Loading...
CR 06/27/2017 / 10 CC !rn Q 0 = z 1- z W cc m0Z ao CC J 0ww > O Q _jOM J � W _1O 12 Z ww J < 1-- ¢ mo co z > Z IV cc z 0 C W 0cocc a WW CO Ujcc z wo 0 Yw W N N (9 < W d W 0 Q m 0 NF2I Q zJ CO 1.— c.--,J J z w � Q • zwwm � z0 k -2 ¢ I- o Z 0 W 4- � Lo ¢ Cn 114 OO l''' (..../. o ~ m H LL O CV wz = W Da. .� zm ' W �o z a m Ocwi� w O ( D N ccs ¢ U 00 = I—' _ 0 0 = o � 1- E' vi az = =O . o O W 0 0 LLI w J ii v wEY = � = m Cl) > cc 0U 0 1- Q CU -73 N < W w0 F- a - w Q Ucc W C W O v c�C! = I— COcI- Q I 19z - = Oz a) 3 No wI- M CD J Si -I CC iri 0 v ¢ c~n W le_ O zzw W oz O W J oZ _ = wp l- ir w 0 ¢ � N z ° J 0w 0 a ■ ,,5'� zwo p ZW 0 Z V y O0 cc w � � V E _ � w wm �, O w m O � cr Q 0) y"' J J V J = , d 0 _ re O 1 CU co a .71 U ai _ 0 C o C o c G' 22 co a m z cc / -"o N .1- r fx < 0 z Z V E4- c4.,. ‘.., z W ce Z Jn0Z oCe - mOu. w �- Qo . _jOM .I F._ a. W tl ¢ Qa a � V • ..- Ow to C7w H 2 W w > Z cn W ceZO Q O0 w "" = W CI cn o to awc a I- 1 W /y Z O a¢' Cn --I 4 L N0a ~ WQ 0- 0- Lu 1 �� �_ maw W u) cc, U r) O N � = a Z ---1 ¢ I- 0 Z � p W o - CC a 8F- 2 . -i 00 (/) 0 O 1- Nzw Z m � O ■V O F- 2 a JLU 2 LIJ in_ LL ui O. Zc90 p ocwn CO =N Oo0 = E 0 0Z = aOw = O o t. F- >n u_ w ZwI- wLu J Noma L) wF- Y O co m CC 1 a1w aN � O Mk. i co O U to W as LU O • t• r a ce) C� = t- f0 N U? Z I = O z_ Mom = Z u- 2 Z ICC om ~ w � O o � ce --. m • N z wO w Z 1- I- O 0 < Cr) W p -i LL ZZZ. W wZ 0 0 Z - Z W H 0--- cOm I.... zw W � `� � Zz 0 ill Om 2 zw0 p zm Z O � c2 W cz V E - -. C cecp fm m wm 0 0 wmO m � a\ y", J J'O —I �L !11 J V- w 0 <LL 2 no o � a s = o a) >- y c 0 0 DI L ICC Z E e cp Z O CD-, 0D 3 cD CO r- r N N CO CD r r m CD = -0 0 W33 = v W C -< o = 1 m c> D 0 z CO CO• __I -13 ii . .,.._m m � r-m � 0 ` CD < mi c c.' C) co m =1 o rn � -I -1 Fri 7 ozc5 m z rt� z mz v zm \�� 0 M cnO --I p ■ -ml Di = 088 � Z ca 0m I�I1 cw J m r0 m --I > Xi 00 C4aoO > - rCO 0 - D —1m mar- m Z 0 DJ m Z0j0 ;CQ --1 0 � C --I 0 - D 9, = Z Oc m =- 1c° 0- a 0. D o-1 � morn 0 o Nao co = ODoz 0 — m 70r- o � z m CD m71 .- cn 0 o � 0 Cc0o U1 � - co K XI —I 1, o I= Om �p 0Dmcci, " •• O 1- rnO Ozo > v75 m rz E mpoo It Cil �■ 0 oCOZoDJ o - � � M =I v z z � -1 �vnI DCCI mM —i ( D CDD m = O OD6 (:--1 D Z rmr m 0 = v � O N M m m -< W Z mz U) 0 � rmmZ n > Z D m0 z r _=F - r--1 = = 0 n> ?` - m 0m � � (T) C) r m 1N. O D mi 0 1 �,� m CD 0) L D 2CQ CD C n) O v M m Q C =' E. XJ _ � -0 `,. 0) -v = 0 m no `° ' r _,..,,mE r nr � „•F �•� CD O °J m O 6 3 n W m "•'�. CCi) z On = O z � m c�pm z op m cmnz C Omz 14* N 0 cn OO --I m c�� ■ ---,.rl m _i —1 73 2 cn _) 700 ' G ' —I ((i) m = _ z o \ . M O o = m ' D IZI z m m O z z TI r- 0 m Cn D m O xi 0 j m z r co r O Z -, z = -< o=I ES cp CO -. 0DJ c = zW CD c m 0 ^ m DJ 0) c7 n ccn Q O ii. m m CD z O a =im �' _. CO � m = 0030 O � -o O m O0co C 3 Di aoCo � � p� = O O -i r (IDp O ooz o 13 m pz M � coz "0 -Ti � � m = gym v c m oT oW -I W -- o =- o� � 7° R•• 8 o D o - D * m 0 zoo - Fz D � Oo O 2 = mst RI m 1 CD mD p r n �O m m m DmD70Cn O0mCD Cf) e(A C o0 ,'m o * v Do -0 r = 7) m -1 Cm \ 73 WD mm m m < z U) 0 pp D - m 1710 _1 _ � O D � 0 D r mm Z1:1301- 3:."1 0 I m oz I � O � r M z --I cn n -< 0• D X I ' CD a) CD D - 3 m CO y m CD to o CD s C =' FIT 0- D CI) � ----6-71 . sa m0 0D m C oD rWm O 7 Wm s DD = a rn n -1 -I �cO - 0 zv5 m �_ m � Z cmnz C7 Omz 0 cn 0 --I z z -� . -G m � - O DiiDO s -tel m --1 -I cn0C7 n -1 cn m 2 3° 02L "Q vzcD mm0zz `C. o r^1'1 -1Z O -0 m xp 00 W m -< z (1 r po • r O D O nD Wo 9 t-, z � „ z = -< � CQ 2- 0 C ._i m 0 c, !. 0_ o rn o � m C7n �? � St- ; ^ Cr cl) = O = m n• _� CO Oom 0cn0 00 -I 0 -0 O = zo �t� 3 �0 m m O Cn 0 XJ 0 0 ) �` =. O O rn O� O� n 2.7J ZZ 0 C i O r cno O 00z o rn > co D 73 p 3W z m68 -n Or 0° . o n Cn Ori =- 00 D 700 r\-- m 0z � z omz D •� m O zoo Cn- r- � 7) moo i ' ;:T-'\ D m _1 D 0 - rA r cn D z a) ,.,, rn m O omm In„,„,, m m OD O Cn 0 � D rr 2 rn o * p 0G) 7D m 0 - D m m cnm = < z Cn 0 W D -I _1D to -0O � = C) 0 O D D 53 D r rn m z 1:101- rn oz r � O o xi 0 D z m - D -I -I 0 o7 I- -G � m = Ccrn - m z � CT) C) -< z z 0 D XI 73 CDSD C D -- 3CO N `° to CD v M 'N. a 5- 0 m (� co D = 13) t — m o m D O . CD— W C7 apm M gym = = 3 Z O 0 z cn m cn z 0 5'... Z cmnz oma 0 M cn O -1 m z � rn m33 � O-1 m0 � m oz xl mon ��A , v Zm m Ozz Dp m (7) zm O 33 OW w m -< z _ r 0 D -1 0 , . �` Z gC S Z o Q =n `v --� ,� rn 0 17'I n D D 0. o D �Om 7m0 < V) g++ pp m � O a =im ci Z 0 _o r � m = Ocnm o al Fri ci M -n T — m —I 0Jo O mz0 3 = n Oo o = 0 _/ 1, O rn m - = i zp �' I— � o 0 OG) z o 13 T iz icZ 5. . --1 -0 � m = _ m O 7J W Z m _—I iv TI n _iO 41, -I 0ro Oz � Z � mz � m zpp Z...- (� cn- � z D p No 0 IDmV-10) m CnD V-10)m m D o r cn > O omp M m m m CO p � mCnfCJ nz — ; -0 O ( p OOm cii 13 D mm m p m t Z < z Cn p co D -I -ID -0O � 0 = O 0 D r mm Z 11pID m z r D o -< m m o 7D pD nWW - < - O- = c7) - m - cn C') z = O D XJ XJ CD0) m D '0 2 CC C `•° co o CD -<O D _ c = 1 m 0. ED cn (G2..., tU 71 2- 0 m r 0 B. r--F .�-. D = r O p0 m O rN ('0 co m m � m � = • rn m Zm n � O O ✓ � �m M Oz x7 m0z o \ 0 zm m0 2 z Ti -00 m - Dm xi C*3 r0W = r0 ^� O 5 > = o38 Z � „ Z = -< 6, CDJ Czw CD -I = O_ Q —n rnOc m Q. 70 m 0DD -13 CL D -O O , DJ <, K Cn ii/ CO S � O � � m %, I— = m � 0 w 0 0 rn m -i— m 3 'A:...... —1 43 Omz O073 C o03 O O O _rnoo n DJ Ooo k:- j; wO o ° z -0m-I - m = -I O ,D=I W Z mOo 1/n O ots `. (n r 2 -1C7 m - oa m O k- Z 0 = D z 0 * m 0 zoo z c (n ,- -1 D -apo O m c(� i m m m D P> r � V rn � m O 0 = m m • D m7080 CI) D = D cn m �'—' c oo55 10.m - yOm __ cnm = Z < z (n k D 0 D M (A mpg 0 S- 0 Co DDD r mm Z 0rr- rn oz r � Oo -t m m 1- o o —I � n DJ ✓ - � m = Oc ( ap m - -1 cn C) -< z 2 0 D XI m03 coo D -a 3 � CQ CD CO CO CD v I O ,13 C = R CL D CDco IOW CO = O 1 MINN -o = o Xi m r O: ° •--� CD D = r O W m O C � , OW m E K m = msk) v 0 zE/3m c�nmoc z O mz v omz O E o m O � � f7 m � O mom M O 0 XJ m ° D v zm m czz -e O -0 - r^7'1 —Izm 0 O Com) m -< z 1— co ......• = r0 'iD - mo / Z (5 3-n Z = -< w _� om c = zw v CD _1m O T M O � m0 > > O. p jjCn� r � � FD1 -s cn _ 0 O m a = O -_1m 5. coSQ mm XI Demo 0 l--F OCDrn mJo O moOJ 3 3 Q O - W C -G T m O O — M moot n a) zo �L St O 1ri1 O O D D OD MS c c m z o0 oco z moo � g Orb Cn o - oo 0•44,ol IL Dm z cnr � rnO Oo - DVNm -o m O) p \ 13 D m D n tb r c!) = mO 0 DoDm = u' 0 - M CID D v 0Cl) •o * voT -D mo ao o � � Dm m cpm = Z < z V) 0 co D ▪ m o k 10- mm Z 2-1 CD M pz Or -< m c � ilrA m - � )„ CDD) CD -a 3 . G0 CR cc 2. CD O-0 = - cC 5 a LU 13 =0 m0 ro r° P _ ✓ mK r-- �,WE 0 C nW m , K T .Zm7 rT'I cz = 00 M P n zc) r_im c�nmco Z o II 0 z 0- - � � oc O r m z X Do o �� I�T1 Oo m ° D ...-4 � e� ✓ zm m G) zz �- TI r 0 m Cn > 0 XI 0 0 ZS m Z rpo - r0 • 1m m * Oiv o C6D -I W o CO Z � -n Z = -< w z C __Iz6n CD --I 0 70 ...1 = 0 w - -rt rn m 0n > o rn m ro & 00 = O � -=im F _� ✓ x PJ oU' c mr11 -n rr1 '� -�-� m 3 0 p xx c mnoo '6" --I CCIo 73 co 0c0 2 0 � > oX - M m -1 C7 232o - O ✓ � o O 00z 8-13m FTDooz ic, �.. --I vm m = � m [� " C7 � o ' moo -n-I o " vim) o -Iri P r m u o - !' * m D Z � D ym --i Dpi V I— c > O omxi `Nm m m 0) n om =om10 E � nz — r n_ -I1 • D mmM a m S N Z < z Cl) 0 m y --I m o V) m 0 -1 r mm o mor t Z -I r M 73 00z r roo r < --' -Io � tA -< m a A. = c , m Z --1 0 z 2 {t G) D M mDZ) CD -a3 `° CQ CT) co CD CD = 73 p a v - CO C =' - m�. Q c- 0)r D C„ - 011DN ' .+mm o )--, a rncn -zi -I � OC7 - J 0 2 (3 m c�nmOcZ cnzz Ozz � 1► _ �,, O MI 7O m 0 - -0 - ppDO 6. m m -1 -I (I) O 33 r\ ,, —1 c70n m 2 — Z ° ^ _-- 0 a Dm Iz li 7 m 2 D G -n Doc m c7 D m �' O O0 ^ m -< z 2 O W C7)Z m Z = � 88 i -1 Opp C = zw D CD m O_ 0 muut rn - Op m m D C% N ...-1c D -I S JJ « v co rTi rn• S r M xi O cn D0 rim on - o iD TIT 0 -I- 3 - m DJ c m o O 1-. —I rn o n DOzo ' / . 0 LI D0z ... rn 5 M V D ,`' mD < � -0 m m --4mm \ + O 0OW Z romps `, -n5 -I o -1 � r o 2- O-I n DDi a z0 Z D m z n * m CJ O zoo fA- I- - D - Oo O ' m co- ..r , DM -0 m m D p n r cnm O 0Do rrl mm m op 0 * o � -0 mo S0 ci, h 2 D m m m = . - m z D W D m O . _ d CoDip, o rmm z 40 ,- % �R rn oz r moo N. -< m 2 Oct m � � cn 0 -< z 2 o D W XI --C m 223 m -0 3 CQ C CD CO CD -< cD rfr v = Q �• a' c coC �• CD 0 1:1Cl) CO ID no no u11 = mD ,..E. D3 J r O co m O 1 M cO0 2 Ni Oizcn 0 c(_nm2c �+ Z ; z omz O M gO -1 mzR -0 JDr -1 �rmI 0 1 v � � m0 2 '' p > D -n o m 5 > O � O 0 C m -< z `\ I- W r P M -im m * O� o D Z m Z = -< c CO -i 0DJ C = zW D CD = c —1 m 0 a o n OI 33 T Imo « cn 0, z O = m n' I— 73m 2 Opp on CD rn „ '< mo= o ' 3 O 33m O mnoo wl \� g 3 —1 cin . 2 °° c0 �`V . O O 2 ° O > o �o rn m -- n DJz0 O r U, o O oOz ow73 "il iz � C 1 -I jo = = 9m C� o mild Z mZro TI � � -I WOO S (n r _ -IO D Dopa rn O ° Z O � > �� z � mz v _, T 1- -I xj moo o , � m m D p 7 p rn � m O 0mm 1 Cl) oc D nCO rn o * p oor 'N m : 2 I/3 -I (\i !\ _ D m m m 2 m O cp m oo D �, r m m Z 4 p r rn z -< m O RA ' l• D3 0 > -< m 2 c (7) C . - m � � CA (7) O -< G D 5 N3 V M ›c=- 4 CD 0)C -< CO o CD m cam• m -o 0 C° 13 CD v c C co 0 = 9? 0. CO n . zC N 03 z — XJ mrm � CD r. -1 o > 5 _ 70 O OcornE qm ( m =1 z ci) -i m „ zz 0 m Ecn "' O0 v co ►� ■ 0 w, -I mm = 0o `' z w 0zmm WW -n rA- 0 m -I D Ibk CO O - 1 � m yrm a eN-±- c5 > Z o DJ o n(0 c -t m sz � � a I77 m � (mm000 Fel 0• „ Hh0ma cn - — M _ cCDz i' DD O 7 1 \ •r" B O Cc � N uK o - 1 cnmm -io a 71 m OT -1 mc�i, �� o r m0 Oz0D -.0 T E JJ D z \) ■ m ��JN 0 O e0m ZOOo m O r -I Do T -I On Cn � 04' , z � z m zm Or D * z 330) 75 O • D - Omr -I . = ,..,. D mmz (m m m D � 0D m 11 r- 0 * v �° o _ --t 00 m 0 m m --< < xi CO z V) O 5 N- 0 = 0 0 ETD -1 m = _ r mm Z :0 > Q nz I- --n -G =io = m_ -< oD m 0 'C.J mm m CT) C7 r m 0 z 0 D mxin X/ o _ -, 0 41t, _ - m z 7 D 0 CD D) m a = CO O y to CD 0 W pp =- su C ° = m 0. I- D Z CO n D O - CD D C rte- _ � m = 0 ;T., \ m 3 > 5 � — < a) o t 44-- n mm E � - 0 m e m u z `-t \, Z 0 z �, m O / O mz v zm t E gi0 --1 Pz 0 c 0 �(\�� 17 rnDj -1 —1 2n' '' J m 7.1 1 O o cri xi o W Ci z m cw �. -n r0 m D O 73 -I •••—• zC!) m 00 � oo0D E � rn m > 1- m12111 Z -n Z o o o� —1 CD ZO c > oo D G) DJ � � Q - = 1= D � � m0o N —I 00 m ooDxi cn 0 Raw W = m O >oo D z cn 3 r mm xj Dj7oD — 0 —I � v OzZm 1 �• K0 xi C cOo u, --I cn � XIm —i � 7.1 .....Xn �ODm ° 'rU, 0z > D 13 m � Eoz -n —I xi o 0 O 7° W zo O° _ ▪ O E T -I O 0 w cn 8 N M 0K Z Mzm �. p z � - -< D vD — FZ D -I0m O 0 j3 ' 1 my mz = m 177 om O OD � lmmD ZrCn v t rn o * w 83 - m0 m m - < z V) G) Z rn o u) I)rmmO D-1 Z rn z r � r r__. r- xi o D 'C = co `hY Em 2 --_i T / - ( Q Di m m o �\ `gyp (� cn X m m `, O D DJa 61 XJ —I0 I`` Oz -a z �' m 73 2 �\ \1 0 CCo `•° c� v v CD 0 v c C �' L m Q —Ir- o o m (Nip) ›, = � r Omm 5 \ 0 Wm . T = 2 rn "-' -1 m (7 � o -- fib z n z � cnmc E ccnno 0 zz .�� i rn-CIm , 0 c=nrri 0 � m pz = m2z rD p xi m - Dp> 0 zm m G) zz T 1- 0 m cn D m O -0 -{ -iZ m -< z M = m m * Liiv o (0 z m Z = -< co CD -I 0) D7 20 C = z W Q =n -i Q o = o � m c, DD rn mim - � 0Cn , m - 0 o -n a m - D Co = 0 � =cf) -1m F3' _� 00 = m = 6 , o .- -O cnO = z �} 0 DJ m= Cm 7W K (-I cnaocp m oo n JDzo '�-- S 0 r � O O � � o m m z E 1"10:3 " 1 m 1 -o M -i -cin '• �'�. -I -o m = m O m▪ o m� zp o —I o0 or •P _ =1. O = R' z m o � z omz T ; � m p zoo .) _ Fz D cooO cn n I vi cn� m �= cfgS N ..\-:------)-) mm m D p m m �D om D JD U) o p O0m 0 m mo = 0 _ � O Dm m cnm = < z Cl) 0ooD -Z-I m0f!) mo -., r m m Z 1101- m 1prrn oz r moo a o D -< m mro ^ E z n W 0 I- -< � m = oc '�-, DD m z -� En C� < z = II 0 D 33 AM Ccs. -f- Q C 0.0 - '''0 f 4 '° Q t D CS2CD 5c� a6 o = co xi 0 =o m ro `� f CD D Krri r- o p0 „ o' Q.)n Q' m 'S K � as = 0 00 z v� m 05 m S ccn0 0 zz j m � ® ccn° 0 , �� —1 ccn° m 2 z - ( ` 0 zm m m 06 33 0zz \\ TI rr 0 m cn > 0 O 0xj 00 w m � z I— co r o v } D O 5 > - Wo Z � m Z = -< o 20 —iza, D CD —1 OC _..�m0ca c m m op —I Op m � D cn a 0) D —ice 33 < K cn — = O � jm _— W Jom 2 O � 0 00 0 "I z � O mzW � ci 33 co 050 = O O t\v/ m oo n zz• o 0 z oODm mMDSr« -0 -11 7-1 m -:_, E g U) • .• O 7° W Z mzN TI fir— —I W � o —I O c7 OD C m � zo o D C-- - z mO z D * m z C>' D � O - r --1 2 -1" c mD v 1 ciom -0m CD N m � z ri O omM a D o � rocCf'„ n ---, Cr) o * O o05o mo o = � Dmm cpm = cz cn 000a d --1 m (1) m0LI r mm O DJ7or Z -1 o r nz r 0Cm0 Q 73 o >� z SS ril � O ( IV-< 2 c -zDD(7) n -< 1 O D XI / z 01- z � r: a z \-) zw = LU J U co CC 0M W - ''. CC I . >- i- w = F- � D E IX { -J z cL W = ¢ Z ww J = L1.1 O 0 = U \)2 c~n -6 CC/) z > Z `� } ILIc w W w E J 0 C.-o- 0 O W w •• cn 0 Cl) O ¢ o a CC W O Y (1) J _ � ~ ~ w ¢ CI- a) a, co W W m co X812 a cc woJ a � o ooD� o aoWo VH Ocno `\4 Umo "- Ou- 0ZO oUW pa /) (� p ¢ cc J 6 L CL— ��` ¢ mzoM Ocn J --- O O O = w 0 00 = V N w Z 2 O d 0 O o cn(� UJ z2a } w = J I J .1..r cc cc � w z V p a ya = m OO 111 �o = cn � wa 0 =°°LZ C a V p0 ; t- cc F- ` Cr) 1 '. z •aCC — ¢ v O Q w = ¢ � WI - m 2 i_ Om J O f o coZm `- On- O 1 ¢ LLJJ k,\1J ` coccl z O W ) 00 Z wp I— cu E c) z ~ z w J o = O H. °- a • C „ z � F— O � M J w z z w z — W 2z 0 \� Z a) zw — wm LLJ U E O � `, " = 01 — 2ii J � 5 d >_ ¢ W O(.9 f=- a CLCC Cr)CU 1 � z _..r. C om = m v o �-- ' w co O a W J 6 co _J >- NJ CDo0 a Q M z CC / z c1- z 3 O CC ¢ Y Q z z w = wv U wc w W cc o O = = w >- CO = ~ Q - J O Q < ccc Z LU J u) 1 CD ¢ }-C .) 1- (i) > Z W w _ w O. 00 El O 0 W •3+/ aw �¢ p W 1- — 0 Y v, J ¢ u) 1- I-- ¢Lij ¢ J O °C 0 Q W J Q cQ ojwCooOOccT0 H c.i I- LL 000 Z = oc 0 Q- ¢ mzm El Occo J 0 c = w V 0p = Imm _ off- u) I- r) wz0 w � O E ami Zcom ,_ � w W zccccc = Ww J CO U c cc ¢ mO 00 I- 0 N O w (/) w cc 73 :73 O = W Ac a v °0 0 ,_ 1- cc ui 0 H cm-- 0 - 0 Ili Z z � cc — ¢ U O Qw � ¢ � w1— m ¢ Dmf 00 GC co z r O .� ¢ �- W o ¢ W C (-) n m W wCC w z 0 1L( 0 UJ o z = Lu , 1- ..12 t 0 N m ~ z w J o_ OU O 0 � a Z zz W � z U L ¢ � W r � Lu a) .P O i= J w J d ,_ 0 W 00m a a, Dz Q c \^ a" ,, w 00 > a. a) c a) i _I >- E 0_ oc.) z¢ Q M z CC _ VA, aa = z I zW Qd m0 ~~ o � J z ¢ o CC w0 M J z a W _ioc11" Z WW J '� Q °C ¢ 0 0 = 0 �_ = m0 Za LU Q Z w H cc O= -I d .