we wish to meet with our Esplanade developer, Taylor Morrison, next week. We also hope you have some additional patience to clarify a few points from our meeting on Friday. 1) The latest Barron Collier proposal has Exhibit C which portrays the shape, sizes and locations of the plan, Tracts A, B and C. Do these things become fixed upon approval or can such an exhibit be altered after approval? 2) One of our key concerns is the retention of the 8.85 acres of Preserve in the current zoning. The Environmental section on pages 16 and 17 discuss the proposal of the reduced preserve. The determination of the preserve seems to be very formula driven. The current zoning specifically cites 22.65 acres of Native Habitat times 15% equals 3.4 acres required, then without explanation specifies 8.85 acres are required. The new proposal, without residential, cites only 13.81 acres of Native Habitat at 15% for 2.07 acres. How does BC justify the reduction of the Native Habitat? The new proposal, with residential, cites the same reduced 13.81 acres at 25% for 3.45 acres. This seems to say that residential requirements are 25% while non-residential is only 15%. If the full Native Habitat of 22.65 acres is used in the formula it results in a required preserve of 5.66 acres for residential and 3.40 for non-residential. What happened to the rest of the Native Habitat? Note - the entire parcel of land is the same covered with trees, no part is naked. Thank you. 3) You enlightened us that the current zoning has tow limitations for the Senior Center, 55'/65' in height and a FAR of .6. The new housing proposal asks for 349 units with a minimum SF of 700, thus 244,300 SF, plus perhaps more for larger units and ingress and egress. Do you have any idea what the square footage is allowed for the current senior Center? While the allowable height may be the same, the density may be quite different. 1 JohnsonEric From:TrochessettAimee Sent:Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:43 PM To:TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; SolisAndrew; JohnsonEric; StrainMark Cc:BrownleeMichael; FilsonSue; GoodnerAngela; GrecoSherry; LykinsDave Subject:Emailing - BCC Correspondence - Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf Attachments:BCC Correspondence - Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf See attached correspondence received today at the BCC offices. Aimee D. Trochessett Customer Service Specialist Communication & Customer Relations Division 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 102 Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8075 aimeetrochessett@colliergov.net Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Cot[ier County Commissioners Cot[ier County Ptanning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Cottier County PrincipaI Ptanner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie's Corner devetopment Cottier County Ptanning Commission Project # 20150001776. We live in Esptanade Gotf & Country Club, on lmmokalee Rd. We have 3 primary concerns with the Addie's Corner Devetopment: Shared Access Point. Current ptans show a shared access point (driveway) between Esplanade and Addie's Corner. Since this is shown after the Esplanade security gate, we are concerned who witl be entering our community. Even if a separate security gate is placed there, the paved road witl make it easy for pedestrians and bicyclists to enter our private community. Headtights from vehicles wi[[ shine into the rear of the homes on Amour Court. Traffic. lt is atready very difficutt to exit Esplanade onto lmmokatee Rd or enter Esplanade with a left turn from the eastbound [ane. ln addition, cars making a U-turn opposite our driveway from the eastbound to the westbound lane add an additional chatlenge. Even if onty 'l 50 residential units are permitted, the additional residentia[ and retait traffic exlting Addie's Corner witt create [onger detays and more of a safety issue. We understand significantty more devetopment is planned at Cottier and lmmokalee. lmmokalee Rd. cannot handle the current votume of traffic. Removal of trees. loss of orooertv vatue. The current view entering Esptanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the right of Esptanade Btvd., with many tatl trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master ptan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15'to 25' in width, with a smatl area at 30'in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likety to see the buitdings through the thin tree [ine. ln addition, the thinner tree [ine wit[ increase sound and tight affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree line, 4 story buitdings witt rise above the trees and degrade the views and property vatues. lf 8.85 acres was determined to be sufficient for the prior property owner, why shoutdn't the proposed devetopment be held to the same size? We encouraqe vou to: a. Remove the Shared Access Point between Esplanade and Addie's Corner b. Widen lmmokalee Rd. before allowing any more devetopment. Not a[[ow the reduction of the preserve, or atternatively, increase the buffer to a minimum of 150'and require a type C buffer. Permit the 2 types of exotic trees to remain within the buffer, or if they must be removed, then require that they be replaced. Limit this development to 2 story buitdings and no more than 150 residential units. Require any lighting to be directed away from Esplanade. 86'1?- Qer,.-ra S.r-, 3+rr7 Address 1. 2. 3. c. d. e. t. F"^*tr^,1t+-7v^11;c- &^oJ -*a c.tt;ar' - J*^'^'-t'-!'u- ?,.l2^"..h\ E M EIUE 2l ,'ii 0 AR ,-^-4f\ A*-,..tnX l!;- i-,c.rs* ii S''<,t'r.f/-li.Jt- '-i1+>al-*i3,aoutt* ac<i J4EE . LD< +26/ 6. & 7"\J dr.i:a-r*- d-D.ldCoe n*a 7.-i**-(. slrcf q Date 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:31 AM To:pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; StrainMark Cc:JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Planning Commissioners Attachments:Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG To: Collier County Planning Commissioners Attached please find a letter and picture file related to the Addie’s Corner Project. Thank you for your consideration. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 March 18, 2017 Collier County Commissioners & Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. We live in Esplanade Golf & Country Club, on Immokalee Rd. We have 3 primary concerns with the Addie’s Corner Development: 1. Removal of trees, loss of property value. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the right of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. The residents on Amour Court currently enjoy the view from the rear of their homes, shown in the attached picture. When they purchased their lots, they understood they were facing a Preserve. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree line, 4 story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values. If 8.85 acres was determined to be sufficient for the prior property owner, why shouldn’t the proposed development be held to the same size? 2. Shared Access Point. Current plans show a shared access point (driveway) between Esplanade and Addie’s Corner. Since this is shown after the Esplanade security gate, we are concerned who will be entering our community. Even if a separate security gate is placed there, the paved road will make it easy for pedestrians and bicyclists to enter our private community. Headlights from vehicles will shine into the rear of the homes on Amour Court. 3. Traffic. It is already very difficult to exit Esplanade onto Immokalee Rd or enter Esplanade with a left turn from the eastbound lane. In addition, cars making a U‐turn opposite our driveway from the eastbound to the westbound lane add an additional challenge. Even if only 150 residential units are permitted, the additional residential and retail traffic exiting Addie’s Corner will create longer delays and more of a safety issue. We understand significantly more development is planned at Collier and Immokalee. Immokalee Rd. cannot handle the current volume of traffic. We encourage you to: a. Not allow the reduction of the preserve, or alternatively, increase the buffer to a minimum of 150’ and require a type C buffer. b. Permit the 2 types of exotic trees to remain within the buffer, or if they must be removed, then require that they be replaced. c. Limit this development to 2 story buildings and no more than 150 residential units. d. Remove the Shared Access Point between Esplanade and Addie’s Corner e. Widen Immokalee Rd. before allowing any more development. f. Require any lighting to be directed away from Esplanade. Thank you for your consideration. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Ct. Naples, FL 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:Mark Scimio <mascimio@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:26 AM To:pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; StrainMark; JohnsonEric Cc:McDanielBill; SolisAndrew; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Subject:Addie's Corner Development Attachments:Addies Corner Development Letter of Concern.pdf Dear Commissioners: Please see my attached letter concerning Addie's Corner Development Project #20150001776. Thank you, Mark A. Scimio 8870 Vaccaro Court Naples, FL 34119 Collier County Commissioners Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re; Addie's Corner development Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. We live in Esplanade Golf & Country Club, on Immokalee Rd. We have 3 primary concerns with the Addie's Corner Development: 1. Shared Access Point. Current plans show a shared access point (driveway) between Esplanade and Addie's Corner. Since this is shown after the Esplanade security gate, we are concerned who will be entering our community. Even if a separate security gate is placed there, the paved road will make it easy for pedestrians and bicyclists to enter our private community. Headlights from vehicles will shine into the rear of the homes on Amour Court. 2. Traffic. It is already very difficult to exit Esplanade onto Immokalee Rd or enter Esplanade with a left turn from the eastbound lane. In addition, cars making a U-turn opposite our driveway from the eastbound to the westbound lane add an additional challenge. Even if only 150 residential units are permitted, the additional residential and retail traffic exiting Addie's Corner will create longer delays and more of a safety issue. We understand significantly more development is planned at Collier and Immokalee. Immokalee Rd. cannot handle the current volume of traffic. 3. Removal of trees, loss of property value. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the right of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15' to 25' in width, with a small area at 30' in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree line, 4 story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values. If 8.85 acres was determined to be sufficient for the prior property owner, why shouldn't the proposed development be held to the same size? We encourage you to: a. Remove the Shared Access Point between Esplanade and Addie's Corner b. Widen Immokalee Rd. before allowing any more development. c. Not allow the reduction of the preserve, or alternatively, increase the buffer to a minimum of 150' and require a type C buffer. d. Permit the 2 types of exotic trees to remain within the buffer, or if they must be removed, then require that they be replaced. e. Limit this development to 2 story buildings and no more than 150 residential units. f. Require any lighting to be directed away from Esplanade. Name Address Date 1 JohnsonEric From:ChrzanowskiStan Sent:Thursday, March 16, 2017 10:08 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Fw: Addies corner So... Eric... how many more copies of this letter am I going to get? When are we going to see the project details? Is Immokalee Road going to be widened ? From: Thomas Kleck <tkleck@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:19 AM To: ChrzanowskiStan Subject: Addies corner Tom & Judy Kleck Esplanade Golf & Country Club of Naples 8864 Savona Ct. Naples, FL 34119 Tom’s Cell : 317-997-3416 Judy’s Cell : 317-408-4162 tkleck@comcast.net judykleck@comcast.net Collier County Commissioners Collier County Planning Commissioners Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner Re: Addie’s Corner development Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. We live in Esplanade Golf & Country Club, on Immokalee Rd. We have 3 primary concerns with the Addie’s Corner Development: 1. Shared Access Point. Current plans show a shared access point (driveway) between Esplanade and Addie’s Corner. Since this is shown after the Esplanade security gate, we are concerned who will be entering our community. Even if a separate security gate is placed there, the paved road will make it easy for pedestrians and bicyclists to enter our private community. Headlights from vehicles will shine into the rear of the homes on Amour Court. 2. Traffic. It is already very difficult to exit Esplanade onto Immokalee Rd or enter Esplanade with a left turn from the eastbound lane. In addition, cars making a U-turn opposite our driveway from the eastbound to the westbound lane add an additional challenge. Even if only 150 residential units are permitted, the additional residential and retail traffic exiting Addie’s Corner will create longer delays and more of a safety issue. We understand significantly more development is planned at Collier and Immokalee. Immokalee Rd. cannot handle the current volume of traffic. 3. Removal of trees, loss of property value. The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area to the right of Esplanade Blvd., with many tall trees. We understand the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. The proposed master plan shows a type B buffer mostly ranging from 15’ to 25’ in width, with a small area at 30’ in width. We understand that 2 types of exotic trees must be removed. With the narrow buffer and removal of the 2 exotic types of trees, residents are likely to see the buildings through the thin tree line. In addition, the thinner tree line will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree line, 4 story buildings will rise above the 2 trees and degrade the views and property values. If 8.85 acres was determined to be sufficient for the prior property owner, why shouldn’t the proposed development be held to the same size? We encourage you to: 1. Remove the Shared Access Point between Esplanade and Addie’s Corner 2. Widen Immokalee Rd. before allowing any more development. 3. Not allow the reduction of the preserve, or alternatively, increase the buffer to a minimum of 150’ and require a type C buffer. 4. Permit the 2 types of exotic trees to remain within the buffer, or if they must be removed, then require that they be replaced. 5. Limit this development to 2 story buildings and no more than 150 residential units. 6. Require any lighting to be directed away from Esplanade. ____________________ __________________________ ___________ Name Address Date Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 JohnsonEric From:Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, March 15, 2017 4:52 PM To:pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; StrainMark; McDanielBill; SolisAndrew; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc:JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's Corner Ladies and Gentlemen of the Collier County Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners. This message is from Ron Miller, 8670 Amour Ct, Naples FL. 34119, 816-507-0164, ronmiller052645@gmail.com. The matter of a rezoning proposal for Addie's Corner will come before you in the near future, perhaps already has come before you. This rezoning is being requested by the Barron Collier organization. The property known as Addie's Corner is approximately 23 acres located on the north side of Immokalee Road contiguous with Esplanade Golf and Country Club, just west of Collier Blvd. I have been communicating with Eric Johnson regarding the new zoning proposal. He has been most courteous and helpful in the exchange of information. I have provided Mr. Johnson with two detailed analytical messages urging Collier County to reject the new Barron Collier request. Mr. Johnson will provide you those reports in due course. Collier County is booming, you must be very busy. I wanted to summarize my thoughts in my two reports before opinions are formed. The current zoning has Tract A and B. Tract A allows for a certain amount of commercial and the balance for "senior housing" age 55+ with skilled nursing, assisted living etc. Tract B calls for 8.85 acres of permanent preserve. This zoning was approved, I believe unanimously, by your previous colleagues. Much thought and care must have gone into that effort when approved. Barron Collier has purchased the property and now wants to substantially rezone to continue to allow commercial plus 350 residential units in lieu of the senior housing. Perhaps the current senior housing element was well thought out as a need, no such facility is available in the area. This substantial expansion comes at the expense of the neighbors, noise, traffic and the environment. In particular, the environment suffers, the preserve is reduced from 8.85 acres to 3.45 acres to allow for the residential expansion. I strongly urge you to retain the current zoning. To allow Barron Collier to proceed would amount to a repudiation of the care and effort of previous Collier County personnel. I think it is also very noteworthy that developers of the surrounding property have not been allow to expand the previous zoning of their properties. Specifically, the two Taylor Morrison projects know as Esplanade Golf and Country Club contiguous to the west and north and the Tree Farm property contiguous to the east are developing within the previous existing zoning requirements. Why would Collier County make an exception for Addie's Corner? Thank you for your consideration in this matter. I look forward to the public hearings. 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Tuesday, March 07, 2017 7:26 AM To:JohnsonEric; LenbergerSteve Cc:Joe Pestana; 'Ron Miller'; Tracey Sosnik; SmithDaniel Subject:RE: Updated Addies Corner MCP, buffer requirements Attachments:S3-Addies Corner MPUD Exh A-F (rev2) (002).pdf Eric and Steve, Daniel Smith answered questions below about buffer requirements, but directed me to you regarding the preserve. Per my conversation with Eric Johnson, I believe the attached file represents the most recent proposal by Barron Collier. I understand page 9 is the current master plan and page 10 represents what Barron Collier is proposing. Although we don’t have drawings that are to scale, it appears the length of the preserve area bordering Esplanade and Addies Corner is being reduced from about 600’ to 450’. Although we recognize there will be a buffer along the entire boundary, it will only be 5’ to 6’ high, whereas the buildings will be 45’ to 65’ high. We purchased our homes with the knowledge the preserve and its tall trees would remain and encourage the Planning Commission not to permit this change. Doesn’t the term “preserve” mean the trees will be preserved, (at least the native and non-exotic trees)? What are the conditions under which the Planning Commission might allow the preserve to be reduced, as the developer is proposing? Also, I would appreciate if you can give us some data regarding the existing and proposed preserves: • What is the length of the existing preserve at the border between Esplanade and Addies Corner? • What is the length of the proposed preserve at the border between Esplanade and Addies Corner? • What are the acreages of the existing and proposed preserves? Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: SmithDaniel [mailto:DanielSmith@colliergov.net] Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 9:36 AM To: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; LenbergerSteve <SteveLenberger@colliergov.net> Cc: Joe Pestana <jpestana@jppestservices.com>; 'Ron Miller' <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Updated Addies Corner MCP, buffer requirements Hi Sam, There are not special buffering requirements with lakes. The Type B buffers (or opacity with existing vegetation) still apply. The other issues (height of buildings, preserve requirements) are reviewed through the Zoning and Environmental professional staff, Eric Johnson and Steve Lenberger. I will forward your questions to them. 2 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 11:20 AM To: SmithDaniel Cc: Joe Pestana; 'Ron Miller' Subject: RE: Updated Addies Corner MCP, buffer requirements Daniel, Thank you for sending me the information on the buffer requirements. Yesterday, I referred to some other files I did not have at the time we spoke. Can you review the attached files and please call my cell? I wanted you to see the tree line view we currently enjoy from the rear of our homes. I also wanted to discuss the proposed reduction to the existing preserve. In addition, I wanted to discuss the triangular shaped lake which I believe is on Taylor Morrison’s property to discuss if any different buffering requirements apply there. I believe that lake is closest to what is shown on Barron Collier’s drawing as DA-1A, Future Commercial Development. We are concerned how high they are permitted to build there. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: SmithDaniel [mailto:DanielSmith@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 4:58 PM To: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Subject: RE: Updated Addies Corner MCP, buffer requirements 4.06.02 - Buffer Requirements modified o Share Link o Print o Download (docx) o Email o Compare A. Applicability of buffer requirements. The buffering and screening shown in table 2.4 below shall be required under this section and shall apply to all new development . Existing landscaping which does not comply with the provisions of this section shall be brought into conformity to the maximum extent possible when: the vehicular use area is altered or expanded (except for restriping of lots/drives), the building square footage is changed, or there has been a discontinuance of use for a period of 1 year or more and a request for an occupational license to resume business is made. For projects subject to architectural design standards, see LDC section 5.05.08 for related provisions. Subdivisions or Developments shall be buffered for the protection of property owners from land uses as required pursuant to this section 4.06.00. Buffers shall not inhibit pedestrian circulation between adjacent commercial land uses. Buffers shall be installed during construction as follows and in accordance with this section 4.06.00: 1. To separate residential developments from commercial, community use, industrial and public use development s and adjacent expressways, arterials and railroad rights-of-way , except where such expressway, arterial, or railroad right-of-way abuts a golf course. 2. 3 To separate commercial, community use, industrial and public use developments from residential developments . 3. To separate subdivisions of residential property that do not result in the submittal of a site development plan pursuant to the provisions of section 10.02.03 from other residential properties. Separation shall be created with a landscape buffer strip which is designed and constructed in compliance with the provisions of this section 4.06.00. Such buffer strip(s) shall be shown and designated on the final plat as a tract of easement and shall not be located within any public or private right-of-way . The ability to locate buffer(s) within a platted or recorded easement shall be determined pursuant to the provisions of this section 4.06.00. buffers adjacent to protected/preserve areas shall conform to the requirements established by the agency requiring such buffer . Landscape buffers , when required by this Code, this section 4.06.00, or other county regulation shall be in addition to the required right-of-way width and shall be designated as a separate buffer tract or easement on the final subdivision plat. The minimum buffer width shall be in conformance with this section 4.06.00. In no case shall the required buffer be constructed to reduce cross-corner or stopping sight distances, or safe pedestrian passage. All buffer tracts or easements shall be owned and maintained by a property owner's association or other similar entity and shall be so dedicated on the final subdivision plat. B. Methods of determining buffers. Where a property adjacent to the proposed use is: (1) undeveloped, (2) undeveloped but permitted without the required buffering and screening required pursuant to this Code, or (3) developed without the buffering and screening required pursuant to this Code, the proposed use shall be required to install the more opaque buffer as provided for in table 2.4. Where property adjacent to the proposed use has provided the more opaque buffer as provided for in table 2.4, the proposed use shall install a type A buffer . Where the incorporation of existing native vegetation in landscape buffers is determined as being equivalent to or in excess of the intent of this Code, the planning services director may waive the planting requirements of this section. Buffering and landscaping between similar residential land uses may be incorporated into the yards of individual lots or tracts without the mandatory creation of separate tracts. If buffering and landscaping is to be located on a lot , it shall be shown as an easement for buffering and landscaping. The buffering and screening provisions of this Code shall be applicable at the time of planned unit development (PUD), preliminary subdivision plat (PSP), or site development plan (SDP) review, with the installation of the buffering and screening required pursuant to section 4.06.05 G. If the applicant chooses to forego the optional PSP process, then signed and sealed landscape plans will be required on the final subdivision plat. Where a more intensive land use is developed contiguous to a property within a similar zoning district, the planning services director may require buffering and screening the same as for the higher intensity uses between those uses. Landscape buffering and screening standards within any planned unit development shall conform to the minimum buffering and screening standards of the zoning district to which it most closely resembles. The planning services director may approve alternative landscape buffering and screening standards when such alternative standards have been determined by use of professional acceptable standards to be equivalent to or in excess of the intent of this Code. C. Types of buffers . Within a required buffer strip, the following types of buffers shall be used based on the matrix in table 2.4. (See Figure 4.06.02.C-1) 1. Type A Buffer: Ten-foot-wide landscape buffer with trees spaced no more than 30 feet on center. When a Type A buffer is located within a residential PUD and adjacent to a lake, the required trees may be clustered on common property lines to provide a view of the lake. Clustered tree plantings shall not exceed 60 feet between clusters. 2. Type B Buffer: Fifteen-foot-wide, 80 percent opaque within one year landscape buffer six feet in height, which may include a wall, fence, hedge, berm or combination thereof, including trees spaced no more than 25 feet on center. When planting a hedge, it shall be a minimum of ten gallon plants five feet in height, three feet in spread and spaced a maximum four feet on center at planting. 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. When the adjacent lake exceeds 1,500 feet in width the hedge planting shall not be required. When a community facility is located within a residential PUD and abuts a residential unit, a Type B buffer shall be required. When a fence or wall is used within the buffer a minimum of 50 percent of the trees and hedge plantings shall be located on the residential side of the fence or wall. 3. Type C Buffer: 20-foot-wide, opaque within one year, landscape buffer with a six-foot wall, fence, hedge, or berm , or combination thereof and two staggered rows of trees spaced no more than 30 feet on center. Projects located within the Golden Gate Neighborhood center district shall be exempt from the right-of-way requirement of a six-foot wall, fence, hedge, berm or combination thereof. These projects shall provide a meandering Type D landscape buffer hedge. In addition, a minimum of 50 percent of the 25-foot wide buffer area shall be composed of a meandering bed of shrubs and ground covers other than grass. 