� cc00 O � O w 5g. w 0 cno to Ov) w a = W a , = wp 0 Y � W oz I- w < J y_ d= Q W a o ¢ W m 1 A = N O Z a W a Z (21W 0 2 Z I- ca Z O W 9 ¢ a� U 0 1- oo ~ m 1 - = p LL - .^ CV Z W Z CIO cc 0 Wim = W w � `� ] ~ U ■Qo L z0 0 0 `e;--, U) J C Fc---) u-w O Wiz ¢ U OO W qk o = o = � w H Z. mz = O= � 0 O E I _I- � u_ w W VWHO CI) W m N a � W 0 O0 1- L cn U 0 CO W W 0 ` 1 05z1-a = oz l— a) N o §- c W I a 0J1CO =Icc lac W 0 ° 0 zz3 W LL' z 0 oz = = oU) 1- czt 0 < = E- z0- LLI zwo 0 0w 0 z 0 w O Z Occcn W 2z U 4-3 00 � 1-- z � W E ccw � m wm o 1-um0 __ a 47. = -0 J w J a a) L w O ¢ WOEOF a U u) a =, CO 01 'a ai 0 � o.. i Q M Z CC CC ao = No 1-- Z W w CO z = CO LUL W �- Q o _jO � J z � W 2Joc Z w _I O _ \ Qm0 co z > z s q�J u) 1 CC ow a J,l cC c= 00 p O W a p O Iwo 0 ICE Ya W p� a� N0v� W 0_ w a o ¢ w CC cc) 00 I r°'' _L O ooz Q zJI Cn Q V �1 -S zw � z � z CI Jin (n � 0 ozm Z mw O w � = W EL I- U U ZDF~ J LL m O0 zoo p Ocn J ■ _ L 0 Jm cc Ocn 1-- Ea) do mow p ww O .fir U \. Z W O- CC cLU o CC J rn 5 (2orq "i O, Wa ¢ mo0O F- cn ¢ ¢ U W o w �n z ~ w Z H Q M ~ Y Z cm O0 § m wE m Q -J 0 J w C.- m J _ 1- w Z I- �� F , 0 cc T 0 < w W pJ LL f (� L zz .3 W wZ CI V O Q ozLii z CD � _ zw I p , , 0w O � � GJ.. ■ .�_ � zz 1— O � M p zw0 p zw O Z c\i5 00 . H � cz W LL � W w _ �_ w � m w0° O w co 0 � w Q W JJU J w -I mill I▪ 0 ¢ W OO = °- b� a U = a U CU a� Q L--1 N ▪; o O 0 N >' 0N c CD a) Q M Z CC _ rJ Q 0 a = z } p I- ,� `nF- z = cc � � w �. mc) z I'_ p = J CO Li- Qp Q J cc O . _I z W Joy Z w J Ivii. V) Qmp cn zw Z I 1. UJ ;� CCCD0 C � O W Z () 0 F- y = uj CCCz p QW J L. Now W 55 aw I 1 CL V. o ¢ F i_ _1 co W0 N � z Q w � Q ` J 2: Ea F- 5. Z :E p O W J Li _ N z W Z co 0 V ^ U ~ W d I .^ .O am < ow J 0.i n p Z cc p 8 L- W I- _ \ �S ccE < U � 0 _ > Jcr = 0 t- E g ' mQz � =O ao 0 a) c w � 1 cUi z � 0 = it m CO a ¢ mow 0 � 0 CZ } J cc '' ¢ aU U-1 mO W -0 'J cri 0 = F— 0=C 0 H Q MSF-- Z p2 11- Y Z Q `' omF z < 0 0 1-U I= M o _Iccm = -\ 0aci W Q ¢ 0 `� �, zZ ( = u' 0 W v Z O w a ____ „,_ = w u) I- �r W v >- 0w 0 1_ a z 1- 0 zwo zw 0 = w cn G w 0 Z 0 0 F- F- m--- •- W E �v r a CCw2 2 wm (S 0 wm0 MCC Q CD ..� �Y E J J U W —I Elk, j OJ W0 1- O = a Cr/ m nri C C o ~� a O a a) >- c w i Q 2 Z Ir `'1 Q0 = 4 I- z W cccc m U Z - CC OO J Z 2 W JLL t -J Z ww J 0 _ I- O w (n 0 w 1— V t/1( = m o C/) w > Z app CC wp cp W C5 = mow � 0 cn �CC w2 a w � W tL._ < < dNo � W aw a t C) Qw F- m O N � z a w -I Q z �w � O � z 0 V ¢ F= 0 Z 2p W a a � 0 = 1— Of— O 1-_ gm u. ,2 (92w Z on cc 0 w � = W � o_ H .— .' 0 zmi- -. u- �. o �' � Zp0 U _p u) J O C i= u_ E:)- U O = =O J 0 cc O O 1- E `V mUw = °comic O mMEM1-11 CC Ell pro 11- o 0I- CC cow 1.-!_i I- ~ Ha0 OO N Su) c; cnac W Q Mow 1 = O = 7:3cc 0 I- � a �`' o } = Z LJ Z Nod ''' � ICC o _Jcc cc U ¢ 2 W 0 J 0 ( (� ZZC3 W wZ 0 � ) 11.1 II Qzcc 3 � E = I- - J o r zLUQ Zw o Z c4 ` � occv W cnZ O i- U O _H H n LL1 E `�Q �/ O Lu 5` woc Q A\ v —1 rt_+ J J 0 'J m a-, J .11•0 / ,� . p = W O H a �JJ = U -a a; _ 0 = o w °- CD c a> a' I< M z CC 0 1Y) zw 0 1z � o ac 1;. ,< c, a 0 zw X z LU J V E5 U cw LU cc ! OOH = > D J -9 J� J 0_ W .< cc Z Lu Lu J 00 V wI Co < I-- C, I__ 2 (/) 0 w 1— Ai u) 3 CA Z > Z w 02 cc GC J a Ori o � 0 W Jm O u) ~ C ) Q az a w � w < u) I__ O om' J Cu' Q LL 1 m r=- -. ,z W wm � C co 2 :E CC F- J Cl) O 2E' 8 '2a wa d _J -i d:O cn w U O I=- r� 1 o 50Z m � O •. QmZ O � Cwf) J 0 o �n ¢ I— W o = cnU 00 = _ o � � = 0 � N0 Z = CC cE 0 i c75 +0�+ Eal zo ¢ � u) =cC m v f; 1 o�camO DO F- as c> cn 0 w CO " cc W "0 .n -a m1- iz- W 20 = emm inn a a a � Q � oz z 0 o ~ 0Z wY C) z 2 cc = a U O Q w = < wI m coFC zz ' F_ a- O D W z c: .nm W z0 W -,` N Z z °C LU I— w O o 0 F- a- a zU i- 02 m O Z 0 z W cA Z V Z0 aW I_- z � w E1.7....., _ zF- W 0 O > — D J a) 'a � ¢ W 9, i_.= a a� = z Q m � m m s co O w C o a) w O >- J Cl.) a; a, _J >- C) +' E a Q * z = / 0zw z 0 tJ bLi- I- CC AO CD‹ Q z w W V cn 'i'''' ' 0 {L U p = W w >- a CO L <t Q p CC O LU ZO Q = O I cc O J a COJg Q� O W co p Cl) 4 ¢ p a ES � W E- (7) ..... u)cn J ¢ cni-- I— wQ a s womCC 55 1 J 1 0 k0CC W - a ccDoa oo0 W V) 0 � UO I- 00U = = O 0ti ,-- 0QOC ALL- LL •..... VJ Z C M Z w J ¢ mz Ocn 0= Q O t- u.. W a o = COO 00 = Imm $ oMcn I— �' OF- 6- "' cc O 4E. N zO - 0 I - - — u._ u_ Wztep Em �, =w = � ww=''''r- Um - P2 cc ¢ m � o0 F- n O w e w cc W '� .� 13 m � = W = 0 S p 1-" cc 0 I- a aw ¢ = Oz CD o p ~ p Z w Y an Y--- z � cc — < 0 O Q wII ¢ w -1= M ¢ ~ m ^ 000 CC U) z Cr) O- O 05 p W o z 0 "'cc; m cc z 0 W N No I-- = W \ ~ z0_ J �, �, zv iO 0oma m Z N z � u w �' c)11 S- w FW Zi_ Z = E CDLu 7-1 o1-- Mw a CC zCES Q Vm O o- C p a) w O >- J a) E ai m 0) ..a E 0 a Q * Z CC CC a z >- O c7)1- z W cc co =O ,_ H > D J Oww �- ¢ O Q JOm J Za W JoF Z ww J Q < coo cn ow z a w � C o= � 74: cwcOo p O W = z U p 1- cn 0 I,, Owc a co ww a �, is -1--CC Q Q O a ¢ CL o ¢ w cc co co �- DQJcn O N � zQz w en zwo Z CC oo W � J ¢O co UO H 1 N Z w Z COC 0 ■� V zco cU1 M J LL ELI Lu O`g zc50 0 Ow J or) • gpQ (.) 00 = °' co0w p cc O . V zci wI— = cc J w W v wF_ Y 0 cc = m CU - v > Ll. OO F— a lUwp w V a xlij 1:10 — CC\ = FH a) Q L9z1- = 0z } = Z = Y Z O - M wI Q N QQ JcE ^� CO J M l ' '. 0 < (Q W 0J 0 V Zzo W wZ 0 zzo� LLJ = w , I_ ,� �. Es .,_,Z H zw W O ¢ w 0 a N HZZ 1— Oco 2 Z w p Z w O Z occcn W cnZ C) N ►, = UOQ 1- z = W E amu_ S `Lu co U O wcoO mcc Q a) i = J _.1 U J w J mil•NoIIIMMIN a � _ OF CL .� a U o c 0 aDa) y °' U) (CrCil Z E CC r1 CC a o = z 1— z W c 52 oomw ~ ¢ la- OJaJO W V J01E Z ww J c. = m0 cn ow 1- ±. coir C o= J a Vl aw_c00 0 � o W 5z2 0 (/) I- co ° C:3 /773 Q wY *Cr < mwz 0 au) J W NCI m W Ill d o ¢ w 1Y cnm I O NIS Q z -I — o oz w § Q zw- Z ., z 0 o � cc a Uo W (9 i= _ d- -� ¢O (/) o O H o ~ m ~ W " zJCCw Z mO V kA w Wfa.. m F- .� Q ¢ zw w O m ¢ ZC 0 gnJ N cc Z ¢ 0 0 0 Lli = o J m = 1-- 0 mUw � m 0 -� oz = O � 0 1— W z _ � w m orV 7c: N ¢ mow O 00 H E cn o U c/) " fr W YS0 = LIJ 1- cc00 = c I— S 1-9 Z Z oz 2, ,T- = YZ NmwEa / , m d cc +f? wZF- O- J 0 ZZC'3 W wZ cm Qz � =i-L1 CC FZw- � 1-- Lu 0 V-- e A zwo z Z L 00o � H c •• V c mw � IE U O w m 0 _ m Q a) e) Fs El -, U J w J 0 - W ° 0- - a U = = c.) Ca til 2212 "' a m _ o a) 0 °- a) >- ci coi I< M E CC CC _ _z wCO O LLJ cc = Hrs)1 co .� o12 Z WW J ¢ QQ O c? = C.) E- s•-•' Cl) z > Z IWcn W WQ gli_ cc o o p W � wQno cn V C0u) = Q W 4% LU -4 `\ oc � 0 O J ` L• NQ (¢ W dW VLA= ¢ W m I Q `�O N n Q z J (n Fli "'G zww � Z � z 0 H .� M Q CC a O 0 C!1 \v N z w Z co cc O VU ~ � W op _61_ N ■� v VA v� z m I- J ij- Q.Q z C3 O LLI cw J Q 0 ozc9V o~ W w 0z = =O . 0 OI— o wI ~ GC cwnW m CU 22. N 'Z► ¢ mow 0 Lcc O ct 1-- L 3 c/) U v co cc LJJ ¢ QW W � p = C "Cli- "\,. r-0 E— co x Z W Y Z N m H ¢ U O WI z >- W co 00 cc I Uz< CC) W oEL LL O 1� , zzc� W Wz en c O W N ,� zz � = w � � _ i CC E6 F— zw J 14• (��' O0w O � � a o Ni v,"- l zwg F- zL 0 Z 0 W cn W cn z V O = cn w oO � 1— z � W EO WmO - mor Q JJ 0 _i m W J Ina -'1 © p .� W 0 = a MIMI 4.) d 0 = — O _U a =I V ii; �''"'a •C > C cc • = O co a> >- c a) co i' Q z E cc z_ w z 0O CC 0 Q z Lzw = 0 0 E5 CCw W CC OH > �= >- W = H p n J \ m ~ >' ¢ 0 CC Q t� 4N LU =I a_ W rt z w w J coIw- 0 0 1z- U F- ci) CO 0 w I- w w w <Z co cc O Cli O0 WcC a Z oV Jo a AZ Q - � O aQ L: = - W d ) ` cc 0a o0 W O O H 3 cicl occH -' 0 LL V o 0 00 z ca 0 0 C.) \ ems NcccC M ALL. LL V D00 co _1 co O o Lu o = u, U O " z 0 q rn p ~ w 0 CO N = CC E c•. wzz0 O Q� ° N z "' 0 ' Jw W V 1 \" onon o = W p W CD E. 7:7a V ° LUa = 0Z z UJ �" o - o _z •� zaCCC ¢ v 0 Q w J Q C W I= m Mi_ 0 � mJ O EC CO Z M� Off-' O ¢ I— W p --I LL. ch = W w z ci Lo Ca_ CC z O W oz = IT- W 1 3 �� N o �- z w J A zJ 0 o a O N �' wz G zw o cn z Z ( z C W U ¢ w I- I— (-15 W 4O0 0aW = } zQa, D 0 as c om > a cc m O o- AC+ ca N W O ›- W J E d J z Q M Z oC V z_ w 0I=- z 3o CC < a z 4 w V v) CC ▪ w W cc O = = w >- 4 m = CC o a J � za w Z w Lii -I c=n `- Q < I-- V c~nO CO z > Z 5• wW W < O =SO � O w � z Q � � Q F- � O Q CCI) J L X a) I- W W g3m I ).'...**. Zeb. O LC zJ Cl) 5 >- c m ci '�--t �i Z o Q o o = hw = � � O 11- O 0 0 Z CO OC O N CI Lll .— Q J W Q m ¢ O J Q o' , J ozz = wIr O Eal -= � O I- 1`� UU) e- J w co _� ) < cCC = � w -1 U ,-, 1- cc OO I-- .� o ( CC w Cl)ta >- W � o C a a • m 01- CC 0 I--� LL ow ¢ M Oz Z r - < 0 "''c`• Z � �C � ¢ U 0 Q wj ¢ 1 wE m Q o 0 c 0 0 I I � 0 �z W I- 0 z CI i W = zo w co ' \ oz I- IW- W W N0 z J z -31 OI— 02 M Z O 0z W Lr) 0 Z L aw I- F- W E �� CD 0 _ � �_ a 0p J 2w J a) ) ,_ ¢ W 01 a cc zc� v n Q LI CliS i0 an oco en CI- 13 OecpWC o O > C a) i CY) a E C. o0 < Q m z c .„ cre. 4 ..... 4 F; — a 0 �J .0 , = z } o 2 x I- z W cc m OU ~qA Oca u- 1-u ~ > = J V-) 0 J Z 0_ W 7 - oma Z C� = U Vv r� ¢ ¢ � O ¢ F- P c.__) ¢ mo `n z > Z W U) Cl) W ¢ • CC U� W � � CC oz --1 o- 3 oCz0 O �' � W 5 W 0 U) O u) cc Q w W Q 84 CC � z o Q � A s" N0Q ~ pW W p 0 � N ¢ W L2 a5m 1 cn /1� Q N F_ = Q z J f//_Y 0OW Q z C) Y ¢ F- 0 Z M0 3 oa—1n Imo- � ,._, LL V V N z W Z co [[ O v ■ O Z¢ 1- Q (J/Wj J 0. /�� zC3o O 1- LL, W O v, (,�J• ccoa 0 00 0 D Occ Q O) i— t"E J mz _ O 5- 0 l- E Pw F- ti LL LU a) o 0 � 0 WCC J 4.1•E0 z w F- re u) W m 1.11 c_) W E Y O ac Q 73 a a) c U W � 0 Ir H s ¢ ¢ W LIU � O = Cu.. c O = 1- cc 0 I- Q) Q f(J, c`' = Z W Y z "J c, ¢ U O Q ,1 00on cc mJo if; cc V J �� zU ¢ s2 W wCL¢ 0 ^Q < — w LU z CIw �►�J O W .� 0 z = 1W- Cf)cc W cc ~ z � J OW O 1- a. zwo 0 O r^� oaW W u) z V Z t " L U , I-- z _ W E -i c cc W m W co 0 o W m 0 — Q .., _, _U J M W J 4•011 N O ¢ W � f- d � U CO C = s 'V N o ro C 0- C 0 a) ?- c a) Na) 0 aE 0- < m z o vl 5 .- z w � z E5 o CC m Y o Z LLI W = _Z O J wU V m 2 CC w W < 0 e3 = 0 UP Iw- � = Cn zw 1- } w w > Z M CC CC p J a. _J p � p W Q o Q fro CO Ful Q I- -(T) O Qm _.I N � cnt- H" aw. w a z • "C cn � w cc W cnm I J O = ° I- Q zJ C/9 '� wzwZ W � oca of _ I NU000 v0 I- oC I-- CPNopW p � O VmocM a_ LLI- .... � ', QOpm zLL, W O ,n < m ¢ o Ow J o = w V Op = O F- i-- IX � m I- N O E --: wzzo 0 c ow itw g z ,�; p � Lu m w c z o Q o co 1-I-1 m R5 �' cc ¢ m "- oo a ,c�ai i power ww I- MI C a m F- I_ W 0 O = Qv zt-.. Zw0 < O w ¢ Lu I=- QomM coO 0 CC CO z s'-''' I-- CI- O QI- W p -1 LL tO nm W pz o z Z w IW-- c o F-- z CC w W ,_ EL a z i 0 Om m Z Uz D � z O z W U m z1-L1 _~ z = MI V C o ~ m wm o m > Mcc Q 4:1) I= *a m o ¢ W 0 = a MIME CU a) nz a 13 6 c 05. m m -- 0 m C 0 w0 O a 0) 3 m a- o z a * z CD Ir Z w - 1 ea -% =_. ti < z w 2 z w J C.) c75 -s 0 == LLI W> - W = ~ 0 03 1.- y, ao O Q W J zJ Za WJ= w .O 0 _ O C/) F- a F- En 0 CC/) z > ->7 I- W W J 2 V 0E L Li a W `+ CO < 0 Q W w Q t F- E5 O Ycn J v /� L = cnF- I � < a .," U a6 F. m- W W WCp I -'c w m re F- -' Cl) �, o 8 � � Q wJ a c 1a o mz o Luc Z.- of = U O f- ci� OFrI— Jp ti (AI 000 Z mct O C.) �i 0 < m 2 CL L J LU0 1"' oF- w GC Mco F- F- oH N ZZOOf O a cWW0ce wW -J F � C � -nE ZCLCm oCCI c) Fn FY = m O 0 0 Q e.) a) V) 0p= C � Ce W -p ›- F- W = O = C a o F- ~ O F a wwa = 0z Q)• o a �' aZ LL Z �� z c a 0 O Q W J < W 1- 2 a 1_ ,:D ...,, mJo O coZ " I- a O cei = W W z Cl 0 ("8m C O W oz = FW- � W /� N 3 Z a.W J ` , z J O o � E O — % _ ZZ w cnz O • Z N CD zF H wm LU 0 E ' c o5 — me a 0 ~0 � W J .M 41011a GC = z Q +r ov m O a w w 0 >- C J c d L -_-.J , E 0. 0 1 Q z I Draft 6/27/17 r SHERI ROBERTS RE: SERENO GROVE \V Summary • I am Sheri Roberts; other individuals here have ceded their time to me to speak • Before I begin, would the chair permit me to read into the record my prepared remarks so that I can outline the issues? • I am voicing concerns on behalf of myself, my family and the families of our two neighbors in Wilshire Lakes; we are here to oppose the approval of the plat and construction plan for Sereno Grove, as presented; SHOW ONE PAGE PLAN WITH HOMES HIGHLIGHTED • My husband and I own and reside year-round at 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd.; our property abuts the Sereno Grove property on two sides — our back property line to the west and our side yard property line to the north o Our two neighbors own the homes to the south of ours; [the Bankstons' home is the one immediately south] [and the Doyles' home is south of that] o [David and Linda Bankston are here today, too] [as is Larry Doyle] • To be clear, we are not objecting to the land being developed; we are objecting to a portion of the Sereno Grove design — only a small portion of the overall project that will have negative impacts on our properties • The proposed design is not consistent or compatible with our existing homes, and will hurt our property values • It will cause us to bear disproportionate negative impacts from this design in excess of those borne by any other homeowners within Sereno Grove or the surrounding communities • There is a viable design alternative that would mitigate the impacts to us while retaining for the Developer the same number of lots with equivalent lot areas o Relatively cost neutral to the Developer 1 Draft 6/27/17 Concerns • WCI/Lennar has chosen to run their access road all the way from Livingston Road approx. 1/2 mile east to within 10 feet of our back property lines, then curve the road north and again east, effectively surrounding my backyard o This portion of their access road is unreasonable on its face • To put the plan in context, please see the overall depiction of Sereno Grove and the surrounding properties; SHOW PLAN IN CONTEXT; this shows that out of all of the available space, they chose a location for the road that will cause us the most harm [and we are the only abutting homeowners to this project] • As submitted to the Commissioners for approval, the plans have no wall to insulate negative impacts and the 10' strip does not provide adequate separation for the buffer that is nothing more than a hedge and trees spaced 25 feet apart • This design will negatively impact our use of our homes and our property values o Our home, being surrounded on three sides by roadway, will be less desirable — to us and to future buyers of our home — due to impact on our quiet enjoyment of our yard o the acreage surrounding our home was a significant factor in our decision to purchase it • Future residents of Sereno Grove can factor the position of the roadway into their decision; by imposing this road position on us, we will bear the cost without having that choice • Design also raises concerns of: o (1 ) safety, since there will be no significant barrier separating our backyard from vehicles on the road, o (2) water runoff from such a significant amount of roadway which will exacerbate the water issues that are experienced during the rainy season," °')u45 o (3) noise from cars, trucks, motorcycles and individuals using the road, o (4) light from headlights and streetlights disrupting our use and enjoyment of our home, and o (5) privacy concerns. 2 Draft 6/27/17 • Like many homes in the area, our homes open to the back with a lanai area that is used much like a family room, and surrounding open area for other uses (such as a play area for our families) • In WCI's own words "A backyard is a sanctuary for renewal" — quote from the wall of the Southwest Florida International Airport on March 18, 2017. Look what they want to do to my sanctuary. • Allowing this design will set a dangerous precedent that will encourage developers to run their roadways, and push other less desirable aspects of their developments, to the perimeter, so that existing homeowners bear the burdens; this design is a serious safety and property value concern • Standards were administratively reduced by staff throughout this process, including: Normal 15 foot Type B buffer reduced to 10 feet [LDC Sec. 4.06.02 Type B Buffer = 15'] • [Landscape buffering and screening standards within any PUD shall conform to the minimum buffering and screening standards of the zoning district to which it most closely resembles. LDC 4.06.02(C)(1 )] ■ [Developments of 15 acres or more...shall provide a perimeter landscape buffer of at least 20 feet in width „,iko\ dc. regardless of the[ight-of-way. LDC 4.06.02(C)(4)] '+�rt., o The requirement to have a standby generator for the wastewater pump located near the NW corner of my home was waived ■ Our understanding: generally the County allows developers to forego a standby generator only when the wastewater pumping station is operated by the county, which has the resources to address issues that may arise in the event of a pump station failure. o Water management retention areas are permitted within a buffer but they are not permitted to exceed 50% of the square footage of any required side yard landscape buffer. A minimum 5-foot wide 10:1 level planting area is required to be maintained where trees and hedges are required. [LDC 4.06.02(D)(1 ) and (2)] 3 Draft 6/27/17 • The retention area to the north of my home does not comply with this. o The berms that exist around our homes do not have flat tops to allow for proper stability and planting o Other deviations also needed to be approved to make the Developer's plans work Alternative Plan o Through our attorney we hired an engineer, Chris Hagan from Hagan Engineering, who redesigned the portion of the roadway around our homes; Mr. Hagan is here today and is proffered as an expert in land development planning, site design & engineering; SHOW ALTERNATIVE PLAN; I will also provide a key to the markings for the record o Moves the curve of the access roadway to the west, away from our backyards o Includes an 8' high wall on top of a perimeter berm with landscaping o Limits the two lots to the west of our backyards to one story height o WOULD FOREGO: changes to the roadway and sewer lift station to the north, and would accept a wall there o This plan is not really the way we would like to see Sereno Grove developed but we tried very hard to identify a design that would address enough of our concerns while minimizing impacts to Developer o We provided this Alternative to WCI in January; they have had ample opportunity to address the issues, but have chosen not to do so Lack of Compatibility and Consistency • Land Development Code ("LDC"): Requires that development within a PUD be compatible with established uses of surrounding neighborhoods, and that the development process in the county be equitable in terms of consistency with established regulations and procedures and respect for the rights of property owners 4 Draft 6/27/17 • LDC also states that it is in the best public interest for all property and development to be designed and used in accordance with good planning and design practices o "Development within a PUD district shall be compatible with established or planned uses of surrounding neighborhoods and property. [LDC Section 4.07.02(6)(1).] o "The PUD shall provide... protection of the surrounding area from potentially adverse influences generated by or within the PUD. [LDC Section 4.07.02(6)(2).] o Stated intent: the development process in Collier County be "...equitable, in terms of consistency with established regulations and procedures, respect for the rights of property owners, and consideration of the interests of the citizens of Collier County." [Section 1.05.01(B) of the LDC.] o By terms of LDC: the BOCC determined that it is in the "best public interest for all property and development to be conceived, designed, built, and used in accordance with good planning and design practices... ." [Section 1 .05.01(C) of the LDC.] o [Code of Laws & Ordinances ("Code"): "The public health, safety, morals and general welfare require the harmonious, orderly, and progressive development of land within the state." [Code Section 250-71(a).] o [Code: intent is to secure the "efficient, adequate and economic supply of utilities and services to new land developments." Code Section 250-71(c)(2). Another of the stated intents of the Code is to secure the "provision of appropriate...utility sites in new land developments." Code Section 250-71(c)(6). ■ Use of the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs would be the most cost-effective, efficient and appropriate location and alignment to provide the necessary water and sewer connections for Sereno Grove.] 5 Draft 6/27/17 • The design of Sereno Grove is inconsistent because it reflects a blatant disregard for the right to quiet enjoyment of existing homeowners, and the design is incompatible because it does not mitigate the negative impacts of immediately adjacent roadways. • Because it violates the LDC, it should not be approved as presented. Developer's Arguments • Developer would like us to believe that the questions of compatibility and consistency are limited to the zoning decision o Not true under the LDC o Cannot be true because at the zoning hearing the Planning Commission at most has only a master concept plan, not the plat and construction plan to evaluate design impacts o In fact, if this is true, Developer appears to have been deceptive at the zoning hearing: according to County records, the concept plan shown to the Planning Commission contained only 55 lots when they were requesting approval for 64 — and 64 is what is currently indicated on their plan o By showing 14% fewer lots than were intended, they made it appear as though there would be more significant buffers than was actually intended o The LDC requires that the design of the project is considered; the most appropriate time is at this meeting, when the plat and construction plan are considered for approval Developer's Tactics • Our two neighbors and I met with GradyMinor on January 9 and voiced our concerns • Since then, we have been trying to address this as best we can, given the hand we've been dealt and WCI/Lennar's unwillingness to engage on this issue o Barry Ernst of WCI [Director of Planning & Permitting] advised me that he would contact us to set up a meeting in January; instead, they filed new plans ignoring our concerns the day before their supposed internal meeting o We were told in April that we could arrange a meeting with Rhonda Brewer of Lennar [VP of Community Development]; on 6 Draft 6/27/17 April 19 I provided her with availability; again, no contact but they revised their plans to file an ICP to again ignore us • Clear that their unwillingness to address our concerns has nothing to do with either the cost or the time necessary to re-work their plans o On February 1 GradyMinor contacted our HOA for county utility easements (CUEs) to use the WL water and sewer stub-outs as they planned o Our HOA President agreed to meet with them, only asking that we homeowners attend so that all issues could be addressed; they canceled the meeting o Rather than consider our concerns, WCI/Lennar wasted months developing a new plan moving the water and sewer tie-ins thousands of feet westward to Livingston Road for which, according to their own engineer's opinion, the probable additional construction cost alone will be approx. $290,000 o For less cost, they could have used the Alternative Plan, and could have been able to obtain approval of their PPL on May 9th, when originally scheduled o In the time taken to file their ICP, they could have revised their design to use our Alternative Plan for the roadway and additional buffering but chose not to • Then, in the 11th hour last week, after their ICP application was approved by county staff, Lennar called me, indicating that they wanted to have a meeting by the end of the week o Bankstons and I (along with Chris Hagan) met with Russ Smith, Lennar's Director of Land Development, and Wayne Arnold from GradyMinor, on Friday afternoon o It appeared to me to simply be further effort to distract us from our need to prepare for this hearing, and to allow them to tell you they met and sought to address our concerns o Mr. Smith advised that Lennar would not engage with us earlier when, in his words, they thought that we "had a gun to their head" because of the CUE issue o Ridiculous since we have tried to take a very reasonable approach from day 1 , even anticipating the impact to their costs and timing 7 Draft 6/27/17 o His statement confirmed that their approach was an intentional one in which they chose to stonewall us while they forced through their ICP in order to get on the agenda today • Mr. Smith stated that Lennar understood our need for a better buffer and that they could provide us with a wall and limit the two lots closest to ours to one-story homes, but that they would not move the small section of the roadway because it is now too late in the process o But they created the timing issue by the approach that they chose • The wall and one-story homes alone don't solve the problems stemming from the road [including valuation, quiet enjoyment] • It appears that this last minute discussion was their attempt to make us feel as if we had no option given the timing of this Board meeting • They should not be allowed to benefit from using these strong-arm tactics on homeowners; since the beginning, we have only asked for a reasonable solution o The county cannot leave individual homeowners to fend for themselves in the face of a Developer's significant financial and other resources o We have incurred significant costs to protect our property rights, and are seeking the Board's support Closing: ➢ WE ARE NOT SAYING "DON'T DEVELOP THIS LAND." WE ARE SAYING "DON'T DEVELOP THIS LAND IN A WAY THAT HURTS US." WE ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO MITIGATE THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO US. > WE HAVE LEGITIMATE CONCERNS ABOUT THE DESIGN PROPOSED AND HOPE THAT THE BOARD HELPS US BY: > VOTING "NO" ON THE SERENO GROVE PPL PROPOSED TODAY FOR APPROVAL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. o [BY REQUIRING THAT SERENO GROVE BE COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING LAND USE, AND THAT THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS BE EQUITABLE WITH RESPECT FOR THE RIGHTS OF PROPERTY OWNERS] 8 Add On 11H June 27, 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve and authorize expenditure of Category "A" Tourist Development Tax funds up to $57,600 for excavation of the Clam Pass inlet and re-grading of the adjacent beaches, authorize necessary budget amendment in the amount of$30,000, and make a fording that this expenditure promotes tourism. OBJECTIVE: To quickly mobilize a site work contractor to excavate the inlet and re-grade the affected areas of the beach to avoid further impacts to Clam Pass. CONSIDERATIONS: The Clam Bay NRPA is a 560 acre estuarine system consisting of beaches, shallow bays, tidal creeks, seagrass beds, mangrove forests, and Clam Pass. This environmentally sensitive asset is managed by the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD). In March, 2016, PBSD obtained a 10-year maintenance dredging permit from the Army Corps of Engineers and the work being contemplated is applicable to the permit. Over the past year, severe weather conditions that included Tropical Storm Colin (June 2016), Hurricane Hermine (September 2016), and most recently Tropical Storm Cindy, have contributed to reduced inlet stability. These storms have pushed a portion of the ebb shoal onto the beach creating a spit that pushes the inlet to the north. In addition, wave action has eroded a portion of the upland beach causing a steep escarpment that will require re-grading to a more natural slope. To avoid further impacts to the Pass, engineering firm Humiston & Moore have recommended excavation of the recently formed spit, which will restore the inlet channel to its original permitted location, refill the channel that has meandered, and re-grade the inlet banks to the original permitted design template. Staff is working with the engineering firm