4. Type D Buffer: A landscape buffer shall be required adjacent to any road right-of-way external to the development project and adjacent to any primary access roads internal to a commercial development . Said landscape buffer shall be consistent with the provisions of the Collier County Streetscape Master Plan, which is incorporated by reference herein. The minimum width of the perimeter landscape buffer shall vary according to the ultimate width of the abutting right-of-way . Where the ultimate width of the right-of-way is zero to 99 feet, the corresponding landscape buffer shall measure at least ten feet in width. Where the ultimate width of the right-of-way is 100 or more feet, the corresponding landscape buffer shall measure at least 15 feet in width. Developments of 15 acres or more and developments within an activity center shall provide a perimeter landscape buffer of at least 20 feet in width regardless of the width of the right-of-way . Activity center right-of-way buffer width requirements shall not be applicable to roadways internal to the development . a. 4 Trees shall be spaced no more than 30 feet on center in the landscape buffer abutting a right-of-way or primary access road internal to a commercial development . b. A continuous 3 gallon double row hedge spaced 3 feet on center of at least 24 inches in height at the time of planting and attaining a minimum of 30 inches in height in one year shall be required in the landscape buffer where vehicular areas are adjacent to the road right-of-way , pursuant to LDC section 4.06.05 D.4. c. Where a fence or wall fronts an arterial or collector road as described by the transportation circulation element of the growth management plan, a continuous 3 gallon single row hedge a minimum of 24 inches in height spaced 3 feet on center, shall be planted along the right-of-way side of the fence. The required trees shall be located on the side of the fence facing the right-of-way . Every effort shall be made to undulate the wall and landscaping design incorporating trees, shrubs, and ground cover into the design. It is not the intent of this requirement to obscure from view decorative elements such as emblems, tile, molding and wrought iron. d. The remaining area of the required landscape buffer must contain only existing native vegetation , grass, ground cover, or other landscape treatment. Every effort should be made to preserve, retain and incorporate the existing native vegetation in these areas. e. A signage visibility triangle may be created for non-residential on-premises signs located as shown in Figure 4.06.02.C-2 for Type D buffers that are 20 feet or greater in width. The line of visibility shall be no greater than 30 linear feet along road right-of-way line. Within the visibility triangle, shrubs and hedges shall be required pursuant to LDC section 4.06.05.D.4, except that hedges, shrubs, or ground cover located within the signage visibility triangle shall be maintained at a maximum plant height of 24 inches. Within the visibility triangle, no more than one required canopy tree may be exempted from the Type D buffer requirements. 5 6 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 3:41 PM To: JohnsonEric; SmithDaniel Cc: Joe Pestana Subject: RE: Updated Addies Corner MCP, buffer requirements Eric, Please respond regarding the buffer requirements or direct us to the proper person. Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: LenbergerSteve [mailto:SteveLenberger@colliergov.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 10:45 AM To: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Cc: Joe Pestana <jpestana@jppestservices.com> Subject: RE: Updated Addies Corner MCP Hi Sam! Buffering requirements are handled by Planning. I will let Eric respond. Thank you! Stephen From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 8:59 AM To: JohnsonEric; LenbergerSteve Cc: Joe Pestana Subject: FW: Updated Addies Corner MCP Eric and Steve, The email below and attached file was forwarded by Dan Waters of Barron Collier. As you can see, they are proposing a buffer varying between 15’ to 25’. I’m concerned that width is not sufficient to block out the new buildings, particularly because the treeline will become thinner when the 2 types of exotic species are removed. Taylor Morrison told us that a 50’ buffer was required. Is there an ordinance governing the depth of the buffer or is that decided on a case-by-case basis? Thank you. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Dan Waters [mailto:DWaters@barroncollier.com] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 11:47 AM 7 To: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Subject: Updated Addies Corner MCP Sam, Thanks again for facilitating the meeting earlier this week, I hope it helped to calm any concerns of your neighbors. Attached is the updated version of the MCP that we are planning on submitting to Collier County with our response. The areas of existing vegetation along the western property boundary that we will save are shown on this plan; keep in mind that this is a conceptual zoning plan and that the clubhouse is going to have the configuration shown on the more detailed plan I left with you. The location of the multi-story building is best defined on that site plan and we will save the 30 feet along that frontage, 25 feet by the clubhouse building, and 15 feet along the parking and 20 feet along the entry road. The potential vehicular interconnect that the county is making us show will almost certainly never be constructed, …….. Dan Waters, P.E. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 Phone: 239.262.2600 Direct: 239.403.6830 Cell: 239.206.7804 dwaters@barroncollier.com This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. 8 This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 1 of 15 EXHIBIT “A” LIST OF PERMITTED USES ADDIES CORNER MPUD Regulations for development of the Addies Corner MPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this MPUD Document and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any site development plan or plat. Where this MPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: I. Tract A – Permitted Commercial Principal Uses: A. Commercial Professional Retail & General Office Permitted Use (Sic In Parenthesis) 1. Accident & Health Insurance Services (6321) 2. Accounting, Auditing and Bookkeeping Services (8721) 3. Adjustment services (7322) 4. Advertising (consultants) agencies (7311) 5. Advertising, not elsewhere classified (7319) 6. Agricultural uses (N/A) 7. Architectural services (8712) 8. Auto & Home Supply Stores (5531) 9. Bakeries, Retail (5461) 10. Banks, commercial: national (6021) 11. Banks, commercial: not chartered (6029) 12. Banks, commercial: state (6022) 13. Banks, savings: Federal (6035) 14. Banks, savings: not federally chartered (6036) 15. Barber Shops (7241) 16. Beauty Shops (7231) 17. Book Stores (5942) 18. Business Associations (8611) 19. Business Consulting Services, not elsewhere classified (8748) 20. Camera & Photographic Supply Stores (5946) 21. Candy, Nut & Confectionery Stores (5441) 22. Carpet and Upholstery Cleaning (7217) 23. Civic, Social and Fraternal Associations (8641) 24. Clothing & Accessory Stores, Men's & Boy's (5611) 25. Clothing Stores, Women's (5621) 26. Collection Services (7322) 27. Commodity Contracts Brokers & Dealers (6221) 28. Commercial Art & Graphic Design (7336) 29. Commercial Photography (7335) 30. Commercial Economic, Sociological & Educational Research (8732) 31. Computer & Computer Software Stores (5734) Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 2 of 15 32. Computer Facilities Management Services (7376) 33. Computer Maintenance and Repair (7378) 34. Computer Processing & Data Preparation Services (7374) 35. Computer Programming services (7371) 36. Computer Rental & Leasing (7377) 37. Credit Reporting Services (1323) 38. Credit Unions, Federal (6061) 39. Credit Unions, State: not federally chartered (6062) 40. Dairy Products Stores (5451) 41. Data Processing Consultants (7379) 42. Dance Studios, Schools & Halls (7911) 43. Data Processing Services (7374) 44. Dental Laboratories (8072) 45. Dentist Office/Clinic (8021) 46. Direct mail advertising service (7331) 47. Direct Selling Establishments (5963) 48. Doctors - Medicine Offices & Clinics (8011) 49. Doctors - Osteopathy Offices & Clinics (8031) 50. Doctors - Chiropractors Offices & Clinics (8041) 51. Drapery, Curtain & Upholstery Stores (5714) 52. Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages); Bottle Clubs and Cabarets are not permitted (5813) 53. Drug Stores (5912) 54. Eating Places (5812) 55. Engineering services: industrial, civil, electrical, mechanical, marine and design (8711) 56. Executive Offices (9111) 57. Executive & Legislative Offices Combined (9131) 58. Fire, Marine & Casualty Insurance Services (6331) 59. Floor Covering Stores (5713) 60. Florists (5992) 61. Food Stores, Miscellaneous (5499) 62. Foreign Branches & Agencies of Banks (6081) 63. Foreign Trade & International Banking Institutions (6082) 64. Furniture Stores (5712) 65. Funeral home or parlor (7261) 66. Gasoline Service Stations (5541) 67. General Government, not elsewhere classified (9199) 68. Gift, Novelty & Souvenir Shops (5947) 69. Grocery Stores (5411) 70. Hair weaving or Replacement Services (7299) 71. Hardware Store (5251) 72. Health practitioners - not elsewhere classified (8049) 73. Hobby, Toy & Games Shops (5945) 74. Home health care services (8082) 75. Hotels & Motels – subject to conversion in Exhibit B (7011) 76. Household Appliance Stores (5722) 77. Hospital & Medical Healthy Services (6324) 78. Information Retrieval Services (7375) 79. Insurance Carriers, not elsewhere classified (6399) 80. Investment Advice (6282) Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 3 of 15 81. Jewelry Stores (5944) 82. Land Subdividers & Developers (6552) 83. Landscape architects, consulting & planning (0781) 84. Laundries (Coin Operated) & Dry-cleaning (7215) 85. Legal services (8111) 86. Libraries (except regional libraries) (8231) 87. Life Insurance Services (6311) 88. Liquor Stores (5921) 89. Loan brokers (6163) 90. Luggage & Leather Goods Stores (5948) 91. Management Services (8741) 92. Management Consulting Services (8742) 93. Markets, Meat & Fish (Seafood) Markets (5421) 94. Markets, Fruit & Vegetable Markets (5431) 95. Medical Equipment Rental & Leasing (7352) 96. Medical Laboratories (8071) 97. Membership Organizations, not elsewhere classified (8699) 98. Miscellaneous amusement and recreational services not elsewhere classified. Only judo instruction, karate instruction, moped rental, motorcycle rental, rental of bicycles, scuba and skin diving instruction are permitted (7999) 99. Miscellaneous Business Credit Institutions (6159) 100. Miscellaneous General Merchandise Stores (5399) 101. Miscellaneous Home Furnishings Stores (5719) 102. Miscellaneous personal services, not elsewhere classified excluding massage parlors, steam baths, tattoo parlors and Turkish baths. (7299) 103. Miscellaneous Retail Stores, not elsewhere classified (5999) 104. Mortgage Bankers & Loan Correspondents (6162) 105. Musical Instrument Stores (5736) 106. News Dealers & Newsstands (5994) 107. Nondeposit Trust Facilities (6091) 108. Optical Goods Stores (5995) 109. Optometrists - offices & clinics (8042) 110. Paint, Glass & Wallpaper Stores (5231) 111. Pension, Health and Welfare Funds Services (6371) 112. Personal Credit Institutions (6141) 113. Photocopying & Duplicating Services (7334) 114. Photographic Studios, Portrait (7221) 115. Photofinishing Laboratories (7384) 116. Physical Fitness Facilities (permitted only when physically integrated and operated in conjunction with another permitted use in this district - no stand alone facility permitted) (7991) 117. Podiatrists - offices & clinics (8043) 118. Political Organizations (8651) 119. Professional Membership Organizations (8621) 120. Professional Sports Clubs & Promoters (7941) 121. Public Relations Services (8743) 122. Radio, Television & Consumer Electronics Stores (5731) 123. Radio, Television & Publishers Advertising Representatives (7313) 124. Real Estate Agents and Managers (6531) 125. Record & Prerecorded Tape Stores; adult video rental or sales (5735) Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 4 of 15 prohibited 126. Religious Organizations (8661) 127. Repair Shops & Related Services, not elsewhere classified (7699) 128. Retail Nurseries, Lawn & Garden Supply Stores (5261) 129. Secretarial and Court Reporting Services (7338) 130. Security Brokers, Dealers & Flotation Companies (6211) 131. Security and Commodity Exchanges (6231) 132. Sewing, Needlework & Piece Goods Stores (5949) 133. Services Allied with the Exchange of Securities or Commodities, not elsewhere classified (6289) 134. Shoe Repair Shops and Shoeshine Parlors (7251) 135. Short-Term Business Credit Institutions, except agricultural (6153) 136. Social Services, Individual & Family (activity centers, elderly or handicapped only; day care centers for adult & handicapped only) (8322) 137. Sporting Goods Stores & Bicycle Shops (5941) 138. Stationery Stores (5943) 139. Stores, Children's and Infants Wear (5641) 140. Stores, Family Clothing (5651) 141. Stores, Miscellaneous Apparel & Accessory (5699) 142. Stores, Shoes (5661) 143. Stores, Women's Accessory & Specialty (5632) 144. Surety Insurance Services (6351) 145. Surveying Services (8713) 146. Tanning Salons (7299) 147. Tax Return Preparation Services (7291) 148. Title Abstract Offices (6541) 149. Title Insurance Services (6361) 150. Tobacco Stores & Stands (5993) 151. Travel Agencies (no other transportation services) (4724) 152. Used Merchandise Stores (5932) 153. Veterinary services for animal specialties (0742) 154. Video Tape Rental, adult video rental or sales prohibited (7841) 155. Watch, Clock & Jewelry Repair (7631) II. Tract A or Tract C - Permitted Group Housing/Retirement Community/Principal Uses: [If no residential dwelling units are constructed in Tract C and subject to conversion in Exhibit B] A. Group Housing, 8051 Skilled Nursing, Intermediate Care Facilities 8052, Nursing and Personal Care not else classified 8059. B. Independent Living Units C. Assisted Living Units D. Retirement Community III. Tract C – Permitted Residential Principal Uses: [If only residential dwelling units are constructed in Tract C] A. Dwelling Units - Multi-family and Townhouse Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 5 of 15 B. Any other principal use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA”) or the Hearing Examiner. IIIIV. Tract A- Permitted Accessory Uses: Tract A and C – Commercial and Group Housing/Retirement Community Principal Uses: Accessory uses customarily associated with the permitted principal uses, including, but not limited to: A. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the permitted uses within this MPUD document. B. Water management facilities to serve the project such as lakes. C. Clubhouses, Community administrative facilities intended to serve residents and their guests. D. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, gazebos and picnic areas. CE. Any other accessory and related use that is determined to be comparable in nature with the foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, pursuant to the process outlined in the LDC. uses and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Hearing Examiner. Tract C - Residential Principal Uses: A. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the principal uses permitted in this MPUD, including but not limited to garages, carports, swimming pools, spas and screen enclosures. B. Water management facilities to serve the project such as lakes. C. Clubhouses, Community administrative facilities intended to serve residents and their guests, including leasing and construction offices. D. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, gazebos and picnic areas. E. Any other accessory and related use that is determined to be comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Hearing Examiner. IVVI. Tract B - Permitted Preserve Area Uses: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for the preserve area depicted on the MPUD Master Plan, that is required to be a minimum of 8.85 acres, other than those uses allowed by Section 3.05.07 H.1.h. of the LDC, or any successor provision. Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 6 of 15 VII. Group Housing/Retirement Community Commitments: The developer of the group housing/retirement community, its successors or assigns, shall provide the following services and be subject to the following operational standards for the units in the retirement community, including but not limited to, independent living units, assisted living units or skilled nursing units: 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. 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 so that a resident can age in place. For example, kitchens may be easily retrofitted to lower the sink to accommodate a wheelchair bound resident or bathrooms may be retrofitted to add grab bars. Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 7 of 15 EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ADDIES CORNER MPUD The tables below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Addies Corner MPUD. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or subdivision plat. I. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TRACT A COMMERCIAL DISTRICTAND TRACT C, COMMERCIAL AND GROUP HOUSING/RETIREMENT COMMUNITY. PRINCIPAL USES ACCESSORY USES MINIMUM LOT AREA 10,000 Sq. Ft. N/A AVERAGE LOT WIDTH 100 ft. N/A MINIMUM YARDS (External) (See paragraph below From Immokalee Road Canal ROW 25 ft. SPS From Eastern Project Boundary 25 ft. 15 ft From Western Project Boundary 25 ft. 15 ft. From Northern Project Boundary – As Shown 521 200 ft. Minimum 521 200 ft. Minimum MINIMUM YARDS (Internal) Internal Drives/ROW 15 ft. 10 ft Rear 10 ft. 10 ft. Side 10 ft. 10 ft. Lakes 25 ft. 20 ft.* Preserve 25 ft. 10 ft. MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN STRUCTURES 1/2 the sum of building heights** 10 Ft. MAXIMUM HEIGHT ZONED ACTUAL Retail Buildings 45 ft. 65 ft. 35 ft. Office Buildings 55 ft. 65 ft. 35 ft. Group Housing/ Retirement Community 45 ft. 65 ft. 35 ft. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA (ground floor) 1,000 sq. ft. ** N/A MAXIMUM GROSS COMMERCIAL AREA 1375,000 sq. ft. *** N/A GROUP CARE FACILITIES Maximum 0.60 F.A.R. up to 26 units per acre***, **** & ***** N/A HOTEL & MOTEL Maximum 26 units per acre ***, **** & ***** (F.A.R. Not Applicable) N/A * No structure may be located closer than 20 feet to the top of bank of a lake (allowing for the required minimum 20 foot wide lake maintenance easement). ** Per principal structure, kiosk vendor, concessions, and temporary or mobile sales structures shall be permitted to have a minimum floor area of twenty· five (25) square feet and shall be subject to the accessory structure standards set forth in the LDC. *** Total allowable commercial square footage is 1375,000 of commercial development within. For each acre of Group Housing/Retirement Community or Hotel/Motel or fraction thereof developed, 10,914 S.F. of commercial development will be reduced on Tract "A" only. **** The maximum height and setbacks shall be the same as those for office buildings. ***** The preserve area shall not be used in calculating the F.A.R. for C.C.R.C.Group Housing/Retirement Community use or the density for Hotel/Motel. Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 8 of 15 II. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR TRACT C RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES TOWNHOUSE MULTI-FAMILY Minimum Lot Area 1,440 SF N/A Minimum Lot Width 18 feet N/A Minimum Lot Depth 80 feet N/A Minimum Front Yard Setback*2 25 feet 25 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback*1 0/10 feet 0/10 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback 15 feet 15 feet Maximum Building Height Zoned Actual 45 feet 50 feet 55 feet 65 feet Minimum Distance Between Buildings 20 feet 20 feet Floor Area Min. (S.F.), per unit 750 SF 700 SF Minimum PUD Boundary Setback 20 feet 20 feet Minimum Preserve Setback 25 feet 25 feet ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Minimum Front Yard Setback*2 15 feet 15 feet Minimum Side Yard Setback 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Rear Yard Setback 10 feet 10 feet Minimum PUD Boundary Setback 15 feet 15 feet Minimum Preserve Setback 10 feet 10 feet Minimum Distance Between Buildings 0/10 feet 0/10 feet Maximum Height Zoned Actual 20 feet 25 feet 35 feet 40 feet *1 –Minimum separation between adjacent dwelling units, if detached, shall be 10’. *2 –Front yards shall be measured from back of curb for private streets or drives, and from ROW line for any public roadway. Note: nothing in this MPUD Document shall be deemed to approve a deviation from the LDC unless it is expressly stated in a list of deviations. IIIII. DEVELOPMENT WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE EAST In the event amendments are made to the Tree Farm MPUD to the east of this MPUD to allow for a unified development plan of both properties, a zero setback shall be allowed along the common property line of this MPUD. IIIIV. ALTERNATIVE LANDSCAPING EAST PROPERTY LINE A minimum 6-foot height hedge, minimum 3-foot in spread, planted a maximum 4-feet on center, 100% opaque at planting shall be installed along the east property line, in lieu of a wall, along with other requirements of a Type B Landscape buffer. IVVI. A stipulation has been added that outside amplified music is prohibited. 15' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFERNO BUFFER REQUIRED15' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER20' WIDE TYPE "D"LANDSCAPE BUFFERFUTURE SHARED ACCESSEDGE OF WATERTRACT C(RESIDENTIAL OR GROUP HOUSING)TRACT A(COMMERCIAL AND GROUPHOUSING (IF THERE ARE NODWELLING UNITS IN THE PROJECT))POTENTIAL SHARED ACCESSBUFFER PER LDCAMENITY AREA WATERMANAGEMENTAREATRACT BPRESERVE15' WIDE EXISTINGVEGETATION TO REMAIN ASTYPE "B" LANDSCAPE BUFFER20' WIDE EXISTING VEGETATIONTO REMAIN AS TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER30' WIDE EXISTINGVEGETATION TO REMAIN ASTYPE "B" LANDSCAPE BUFFER25' WIDE EXISTINGVEGETATION TO REMAIN ASTYPE "B" LANDSCAPE BUFFER15' WIDE TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFER0200'100'SCALE: 1" = 200'GradyMinorCivil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCert. of Auth. EB 0005151Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151Business LC 26000266Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.3800 Via Del ReyBonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380NOTES1.THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE ANDIS SUBJECT TO MINOR MODIFICATION DUETO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.2.ALL ACREAGES, EXCEPT PRESERVE, AREAPPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TOMODIFICATION AT THE TIME OF SDP ORPLAT APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THELDC.SITE SUMMARYGROSS SITE AREA23.33± ACRESPUBLIC ROW/CANAL1.50± ACRESNET SITE AREA21.83± ACRERESIDENTIAL (TRACT C) - 9.82± ACRES (45%)COMMERCIAL (TRACT A) - 4.32± ACRES (20%)AMENITY AREA (PART OF TRACT C) - 0.59± ACRES (3%)PRESERVE (TRACT B) - 3.45± ACRES (16%)WATER MANAGEMENT - 0.95± ACRES (4%)BUFFERS/OPEN SPACE - 2.70± ACRES (12%)TRACT ACOMMERCIALMAXIMUM 75,000 S.F.GROUP HOUSING0.6 FARTRACT B - PRESERVEREQUIRED:3.45± ACRES (13.81 ± ACRESNATIVE VEGETATION X 25%)PROVIDED:3.45± ACRESTRACT CRESIDENTIALMAXIMUM 349 D.U. (16 DU/AC)- IF ALL RESIDENTIALGROUP HOUSING0.6 FAROPEN SPACE: REQUIRED:30%PROVIDED:30%# DEVIATIONSESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES RPUDPRESERVEESPLANADEGOLF ANDCOUNTRY CLUBOF NAPLES RPUDRESIDENTIALESPLANADE GOLF ANDCOUNTRY CLUB OFNAPLES RPUDRESIDENTIALTREE FARM MPUDUNDEVELOPEDINGRESS/EGRESS31456 Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 10 of 15 EXHIBIT D LEGAL DESCRIPTION ADDIES CORNER MPUD The North one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; and The South one-half (1/2) of the West one-half (1/2) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1/4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East; excepting the south 100 feet thereof; and The East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the East one-half (1/2) of the Southwest one-quarter (1/4) of the Southeast one-quarter (1 /4) of Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, excepting the south 100' thereof. Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 11 of 15 EXHIBIT “E” LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC ADDIES CORNER MPUD 1. Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.H.1.a., commercial and industrial districts, which require if located on a contiguous residentially zoned property, the wall and/or fence shall be a minimum of six (6) feet and a maximum of eight (8) feet in height and shall be located a minimum of six (6) feet from the residentially zoned district, to not require a wall within a Type B buffer along the east property line of this MPUD adjacent to the Tree Farm MPUD to the east. (See Exhibit C, MPUD Master Plan.) As mitigation for the wall, a 6-foot height hedge shall be required in addition to the requirements of a Type B Landscape buffer. (Also, see Exhibit B - Development Standards pertaining to Landscaping). 2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 to allow the floor area ratio (F.A.R.) to be increased from 0.45 to 0.60 for a Group Housing/Retirement Community. 3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.F.3, Development Standards for Signs within Non-Residential Districts, which requires minimum setbacks from signs to the property line and limits sign area, to allow for two project directory signs to be attached to the proposed private bridge providing access to the project (one on each side of the bridge) with a total combined allowable sign area of 140 square feet. 4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G - Parking Spaces Required for Multi-Family Dwellings, which requires 1 parking space per residential unit plus 0.75 guest spaces for one bedroom residential units and 1 guest space for two bedroom and larger units. In the event that Tract C is developed as leased multi-family units, this deviation proposes to establish the required number of parking spaces for leased multifamily residential units at 1.65 spaces per one bedroom unit and 1.8 spaces for two bedroom and larger units (inclusive of resident and guest parking spaces). 5. Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.04.G - Dumpsters and Recycling, which requires that multi-family rental units provide dumpsters or a compactor to allow for rental units to have the option for building staff to transport bulk containers from storage areas internal to the buildings to designated areas for pick up by the solid waste and recycling hauler. 6. Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N – Street System Requirements and Appendix B, Typical Street Sections and Right-of-Way Design Standards. The LDC establishes a minimum 60-foot right of way width for local streets. This deviation proposes to reduce the required right-of-way width for local streets to 50 feet. 7. Deviation #7 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N – Parking Spaces Required for Multifamily Dwellings allows for a reduction of the number of required parking spaces for small-scale recreational facilities within multi-family developments based upon the Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 12 of 15 proximity of the units to the small scale recreational facility. The LDC allows for the required parking at the recreational facilities to be calculated at 25% of normal requirements in cases where the majority of the multifamily units are located within 300 feet of the recreational facilities. This deviation proposes to increase the specified distance for the reduction of parking requirements for small-scale recreational facilities from 300 to 500 feet. Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 13 of 15 EXHIBIT F DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT ADDIES CORNER MPUD l. TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS (Amended by Transportation Staff on 2/4/10) changes accepted on 3/26/10 and then CAO edits put in) 1. The Owner will has dedicated in fee right-of-way for the purpose of relocating the Cocohatchee Canal as depicted on Tract A on the MPUD Master Plan, that includes compensatory right-of-way for the turn lane into the project. This area comprises ± 1.62 5 acres and was based on the most current information available at the time of approval of this ordinance. The property owner will dedicate to Collier County this right-of-way within 90 days of written request of the County at no cost to the County. The County will be responsible to relocate the canal, except only those portions immediately adjacent to (approximately 100' each side of) the proposed bridge. Collier County Transportation will provide design direction to the developer as to the ultimate alignment of the relocated canal prior to the time of SDP approval. See O.R. Book 5087, Page 93. 2. The Owner, his successor or assigns shall provide a roadway connection available to adjacent properties to facilitate interconnection to the properties property to the east (the Tree Farm MPUD) and will reserve land for an optional roadway connection to the West (Mirasol PUD), at the time of submittal of the first development order application. 3. When Owner constructs the bridge providing connection to lmmokalee Road it shall be constructed in a location consistent with the future location of the Cocohatchee Canal to accommodate the ultimate canal configuration. This will include relocation of the canal immediately adjacent to (approximately 100' each side of) the proposed bridge. Collier County will be responsible for providing the required easements to the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) for access and maintenance of the canal (to satisfy the permitting requirements of the SFWMD in the SFWMD ROW Permit Application authorizing the canal relocation). 