Humiston & Moore to prepare engineering design plans and obtain the required approvals from Florida Department of Environmental Protection and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and with Procurement Services to obtain competitive quotes to quickly mobilize a contractor. TDC RECOMMENDATION: At its meeting on June 26, 2017, the TDC voted unanimously to endorse staffs recommendation to recommend to the Board that TDC funds in the amount of $30,000 be authorized for excavation of the inlet and re-grading of the public portion of the beach, and make a finding that this expenditure promotes tourism. The TDC was advised that the Pelican Bay Foundation will reimburse the County the proportionate share of any sand that it receives for its beaches. The amount is not known today. FISCAL IMPACT: Total estimated cost for the Clam Pass inlet excavation and re-grading project is $57,600. Engineering, permitting, surveying, and monitoring fees are estimated to be $27,600 and the engineer's estimate of probable cost for construction is $30,000. Funding in the amount of$27,600 is presently available in Clam Pass Dredging project 88032 in TDC Beach Renourishment and Inlet Maintenance Fund (195). The balance of required funding, $30,000, will be provided from TDC Fund (195) reserves. A budget amendment moving funding from reserves into project 88032 will be required. Add On Item 16H1 June 27,2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation that(1)the Board advertise a Public Hearing,to be heard at the July 11,2017,Board of County Commissioners Meeting, to consider adopting a resolution as to CDD#1 and amending the CDD2 Ordinance to include the special power for the CDDs for "The Control and elimination of mosquitos and other arthropods of public health importance" by contracting with an outside vendor to address additional mosquito control needs; and (2) in the interim, to authorize the Fiddler's Creek CDD 1 & 2 short term consent for "The Control and elimination of mosquitos and other arthropods of public health importance" to procure the services of PowerX to engage in ground fogging of mosquito larvicide, from June 26,2017 through September 30,2017,in order to alleviate the impact of nuisance mosquitoes. OBJECTIVE: For the Board to consider granting short-term consent to the Fiddler's Creek CDDs that will allow the CDDs to secure the services of a qualified and licensed contractor, to engage in ground-level fogging by motor vehicle in the Fiddler's Creek community to reduce the impacts of mosquitoes in the community. CONSIDERATIONS: Heavy rains at the end of May and beginning of June have provided increased breeding environments for mosquitoes. The residents of Fiddler's Creek have experienced a corresponding increase in the mosquito population in their community. The location of the Fiddler's Creek community places it is in close proximity to Rookery Preserve, and this limits the capabilities of the Collier County Mosquito Control District to combat the infestation of mosquitoes via aerial spray techniques. The CDD has communicated with the Collier County Mosquito Control District and the district does not provide truck spaying for an additional fee. Florida Statute 190.012(2)(e)provides the CDD with the special power to authorize additional resources in order to control or eliminate mosquitoes and other arthropods of public health importance. Under this provision, and in order to alleviate the current mosquito nuisance, the Fiddler's Creek CDD 1 & 2, would like to contract with PowerX, a qualified and licensed contractor, to engage in a ground spraying campaign, to control the mosquito population in the community. PowerX has been in business since 1988, providing services to residences, businesses, and various communities throughout Florida. Their services have been used by Miami Dade County since 2016 as well as the City of Indian Creek, numerous HOAs, and private residences. They are certified and insured in the State of Florida to perform mosquito management services. PowerX would target mosquito larvae through the ground distribution of larvicide from mobile vehicles. This activity would supplement the actions of the Collier County Mosquito Control District, and ultimately reduce the mosquito population by prohibiting the development of eggs to adult mosquitoes. The Fiddler's Creek CDDs and PowerX will coordinate and cooperate with the Collier County Mosquito Control District to determine the frequency and type of spray used to insure full compliance with all label restrictions and applicable regulations. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to the County. The Fiddler's Creek CDD 1 &2 would pay for the services of a contractor, as well as the advertising costs associated amending the ordinance. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts associated with this Executive Summary. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney. This request was initiated by Fiddler's Creek CDD 1 & 2, after the agenda was published. There are two Community Development Districts comprising Fiddler's Creek. Fiddler's Creek Community Development District No. 1 (CDD#1), was established by Rule adopted by the Florida Governor and Cabinet sitting in their capacity as the Florida Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission (FLAWAC) and Fiddler's Creek Community Development District No. 2 (CDD#2) was established by Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners. Community Development Districts are empowered with General Powers under Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, and can Add On Item 16H1 June 27,2017 request that the local government agency grant them additional Special Powers. The two Fiddler Creek Districts have certain Special Powers, but not "The Control and elimination of mosquitos and other arthropods of public health importance" (as authorized by Florida Statute Sec. 190.012 (2)(e)). Ordinarily, in order to grant this Special Power a resolution would be adopted by the Board of County Commissioners as to CDD#1 and the CDD#2 Ordinance would need to be amended. The better practice would be for the Districts to make application for the adoption of a Board of County Commissioners resolution and an amendment to the CDD#2 Ordinance, however, from a time standpoint this is impractical. The position of the Collier County Mosquito Control District about this request is unknown. With that noted, this item is approved as to form and legality and requires majority vote. -JAK RECOMMENDATION: That the Board advertise a Public Hearing,to be heard at the July 11, 2017, Board of County Commissioners Meeting, to consider adopting a resolution as to CDD#1 and amending the CDD2 Ordinance to include the special power for the CDDs for "The Control and elimination of mosquitos and other arthropods of public health importance" by contracting with an outside vendor to address additional mosquito control needs. In the interim, to authorize the Fiddler's Creek CDD 1 & 2 short term consent for"The Control and elimination of mosquitos and other arthropods of public health importance" to procure the services of PowerX to engage in ground fogging of mosquito larvicide, from June 26, 2017 through September 30, 2017, in order to alleviate the impact of nuisance mosquitoes. Prepared by: Commissioner Donna Fiala, District 1 1 Honorable Penny Taylor, Chairman VIA EMAIL: PennyTaylorrcolliergov.net Board of County Commissioners ShenyGreco@colliergov.net Collier County, Florida 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 RE: Request For Consent To Exercise Additional Power Under Section 190.012(2)(e), F.S.; Ground Level Mosquito Fogging; Fiddler's Creek Dear Chairman Taylor: We are the Chairmen of the two community development districts for the Fiddler's Creek community, Fiddler's Creek Community Development District#1 and Fiddler's Creek Community Development District#2. I As you are well aware, there has been a recent explosion in the mosquito population in Collier County.As a result,the outdoor conditions at Fiddler's Creek have been unbearable over � the last few weeks. The current situation poses a serious health issue to the residents of and I visitors to Fiddler's Creek.While Fiddler's Creek is aerial sprayed by the Mosquito Control District on a periodic basis, our proximity to the preserves surrounding Fiddler's Creek are limiting the extent of the spraying and the effectiveness of such. In order to address this serious issue and provide interim and short term relief to the taxpayers and residents of Fiddler's Creek while a long term solution is pursued, it is respectfully requested that the Board of County Commissioners, I pursuant to Section 190.012(2)(e), F.S., provide its consent to both Fiddler's Creek Community Development District#1 and Fiddler's Creek Community Development District#2,to exercise the 1 additional power under Section 190.012(2)(e), F.S. relating to the control and elimination of mosquitoes and other arthropods of public health importance. We have, through our District Manager, contacted a highly qualified and competent vendor, PowerX, a qualified contractor used by Miami-Dade County in its efforts to combat mosquitos. While reserving the right to in the future request the Board's permanent consent,we request that an interim and short term consent be granted under the following Conditions: 1.this consent is for the period beginning June 26,2017 and ending September 30,2017. 2. control and elimination of mosquitoes will only be by ground level fogging, by motor vehicle only, by a licensed and qualified contractor, using approved materials. We and the residents,taxpayers and property owners in Fiddler's Creek would greatly appreciate your favorable consideration and consent. Respectfully, Fiddler's Cr ek Community D elopment District#1 (_? j�. -% ___- Fid ee Com Wily Development District#2 Enclosure Cc with End.: Commissioner Donna Fiala; County Commission; Leo Ochs; Nick Casalanguida . . at , . 0 .,...." ga ,. � 4 . .. •t • • • o SCD - : . CD: ;•;.-•••5„,•:.„.„,....;••!;•••• Q Q • �V1'CD t%1 cD o .. O o • CD cD p CD • �..► ; CD • pn • A • S. 1.1 CD •• n r. • • y f 431 kit-.tI. ,,..yr a.x � # 'x^., u^,,..c.,-„,,,...,,,,..,.., ,a .' $ A m- _ Y t L.P 3 r� i M�'yn x :c''•.--;---,,,,,,..-'.,-.' � { 1.-Ci , , .s `9�}�- ` .fit V'�` 'oy n �O E a 3 n '9111 r cr) A, l .;-- .ii-,-!:1,1'w.,-4 .3� a O2. 1 S 4 a 4 ,r. O r-' Y2Y 1.1° .''''i'''' ;t fir cr a, � ,,� � �N,,5 $ ` 1".' ' +t±.,.,riV's., tt*V.1- ' - .:ItriNf„..4P lyi(4',L-'!,l'i:,W.:4-,4%, a CD O .. f S 4, or* j IF? •t,...„ m ' ti 73 I'ml t } • �T • [� 71� big M1rh `- t , i.. � • te `. / , 41,1, , ,......i, _ m., 7 ,. - *, ,,, .F.::: .1 -,-.--,„.. . 1 Z-i 0 Cf) 5 0 M W Vs 03 CD i III II 7 N 3 (D 3 0,• _ VI,e;•-•,. I �: CO r f 4 ,, 4 c 46 CA 0 tri 1i1I zit: ..c-_-_) Ejifi ._1•1 0 • ifliiilitl Ilit; tiil 411-4 oo_ < cx F•••+ • f • r CDI 7C i'-: slt 1 t /�- r) 5 t .. ‘L l 1 c • 11 N > _ ,i o' t , : . �= rum �!" P-1 1 i ,pII H . . � ft 1 ,.. , v • 310, ., ,.,....:'....43._m c. N 1 z" i Cwa1...km 7 _._ _ kDIgo_ 0 r....._ , im ft- \ ' , till S . . ,c) 0._i ca r-i rk ur ''.,,-,f.:-'::.';.:4,44_.-•::- '-'. ' .* 4. F '< (tee. .' . C) 1 1.... i • CD , F 4; H -t n 4 ,, ., _ .. O i, , p'444.--, ,, Et ._,A 4,1 ruT...„ '' • S (206 R. z r 4 , „., pi.) 0 ,,_••• rn \M FI = t.:,.... ""..?,""::,..,..17< • • .. rem H1411131 � - �►.1!414111,•' �144 �J ii)4 ,41Q �+Q)s .191�� I . ki). )hi, 1 1,N41c,, ptA . 4 <-1 i '�IIOI • +i •` O .--- 1 poi 004 . I ' ,14° no9t+ 1 p., x E. � L 410,i 4C.VIPMM it1+1'1w• .;ply 4 14$4i ,,, 4 2 t'r; ,. 4) .i 1 4 ryc 1 *. ..__.�,.. 1 111` X01 to �,.,, . F•-► /lp Iptpp+i'1�r 11t� P'VtV tiii,0091- w' Cf) Ci I `"i �'h1�+Rl,NNrH�llt 1 . F a ''. 4tt"."'1:1:•!,...1.. 1 w 1l 4 • 1 M �j ( .1... } r Ii1 'll f.u 4 v k 411 ' i 0 SSS r• _ e::-?::: ::1:1T4'71,',.;-11r:',:;:5-:?f.:::::' $� =� �'�%+ \� :,., , ,„,.,,,,..„ .,,„ ,,,„,,..''"'i,,,„1i11et e, i erreiiik, •-_.. `� '' i4Q�1eleeiee ; I1 I +� 'IIi1 �- ;w:•�. i 1411 a �e0, ee Si ee eei lie 1 '.! Xi44.1✓d4,..10,0....0.•dt!Ve L`} \ee . ee /ie14gi1 4,',{ l' ti iib,,4i %i;•**:8 e4e' .L:. :: ►14� ee i �,4. iii a itiettao ; 111 a '.f.:,' ►•eS9'••1. . •,';ri 11 . • . I ' 000 DDD • 010 A -{ n<0V Ni m 3 n -IOHH cr, 1 rt . HrUIUf • M 3DD -' 0 0 m Z Z -I rp �....s..+. -I ci�rnrn a 0 y H 0 0 70 7'N-I r- 7 N vi a mD-aa to H A) HmA D< Z ;n u'I rn0-Crn N'• 0 0 0 N I. O NN I .' V 1 NNGI g n N 1 0 t 0' 010 0 n 3. V33 __ _ r n 6-)J J cn 1 J. Al A) M tt', I ' J. -..1 til In • I a I to,� �. ---- 0 ru to v N " O - l0 O. tD G1 N �...? e-3 li 01 -.' 0 rt 01 3 C 13 V n Cu 0 —t D m I••-% t~-' 3.01U31 U VI • N t 2US N • rt .. I ..gu C • 3 LA t ' 3 O 3-I '"r • 44.1 =J. 3 0. H 3 0 3 1 S— � I 3 • 1 3t1 co 1 • • at •• V x • 3) II G1--I • H b 0 • 3* N N 0 •• 0 • • • . I . •• l • . • t n , • • . I'll • l'''4 .fir t ' {., • .s • • i • S h' ••• 4 • ' . • i ' 4 \ i • ' , •, t PI (,f)`> i, i r • L}/TA • y • r , Q3 + t i. i e � - I •• - • i ' �• • • • y1• . ' ' . ^ 8 r Q ISI IL 4 A s • 1-; , I A. -r.-, t f. r • rel' +fit. • .' is • i !' . • r, • ,' • { o f i:S n. .: j , ,i I) t 1 ' I '' - ,p -.) . l ' • V ' ` ' i e ' t ,I, (ID sR • fr fl) , _r a `" s ,, - M. - • If i .7-- ..•., a.: i . . •-..--- .•-, 3:1 .i• ..t.- - , t --...... , • ... Cf) •, •. -,:...,_.- ....._., , i . 4....,:. a... 1 ... (1) LI We. .....: r..7.s'.. t:IX 4 ..... -.7.7 .... CZ/ , "4""'ll 7 ii', • , ... CJD . . ... .... . , 4..) .. . • •—.4 IC "MOP r . .....„4:,, . rt. tins[11111P 1.: • v—..1 es :- t craC7 i, ..,.. — \ 0 , t J ".....71 • • • • I C P >' I A 0 fn y ,*k� O 4 _ • • \ ..«.v/ ». C ♦ i n l � t W C11""i , J to Z CL) f ' TSV ,..... 8. ' .. I j, 1; Y is 1 t - -.Ti• ''. ''.. • • • . , .. . .,..• ..,. '''''''1•4'..',.'.7%.x..,/.1 ' , I( t— *k' ift:';1 % . .- ''''' '''' '4,kt.; • — . -4-•-) . , v.......4 ..,-.::,....."'-: -rg. . ",.......4 N... ,,,,,,,,- • -1- -ilif,,- 1 w., -•.: '..4, 1 '''-•- - -s- 4'1 1 ....,. a," .11...fi' .''' .: .- ' 4 i . \ , . Si I ; -' • VII.,,'1. ' .. , -...;.; a , i ' .4,1s.-:4 f •. l' ..,_,. l•-•'.•,' , 1. ',...,_,,,-, - , . i -°-. ,_..4ii'z'- . • 3, -'... t 4- '..,--,;i7„\• '":' --;•,°,-,',-,...,-', i ' - 4., 7 C110) ...':.'.. ,,_ , , . • (*air) .. , ., . .j..,•',., --"7" ,.21,. i Ea• . EE , . . I .1' 1 a 1 n 1 .• :77,'tE;y' : ' • , • , • 4 . . . . k •,. , , . „ .,.. . t v .., .4 s.„.. 4., . . i -..... • 4.. ,. c 0 m u; OG °. 3 LTJ a+ fit- o ,, u ce 0 /. g u i tin z ..`, J x c O in y n{}t o —.. j — u- :1 p " ; % ' f 2 0 '= i X „ c e L: i 4 c L U.1/.• LQ " Z. ✓ or O ct`21N , 'v s; ,c y .:4 *4 W e G x e m c = .0 Cv^ t0A c4 V of �r 0 o = ems.. o G := 0. C., • 3 j fi W W. ,spa A tart ;a ' L 7 0 cA L V k: j 7 Q tip0 en 0 % �] O o DI a 0 Q (j a 10 Cd T fq3, 3,1 J. V U .J f^ a.. L4 , H O M ,e !-` 0. 0 :a= f o . 0 o 1'y .t7 7 Q I ,r. ..., .< w rs O - .Z LJ o. v: ,_ L L .d LI (�] L I., .4 m w. t1 L = il x li F- v4. z • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • , 4} d 5 OO j . ..• .i..••:'''.'.0. •••,.....s. .....,.. . . . :.: •••••••.:-.0.!..:•'.,.........'.,..:..: ....:•...:::1,..::::::,,';','......-.',...1...,.:,'••:::•..i.:::::..::::;:••„:•:•••• '•'•:•••'..•••:••••••••••••,•'••:::•: ....• . . ,, \\ 1� .........-.c.)::,..........': �- =� •... . , • 4uawa2euen alseM pips;a luauwedaa`aa2euelN suo!leaadp'zanbseA sJawley0 luawaSeue j alseM pnos;o luawlaedaa'aopaa!a uo!s!A!a'AaseD aai luawa2eueo!alseM Nos to luawlJedaa'aopaala Alndaa'olla!aneyj fined :3 s.J!e}}y lewalx3 pue leluawwano2Jalu! ;a!yo'eaaageD rt-irr --ront 'AlaaaDu!S •Alunoj apes-!we!W of ao!Aaas anoA noA>luegi •£Z/0 -E'L6 aagwnu pealuon aapun 2u!deospuel pue ao!AJaS uMel Aaluo Jo;aohealuoo-qns e se gtOZ;o lsn2ny u!AlunoD aped. we!!Ai of sao!Aaas loaluo3 ol!nbsow 2ujAoad ue2aq XaaMod leyl a2pajMoure of s!S!yl :aaaolelaa sib!aeaa 9LTE£ ld laaalS 6ZT MS SUS XaaMod aa2euew uo!leaadp aaaolelaa auueuy•s!Al LIOZ`LZ/uenuel • II Ao2•apep!wEIw 9999-17LS-0E i 9Z l EE epPo!j O 1.9 l al!nS•laaIIS is t MN t l l 99991,LS-SOE 1 Jl1Nt103 L4LEE epPold'PIM! W V I W DOLS allnS •iaaalS pun MN SZSZ luawateueW alseM Nos • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I • n a CD ® A`o CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MMIDDIYYYY) 6/8/2017 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.This CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: if the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(Ies)must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder In lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER -ONTACT NAME: CPC FINANCIAL SERVICES INC PHONE MX.No,Ex (305)774-9618 FA C.Nol: (305)7749620 3835 SW 8 St ADDRESS: Imodiancpc-insurance.com Coral Gables, FL 33134 INSURER(S)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC it INSURER A: Markel Insurance Company INSURED INSURERS Associated Industries Ins Power Exterminators Inc INSURER C: dba Power X INSURER 0: 8815 SW 129 St INSURER S: Miami,FL 33176 INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR ADDL SUER exp LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE INRn SVVD POLICY NUMBER (MM/DDrYYTY1 IFF MMDCO I LIMITS X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE S 1,000,000 CLAIMS MADE X I OCCUR PREMISES(Ea occurrence) $ 100,000 MED EXP(Any one parson) $ 5,000 A x x PCG20013361-04 5/17/2017 5/17/2018 PERSONAL5AOVINJURY $ 1,000,000 GEN.AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE 3 2,000,000 i —�POLICY I I JEOT ri LOC PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG S 2,000,000 OTHER S AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT I $ fEs soddsnl) I ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY(Per person) S n OS ONLY _ SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY(Per acddent) S AUTOSHIREDONLY AUTOSNON- ONLY PROPERTY DAMAGE $ (Per accident) $ UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE S 2,000.000 A X EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE x x PCU20013361-04 5/17/2017 5/17/2018 AGGREGATE 5 2,000,000 DED RETENTIONS $ WORKERS COMPENSATIONPER _ AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY Y/N STATUTE I ER ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE E.L.EACH ACCIDENT S 1,000,000 B OFFICERAIEMBEREXCLUDED? II N/A x AWC1084462 611/20176/1/2018 (Mandatory In NH) E.L.DISEASE-Ea EMPLOYEE S 1,000,000 If de.ufbe undo DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT S 1,000.000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS(LOCATIONS/VEHICLES(ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,may be attached If mon space la required) 1 CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE I .9P''" L'. 01988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2016/03) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD Rick papart#4a,� Florida Department of Gove note 4° - ° Environmental Protection • Carlos Lopez-Canters Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building Lt. Governor ' ° • 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard "o Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 Jonathan P. Steverson ''ental Pt°% Secretary III August 31, 2016 To All Managing Agencies for The Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund and Mosquito Control Programs of the State of Florida Re: Updated Guidelines for Mosquito Control on State Owned Lands Dear Colleagues: I am writing on behalf of the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection(the "Department").The Department serves as staff and agent for the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund of the State of Florida(the"Board")for the administration of state owned lands,title to which is vested in the Board. You are also aware that the Department leases these lands to state agencies for management as state parks,preserves,forests,wildlife management areas and other conservation and recreation areas. It is the responsibility of the individual managing agencies to work in conjunction with the local mosquito control programs to maintain a public lands mosquito control plan for these lands. In 1987,the Department of Natural Resources(which later became the Department of Environmental Protection)provided basic guidelines for mosquito control on environmentally sensitive and biologically highly productive("ESBHP")lands owned by the Board. Flat fan, thermal fog technology used for the basis of the 1987 guidelines consisted of high volumes of mineral oil diluents with active ingredients(typically fenthion)at 21 to 50 ounces/acre. Today,ultra-low volume(ULV)adulticide applications are used,which produce application rates from 0.5 to 2.5 ounce/acre.ULV technology produces very small droplets that impinge upon the flying mosquitoes rather than deposit within the environment, which results both in reducing environmental risk and a more efficacious control of mosquitoes. In light of the ongoing public health risk associated with mosquito-borne disease,as well as the advancements in technology and chemistry over the past three decades,I am writing to inform each of the Board's managing agencies and the mosquito control programs of an update to the Department's guidelines for mosquito control on ESBHP lands owned by the Board. Page 2 of 3 August 31, 2016 The Department recommends the following guidelines for mosquito control on ESBHP lands owned by the Board. A. Non-ESBHP Lands.Areas not designated ESBHP can be sprayed in accordance with EPA label restrictions and Rule 5E-13 of the Florida Administrative Code. B. State Owned Submerged Land (below mean or ordinary high water). These areas are not to be sprayed. Current EPA label restrictions already prohibit such spraying on submerged lands. C. Aquatic Preserves, Estuarine Research Reserves. These areas are not to be sprayed, except in upland areas above the mean or ordinary high water mark. Materials must be applied in accordance with the EPA label restrictions.Adulticide treatment is permitted on non-submerged lands provided that: i. Adulticide is applied according to Rule 5E-13 of the Florida Administrative Code, and stipulated in the Arthropod Control Plan accepted by the land managers and the mosquito control program. ii. The applicator is a Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) Public Health Pest Control licensee for a mosquito control program, an entity contracted by a mosquito control program, or an entity contracted by FDACS or the Florida Department of Health. iii. Adult mosquito population monitoring must occur within the boundaries of the treatment area just prior to any treatment. D. Upland Areas (such as parks, reserves, forests, wildlife management areas, educational research areas, and recreational lands). Spraying is allowed and materials must be applied in accordance with the EPA label restrictions. Adulticide treatment is permitted on non-submerged lands provided that: i. Adulticide is applied according to Rule 5E-13 of the Florida Administrative Code, and stipulated in the Arthropod Control Plan accepted by the land managers and the mosquito control program. ii. The applicator is a Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services(FDACS)Public Health Pest Control licensee for a mosquito control program, an entity contracted by a mosquito control program,or an entity contracted by FDACS or the Florida Department of Health. iii. Adult mosquito population monitoring occurs within the boundaries of the treatment area just prior to any treatment. E. Public Health Emergencies. The State Health Officer has the authority to declare that a threat to public health exists when the Department of Health discovers in the human or surrogate population the occurrence of an infectious disease that can be transmitted from mosquitoes or other arthropods to humans.The State Health Officer must immediately Page 3 of 3 August 31, 2016 notify the Commissioner of Agriculture of the declaration of this threat to public health. The Commissioner of Agriculture is authorized to issue a mosquito or other arthropod declaration in those counties needing additional mosquito or other arthropod control measures based on the State Health Officer's declaration of a threat to the public health. The Commissioner of Agriculture shall order such ameliorative mosquito or other arthropod control measures as are necessary to prevent the spread of disease, notwithstanding contrary provisions of Chapter 388, Florida Statutes, or Rule 5E-13, Florida Administrative Code. The Department encourages all managing agencies of Board owned lands and the respective mosquito control programs to evaluate existing mosquito control plans for Board owned ESBHP lands considering these updated guidelines. Sincerely, Gary F. Clark Deputy Secretary Land and Recreation GFC/dd/r cc: State of Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Agricultural Environmental Services State of Florida Department of Health Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Recreation and Parks State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Coastal Office State of Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services,Florida Forest Service Q 0 1 • • • . 0 5 rm. CD c-F 03,..t Q CD CD o o p-t 0 0 n CD al, Ci)c-F (,) (71 r+ 0 (/) - c-F. • P CD Q CD �. b - o cDcD rn • CD r Q o 0 • • • n .3 a. .i ..•'''',-A- is t - CC - /1"7:::1 `T � x,151 �,�. '� - V r S µ . ai -, + Qs o f ?, X 1 4 0 C c+ cp 0 o o �. o c o _ Cf) N 00 cn o m CD CD 0 0• Pi O '-1 " -O) - `� (!) . ..... , „, , ,„,. ,...,.„ . s. ..„..„4.., ,,, ,,, _ _. . , ., , 4 JtCD '1.____, O t. '^ �ifirt . . . "4,-14 , ' l5� b :!•,,,,:f.::.,_.. , .":0..,i, ' 1- i • ' iirt, :1. 03 , : vd,:,::_,,,,:.41114,.. -, Fx , .ifli,,,,,,,;i..:.,, :1:, 1:131......io.i • ... 1 4 D.) ,. --A 2 \ V 0 �/^ C elir I • N O CL CD L-e.° fD c' n — �' CO 2 r / r c i of o a 0 1 i'Jiti !iIfr ili0 ig i i 41ikr • f,',:l.' 4 t �r `. `` (7,-,....-, W - ' tst/ 1. r `� si II 1 ,- fa ft . I b - :, oft . s �, llir alb 0 %.0 NI241)y immimm Z'" ) Mr i ` (,) . 1 1 i....., • -Ic , c—t- 1 i (D r""1 . ,. ... .. . . .,,. . _. ,.r • . ,..„ u ,,.,_ ... ,. . .,.„... . . .., .,... I..., • , „,:-..,- ".-t....„.„,_ :_,..,,-, ..„ . ... .;,,,.... . , _ , ..,..„._ . ,,,. n . _ . _ . , ,,.._ . 1 µ .. ,.... � ifs.', ,.„..,„: (:)...i. _ .: .,...,. , ,,..,.. , .44 :•,.._;„.... ++ 1 ., . _ . . . _. .. ,.. . ..... . . .,,. .. . .. .,.. . , __ . . ... . . . , . . ., .. . . . _... ._. ,. . ....... . -;:,, ,.,..",„,:,.t-,,:_ ..,.„,:-_,,,,,--; ,...,..,_:,,,, ..,,,ii:,;,,,,,,,,:;,--,.--- 7,;....4.,..,:,.. ,, __ 1 1 ,,,,, .7.,.. -_.,i:- 41, -r-'7;-'i:. ';."';-'.-- --,i..'t.;:--, d I 1.. . . . • • H 1-.1 • y4 ^. 9 s cuff -, x t � '. • s Fl ' t. _lrc\'l ,..4+ K r Ill 0 I-• CD rt. 4. ‘; A"►l►i,iv‘44?kt)11`414vt44.1t4t1 i1141N4 svo4 „ . . +p44141ii:, %..•.It'- --''',-'-• k-- 10'A►444, T: ci N►,1141 )0111111114, ti C) 14011441 111i 40 4444'�11°/°4 811111 100+ sl►/ii �,��19 0v , .1.,..,—,, r+ < M--+ • 01 ,+ , 04 J11 /° a°I O :11N°e� f4, 41'1 01 elguar pt• 4lh1i1+`A dl,4 "'—'--, •—•.—=d ~'t 1.11!1 a° „ �:44$i 4i ,..: � 1 ‘114101/0 ; '/ 111/4x1/1 ; n 11 11141\4' - cid()111.X11/1'!1!!"!/ � 11 "Il///h � r ..4"1 Ilis 1, .. . ' • 4 (—I-- ,,,• . X011 f R �', 1,..6• O \ 0 t:11'I*:/.: , ,,,,:„.1..!..,37,,,,..', ' s v _ Ci) 0,3 '11+ • ¢+ 1111+ f � s7"-.••,.''.• Y w ti h�W 0 11111i111�1 q'91,t. , P P 1 ,: H ,' '1'1111;11i1111i f /�,tS'i Ste''i' ' y • 4' 1111) 1� ,.,',�S 41,yItS1. a 1;11 ,: 1/ 14'i '��; 111�1111s � � t;i L � gli�q toll s�+,, •., �� 1 + �j 1 ' 1111111yi 1 ,1 �l�l�.l'�f,'P qya >'I.'c jp 1 � �1��1J111'1 1\111 11f..iil�:1 //'/y r.,qb JP g10+y,i�.'' 