4. The Owner, his successor, or assigns agrees to construct at no cost to the County a 12' multi-use pathway along the North side of the future location of the Cocohatchee Canal, within property owned by Collier County, which shall connect to the pathway to the West. A 10' pathway may be substituted at this location if consistent with the County's Comprehensive Pathway Plan. This pathway shall be constructed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The development within this project shall be limited to 1,044 unadjusted twowaytwo-way PM peak hour trips (or 708 adjusted two-way, PM peak hour trips; correspondent to the highest trip generation scenario of those proposed in Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 14 of 15 the updated traffic study information dated November 6, 2009); allowing for flexibility in the proposed uses without creating unforeseen impacts on the adjacent roadway network. The terms "adjusted" and "unadjusted" shall reference allowances for pass-by and internal capture trip reductions. For purposes of calculation of the weekday PM peak hour trip generation of this PUD, the lesser of the weekday PM peak hour trips as calculated in the Institute of Traffic Engineer's (ITE) Report, titled Trip Generation, 8th Edition or the trip generation as calculated in the then current ITE Trip Generation Report shall be utilized. 6. The Owner, his successor, or assigns agrees to be responsiblehas paid for 2% of the construction costs (not to exceed $50,000) to be considered the PUD's proportionate share of the improvements to the intersection of C.R. 951 and Immokalee Road. Payment shall be due within 90 days of receipt of the County's written request. The term "improvements", in this paragraph, means the relocation of the canal, the at-grade improvement of turning movements and turn lanes, all other ancillary at-grade improvements (curbs, bike lanes, etc), construction of a relocated bridge over the Cocohatchee Canal, and signalization for all movements. The term does not refer to potential future, grade-separated intersection improvements. Check received 12/17/15. 7. The owner, its successors, or assigns, agrees to be responsible for permitting the impacts to wetlands within the 1.5 +/- acre right-of-way parcel that was dedicated to Collier County. As a part of the first development order submittal for the site, the owner, its successors, or assigns will clear the 1.5 +/- right-of- way parcel of vegetation and place the sufficient fill required to impact the wetlands within the right-of-way parcel. Collier County will reimburse the developer for the reasonable cost of mitigation, clearing, and filling of the right- of-way parcel, upon submission and County approval of an engineer’s certification of costs after completion of the work. The construction activities that Collier County will be responsible for reimbursement of within the 1.5 acre right-of-way parcel include, but are not limited to: (1) costs for the purchase of mitigation credits to off-set wetland impacts, (2) costs of clearing and grubbing within the 1.5 acre ROW parcel, (3) the costs for the import and final grading of fill material required to elevate the ROW grade to an elevation sufficient to remove the area from SFWMD and ACOE wetland jurisdiction and (4) the costs of transferring the permits to Collier County following the completion of the construction. The Developer shall be allowed to clear vegetation within the County owned portion of the project and maintain this property until such time as Collier County proceeds with the planned right-of-way improvements. II. ENVIRONMENTAL 1. If no residential units are constructed: Based on total site acreage of 23.34 33 acres and 22.6513.81 acres of native habitat area, 3.42.07 acres (15% of habitat area) is required to be preserved pursuant to the Collier County Land Words underlined are additions; words struck through are deletions Addies Corner MPUD Revised 02/22/2017 Page 15 of 15 Development Code. The MPUD Master Plan, Exhibit C, shall provide 8.852.07 acres (0.15 x 13.81) of preserve area. 2. If residential units are constructed: Based on total site acreage of 23.33 acres and 13.81 acres of native habitat area, 3.45 acres (25% of habitat area) is required to be preserved pursuant to the Collier County Land Development Code. The MPUD Master Plan, Exhibit C, shall provide 3.45 acres (0.25 x 13.81) of preserve area. 23. As a part of the Environmental Resource Permitting process of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE), recommendations from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding impacts to protected wildlife species will be incorporated into the permits issued for this project. The developer shall comply with the guidelines set forth within those permits. Habitat management plans shall be provided for the Florida panther, Florida black bear, Big Cypress fox squirrel, wood stork, and any other protected species which inhabit or utilize the areas within the project. 5. Existing native vegetation along the western property boundary will be preserved within the areas shown in the Master Concept Plan. The preserved vegetation along the western property line will be used to satisfy the buffer requirements after exotic removal in accordance with LDC Sections 4.06.02 and 3.05.07. III. MISCELLANEOUS 1. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does 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. 2. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development IV. UTILITIES A stub-out to the Tree Farm PUD property boundary shall be provided if the water distribution system for Tree Farm is not available for interconnection at the time of construction. The location of the interconnection shall coincide with the future shared access depicted on the master plan exhibits. 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 28, 2017 8:59 AM To:JohnsonEric; LenbergerSteve Cc:Joe Pestana Subject:FW: Updated Addies Corner MCP Attachments:Exhibit C MCP Rev2 (12-08-2016), size of buffer.pdf Eric and Steve, The email below and attached file was forwarded by Dan Waters of Barron Collier. As you can see, they are proposing a buffer varying between 15’ to 25’. I’m concerned that width is not sufficient to block out the new buildings, particularly because the treeline will become thinner when the 2 types of exotic species are removed. Taylor Morrison told us that a 50’ buffer was required. Is there an ordinance governing the depth of the buffer or is that decided on a case-by-case basis? Thank you. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Dan Waters [mailto:DWaters@barroncollier.com] Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 11:47 AM To: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Subject: Updated Addies Corner MCP Sam, Thanks again for facilitating the meeting earlier this week, I hope it helped to calm any concerns of your neighbors. Attached is the updated version of the MCP that we are planning on submitting to Collier County with our response. The areas of existing vegetation along the western property boundary that we will save are shown on this plan; keep in mind that this is a conceptual zoning plan and that the clubhouse is going to have the configuration shown on the more detailed plan I left with you. The location of the multi-story building is best defined on that site plan and we will save the 30 feet along that frontage, 25 feet by the clubhouse building, and 15 feet along the parking and 20 feet along the entry road. The potential vehicular interconnect that the county is making us show will almost certainly never be constructed, …….. Dan Waters, P.E. 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 Phone: 239.262.2600 Direct: 239.403.6830 Cell: 239.206.7804 dwaters@barroncollier.com 2 This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. 10' WIDE TYPE "A"LANDSCAPE BUFFERNO BUFFER REQUIRED15' WIDE EXISTINGVEGETATION TO REMAIN ASTYPE "B" LANDSCAPE BUFFER10' WIDE TYPE "A"LANDSCAPE BUFFER20' WIDE TYPE "D"LANDSCAPE BUFFER20' WIDE EXISTING VEGETATIONTO REMAIN AS TYPE "B"LANDSCAPE BUFFERFUTURE SHARED ACCESSEDGE OF WATERTRACT C(RESIDENTIAL OR GROUP HOUSING)TRACT A(COMMERCIAL AND GROUPHOUSING (IF THERE ARE NODWELLING UNITS IN THE PROJECT))POTENTIAL SHARED ACCESSSEE NOTE #3 REGARDINGBUFFERAMENITYAREAWATERMANAGEMENTAREATRACT BPRESERVE30' WIDE EXISTINGVEGETATION TO REMAIN ASTYPE "B" LANDSCAPE BUFFER25' WIDE EXISTINGVEGETATION TO REMAIN ASTYPE "B" LANDSCAPE BUFFER0200'100'SCALE: 1" = 200'●●●NOTES1. THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE ANDIS SUBJECT TO MINOR MODIFICATION DUETO AGENCY PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS.2. ALL ACREAGES, EXCEPT PRESERVE, AREAPPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TOMODIFICATION AT THE TIME OF SDP ORPLAT APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THELDC.3. A 10' WIDE TYPE 'D' BUFFER BETWEEN THEPROPOSED INTERNAL ROW AND THECOMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL TRACTSSHALL BE PROVIDED.4. EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN ALONGTHE WESTERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY WILLBE UTILIZED AS REQUIRED LANDSCAPEBUFFER AND SUPPLEMENTED WITHPLANTING AS NECESSARY.SITE SUMMARYGROSS SITE AREA23.33± ACRESPUBLIC ROW/CANAL1.50± ACRESNET SITE AREA21.83± ACRERESIDENTIAL (TRACT C) - 9.82± ACRES (45%)COMMERCIAL (TRACT A) - 4.32± ACRES (20%)AMENITY AREA (PART OF TRACT C) - 0.59± ACRES (3%)PRESERVE (TRACT B) - 3.45± ACRES (16%)WATER MANAGEMENT - 0.95± ACRES(4%)BUFFERS/OPEN SPACE - 2.70± ACRES (12%)TRACT ACOMMERCIAL MAXIMUM 75,000 S.F.GROUP HOUSING 0.6 FARTRACT B - PRESERVEREQUIRED:3.45± ACRES (13.81 ± ACRES NATIVEVEGETATION X 25%)PROVIDED:3.45± ACRESTRACT CRESIDENTIAL MAXIMUM 349 D.U. (16 DU/AC) - IF ALLRESIDENTIALGROUP HOUSING 0.6 FAROPEN SPACE: REQUIRED: 30%PROVIDED: 30%# DEVIATIONSESPLANADE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLES RPUDPRESERVEESPLANADEGOLF ANDCOUNTRY CLUBOF NAPLES RPUDRESIDENTIALESPLANADE GOLF ANDCOUNTRY CLUB OF NAPLESRPUD RESIDENTIALTREE FARM MPUDUNDEVELOPEDINGRESS/EGRESS3145615' WIDE 30' WIDE 25' WIDE BUFFERBUFFERBUFFERBUFFER20' WIDE 1 JohnsonEric From:Joe Pestana <jpestana@jppestservices.com> Sent:Friday, February 24, 2017 4:48 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Addies Corner development abutter Hello Eric, I am contacting you so i can be put on the list for notification of meetings regarding the Addies Corner Development by Barron Collier. I live on Amour Ct in the Esplanade Golf and Country Club property and can be contacted at the address below. I will say that I am very concerned about the change of zoning being requested by the developer. They apparently hope to build some form of mixed commercial and condo type residential 4-5 story structure. They have preliminary site plans greatly reducing the size of the existing preserve space, basically removing all the natural buffer along the property line adjacent to the Esplande as well as putting in an entrance off Immokalee just east of the Esplande entrance so as to maximize their development potential. They knew the uses permitted of this property when they purchased it. I am not sure if it is standard procedure for developers to be able to request and receive these types of adjustments to the zoning. I can tell you that it is deeply concerning to me from a enjoyment of use as well as a property value perspective. The current zoning allows nursing homes, assisted living and 55 and over type property’s. It was designated that for a reason and in my view should remain so. I can be reached at the following address. Thank you Joseph Pestana 17 Grant Dr Bedford NH 03110 8636 Amour Ct Naples. Joe Pestana | President Office: 800.222.2908 Facebook | LinkedIn | Twitter | Google+ | JP Blog Tell us about your JP experience here! ***CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT*** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you are not the intended that any review, use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please immed 2 . 1 JohnsonEric From:DAVID FIX <davedds@comcast.net> Sent:Wednesday, February 22, 2017 9:57 AM To:JohnsonEric Cc:LenbergerSteve Subject:Opposition to the Barron Collier Plan We are writing to you to express our opposition to the proposed change in the PUD to the property east of the Esplanade, known as Addie's Corner, by the developer, Baron Collier. These are the reasons for our opposition: -Homeowners in the area purchased their properties under the existing PUD, therefore changes to the PUD would represent an injustice to these homeowners. -Barron Collier knew what the existing PUD was when he bought the property. If it was satisfactory to him then, it should be satisfactory to him now. -Changing the existing PUD is a overdevelopment of the area. It would result in population density too high. This would increase traffic congestion and reduce safety. It would increase noise and lights to our area. -Changing the PUD would damage the environment and beauty of our area. Baron Collier proposes to tremendously reduce the size of the preserve. -Other developers have been held to their existing PUD's, as should Baron Collier. In conclusion, we urge the board to reject Barron Collier's request to change the existing PUD. We also urge the board to maintain the existing preserve in a mainly untouched condition. We wish to be notified of all meetings regarding the issue. David and Alayne Fix 8656 Amour Court Naples Florida 34119 2 978-618-9137 1 JohnsonEric From:Lilliston, Brent <brent@lilliston.