1+4i&Vt'11 m ti 0 f ° t -i-1-1 1000 3>DD o 1 1 rr , 1 c0 r v , •1 n100700 1 CDD = n rt ir HrNut __ 0 m DD� i 0 mo z z -1 fD -Si. -{ 0-<7aD NM ba m0-I0 0 1 0 z•• rr z C NJ Vii O p R' N �O 1 •• v 1 1 --- 1 1 rNa1 1 N O to d. z. Q1• tO g 010 0 r-g, _.t. al I- ft V 3 3 ---- y to -1...1. � 3 - -., c).._rJ J a3 N VD 1 —s ...1. ',. 1 fD f1 A 1 IA J. Q. 3 fl) VI V NJ 'O 0 -1 A kJ, 0. N C C NJ ....i r1 Crt -I O 0'1 3 •1-s at C to� ' -- .0 (D D co 1-, 14 VI tp V1 I 01 CL N VI NJ 1 x N V.1 I xw C v, i -3 3 V 1 3 rt to fit. O x-1 rt w x-I. 3 $fD Q. VI I-' 3 O 3 ....1__, 0 x r AI 3 .p i i a cog. V X (.0 VI 0 Q —�J N y0 • 3 X N NJ O 0 ii • • 1 • • . , l Ilk 'slitr•1 Ny 9 ` •211/ 0V . 7 •. -A '.. q. . • 1 . * ' ' t 1 14 .t r? ' . ' !J)~ 6 1 • • C • 0 • d i i_1r; •, f . i f C2 •� ' ` 1� ,1111 ,i ' ,. ,• . 4 1 ' , • 1e • 1. • . _ • Ikb a t • • • • i r 1 1 f L V , 1 r I. • r--/— ,� ' s • 1 I 1 S • • 9 cIa, --CI CICIrli. D..) .L.01 C(C1 1..........i pi -'•1 . 0-s 4eieepor ..44`,' 1 ikk. (4 , . .., .. ,...- . ,e .,._ . . 1::.) 0.7 --' 4,4., rtIkt,, 'lt . Z ' ... . 1, --- i, m+. A ', i 1 i J '. I . • ( rMil .4 ., , ilEMEA • ,-. k-, (1) ,, , ....._ CID . _ .. 4 4....,4. * : e . Di) . i , . , N Yz'r: ... • , .., . ',-. ,,•4 .4 CD .... .....„ r , , , , . ........_s.r 4. ,W.,_......,___... . Nit- • [[,••• ,. CD I,-•e.. -..... el -. . . .-. .,.. W--.-- , ',....... 1 ... -,.. •., , = -• ..... ... [ 4 1 • ...A .1• pr("wl YCD •Ird ',,e 9 1. ri w/ 7 Ir CD .�, 0 0 1 -- o CD 1 r1. 1 f 0...A • ! (--1- x--, 0 1: 1. i t1 ,. Di) 1 .. ,--1 i4 . _ ,i. 1. ..- } < I9 i 4 • 1. '. 1,44.4'"1-': `t t ..';'-'-T40.1'. .-di*: ._ a, ', 4 ' ' i r Ii ,.... . _,,,,,„ CD w , � a ; . IVA 11 1 1. 1 I I I I 1 M. ::1h i.17 pm ` ` t 4t, 'y K k. ter' y. _V C) :F` s .. '' ; ' da _ , b .6 t - J l Y , . ._ t. f. t \ : :: 1 ri I 1 7 ,,,, > u ,..." 5: 7;F. 0 rn X c -' x r- rri 2 K e vIrr 4'' ,... , :- :::X ....: ---• ..... < C: t-i ' -r, -C ,-1,...,_ • c... -1,'" M .... CC 1:•"' " ,..., ,..- .., = ij Ai :''..., --:N . - :irf "1' -ei -.1 7 E tc.; -; rr r ..... r /) 7J •. -• r. 14 r' n -I y. z .,... 4.. ...' .,'' el g? ••• ril :::.*; ...1 = '-d ' Le •- cr0 rrt > o ' ..., ...; c ,... ,, .. ...r, tV ,... :2" t4,14 0 CD V) rrl = = ea rt 0 c; r• j "I 41 limmk • •-) = • E —1-'•) N. x -z. = ,-, .., -0 ;..... -i -* "r. M 'XI 0 Cm) OC Se, r.t.'r ilimmkik • 1 0"0 X 2 I. CC .« (TI f- 3: c '..r.• z r t's: .''. g .i+ r __(.01 . .., ,_.4 c- '0 7. 1 bi?. ,1 "C =r- rr s rr "0 Z. ra > 7; rt•-- z ts -1 --i 0 .... = ..„, - 2 .... 0 = x al r- a- - a , .... rr-,e, ':-.; .4.1.-..,, •,-.! -,-1 LI R 0 rr iv! 0 si ,xi x v. X rit - ,-, ..•I tn r'l = L x 7 2c• rr, r= = cr, x , - -,- = ?• ,, 0 0 = -r; -I = Fr* rr: 74 r. MI la X C • . . • • Q' N `-� gD, .1,...1 /� 0 ri- p�y-u 5 w7-ii CD 1,•:_•: w ro. C7 0 r. F- O 0 t-r- o CD n CD CD 1 Solid Waste Management 2525 NW 62nd Street• Suite 5100 MIAMI-DAD Miami,Florida 33147 COUNTY T 305-514-6666 111 NW 1st Street•Suite 1610 Miami,Florida 33128 T 305-514-6666 miamidade.gov January 27,2017 Ms.Arianne Delatorre Operation Manager PowerX 8815 SW 129 Street Miami,FL 33176 Dear Ms.Delatorre: This Is to acknowledge that PowerX began proving mosquito control services to Miami-Dade County In August of 2016 as a sub-contractor for Ginley Lawn Service and Landscaping under contract number 9743- 0/23. Thank you for your service to Miami-Dade County. Sincerely, Aimee Cabrera,Chief Intergovernmental and External Affairs c: Paul Maurlello,Deputy Director,Department of Solid Waste Management Lee Casey,Division Director, Department of Solid Waste Management Chalmers Vasquez,Operations Manager,Department of Solid Waste Management iI • V/ CD ARSDCERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCEDATE(MM/DDIYYYY) 8/812017 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(les)must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder In lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: CPC FINANCIAL SERVICES INC ONE AM. .Est); (305)7749618 f .No): (305)7749620 3835 SW 8 St ADDRESS; )modiat83cpc-insurance.com Coral Gables,FL 33134 INSURER(8)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC P _ INSURER A: Markel Insurance Company INSURED INSURERS: Associated Industries Ins Power Exterminators Inc INSURER C: dba Power X INSURER D: 8815 SW 129 St INSURER E: Miami.FL 33176 INSURER F: COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN,THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. HER IADDL SUER POLICY EFF POLICY EXP LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE INSn W1R1 POLICY NUMBER IMMIDDIYYYY I(MM/DD!YYYY) LIMITS X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 DAMAGE TO RENTED CLAIMS-MADE IX I OCCUR PREMISES Me occurrence) $ 100,000 MED EXP(My one parson) S 5,000 A x x PCG20013361-04 5/17/2017 5/17/2018 PERSONAL&AOVINJURY $ 1,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 POLICY PECOT LOC PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGO $ 2,000,000 OTHER: $ AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $ IEs accident ANY AUTO BODILY INJURY(Per person) $ OWNED —SCHEDULED BODILY INJURY _ AUTOS ONLY AUTOS (Per accident) $ HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $ AUTOS ONLY _ AUTOS ONLY (Per accident) UMBRELLALIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE S 2,000,000 A X EXCESSLIAB CLAIMS-MADE x x PCU20013361-04 5/17/2017 5/17/2018 AGGREGATE S 2,000,000 DED RETENTION S $ ' WORKERS COMPENSATION PEROTH- AND EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY STATUTE I ER ANY PROETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTNE Y!N EJ...EACH ACCIDENT $ 1,000,000 B PRI OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? I I N/A x AWC1084462 6/1/2017 6/1/2018 (Mandatory in NH) EL.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYEE $ 1,000.000 If yes,tl�acdpe untlar DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L,DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $ 1,000,000 I ' DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES(ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,May be attached It mon space Is required) CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE I aire4' '' ®1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. ACORD 25(2016/03) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD O O (I) a • h .. ,� 'EXHIBIT F-1v�° r f II r .. ( 7 IIIUIIIIIITUt ( IIIIIIIIflHIII • r__,• ------- Mille. Mk 1 :ii - 1111".. 10-3 1 I r'/ PROPOSED BUILDING F. '1•. A ra I•a. Ark 701 �r111 ale 1r, • X10-4 PIA IIINFIININVAI —V - E 11—,. ., ::11_..1...A 4, lik , , ----7 f All ilf L.-- -',,-Aariog v * X10-5 ®IF Villirk-.._111W-- _y. -. a ,x �• i ,b e,^ • 744 r .: a LEGEND — ,,;�I- s .,,,,iii„., llul�� �1• PARKING LOT VICINITY(75 LF) p� 10'HT TREES 15'O.C. ' •---'� . — - 20'CT SABAL PALMS @10'O.C. '.- '1. � � 30 CT SABAL PALMS©10 O.C. RESIDENTIAL BUILDING VICINITY(205 LF) . - 16'HT TREES @ 15'O.C. 20'CT SABAL PALMS©10'O.C. 30 CT SABAL PALMS @ 10'O.C. �C ik !� IMMOKALEE ROAD er CLUBHOUSE VICINITY(70 LF) � 10'HT TREES @ 25 O.C. °e 94g- .r -�;r,. 4 '��. 20'CTSABAL PALMS @10'O.C. 30 CT SABAL PALMS @ 10'O.C. " EXISTING SLASH PINES(±10)+SAW PALMETTO • SUPPLEMENT WITH 10 SABAL PALMS @ 16'-20'CT 1 OWNER/CLIENT/CONSULTANT: PROJECT: TITLE: SEC:22 TWP:48S ROE:26E 1 Designed by: STEVE SAMMONS g P E N I N S U L A 1� Drawn by: ALEJANDRO AVILA 1 ENGINEERING` CCC WEST BUFFER Date: MAY 2017 12600 Golden C.M Parkway ADDISON, ADDISON PLACE PLANTING Drawing Scale: 1'=200' 4Naples,Ronda 34105 LLC Project Number: P-CRKW-005-005 Pham:239.403.6)00 Fex 139161.1]9] CONCEPT E r7dmro�aTe7Atm zalion*26275._�„e rea0,n File Number: P-CRKW-005-005-X10 Fbrida CwMcau oL4000riea0un 0262e5 C—X10-1 Sheet Number: 01 of 06 W N Z -I -A -I HId �D() Z7 z1G) D* DDmr-.D3DDDcn -1 -ivx(m 0 �� v P i00> Haco00C� O m-I O -10KH _5ccn<Cm c vn < r-C3D m�(nG)xi C�� <OXX < mmn 2 z x� D01 D m T. m z-ioz mco _ > mm_Iz PO 0 P=� P P Oc2 my=imI-0r m�D x O C)m�n < mcnZO -Di,,73O�n cow cc—neryCmi> �rD- zODD�- O DDS m mmmoo3 zm 3 00 ►nc m (nmc)v��M zm y ((I) O gym ' G)CDnD )--i 0 0 o Z-IN3 x 0 m3-IDD�x DD r fir . � mT <(�� _izZ G)_iN m 0 nzW-_n-A r m x zz (nom y m pp O.� mZ OO poZW� wZw r.)c, m� D�� ��W D Cl) r -1CIHAmMI D Oxm in _ w p3 _r0 CDmzp077 H mm73D3 µD-1iI++r, Cm N,_AO ' .K 'coFFw * (0n-Impzm(nzR. -0o- D 1-ZDjt x0 DmD nxic oµi+�wooz DnD DG mx30 to icor z . T(mo x<x 70 3 I+ D>-NO"-i .20x0 C> — m A ,� — LST v mmm m -4 Dnn� 0° -IDzm X-1 *00-0mc>z cz1-Oc (nOcn cn c�A� DDO mcnm pmDnmmO�Trcx3Dz zOr� �� b mm(mnn�n3 cn _v .tea (4(nr53m(n�0Woizpl (Dxmm- Dw o cn�2omm3 O �' C gNN��� D O< _1mm Z z acn po cAi, O N in z s00000 •orD co -nr0 23 m 0m -1Om-<p Zi+ ,,E.---i+o R AA . W-p m�0,1 m z >Z- C ruin 0�0 0 mzm -i-i' r > 0 0My 01x x 73 Oo mx > -1X -I -i Dr N o m m 0 z (nNz Um •tom 0 (n 0r (n o) cn c o O w -- o 333 �oo Mill c) - o� �-..` I n N r w r oo@i$ O6 x C7 r o 0 com Z j o nx- 5555- a a��' , H-a3C] I Ow xZOC� m? 0o fonw :000 m 1 0O co N mnzz 0 () mZCa)a) oxr O a)13-In > 05 n- cnnzo-o 'i LJ I vv a):(1 mfmn<m mm mo mm mm23m ...- •T«�� 0 mm Om Z�O0 C Wm c z,{>Z ;.1. .a2 z -atZ0 Cu< zv ncWP m' m A �v�om [mn o my m r m _ m ;.x a 4 rrz mm --1 OOZ X co m W �ml ai 0 Z A W n o r n ` • m ..... `��tlli -- -_...),,- ''') AMENITY iI z r- AREA rmn x "age ' o CO I I�_ m m -0 n Ir - • K n -'x(n I m O I O .. z x, me ± 4 I I 3 W m �� I m� E. g, O m m --4 i D-Z-i .'k - m_< F a oo I D A 1 , �- -1 I oco II r �, - -- . .ad --1 � �r ; - �, o o - mz I %3D I A•- a _ --, �O I m cn Er; e �� o� I Icn❑� o op 0 -<H Z I o z g 9 A a a y m p ---'-D- ----'---- XI 0 D m - I c mmm n -<2 m I m I (A zL) m D3 � I yy 1_ a' CO z '\ n m z� 3' rn C I I 0 \ -• Z I 0 aaY ITo -i • co m cornI Om , ....\E __ , 7 , �t cA� in Aa' a, C Z m CI M I m5 73 mT Om ii t7 Om m mXi n m -= n m 03 m OC Tai 73w k, I D T0° o o m 111 73 tm A I A 00i a _ Q2IdA3 NOISN3,LX2 Q2iVA3'IfOH 1 ITIO3 Zanin,i1 2131'11002131'1100oa oo CP/021 nvItTIa (no I I a r I m m m99 'i ; _,a >fZ qgII D Rpg.. � O$ I ...acu\n...s\vu—v—-vw.wxcµvr.-—.—ER coo(vuo.wm17X\ORurn u n n 0002017 10.27.a. a, 11' ..• -' ,"„:0-4.-,------,-.°: I. j' tit- q. ' -.-- :-:. ,--, -'. ; :•47". r . tt-"-'w ."'.4,1 rril,' i j it , . k ,... ,A.1.4.,'...- ,I}' .,..fes EY {>Op t 7 4.irt y i- { . ° tY "If M ri e: tti , i.1.14.. It"61" ,Y (F Y` `� 7.2. 20 • > 7lII p j„. `.'^�,,....."'! ��`. Ptf31„f��1pa Q. #� � s.,.K.-K.- ,�'� iA e{% ''',i, \ f Ape ,� i t{ + x pa - s;',4:12E t, 44; ---4.4" ' ' * ',. l',,,:—.,:k ,,, '.,:it' ' /," J li iN _ __.1 !i. a # aAia a3�»oo�_ 4. .f ,. . !!"--'''..!.. -,-.: 1. • : , ., r:1 ,,, § $ '. ' ,, rm + �*,,a ' I `, A rn r>sm b +� "i-x_ 4 �, - l I �; F�, ii t. et tatiel 1,e . ., �. -•ii),.1 " f,. 1iIII 1rc. Try s go g 1. I .13 o C .. {l{ t Er< a �,qof tt , VV ��• O „Al 1}tis'. f'' ..NI Ai> [', D!!+. 12 " , ".44..- ';,'„1, ,-- x , 1. yaxex[[i4 k�i; c �k iirt i t E s yco ..i i oii Ca n w to �• . ' - ',.,S C t,, �..,y ,->,., D Attachment: Attachment 6-Items Collected at CCPC (3252 :Addie's Corner) Palm Springs Area Stormwater Outfall (MGG — 15) Exhibit Collier County Stormwater Management Section -, ovumi �. Golden Gate Main Canal "! y -.:--�� �^� 4 ' • ' �� $ 127,325totaldesign ; 4 dmil ..-:;°, �t f. }� . : and const cost 9/09 52' r�: • .4:� FIF est. add cost to widen to �_ ' i Rj - "4 , Lb i. + 1 ri iJ b. , '� s � l 1�'ai a 82 is$76,00,0_ ? d� v , j�''w' 4 1 �[. -!.-4" , ..�.T[ - 1 r i (7' • ' ., - rS CtTVCaAT£ 2: -z-'"— 41i4D ' t Irl1 - • ^.r .�r,ad�,�....¢¢(( 1. �1 s( :.S.w wih;9... ., �!u'm.AA ,w 'nw .I. 'b' � r.4 ,yaifl4F.'•^ slit 111141$ , ,� ' , kd�����e41r ra��.;ra0�• unimproved, estcost ��� :; DPC= $150,000 1 a -, r , c 4. ! v Cz•t r«� ` ,47 k` 41t. ars! ,_, 1.,,,,,:,. Rehab costs$122,679, ..c.,'' r . rr v. �„,, ,,, `� , ,..,,..1,.„..,../ A .,„...,-_, ,, .,.1� .. M , . 9/09, 3 sections , ,,_,.:-.., „ r � ir. ,S a 'tt 1+�� ,w .+!.. ?lEC9P1€lN"41'M,�y=+�+ '�+, •r' '.v r-, d o , r .d'' ei 1 Z '�A i �frV��it ny - - J 2i T 1 .[i '''T 4 tili �` t k ' ?,.-" .. mo* �{r 2 1., G Stie ` ; ^h.,.... , ,y.!! `,-+:—. 4 M ri0- 7'i _..A4r t. L 1 �� "` • 1�.., , •q ' • , rIP r �1.: k �1 l 1'(,# , ,i, �[ •' PUD Area t �.i r . ...' s „..,11,- 1A.:),”'R:,% ,. TMS �.+.r_ ,�� ¢Yh�, f , t qc qa j elc...._ c ce 9 w u_ w w CI Z MI �J w 2 O a J a 0 I a z 10:72 Z ,,,•z w O 3-a En — m I0 N En \ z 0 1U W Q a GA N ,I. z icoW P-4 d w Y 3a 0 in v 1 ,k, v, l7 r z2 3-> a a aco a rDATE: , t CLIENT:„1: W JUNE.,2017 SCALE". N/A DRAWN ev: TITLE: ENGINEERING DLP 6610 Willow Park Drive,Suite 2001 Naples,Florida 34109 DESIGNED BY: TRIAD PROPERTY SECTIONS (239)597-0575 FAX:(239)597-0578 MCP www.consult-rwa.com SEC TWP: RGE: PROJECT SHEET 2 FILE 1300190200P T501 Florida Certificates of Authorization EB 7663 LB 6952 NUMBER: NUMBER: OF NUMBER: lune 26,2017 3:52 PM 02013\13001902.00 Hadley Place-PUS.ERP,PPL1008 Civil Engineering Design,Co strualon Plans&TS\EXHIOITS11300190200P TS01 dwar n+n la, i CD Sa baf t ... .... Q Aid c e li CC) y�rseydsww t4� _ . T- ^a-. �' r *i, ` w .; M » e �...,.,Yt.j�___..�*....-r...—w ,tor-r.-----.. . % - - SY I -.,I ' CD ,1 ., koi. --N t-; ' ''. ?Iiii,0014' - '-: - - --t- ,' . -,4: '» ' - 0,..at c u-it (/) w. ��. T 111W141111011111111- it 01 0 rCD i 0o cr Q pc . (r) C. r II p CD imi 1 v a410 , C CD cn o� • . "�+Cr) • � -D m 5° — C/)• 7:-.1o Q O 3• a ON ggc O 0 (D D p Q Q C cn C -Ti SIC __,- — 3 -0 5* t3 ) 5,T, _i (T)- c 0 N T CD "' cn Q• O n Q 3 IT (D Q a Q (D < � Q T, > 3 op n x CD (O (D 0 O �, p C (D O + O O N Q48) o N (-�� (mD I _� .--F- Q D A _yam C `✓ �^V _ SL cri (D 3 0- , a (DD • � o, V 0 ; -. .-- CD (1)N MN C O Q g N O O n CD v) D .