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 14, 2017 8:59 AM To:JohnsonEric; LenbergerSteve; BellowsRay; BosiMichael Subject:Addie's Corner Developement To all, My name is Brent Lilliston and settled on my beautiful retirement home in Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples on September 3, 2015. When I purchased my home on Amour Court I was informed that a large portion of the property adjacent to the main entrance of our community, where the view from my Lanai is, was a preserve and that we would always have the beautiful trees and golf course as our view. I am shocked what was revealed to us at a meeting that I attended that Barron Collier Developers were planning to do with Addie's Corner on Immokalee Rd close to the Collier and Esplanade Intersections continuing west to Esplanade Golf and CC on Immokalee Rd. I asked at that meeting how much buffer was going to remain and the spokesman said there would be no buffer! Recently I learned that there would be a 10 to 15 ft buffer of trees which I was told should be a total of 50 ft between property that share commercial and homes. That would be 25ft of trees on Addie's corner. How can you do this to million dollar homes in clear view of our properties facing Addie's Corner? The builders spokesman informed us there could be a 65 ft buildings put on the parcel but would not say whether it was a hotel or senior housing as it was approved for. My additional objections are the plans show yet another entry onto Immokalee Road which just today, I had to wait for 5 vehicles ahead of me just to make a right turn from Esplanade onto 2 Immokalee Rd. The traffic is so overloaded on Immokalee Rd it is becoming dangerous! Plus on top of this we are supposed to yield to vehicles making u-turns from the Laurel Lake community, which is another very high density community. When Esplanade is built out we will have almost 1200 homes. Today we are approaching almost 400 of them built and under construction. What will traffic be like then? Now I understand that the preserve area on that parcel, has been requested to reduce the 9 acre preserve to just 3.5 acres! This is not acceptable and is wrong. Taylor Morrison was asked to maintain many of acres of preserves which was done. Why would you even think about taking a 9 acre preserve and shrinking it to 3,5 acres which is nothing. I moved to Collier County because I thought the city fathers care about this beautiful county. Now it looks like money can buy anything, if your name is Barron Collier. There are many very unhappy people here in Esplanade at this time that paid lot premium of up to $175,000. for their dream home to be built on. Now they will face bright lights and noise from the project being considered in plain view of these homes. When asked if it was housing, senior housing, (which it was approved for) or hotels they said there was no decision on what was going there yet. You have to be kidding us all! They know exactly what the project is! In addition, Barron Collier Development is now asking for more door knobs! Stick to the original approvals In addition I am demanding that a traffic signal be installed at the entrance to Esplanade Golf and Country Club be installed to offset the huge traffic problem we already have before more development is placed on Immokalee Road. Most other communities in the area have a traffic signal! It's time to think safety instead of granting permission for a very dangerous situation on the already overloaded traffic on Immokalee Road. 3 In closing I want to be included on all and future meetings that pertain to this project. It is my right as a Collier County homesteaded resident. Brent F Lilliston Vice President Lilliston Ford Inc. 856-896-6671 Direct Office # in NJ 856-691-2020 Main Number 856-691-3182 Personal Fax 239-261-0735 Florida Home Office 609-381-6949 Personal Cell brent@lilliston.com cardealer@comcast.net Mailing Address: 8682 Amour Court Naples, Florida 34119 1 JohnsonEric From:James Welsh <sirjaw@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 12, 2017 10:33 AM To:JohnsonEric Cc:LenbergerSteve; BellowsRay; BosiMichael Subject:Addie's Corner development We in the Esplanade appreciate your review of the request for changinging the PUD for Addie's Corner. We bought our home in the Esplanade mainly for the view we have facing East toward the affected development. It gives you the feeling of being in a secluded area. We understand that the development of Addie's Corner will be developed. We also feel that the developer bought the property understanding the building restrictions under the PUD as we bought our place with the same understanding. If allowed, reducing the preserve area will materially affect our property by reducing the privacy we currently enjoy and expected based on current PUDs. Thank you for your time and help. We hope the status of the current PUD is maintained and we all can move forward with the knowledge of why both parties bought their respective properties. -- Have a great day. Jim Welsh 8648 Amour Ct Naples, Fl 1 JohnsonEric From:Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 09, 2017 4:41 PM To:JohnsonEric; BellowsRay; BosiMichael; LenbergerSteve Subject:Fwd: Addies Corner ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Date: Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:36 PM Subject: Re: Addies Corner To: Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Thank you for your feedback. Please circulate this message to all Collier County personnel involved in the process. My contact information: Ron Miller 8670 Amour Ct. Naples, FL. 34119 816-507-0164 ronmiller052645@gmail.com Thought I would take this opportunity to follow up on my previous message dated December 23, 2016. That message related specific objective reasons for the rejection of the proposal to change the Addie's Corner PUD. The main points of that message is any change after other surrounding residents have built houses is a an unfair retroactive change to our properties, the developer knew the PUD when the property was acquired, the existing preserve would be reduced by more than 58%, and 349 residential units would be added. All of this would create pressure to the surrounding residents, the environment and traffic. Based upon the objective facts in that communication, I asked Collier County to reject the proposal in it's entirety. This message will present additional objective facts regarding the Collier County actions about all of the property surrounding Addie's Corner. Mirasol Property The Mirasol property is contiguous to the west of Addie's Corner. This property is now well under development known as Esplanade Golf and Country Club. The PUD on this property was established in 2004, 2004-41, amended in 2009, Ordinance 2009-21. The property is approximately 1,658 acres. Approximately 1,000 acres was placed into Preserve, allowing approximately 658 acres to be developed, allowing 1,121 housing units. This amounts to a density of 1.5 acres per housing unit. In addition, the Preserve was required to be maintained as was, a point of such importance, it will be addressed separately in this message. The developer who acquired Mirasol has developed the property subject to the Collier County Ordinance 2009-21. Mirasol Addition The same developer who acquired and is developing Mirasol (Esplanade) acquired approximately 20 acres of property north and contiguous to Addie's Corner and also east and contiguous to Esplanade. This property was annexed into Esplanade for additional housing development. The PUD on this property was also established in 2 2004, 2004-41 amended in 2014, Ordinance 2014-36. This Ordinance allowed 112 housing units, approximately 5.6 housing units per acre. The developer has developed the property subject to this Ordinance. In fact, the developer has limited the housing units to 47, approximately only 2.4 units per acre. Tree Farm Property The Tree Farm Property lies east and contiguous to Addie's Corner. This property is approximately 59 acres. It's PUD was also established in 2004, 2004-41, amended in 2007, Ordinance 2007-54. The Ordinance allows 175,000 sq' of commercial on approximately 19 acres and 425 housing units on approximately 40 acres. This is approximately 10.6 housing units per acre. As far as I know, the developer is being held to the standards of this ordinance. Addie's Corner Addie's Corner is approximately 23 acres. It's PUD was also established in 2004, 2004-41. It was amended to it's current status in 2011, Ordinance 2011-08. The current status has a Tract A of approximately 13 acres allowing a combination of 135,000 sq' feet of commercial and/or senior housing (55+ assisted living, etc.) or hotel/motel. The Senior housing is based upon a FAR of .6 or a hotel/motel of 26 units per acre. Tract B is approximately 9 acres of required Preserve subject to Section 3.05.07. More on that later. Under current status, the development of any one of the three uses would reduce the amount of the other two. Barron Collier is requesting another ordinance amendment. Their request would create three tracts. Tract A would allow 75,000 sq" of commercial. Tract B, the Preserve, would be reduced to approximately 3.5 acres, thus allowing the expansion of residential units. This reduced Preserve continues to be subject to 3.05.07. The minimum width of the Preserve is reduced from 521' to 200' and the length is reduced by approximately 150'. Tract C, approximately 10 acres creates a new use allowing 349 residential units, 35 housing units per acre. Conclusions I urge Collier County to reject the Barron Collier request in it's entirety. Barron Collier is a sophisticated developer and knew the current restrictions well. These restrictions were established in 2011, are not a surprise to Barron Collier. Collier County has held the developers of the surrounding properties to their restrictions. Approval of the request would allow a substantial increase in density, a significant reduction of the environment and a substantial increase in traffic in an already congested zone. As objectively outlined above, the development of all of the surrounding contiguous property has held the developers to it's existing restrictions with substantially less density, destruction of the environment and traffic. It seems that Barron Collier knows they can have additional privileges when involved in a development. I would like to close with a quote from President Reagan, what Barron Collier "thinks they know, just ain't so". Preserve Retention The retention of the Preserve is a matter of such importance it needs special attention. There are two matters related to the Preserve. The first is it's size. The existing size is approximately 9 acres. The proposal is to reduce it to 3.5 acres. I urge rejection of that reduction in size. The second matter is the retention of the Preserve. Pursuant to Section 3.05.07, the retention of existing preserves is required unless the developer can somehow demonstrate it is unreasonable or perhaps impossible. Under those circumstances, it can be removed and replaced, a generational period of time. As demonstrated by the development of Esplanade next door, the existing preserve can be retained. I urge Collier County to require it's retention. 3 On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 3:33 PM, JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> wrote: Ron, I sent an insufficiency letter to the agent in December. We are still waiting for the agent to address our concerns by resubmitting updated information. Once the application is deemed legally sufficient, staff will generate a staff report, including a recommendation, and schedule the petition for the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC). One caveat to this is on instances when staff and the applicant “agree to disagree,” and the applicant requests to have their petition go forward. Regardless, the CCPC will advise the Board of Commissioners (Board) to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the applicant’s request. Once the CCPC is held, staff will schedule the petition for the Board. Generally, there are 4-6 weeks between the CCPC and the Board, although this may not always be the case. In any event, the Board is the final authority in all such matters. As previously mentioned, the applicant needs to resubmit, and staff will have 30 days to review the new packet. Petitions must meet all public notice requirements prior to being reviewed by the CCPC and the Board. Other than the pre-requisite 15 days public notice requirements, there are no typical timetables. As of today, no CCPC is scheduled, and I do not anticipate one being scheduled for the entire month of February. Respectfully, Eric L. Johnson, AICP, CFM, LEED Green Associate Principal Planner From: Ron Miller [mailto:ronmiller052645@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 11:36 AM To: JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject: Addies Corner 4 Eric, this is in follow up to my previous message. Would you be so kind to provide a an overview of the Addies Corner process? The number of public meetings, typical time table, the ultimate voting, who votes, etc. Do you know the date of the next meeting? Thank you. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Thursday, January 19, 2017 5:34 PM To:JohnsonEric Cc:SmithDaniel; LenbergerSteve Subject:RE: Addie's Corner PUDA - Status of Saving Trees on border with Esplanade Eric, (Dan and Steve), I have been in touch with Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering as stated in my email below. Dan has been cooperative and I think is sympathetic to our concern. I left voice mails for you and Steve today, just seeking to learn anything new since my last contact several weeks ago. Whether there is a code requirement to save the trees would be good to know. However, if the Developer intends to save them, I believe that would be a non-issue. I don’t think you need to forward my email to the applicant, because at this point, I feel there is communication and cooperation. Any news from Dan or Steve would be appreciated. Thanks. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: JohnsonEric [mailto:EricJohnson@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 5:26 PM To: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Cc: SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net>; LenbergerSteve <SteveLenberger@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Addie's Corner PUDA - Status of Saving Trees on border with Esplanade Mr. Miller, I received your voicemail today and wanted to respond. The County sent an insufficiency letter to the applicant in early December. We are still waiting for the applicant to address our concerns and make a resubmittal. No public hearing date has been set. With respect to your specific request about saving trees in the location as per the attached, I defer that type of question to Dan Smith, the landscape reviewer and to Stephen Lenberger, the environmental reviewer, for either of them to make a determination as to whether there is a code requirement to save these trees. Both staff members are copied on this email and can respond to you directly. I suspect this is a topic of which Dan Smith will opine, but it is better to copy both in case I am wrong. If there is no code requirement to save these trees, I can forward your email to applicant if you’d like? Please advise. Thank you. Respectfully, Eric L. Johnson, AICP, CFM, LEED Green Associate Principal Planner 2 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 4:36 PM To: JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUDA - Status of Saving Trees on border with Esplanade Eric, Per my voice mail of today, is there any update on being able to save the tall trees in our view? Thank you. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 10:21 AM To: LenbergerSteve <SteveLenberger@colliergov.net>; Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com>; Sharon Umpenhour <SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Cc: SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>; BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Addie's Corner PUDA - Buffer requirements for west side of PUD In follow up to Steve’s email, I spoke to Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering (Barron Collier) this morning. Dan said they met with their landscape architect recently. He said they will try to save existing tall trees in a 15’ to 20’ buffer along the west boundary. He said exotic trees will need to go, for which they would fill in. He said they need to have their ecologist look at and would flag the trees they hope to save. They also need to talk to FPL, Sprint, etc., to learn what clearances are needed for utilities. They also need to clear things with Land Management, so it may be 2 to 4 weeks before he has a more clear understanding. He was not making any guarantees, but he said he is sympathetic of our concerns and is trying to do the right thing. He also said he thinks the tall trees help their property. We also discussed the “potential shared access” along with west border shared with the Esplanade community. We discussed that Esplanade is a gated community, that headlights coming from Addie’s corner would shine into the homes facing it and that the point of shared access is where a lake currently exists on the Esplanade property. I don’t believe Barron Collier intends to build a road at this point or that they requested the shared access into Esplanade. It seems to make sense to remove that shared access into Esplanade. I appreciate everyone’s cooperation at the County and Barron Collier. I would appreciate being kept informed of the progress on this issue, including notices of hearings, public meetings, etc. Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: LenbergerSteve [mailto:SteveLenberger@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:14 AM To: Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com>; Sharon Umpenhour <SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Cc: SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>; BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net>; Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUDA - Buffer requirements for west side of PUD 3 Good morning! I spoke with Mr. Miller this morning and he may be approaching you concerning proposed buffers along the west side of the proposed project. Mr. Miller understands that retaining existing slash pines in the buffer would not likely survive. Thank you! Stephen From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:52 AM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com' Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:40 AM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com' Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 12:50 PM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com'; JohnsonEric Cc: BrownAraqueSummer; BellowsRay; SmithDaniel Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? Hi Mr. Miller! Landscape buffer requirements to address compatibility of projects with adjacent property owners is handled by Zoning Services. Best to coordinate with Eric Johnson, the County Project Planner handling the petition. Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the application for the requirement for a preserve, which is identified on the attached proposed PUD master plan. The proposed preserve meets the minimum size required by the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The location of the preserve also serves as a buffer along a portion of the property, adjacent to your development. Eric will be able to address buffer requirements in areas where the preserve is not located. Generally speaking, existing slash pines to not survive well in landscape buffers because of their sensitivity to disturbance of soil and the effects irrigation. Setbacks for buildings from property lines, type of plantings with landscape buffers and use of larger species of trees such as live oak will help in blocking the view of larger buildings from neighboring properties. Check with Eric on the requirements of these for the PUD. Thank you! Sincerely, Stephen Stephen Lenberger Senior Environmental Specialist Environmental Planning Section Development Review Division 4 Collier County Growth Management Department 239-252-2915 SteveLenberger@colliergov.net From: BrownAraqueSummer Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 8:48 AM To: Miller, Sam H.; JohnsonEric Cc: LenbergerSteve Subject: RE: Addie's corner development, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community Mr. Miller, I will speak with Stephen Lenberger, the Senior Environmental Specialist reviewing this petition and we will call you today to discuss. Regards, Summer B. Araque Principal Environmental Specialist Environmental Planning Section Supervisor Development Review Division Phone: 239-252-6290 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Monday, December 26, 2016 9:46 AM To: BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject: Addie's corner development, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community Summer, 5 On Wednesday evening, Dec 21st, we attended a Neighborhood Information meeting on the Addie’s corner development, described in the attached article. Eric Johnson was in attendance and gave me your name. We are quite concerned the view from the rear of our homes will be adversely affected if the trees closest to the Esplanade development are removed. Attached is a picture showing the view we currently enjoy from the rear of our properties. Also attached is a map file showing the area involved. Since the developer told us the retail and office buildings may be 65’ high, preserving the trees is even more important. At the meeting, it was explained that fill dirt must be brought in, I believe to satisfy drainage requirements for the site. For that reason, it may be necessary to remove the trees bordering the Esplanade community we are in. I spoke with Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering (part of Barron Collier), asking if they can meet those requirements, without removing the trees. Dan understood our concern and said he would see if that was possible. When we recently purchased our lots and built homes, we were told the wooded area was a “preserve”. We are now afraid we will lose the beautiful view we paid a premium for and will be looking instead at office buildings and a hotel. I hope you can appreciate our concern and can work with the Developer to find a solution that meets the requirements of the County and the Developer, without negatively affecting our view. I would appreciate if you can let me know if that is possible. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Thursday, January 19, 2017 4:36 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:FW: Addie's Corner PUDA - Status of Saving Trees on border with Esplanade Attachments:Homes facing new development.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_ 5226.JPG Eric, Per my voice mail of today, is there any update on being able to save the tall trees in our view? Thank you. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 10:21 AM To: LenbergerSteve <SteveLenberger@colliergov.net>; Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com>; Sharon Umpenhour <SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Cc: SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>; BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Addie's Corner PUDA - Buffer requirements for west side of PUD In follow up to Steve’s email, I spoke to Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering (Barron Collier) this morning. Dan said they met with their landscape architect recently. He said they will try to save existing tall trees in a 15’ to 20’ buffer along the west boundary. He said exotic trees will need to go, for which they would fill in. He said they need to have their ecologist look at and would flag the trees they hope to save. They also need to talk to FPL, Sprint, etc., to learn what clearances are needed for utilities. They also need to clear things with Land Management, so it may be 2 to 4 weeks before he has a more clear understanding. He was not making any guarantees, but he said he is sympathetic of our concerns and is trying to do the right thing. He also said he thinks the tall trees help their property. We also discussed the “potential shared access” along with west border shared with the Esplanade community. We discussed that Esplanade is a gated community, that headlights coming from Addie’s corner would shine into the homes facing it and that the point of shared access is where a lake currently exists on the Esplanade property. I don’t believe Barron Collier intends to build a road at this point or that they requested the shared access into Esplanade. It seems to make sense to remove that shared access into Esplanade. I appreciate everyone’s cooperation at the County and Barron Collier. I would appreciate being kept informed of the progress on this issue, including notices of hearings, public meetings, etc. Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: LenbergerSteve [mailto:SteveLenberger@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:14 AM 2 To: Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com>; Sharon Umpenhour <SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Cc: SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>; BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net>; Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUDA - Buffer requirements for west side of PUD Good morning! I spoke with Mr. Miller this morning and he may be approaching you concerning proposed buffers along the west side of the proposed project. Mr. Miller understands that retaining existing slash pines in the buffer would not likely survive. Thank you! Stephen From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:52 AM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com' Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:40 AM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com' Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 12:50 PM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com'; JohnsonEric Cc: BrownAraqueSummer; BellowsRay; SmithDaniel Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? Hi Mr. Miller! Landscape buffer requirements to address compatibility of projects with adjacent property owners is handled by Zoning Services. Best to coordinate with Eric Johnson, the County Project Planner handling the petition. Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the application for the requirement for a preserve, which is identified on the attached proposed PUD master plan. The proposed preserve meets the minimum size required by the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The location of the preserve also serves as a buffer along a portion of the property, adjacent to your development. Eric will be able to address buffer requirements in areas where the preserve is not located. Generally speaking, existing slash pines to not survive well in landscape buffers because of their sensitivity to disturbance of soil and the effects irrigation. Setbacks for buildings from property lines, type of plantings with landscape buffers and use of larger species of trees such as live oak will help in blocking the view of larger buildings from neighboring properties. Check with Eric on the requirements of these for the PUD. Thank you! Sincerely, Stephen Stephen Lenberger 3 Senior Environmental Specialist Environmental Planning Section Development Review Division Collier County Growth Management Department 239-252-2915 SteveLenberger@colliergov.net From: BrownAraqueSummer Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 8:48 AM To: Miller, Sam H.; JohnsonEric Cc: LenbergerSteve Subject: RE: Addie's corner development, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community Mr. Miller, I will speak with Stephen Lenberger, the Senior Environmental Specialist reviewing this petition and we will call you today to discuss. Regards, Summer B. Araque Principal Environmental Specialist Environmental Planning Section Supervisor Development Review Division Phone: 239-252-6290 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Monday, December 26, 2016 9:46 AM To: BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; JohnsonEric 4 <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject: Addie's corner development, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community Summer, On Wednesday evening, Dec 21st, we attended a Neighborhood Information meeting on the Addie’s corner development, described in the attached article. Eric Johnson was in attendance and gave me your name. We are quite concerned the view from the rear of our homes will be adversely affected if the trees closest to the Esplanade development are removed. Attached is a picture showing the view we currently enjoy from the rear of our properties. Also attached is a map file showing the area involved. Since the developer told us the retail and office buildings may be 65’ high, preserving the trees is even more important. At the meeting, it was explained that fill dirt must be brought in, I believe to satisfy drainage requirements for the site. For that reason, it may be necessary to remove the trees bordering the Esplanade community we are in. I spoke with Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering (part of Barron Collier), asking if they can meet those requirements, without removing the trees. Dan understood our concern and said he would see if that was possible. When we recently purchased our lots and built homes, we were told the wooded area was a “preserve”. We are now afraid we will lose the beautiful view we paid a premium for and will be looking instead at office buildings and a hotel. I hope you can appreciate our concern and can work with the Developer to find a solution that meets the requirements of the County and the Developer, without negatively affecting our view. I would appreciate if you can let me know if that is possible. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 5 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Homes on Amour Court, directly facing new development Can tall trees adjacent to Esplanade be preserved? 