-I- \9 (D (D v>• (D � M 0 I A >- W N - A g -I Co g D ° ;mp m < m > x1 (A55pz DDCD OBD DoD -t _ (, 5<_, .l m OD zm Jm Om m z --icvA" 000 zczO = D t D-oZooN OG) �� O 0g -0m O W � ZZO2 omoz (n Cl) Zcr0 nzoon�N p , Z ax fm0 --IZ Cm111 0O gG5 '-'� D � O ct xj fm =1 ), �Nz6?;gmg n1 f=1 m mmm > A. -I -iXvcLim m > W °ico - iipm xr_c,� r,nco› C1 - O0 D9Dp R -i3YX 0G) mc -1 DSD .coN$^,�Tj I+ ZDH. m —10T -umO � O - > z OmnDm gni �r1 Inil--�• "D-7-{zc � z - !• rrrl < D � O -n0 mMOzp pn ---a - z F_- r- mZSv, - ui Dm '', cow r p Dgz0 --1 Zr z tq>zcEzpo Dxm --Im �7 (D * 0v1lzmo = "i �IOzD xj08 3 z0<R1�3z0 n (mi) 0 < 011 > rn _1-10 p Oz � = � � (min (I) CV w�mgr+pmN m O m x z (A m (� m D C p 1+ �a�za�� < I+ 0) Z 2 z 73 m --� m m � 0m z � n 1 ?nZDZrZT m 0 -1 m O m m-Irin2Vf-< IP X z m z (n '� M m I ZONING:RMF-12(7) CURRENT USE:RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY,PALM SPRING NEIGHBORHOOD • ( I + + 1:-.. + r +r + + r+a + _ II 4.%.+ ,{ r T y r + _ Tr , t T tr T II / I ,:,:,,,,,:i.,,,:.„,.:„.,.,, { +.+r``4 { • ` l I0 t 1} ++ +r'++r'(PB 8,PG 21)'x' + y t + t,!:__,_.:_,, ., r ♦1 13 + • _-1 n �!+ rz I • 10'TYPED'BUFFER ^Z'1 33 y - I —_- 0 z 5 c : olli 717, ., 2 r,8 : gl : , 0 Z o I z 0 I m �' , 0 =1 i.C Z GI D • --— -77-`'-"\- -•' • -: _ ,_ "..."..=-'..'_'.."._—-- — ----- 15'BUFFER 1 `• r S P2 TYPE A PlANTINGS I cN .A Zoe m 729 �1 --1- il "\ .......moim....m.... _ ^RADIO LANE_ - _ - ---,;----1,---i-- \. - ZONING:C-3 COMMERCIAL l' CURRENT USE:SHELL SERVICE STATION,BUS STOP SCALE 1-.40 ! !-7 . cd•_ D.R.HORTON,INC. I', IHRIL&L 1 61N!lEIN6 I—!`1i TRIAD RPUD ENI , }: ..,�. MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT C 7777-••""'• . Mt. ,..s. "" ♦ 1. • 4 1 4 ` - a r yJ esy+ { by r � N/ +*4- +� Or (0-4) ut ..• ...., . / .. el ..r. 0 O • V1 d A fmil el tOt N [ 1 A _ • Fir / ' '4 cl \ow *',1 0 II41 X kpl, *Ike N en 4ili: m * m 4.N t M m = \. Ei., . ,I, 70 . ,, ,_. w O 1 \\i,..) - vi . a. r ,al k M ' i \ 0 23 CO CO Au ,"9-oio0.1QaiPAeS.....‘ et gm y1 '•`° """" 3119IHX3 ...-...7.7.77,707.7:....•,,i NVId 1131SV N .,w z $ $ 'JNIiiiN177Ni ana DWI n.,.. °- I Oka '�NI'NOliIOH'il'O .bN . •-.^ z @ o>=.,11YX NOIIVIS 3DIAi13S 113HS/1NVDVA:3Sn 1N32121n) £ �_9NINOZ _ -- I ______- -i:::_...- - - �1�'IOIQE�2I— - I / \ --1 o 1LL1 a CD I m Wa N W 1 r m ts z tri w -- 0 -4 „, , ..- n Q C 213jjnaa Z 3 I , „a.,3dAl,L Y 04o 0 I L co 71 I , Zaz L.11 : W I v J cc O Z I� ce L", m <a I OZZ (LZ 9d'8 ad v �W a ----------— — — -- -- -- 2 - , 3nd.0£X3 a0 Z� 2O C` dcc coZ"' Z ONI- �---- I-a � Ow 1 I w ce 213A(18..a.3dA1,0L CC z z ; V .£L , I J ,' I --� \C H R F 1 z ;1 a � J > °s J n U.1 a n. _ g � yi I 000H21OEIH9I3N 9NI2IdS Wl`dd'AIIW`dj-319NIS 1VI1N34IS321:3Sn 1N32121nJ� w u) (L)ZL-WW21:9NINOZ o CC U I11 Z W z ch VIQ� JZ~ZZD a U C7 w g w O p Q ai z w (� _ z a Ow +I IL > avvix >E-wgao fi +I - 0 cc Z w u) 1- Q w u) O cno�OwgW0m W c � W W Z <0 W O w O Z O W 5 Q Q 1- O > U W U p5L`u,paQO� 1. .. Z ., ~O 5zp � � z ZWz � o co� w cWi� vw � oNW�o=N2ZW LI Q � � z a ? �- � o ~ � O_ wQwl� W 0gQ } w `° > a �? Waz�,---i— OZ wccOa Q ooF .-:� m�Wa3W3mu a ce w z WQUWO QN1- 0QpwQ ctOI- 2 awz0 . aowi�uq�joa aOur 0- u) 0 -' < c� wZDa. - I- JowQ w o t= w2->> z`oz=� m I- 2 -J aw � pp � Q ° 0a (5°W Z1-- Zw � o z � o �o2 2ozJ3Y i. o -1 � Z ~ � Z0w0 CLOZZO WHO Wa00 av� 0O �=W U<c1 WI- (n < 2OZ0Z OOOZa. DE- Z Z W � Z WOX W W �1-t ao I_ p < � g F- 000 < < jO J < CO < < _ 0 _ U) CCQW > 0_ m tO < ' U) H nj M st v i 0 D 0_ is U m ____ ___Jr .<— c\1\ (^ V >4 UA7Y TIIO3 QA c:-.----------='—t- ill '\ Ci ilcc O //// "' li j_/\ p -i--- \ L 1 A ''',, IN , N , Ups r ,,,--\\..) l' ----...,......., -\\ p 4"" 1..) 0 ,.//)/...i\ ' ) cyj - ' ,,,_ W -(0) ' m M .-1,1C-7,- =� 04F---9.6 0 w E- w 411) z Lu J Q U _ O \ I '—'7 -- --- --- --- --- - --- 2I 7 bo 36 4015' I I , L7,' iI I N 1 I >_ I I 35 4 I J LU I 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 !— I , a 34 40' 50 55'----40'-40'-40'-40'--40'-40'—'--65'— j..,..) I 33 40' ,• y ——————.)-----N —— 1)55' g 31 40' � 5 6 7 8 4°' 10 I II Y 30 4 I 2 I I Q I I I 40 11 15'DRAINAGE EASEMENT I I HI20' L.B.E. Q —109.97' 1-55 40' 40' 55'� „999' I \,..„. W 29 40' 40' 12 —� (I) 120' \ Q— 28 40' , 4 3 2 1 I 40' 13 I I I o I I m / 27 40 / 40' 14 I 100'MIN.WIDTH ` ,/ 26 410 . 4°' 15 I I/ • __ __ —< 25 4 I16 II I r50' 55' 40' 40' 55' � 50' 4° I I >- ,30' I 24 4° I 22 21 20 19 I w 40' 17 I \ 1 I Q L Lfi ..._ 23 5014 I I I 45' 18 I � � --- 15'LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENTJ ,/ <� - - - — PALMS—SP RIN6—BOUL€VAB=_ -.. i „--- F _ — 15'LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT -.1 ) I 4OI66' 30 I I I 40' 35 UJ 12 .7 I I I w 1 w 4I' 29 J I313233 34 I J 40' 36 I a Q I-50' 55' 40' 40' 55' 50.0' 4°' 28 I � 40' 37 UJ ' I IY 105' -- •-- 4°' 27 I ,, ,.` I 4°' 38 H I—Uao, 26 -- -- I 40' 39 '4 7 cn 0 ,20.0' 0 4°' 25 i I I $ 40' 40 i I , cC H I 5 6 7 8 1 25'L.B.E. 1HCI- 40 40' 24 I 41 HI55' 40' 40' S5'- I I I I I ' I „so 40' 23 I I H40' 42 I II H ' I I I H, 22 40 43 4 3 2 1 I j_%EMI al' I I 21 I 120.0' I 120.0' 44 1 I --�-- ....4) SI' 40' 20 — j 40' 19 I _ J I ' 60' 40 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' 60 40' I 18 I Q I 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 I 100.6' 40.24' 17 i I i I 7 ,........ t 1 I I 10'L.B.E. --- 30'DRAINAGE EASEMENT 1 I I \ \ o I-- o w w z w U _ el" 1 Cn \\ --- - - I I 36 40,Ts7r I I ' I 35 40' H >— ' 37 38 39 40 :_:2__: 4 44 a 34 55' 40'— 40' —40' 65'-- 4°' 1 I - -_ -- -- 33 4°. I 11---- f -- -- 1 Com 32 4 55 9 40' I 8 I I 31 1 5 6 7 I I II 40' 10 Y 30 40' I 120' I I I Q I 1 1 40' 1 1 I 20' J 15'DRAIN AGE EASEMENT I I L.B.E. 0 -109.97 �55'--45---4M--55'� 11999' I] 29 40' 4D' 12 1 "� 120' I ) p 28 40' 14 3 2 1 I 40' 13 1 1 r � I I ` / 27 40 - -- // f T 14 I I 100'MIN WIDTH a� ♦� I I 1 \ 26 40 15 ' I -/°-- --.< 1 25 40' F__„, 16 S5' 40' 40' 55' � 50'— 40 135' I I 24 4D 0 22 21 20 19 I J 40' 17 i I \\ 23 50.4' 45 18 I I I v ) I 15'LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT } A C-- - PALMS Md�-BL3l�L-E-VA��= S ____ -.., O 15'LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT \ I< Cr III 40.66' 30 -) H40' � � 4 1 1 29 I Q 3122.; I 32 33 34 I Q 40' 35 36 H1-50 55' 40'--40' 55' 5o.0' 40' 1 4D' 37 Y --� 128 -- -- Q 4I Hkff , \ 40 38 , —— — 1 a039i � 0 120.0' a0 40' 25 I I 1 I 4o' 40 25' ; I i 5 6 7 8 1 L.B.E.' 410' 24 I 4D' 41 1 --55' 40' 40' 55'—iI 4 23 I 1 I i 4�' 42 40' 22 1 - I I 1 40' 43 1 I 4 3 2 1 I L_, 1200, 12.....J :: : / I I �` 55' l 40' 19 1 - -- ------ -- / 60' 40' 40' 40'——40' 40' 40' 60' )/ 4I 18 I J 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 1 Q I 17 I 1 100.6' 1 1 40124' I I _ 10'L.B.E. V-- — — — — -- --- 30'DRAINAGE EA- EASEMENT-- - --- _.-- --- —1 ' _i I \ \ ) CZ P /a..— U4 =W 2 0,4, n„l 4, H- \ \ y,.ryWALK u ------------ RAC,05,OPEN SPAM 110FIA 1.1.131VE.1•11 SA PG 12.113 .:j , A 1Tt N g H-W , \ bo o' A n m . N • i 7,,t•$1 a x o• i I N m \ \ N i W 01 Y n m p FF 0 01 k V N N p I . r ¢ ¢ \ v s� 2 8 2 ' v 1 N ''',A t 1E ai a 1 A il s 6 A A A A A A // \ \ # x t i c.N 0. """f--, i Iil OE l NC 0 8 fi 4 4 e z i s $_g b36a44 ,,ora ,(.\ E Nt 1►' . ./': i i a €i3 3 VANDERBILT 91`i �,. > m �^s • E:n x F F RESERVE SOBEL VANDERBILT,LLCqiiiM a 6 8 "a M .. 2385 N.W.EXECUTIVE CENTER DR., t 1111 C $ m SUITE 440 tI N "' EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP BOCA BATON,FL 33431 kL....._ ssr $ ,...., 13;451 El 4 1 •11 bMOWN•no _--_-_________-----------i--- -________---- --- 3g,3fi • il- ! . g.1 . , I LLL_---; l i_ -11,1 a-r ,� , , '� ah'® � ®�®;I`;® I®I®I®1=' i ®I ®I®I® ®I®i® ��4, � I7_1: 'J?puI '® ; 991 �.; p � ' ; I Ifs " 151 . i- .,, II ' ,�J - i Im. o , Igo® (�" '. , , " _ , ' , D , 25 . IE r—® ® I®I®I®I®I®1®1®I ® I ® I®I®I®I®I®I®j® ,__®li.14,j 11,1 1 n : I ® 11. � ®_' o ; r;--- D - - -� - F a 1 I ® r --® i gi ,-r l S a $' IS $ I j , ; ® ass> - ti. o ® s ® , 0 4$^>m R e ® � I D :U qy -1 --"-_ _- - -- j - i `61'61'® ®' ® ® ' i®I®1®►® ®1®1® ® 1 I— = tI I - - z -i t --1--- 1$111411 , ,1 :!it 1"0 la-; @ - r, blj '®'® ®j®1®1® ®;11® 1 ® 611 ®1 ®1 ®I ®I ® 1.'_ ,__�--, I >_ I---� - e 71 I IP . ' • Irl ® __ I ` x _� =_ I: I e _ E. T I Ii7_I Doo - a NIN F i ('o ag11 [ll ILH!i I� — Dh$I, s 1 ;' Ld a DSI -(1,11111 ��® ®1® ®'I ® 1 611°1®'I®'I® ® 1 ®i 1 1 ,; 1.1 1 I It a I.. ;..:o.'s a ,g; ou, 11) ---;-..i ,� 1. ,-�'�� _J ----- 1 .t-�---'---� 'e'®�6161 ®; � ' ' Ik®, ,,..,®i:,@,„..1@1,€11,01,®!@; 1 ' I®,I+ ®�®j®1®I ®I ®j® I®jj®1®1® 1 1.:,.:..„......,._,.....,..I 1 1 'I G 4 ® ►®a®i®1`- 1 - - - r - '1-' I. t - ,, fig; 'r�-- _L -.:.—.-.7=-=7,.,..--.-:..-.110.;...!=–R _ ... - �� r _ - _ .. C" -. - a ilr �. , Y PGE - E _,� aiiii a s 1 ® 1 oda w ➢ p n" 1: - i iUb1 s0- 3 8_g "3388 18 ®& $ C e IP i $ c =. YXo _ F D m F F F x$ F Ry 9 S s E aF as exp a _ :::1101 € € s s s I l' 9 p" a 9 WI, F Iii "e r-1 c : a g g g i<- ea8l"V ' § 3 s o €ii 'EH 28a R g ; I Q I 1 , $I � g ' 1, 1:: 1,1g ^,_ D : p:5' i _ i 6 F ! _ i S t e !Ili (al D 11, i " g x . 4 §I R_� °0! e - I:5:y:y:a: 3 a m g=' est : s i 1 A? € g g °lg is o mil le a .. 11:111:1 x',',`oi - v g: 111 1 g l81 f� 1 is , A a: � • r: �. • 7 C D l 14 P€ x F £° r. a =r. a %.1 �5 D s ass s san a •.-e " i_ a a s sas a ssax x 11 1 g. '4 a:•wo:1;; 4_ s fl E ....�•.,,.�.m,..ww,.,�. g Op 3 .m °.._ :ftp ` m =w 2 1 I;, _VANDERBILT !E p( f_m�1 g"$ t- b{ - ° RESERVE SOBEL VANDERBILT,LLC 3 g�:1 <y ry4Fn ib� tj,. E III 9':i it��Sp^c .;�.,' _ a __ 2385 N.W.EXECUTIVE CENTER DR., m SUITE 440 j i4E N 43 MASTER SITE,SIGNING 8 SOCA RATON,FL 33431 i t �� STRIPING,CLEARING PLAN ! • • v )Cit CONSTRUCTION,MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SUB DIV IS ION IMPROVEMENTS-(INFRAS FRUCTURE) THIS AGREEMENT entered into this 36' day of August, 2005 by Bucks tone Estates, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (hereinafter "Developer"), THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (hereinafter the "Board"), and Orion Bank, a Florida banking corporation (hereinafter"Lender"). RECITALS ORIGINAL A. Developer has, simultaneously with the delivery of this Agreement, applied for the approval by the Board of a certain plat of a subdivision to be known as: Black Bear Ridge. B. The subdivision will include certain improvements which are required by Collier County ordinances, as set forth in a site construction cost estimate ("Estimate") prepared by Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit 1. For purposes of this Agreement, the "Required Improvements" are limited to those described in the Estimate. C. Sections 10.02.05 and 10.02.04 of the Collier County Subdivision Code Division of the Unified Land Development Code require the Developer to provide appropriate guarantees for the construction and maintenance of the Required Improvements. D. Lender has entered into a construction loan agreement with Developer dated June 2, 2005 (the"Construction Loan")to fund the cost of the Required Improvements. E. Developer and the Board have acknowledged that the amount Developer is required to guarantee pursuant to this Agreement is THREE MILLION FIFTY-SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIX AND 50/100 DOLLARS ($3,057,906.50), and this amount represents 110% of the Developer's engineer's estimate of the construction costs for the Required Improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, Developer, the Board and the Lender do hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. Developer will cause the water, sewer, roads, drainage, and like facilities, the Required Improvements, to be constructed pursuant to specifications that have been approved by the Development Services Director within 12 months from the date of approval of said subdivision plat. 2. Developer hereby authorizes Lender to hold THREE MILLION FIFTY-SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIX AND 50/100 DOLLARS ($3,057,906.50) from the Construction Loan, in escrow, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The &;:r-calt.Orion Bank account number for this account is 8500006690. 41`' 3. Lender agrees to hold in escrow THREE MILLION FIFTY-SEVEN Atli- -A6 ,JALls ' A+ %k P 9 L Black Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget Off-site Improvements (PRISTINE DRIVE) %PROGRESS BUDGET Site WorkQuantity Unit Price Total AS OF 9-15.06 CONSUMED 1 Clearing and Grubbing 2 AC $3,500.00 $7,000.00 100% $7,000.00 2 Silt Fence 2,800 LF $1.50 $4,200.00 100% $4,200.00 3 Fill 8,500 CY $9.00 $76,500.00 100% $76,500.00 4 Final Grade 1 LS $6,500.00 $6,500.00 100% $6,500.00 5 Valley Gutter 2,700 LF $5.50 $14,850.00 100% $14,850.00 6 8"Limerock Base(compacted and primed) 4,800 SY $7.50 $36,000.00 100% $36,000.00 7 12"Stabilized Subgrade 5,750 SY $2.25 $12,937.50 100% $12,937.50 8 3"Asphalt 4,800 SY $8.50 $40,800.00 60% $24,480.00 9 Signing&pavement markings 1 LS $6,500.00 $6,500.00 0% $0.00 10 Sodding 5,800 SY $1.50 $8,700.00 0% $0.00 11 5'Wide Concrete Sidewalk 1,500 SY $16.50 $24,750.00 0% $0.00 12 4"Limerock(under sidewalk) 1,500 SY $4.50 $6,750.00 0% $0.00 13 Maintenance of Traffic 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500.00 100% $2,500.00 Sub-total $247,987.50 Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements _ I nand Unit Price Total I Tum Lanes Complete(WB Rt,EB Lt) 2 LS $40,000.00 $80,000.00 0% $0.00 2 Signalization 1 LS $I30,000.00 $130,000.00 0% $0.00 3 Side Drain Drainage(4 DB1,DBL run 36") 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 100% $35,000.00 4 Lighting 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 0% $0.00 Sub-total $270,000.00 Sanitary Sewer Quanti Unit Price Total 1 8"PVC Force Main(C-900 Class 200) 1,400 LF $20.00 $28,000.00 100% $28,000.00 2 8"Plug Valve w/Box 2 EA $1,380.00 $2,760.00 100% $2,760.00 3 Hot Tap Future 16"Force Main on VBR I LS $5,500.00 $5,500.00 100% $5,500.00 Sub-total $36,260.00 Water Main Quantity Unit Price Total Hot Tap Existing 30"Reinf Conc Water Main 1 - (or alt=jib and tap new prop 24"wm) I IS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 100% $35,000.00 2 12"PVC Water Main(CL 200) 1,400 LF $25.50 $35,700.00 100% $35,700.00 3 12"Gate Valve w/Box 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000.00 100% $3,000.00 4 Fire Hydrant(Complete Assembly) 2 EA $2,400.00 $4,800.00 100% $4,800.00 5 Permanent Bacterial Sample Point 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00 100% $1,000.00 6 Temporary Bacterial Sample Point 1 EA $900.00 $900.00 100% $900.00 7 Air Release Valve 2 EA $1,550.00 $3,100.00 100% $3,100.00 Sub-Total $83,500.00 Drainage t nand Unit Price Total I Control Structure 1 EA $4,000.00 $4,000.00 100% $4,000.00 2 15"RCP 100 LF $23.00 $2,300.00 100% $2,300.00 3 18"RCP 350 LF $25.00 $8,750.00 100% $8,750.00 4 24"RCP 1,200 LF $34.00 $40,800.00 100% $40,800.00 5 Valley Gutter Throat Inlet 6 EA $2,000.00 $12,000.00 100% $12,000.00 6 Grate Inlet 4 EA $1,700.00 $6,800.00 100% $6,800.00 7 Junction Box 8 EA $1,850.00 $14,800.00 100% $14,800.00 8 15"Flared End Section 1 EA $900.00 $900.00 100% $900.00 Sub-Total $90,350.00 Off-SiteTotals $728,097.50 590/a $430,077.50 9/15/2006 o F- o w IAuJ w z w Q U _� O \ _f_ 20' 1 � 36 40115' I , 5.71' 1 I , 1 , I Lu I 35 40 I I 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 I I Q 34 50 55' 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' 65' ji 1 ,41 I 1 33 1 J 4Icr r - nfl i�--- 32 40' S5' 9 1 1 I 31 4 I 5 2° 6 7 8 I 4°' 10 Y 30 4 I i I I I 40' 11 1 20' J 15'DRAINAGE EASEMENT I ' I L.B.E. A C ,`f IH I\L Q -109.97' � r55' 40' 40' 55' 119.99' �� j '-'---' --� w 29 40' 4 12 120' / a 40' i 4 3 2 1 I ::' 1O28a274 L- - 14 I 1 / 100'MIN.WIDTH .