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Thursday, December 29, 2016 10:22 AM To:LenbergerSteve; Wayne Arnold; Sharon Umpenhour; JohnsonEric; SmithDaniel Cc:SawyerMichael; BrownAraqueSummer; BellowsRay Subject:RE: Addie's Corner PUDA - Buffer requirements for west side of PUD In follow up to Steve’s email, I spoke to Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering (Barron Collier) this morning. Dan said they met with their landscape architect recently. He said they will try to save existing tall trees in a 15’ to 20’ buffer along the west boundary. He said exotic trees will need to go, for which they would fill in. He said they need to have their ecologist look at and would flag the trees they hope to save. They also need to talk to FPL, Sprint, etc., to learn what clearances are needed for utilities. They also need to clear things with Land Management, so it may be 2 to 4 weeks before he has a more clear understanding. He was not making any guarantees, but he said he is sympathetic of our concerns and is trying to do the right thing. He also said he thinks the tall trees help their property. We also discussed the “potential shared access” along with west border shared with the Esplanade community. We discussed that Esplanade is a gated community, that headlights coming from Addie’s corner would shine into the homes facing it and that the point of shared access is where a lake currently exists on the Esplanade property. I don’t believe Barron Collier intends to build a road at this point or that they requested the shared access into Esplanade. It seems to make sense to remove that shared access into Esplanade. I appreciate everyone’s cooperation at the County and Barron Collier. I would appreciate being kept informed of the progress on this issue, including notices of hearings, public meetings, etc. Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: LenbergerSteve [mailto:SteveLenberger@colliergov.net] Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 9:14 AM To: Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com>; Sharon Umpenhour <SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Cc: SawyerMichael <MichaelSawyer@colliergov.net>; BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net>; Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUDA - Buffer requirements for west side of PUD Good morning! I spoke with Mr. Miller this morning and he may be approaching you concerning proposed buffers along the west side of the proposed project. Mr. Miller understands that retaining existing slash pines in the buffer would not likely survive. Thank you! Stephen From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:52 AM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com' Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? 2 From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2016 8:40 AM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com' Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? From: LenbergerSteve Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 12:50 PM To: 'shmiller@trumbull.com'; JohnsonEric Cc: BrownAraqueSummer; BellowsRay; SmithDaniel Subject: FW: Addie's Corner PUD amendment, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community? Hi Mr. Miller! Landscape buffer requirements to address compatibility of projects with adjacent property owners is handled by Zoning Services. Best to coordinate with Eric Johnson, the County Project Planner handling the petition. Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the application for the requirement for a preserve, which is identified on the attached proposed PUD master plan. The proposed preserve meets the minimum size required by the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The location of the preserve also serves as a buffer along a portion of the property, adjacent to your development. Eric will be able to address buffer requirements in areas where the preserve is not located. Generally speaking, existing slash pines to not survive well in landscape buffers because of their sensitivity to disturbance of soil and the effects irrigation. Setbacks for buildings from property lines, type of plantings with landscape buffers and use of larger species of trees such as live oak will help in blocking the view of larger buildings from neighboring properties. Check with Eric on the requirements of these for the PUD. Thank you! Sincerely, Stephen Stephen Lenberger Senior Environmental Specialist Environmental Planning Section Development Review Division Collier County Growth Management Department 239-252-2915 SteveLenberger@colliergov.net 3 From: BrownAraqueSummer Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 8:48 AM To: Miller, Sam H.; JohnsonEric Cc: LenbergerSteve Subject: RE: Addie's corner development, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community Mr. Miller, I will speak with Stephen Lenberger, the Senior Environmental Specialist reviewing this petition and we will call you today to discuss. Regards, Summer B. Araque Principal Environmental Specialist Environmental Planning Section Supervisor Development Review Division Phone: 239-252-6290 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Monday, December 26, 2016 9:46 AM To: BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject: Addie's corner development, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community Summer, On Wednesday evening, Dec 21st, we attended a Neighborhood Information meeting on the Addie’s corner development, described in the attached article. Eric Johnson was in attendance and gave me your name. We are quite concerned the view from the rear of our homes will be adversely affected if the trees closest to the Esplanade development are removed. Attached is a picture showing the view we currently enjoy from the rear of our properties. Also attached is a map file showing the area involved. Since the developer told us the retail and office buildings may be 65’ high, preserving the trees is even more important. 4 At the meeting, it was explained that fill dirt must be brought in, I believe to satisfy drainage requirements for the site. For that reason, it may be necessary to remove the trees bordering the Esplanade community we are in. I spoke with Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering (part of Barron Collier), asking if they can meet those requirements, without removing the trees. Dan understood our concern and said he would see if that was possible. When we recently purchased our lots and built homes, we were told the wooded area was a “preserve”. We are now afraid we will lose the beautiful view we paid a premium for and will be looking instead at office buildings and a hotel. I hope you can appreciate our concern and can work with the Developer to find a solution that meets the requirements of the County and the Developer, without negatively affecting our view. I would appreciate if you can let me know if that is possible. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 JohnsonEric From:Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent:Monday, December 26, 2016 9:46 AM To:BrownAraqueSummer; JohnsonEric Subject:Addie's corner development, Saving Trees bordering Esplanade community Attachments:NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Petition PUDA-PL20150001776 Addies Corner PUD - Naples Daily News.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_ 5226.JPG; Homes facing new development.pdf Summer, On Wednesday evening, Dec 21st, we attended a Neighborhood Information meeting on the Addie’s corner development, described in the attached article. Eric Johnson was in attendance and gave me your name. We are quite concerned the view from the rear of our homes will be adversely affected if the trees closest to the Esplanade development are removed. Attached is a picture showing the view we currently enjoy from the rear of our properties. Also attached is a map file showing the area involved. Since the developer told us the retail and office buildings may be 65’ high, preserving the trees is even more important. At the meeting, it was explained that fill dirt must be brought in, I believe to satisfy drainage requirements for the site. For that reason, it may be necessary to remove the trees bordering the Esplanade community we are in. I spoke with Dan Waters of Peninsula Engineering (part of Barron Collier), asking if they can meet those requirements, without removing the trees. Dan understood our concern and said he would see if that was possible. When we recently purchased our lots and built homes, we were told the wooded area was a “preserve”. We are now afraid we will lose the beautiful view we paid a premium for and will be looking instead at office buildings and a hotel. I hope you can appreciate our concern and can work with the Developer to find a solution that meets the requirements of the County and the Developer, without negatively affecting our view. I would appreciate if you can let me know if that is possible. Thank you very much for your assistance. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 12/6/2016 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Petition PUDA-PL20150001776, Addie’s Corner PUD - Naples Daily News http://naplesdailynews.fl.newsmemory.com/publink.php?shareid=3764372eb 1/2 Naples Daily News | Page A24 Sunday, 4 December 2016 Powered by TECNAVIA (c) Naples Daily News NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Petition PUDA-PL20150001776, Addie’s Corner PUD The public is invited to attend a neighborhood meeting held 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., representing Creekside West, Inc. on: Wednesday, December 21, 2016, 5:30 pm at Saint Monica’s Episcopal Church, 7070 Immokalee Road, Naples, FL 34119The subject property is comprised of approximately 23.33± acres, located near the northwest quadrant of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Creekside West, Inc. is asking the County to approve this application, which proposes to amend the previously approved PUD to permit up to 349 multi-family residential dwelling units, 135,000 square feet of commercial uses, hotel, and senior housing uses. Business and property owners, residents and visitors are welcome to attend the presentation. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only,itisnotapublichearing. Projectinformationispostedonlineatwww.gradyminor. com/planning. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone, fax or e-mail to: Sharon Umpenhour, Senior Planning Technician Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Phone:239.947.1144 Fax: 239.947.0375 sumpenhour@gradyminor.com December 4, 2016 ND-1379950 Click here to see this page in the eEdition: Homes on Amour Court, directly facing new development Can tall trees adjacent to Esplanade be preserved? 1 JohnsonEric From:Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, December 23, 2016 2:10 PM To:JohnsonEric Subject:Fwd: Addie's Corner ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Date: Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 1:07 PM Subject: Addie's Corner To: Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Dear Mr. Johnson: This message is in follow up to the Addie's Corner public informational meeting on Wednesday, December 21. This message is from: Ron Miller 8670 Amour Ct. Naples, FL. 34119 816-507-0164 ronmiller052645@gmail.com Thank you for attending the meeting. I request that I receive notices for all such future meetings. I further request you send this message to all Collier County personnel who will be in the process for the requested new revised PUD for the property. I strongly request that the Collier Board reject this proposal in it's entirety and require Baron Collier to honor the current PUD. What follows is an analysis and the reasons for my request. I will circulate this message among other interested parties. The Collier Board analyzed this property in 2011 and substantially changed it's it's PUD from agriculture to the current PUD pursuant to Ordinance 2011-08, which remains in effect today. This property is approximately 23.33 acres. Overview Analysis of the current PUD 2011-08 The property is divided into Tracts A and B. Tract A 56%, Tract B is 38% and the balance is easement. Tract A allows a combination of commercial and or senior housing. The commercial is very broad, allowing 155 different development choices. The senior housing is very narrow, allowing 55 and older residents for skilled nursing, independent living and assisted living units. The overall limit on the amount of combination of commercial and senior housing is beyond my understanding, but there is a limit. Tract B preserve is preserve. Overview Analysis of New Proposal 2 The property is divided into three tracts. Tract A is 20%, Tract B is 16%, Tract C is 48%, the balance is easement. Tract A allows the same as Tract A in Ordinance 2011-08, that is, a combination of commercial and senior housing. Tract B is the same as Tract B in Ordinance 2011-08, that is, preserve. Tract C introduces a new allowance for 349 of undefined multi family residential units. Analysis of Current PUD Vs. Proposed Tract A - this tract has been reduced from 56% to 20%, allowing the same commercial and senior housing. The intent is obvious. This will be developed into 100% commercial. Tract B, the preserve, has been reduced from 38% to 16%, less than half. Tract C, 48%, has been introduced for 349 residential units. Reasons for Rejection of Proposal The property was thoroughly reviewed and raised from agriculture to the current PUD in 2011. If any change is allowed in the future it would be a repudiation of the Collier Board in 2011. The current owner has probably the biggest development history in Collier County. The county is named after the developer. They knew the PUD when the property was acquired and paid a market price for that PUD. To allow any new PUD would be granting a windfall to the developer at the expense of the surrounding residents and environment and traffic. Please don't be taken in by a request for 349 residential units with a compromise of fewer. A reduction, which is planned for in the request, would have their lawyers high fiv'ing in the hallways. Many surrounding residents, me specifically, actually checked the PUD of this contiguous property before purchasing property. Approval of any new request would be changing our property rights retroactively. Any new proposal would also negatively impact the environment and traffic. Such changes are beyond the scope of this message. My request is for the Collier Board to do the right thing, rejection of this and any other change proposal. I write my request with some trepidation, an analogy of David vs. Goliath, but with optimism, remembering the outcome of that incident. Thank you for your consideration.