\ _,26 I_A I `� j_j/1 4°' 15 1 I II 1 -- ------C 1 I I ` 1 25 40' 1-50, r55' 40' 40'---55'--A--50' 4°' 16 I 130' } I 24 40' J 1 22 21 20 19 I J 40' 17 1 , I I Q I I Q j Liiii23 5 14 I I 45' 18J --- 15'LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT IC--- --- --- 2 PALMS SR€� OU-L€VA - — - F--- --- 15'LANDSCAPE BUFFER EASEMENT 4°166 30 � 4°' 35 > II 122.7 I }_J I -J I 4I' 29 J I 31 32 33 34 I Q 40' 36 I I 1 I Q 40' 28 I 50 55' 40' 40' 55' 50.0'- 4 0.0'i 40' 37 w 105' —— —— a°' 4 27 I • 38 1 0 n rl (-- - - 40' 3g a U 4° 26 I O ,2 25 I 4°' 0cC I 14 I I 5 6 7 8 1 I 40 25'L.B.E. i I I a ao' 24 I 40' 41 II `--55' 40' 40' 55'--1r- I H I I , I I 40' 42 1 I 215.0' 40' 23 I I I 14 43 4°' 22 I J I I 4 3 2 1 1 L. 120.0' 120.0' I 4°' 21 __J5I' 44 I I .) 40' 20 - - / I ) I 40' 19 ; - -- -- -- - 60607'.."'60' 40' 40'--40'-40'--40' 40 V 4� 18 Q I 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 I 100.6' 40.24' 17 i I I 1 m 710'L.B.E.II IN' 30'DRAINAGE EASEMENT ---�' J 1 --- --- - --- --- --- ------ --- --- --- C- 1\ \ \ al < e-h cr) 0 vl 5 o 2- -(1)-NJ • _1 1-h el S20 4=1 0 NJ 0 H 0 CD 0 (7, _1 rc' N n O 00 g � tri Q. fD N O 01 H H 0 0 0: 0 v 4 I . ,' ' ":- _ . � :: .vz _�_.: SPK u 319ld) O_..NOISONI CE �S -"Mr Ca ,..,,- ...... 01 .______, � " _ ,,,` ',,1 ' r11i`s,,4.,7,,....„:„-,.:7,7_,,7„.7,7,7_,:::;;;.., .,-„,,,,,,NO•'771°1 ,, rJ T,0 n ;;;;V:43.7.;;51/..Z4:„ Qin?• MIN. IEROM m 11 I c - T - ' D B1/ Q �1: o j3. a , �I E i 1 ` D C7 w � __y • //� i �iIIII�:4/ o�' al �o_oz ''§';‘7.2 9,7 E41 IP F /,'I Iii 1 i m a s-fie _ I /�;;;1175'''' '''4V ����, i G)CS 1L / I 23 10 / i j'lr� 1 "�� C. aye / 1 ,' / ' I ' N2i61vHNZUZZ21.'.-:w.....H_o ..,.>a�,-0020 d` ( , 1 �� (� •.( o� m �I �I BOW 00 • I 11 - aga��$g�eca'afsaaga�ssassaaaseas�f-1 `1 4 /� kssak� mksskakksaaaassakkksak:_o F, a n / X1..4..\ t- ) //` / 6 - 4 T `t• /'//r�� s� �•as;ts`;x�sN>u�amS:S&iWvssM� INNs�wM- I i -- 33 ---_,--;-/.---; ;'\ \ \/ / / / / `/ /� i, ' \\\ // 1 / ♦ g..... >2E,T,asE �saeaag.aa>s>saaea :1 2 \____,, I I c / / //,/ cek8k8klakkkk"' YM2f3kk$k&FSkkaakkkk \ / fl Z\, \ mom /� N � I % �/ // / Z u ti - i-;'"_ m G7 O f is g'" $' k -' t i e R - c g _��`„_" a co ''� O Z /I /� / / m :^,q m T o ig 0,1 E _ P_ A i z `= t o � �2 m� �« a� _� �`= sem` a 155 T,/ 'Im __,-,-,---.;••:.:::::----;--- - z a _. En (,y`t/\ /, I <� g�� Y�" z� �, � � § o on it z `\ /,� �� mm V'�)j` / I -Iz ..g:21mgAm$1' Ef 2 1 4 w 8- 'D' < 1 i 1 ` //� \ nn If I 03 6sl. \\ z> 6,r2h410 01,"1gro..,4141 •- k A mo y Z F,3. m g g .�>--- ' /�- !/�`\ • _ix'i' / / ,gym '6411 $ -10 .. z x i �I, i z ' x �� m gg^ tw2$N^ o F ,V----' .7-' )1 1 �l f' A \y.:\- RRA '" •I � � 2 a ^y'� M I / �i /�/ > �O cn D SQA $E`> 5 iir -- .. E.U. .. i>m rn o / q r o g L n a I ✓ R:''' ~ D c a '' / ( A m\ \ m 3�� § 3N N1.,N r•m3: or rr \; m 8 m Em 'm ap on - - - - - , • • • • • • w c I N II D I I 4:.T.MOHHHH NIZg:7gg•H:: v i--• • wN • 7 0. = . . . . _fill, 11, 1,...„—„,,. Ndt1ano�1�3Mxvw x% gym \ ---- i w E', m / I ___a O // • N• o a7" JN ° I I A :ai JfII ��h - - :m 1 o Z m I_ !JIDh a7? aC] _ I( •N • T nod J . I m ; w m O • • z _n � 1 III v� 1 - — — : �2 0 w w i i l ! �' ._._._..-._ m 2 I T=' IIIIS m lim m - -illLOT UNE it X 9 L o D m / f (317A1ad)1S3MItinoO1S3I1 \ `D m Z l O - _ _._.--_ O r "� ID,I 2I MIN. N D �" i m m 'Q I PRINCIPAL m p Z !/I .7i ''Ll VE I SETBACK ': \\\\\\VVV` .� I (25'MIN.0 D m " N -13 III N n PRESERVE) O O J 6i = O /J Z m I m wg N c 7 I m y , �. Z `J ❑ LOT LINE 'y' ZO m�' O ;- /gill\ _-_ -I mT , no Z tni N ? A ---- L IImo�,, - m- Z— S. I s i•S 8 A 10'MIN. I O m ` >1 / m ��5 O m , r n, T Y Z u, 'I / A A ^ 5' 7J Qla' ill �MIN. \ - d (T1 `' u, D ❑ lOT UNE -.- -i -- _- I •isii ,�, ell Flo l DSO 2E ' > '12 L. • m ' I = - � D i I D I ?1 I VA (31tlMadt 15tl31af1031S311 _2_ L a^ " _ my - - LOT LINE �_ `""' .L I LOi LINE .r .n N lr n Nn'r—+• 2�0• - -1-. (31tlNad)Onl9 S3Ntl13V v I I - 1 -F- - ..o u,----------------"'"-':-.41----= --—--- - -O z< :. m m D 1 '�]< I I I �� 110' 1U' I 120'MIN. (/J— -Z S_.- N\ n 5' UE I 40'ROW 4 UE L PRINCIPK L r� '\a0,\; N r PRINCIPKA ., - O i- ✓ Eo'Row' UE SETBACK .D .,„---1 , SEOYCK D m o n ‘,‘,, .•„•' m Z N O 0 25'MIN.0)._ - (25'MIN.022 Cl)= ^ C7 i� I <n (PRESERVE) D I \ 1 �� 8 PRESERVE) D r+' Cl)m \\eo�,.!+',\ p m7..,2- i:". Z 9,6 O YYY , I Y � D rn !!� !4 D m2- Z 0 15' j 1n prr _LOiLINE1 r 5 T. LOTLINE NF. I ?,1g I © I ''s I 10'MIN. Z , L� 10'MIN. �g^ D Cl) o = 15' ACCESSORY O L u - CE550K Ry�f ' SETBACK m '^ < m 9 c \m O 1. • MIN. r A- I p Qp P :• /� O v • O�,--III ^' fin II EA 9� A s _ . ' I 1 § o p o m D I ❑ LOT LINE J , I ❑ LOT LINE ,r 's • , Iyryy -1 • I N1 IL/A I f ry I 1 II 1 8 G:\ENGINEERING\PROJ-ENG\W\WCIPME\O I DWGS\SUBMITTKTYPE\PPL\WCIPME-PPL 0ADWG 3/1/2017 3:12 PM ne a.r moNN`Ja¢Drmmhon.oV.m+wlan-mvaxnawaTa 1 ti 4. W 1Li;.r�1 ..-1- z 4 E ril,R.at ► i2 • sNI11.1 UU Dm 1fQY. . t ` Wp Z /._ \ 0 t LI- r. 03 6 I>> Q t) w �� "T... �dycl c■ 3 ""r— • ! Tp,_L.1 �j, ,,q :""I- '9 a 4tlt...':'!'t:.C.4"%.,,,,t;ig:t'4...,r):,..",.,.-.L-,_,.......... .4-7_1111-17. . 14t.;„- --,.., ,,:fi.,,,,,r..f.,?..„.. - ;.1:1.144..4,7,:,..,- ,:t.,"!....4-.,'40-- . : ' ,,-' rLi..] * ^ — - _ __�) a_---� \ 'A...Tit,' iso/'`," ;';''m'* .am-» ' "r- - : *,..41t., ', I.-- ,,\ \ 11 1 aq '14."4r II 4 ' 4%"*.,t't • 0.1. ei,t4 - { i ,.! i.i _. — wet V'9 a a = i , • m: 7 'u,+a a.' apt ae Itndr `'-1: .• f.`}. ' e * E. - 44Fr i f tkir_,___''.1:;V:1:.61..'f'i'.,c1,;:!.,':g 4',:El,f,, al t .1144fr, 1111110 k, , _ ( p d W'1 � •a p }"hj _ vis ;....4.- > 1� -----__�` _ �� :Idi a tJ ,-, t 1 . li ' J r e .'i- h uI. ®�1 1''44"'''''45 j * Wzn # >t4 �4 .! y z' h .> ,.4,e¢ +, \1`Qty ,° N�, % 4,: "3 e ki, .fit' k• "z, `, ,:r,54Y.-'0gc. �.w4,5c i"t" r �,;,'✓F ,�,t L . �. >4** "'yr "'*.it.�, an` �s.r.. 'k:+. .:�� 5.."4..-1 r - ,"ajr flxirnNc e•WIN U K MICA ....+ "a. c . „., '♦"., rr . a st ',w2 It M; :°�.' _ . , - sa • ,Y�++ ,,,r 1 I w' :tT'Y" h•' '`...,%---,t4-1,, ,,,,,,♦"-I i t' +I. .;p tom'.t "peis ^ 'j r •k' ;• i�'a �,� )) r''_, '4,, h 'C, 1 �f. , ,,.. ...- ,-..,,- yye�ss � .. , '4' ,'.''''r •*' •• ' % - ••r? .,,*'' • , t r '}ry� ''. _ '''' ' ' " ,,,o: ' ,. •V.,. ey >. ' a "w' *s^ > 4,1 `.1 ,a,, • ,,tr'i ` N„0$�r;R ir•,. . t ,� p 1l 44ttr Tt ^t "V. ARCy,.f A'�"rT Y•6 h 1'f '°•Y.. h i' • 7 ~� V,,;.,,,. ...,,,,-,:0'•::z..,1„, ,,,r,...17.:‘,...::-.e142.c.....4,,,,,-,-14.-in.z..?,.-...).1 -*ft f",,,,Z,. .i.4. - itto ,.„. , ; af;',Iir.4.7r ` keII" °�, .. ��'� �+A ItVi.i.V.X. ....c . ,. 2... .„..„ . ,,_., . , ' / 4 ' r ';1/4.Aijk. " It i ol. ii,„,..., ,y am:; S 'i64� 11, '. n 44 `*V 4_ -. ♦.. -'W. Kw ON •pY' b. ,� '!'i} 'n • TOvOM NOlSONIAIl , s f Cl) _, ,.,„ t_r_-,- c ., N a) ' 1` a yi 1 z • .f), 4. ' 'Iv'. i .r.- S... ... tin ( It e, li . ' 0 *lir al Na.,.,1:10::)".."41116 .44 '''''''!'" 0 • 0 E ..-. a, I V, '• '4"it, Ili ,s1 ) N IIN `." Do+ ''''' -00, - 2 E C\I _ ..., co • •, iv ' 4 a g R , CO I i • Ili, r___ 4, so) I , . - 11"41114104 rfilk4i4141 ',-L ' 5 - c - • -4. __. ... . .... _ . CI3 • a " ..,... -r. . 1 C.7 '..- ,tA ;.- • ... CD :.. _ • Z. lit , ' . • C/ V i• ,.. ;.- . __I- •• 8 . lig 0 . 000"11111‘1111111 ''Ili ... : _ CO 0 Afr tifr *IV ". 14 1%t " '.04 CZ ve:: ..c. 1 44 1 74 1 14r A .4ge ....... C 011".. ,, •, ,r. 11FP, C___. c„,,,,,,w O __ 4111 It ' ' *ill Arr, • 4 - C CO IIM a.. -9.1t. Ai i : t ! g ' --I .ggi 1 ' ' ' ' ..-- _. CD ,. 1 ,.. ......: !!!..*L-1. ..... -- _... (f) .t., 11'•1.4e,' --- 8 -- _ CD . . ''', .1;4.5'V.O'''•fri* ' = •rt• ' " " „y., il 4,!'". „:,‘, , : 1 i I 1 .. , Ali /k.' .4e 'L.. 1. ti•A!.4. A;. Ir. a • Al* f I 1 I I 1 .g • g. , 1,. C 0 0 4 .. 4 RIP ! firigill ii h ! 1 4; _ \�\ g Yll & /111'":1;! g 9egr $ g e g 111 r° o i � 9�e �11 1 �� ��i8� r° i gip e W � �gggb 6 'W2' g Y I: k„ w,$l I gIgli g . E Nai @lV l ! p 61i \ e - ti J � xIPg : 3 , pi :, � Oil'''''''''''.::::'''.12. - _. - --- .=.---:T.:•--,-------7-7.-..-_-,,,1'1 ,c:-_.ems= Rkp :mitbii, ,/lid,._, 66 k , -\ - ie .' .., . %w.. \wvkre\ 88 k 92w z9 Pal/Opal i€ ieg 1=0 11 n 8ewB '! :.11j)!!!1! x , .. e ..E1r _ — EAST(PRIVATE, ` R_ / - , I . Sn d E' — sI. I iVii:VW Pi � 8 �i \--I b gg _ lgp" e IO v -- --- — S I€q.. I' 1 It Y y 9 i 9 ap 10 � tk loll U om...., )._ V aY x , P. a II III i € 1g1 ill 181 W ; 2t IR i ll liO' II/ 1 5 5 w W 4i A Y i e3 Eag Fg�k i w" w �r� iq" 3g� t7 ii `j'�:� iw // _ 1:J �i . mak' i 15 S 8 a ICI Srl�._�' g X_g : i egf II 1 �k` b g A @w E i o 1 a1 gg g��gg g;85 ail LES t is LIEU COURT WEST(vaN,LiEI: c 31 F _ FFgl 111- �F . .._�_. - ". II �hI -111: .A •' : if I\ ." a II Q `_�__ li a a� Y. iMH I ii •I I _ _ R .:1 0 /MN\)______——: : ! il V( a ,,, ‘.' 1 S. :: E 's pp _ L = o .,-r W I,�I . n A "��' ."a o G n -L._.. (t I f n \7\ II/ 2 1 g .2 • Iiilk 11 \ � S ii DIi IA „ �. 3 Ei Ffs .Ag • 1 , ,�7 ' IIli I f1'iJOI 1 Ii gaol 1g elli �`i ;Jill AYI E iLL /, i 11 s. i " ' i 46 §'v 9' Y 4 0gy // �� ] R if' ; I I"4 II I ei I Bii e � �.na' c�e S�c999 I g , (' i IT i I i I eei In : f 1 ,1 k a F R i" rg r i cl i1i11iiikgalgglimOm! i.., i ?3$ p t 4 // ', al k i T7T 1 2 iivl ,i a a i ik'r'a4 $e © / ' i / ,� g ;:;1!!;::s go t ij_ 1 ldliwill .... 1 '...„ - t wig w -` acc n. n P- ."alffa'cseg c T_- - € gpi ; 1".7-4:,- .4.7.7,.,.,=;...47..4.a;,;,•7,I i a ghigh "'"s "'''ru''q fpr '. 1 h.i+"aax6 "x .ea..ealo.. \ 1 x _ a - W o . EY, j 1 a . a • _ O x Q I H EI N ,ma^ w a j, Lo�Ni - ' W z c.) _ ' I I 3 'a ,.. -----Th----II D. Y o u ew a �� a 0 _� I I a I F L F �u� ' . E zm ■ TT z \ \m \\ ,•H40 aLL. 4li r. ,.,,, IPA,..,8',4 1 o4 t , ' I w II w EE 5 w n c GA 01 / Ii ow 1 so am F rt - I ( v GAGAa 1 I / v / I a cr al / 1-' I K F-' n c g „-,4 1--!--F r> ° ISIcrl ° a� N II o �-= 1 Wiii I _- li il 11 I i 1 1 v ,¢ Pt€ r.1 I I �I � oW� ec' I 1 1 1 III I _ I FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY,OR COMMITTEE Solis, Andrew I. Collier County Board of County Commissioners MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON 3299 Tamiami Trail, East, Suite 300 WHICH I SERVE ISA UNIT OF: CITY COUNTY C]CITY L7 COUNTY 0 OTHER LOCAL AGENCY Naples Collier NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: Collier County DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS: June 27, 2017 Cif ELECTIVE ❑ APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent, subsidiary, or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies(CRAB)under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A"business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder(where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). • • ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise participating in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision)with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2) CE FORM 8B-EFF. 11/2013 PAGE 1 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C. APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who must incorporate the form in the minutes.A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST Andrew I. Solis , hereby disclose that on June 27 20 17 (a)A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one or more) _ inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, Developer of Sereno Groves, a client of my law firm • • inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, inured to the special gain or loss of , by whom I am retained; or inured to the special gain or loss of ,which is the parent subsidiary, or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b)The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: On June 27, 2017, BCC Agenda Item 11,kthe Board will consider a recommendation to approve for recording the final plat of Sereno Grove (Application Number PL20160001884), approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement, and approval of the amount of the performance security. The developer of Sereno Groves is a client of my law firm, and in an abundance of caution, I will abstain from voting pursuant to Section 286.012, Fla. Stat., to avoid any perceived prejudice or bias. If disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attorneys, a public officer, who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way as to provide the public with notice of the conflict. June 27, 2017 Date Filed •1dre NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. CE FORM 8B-EFF. 11/2013 PAGE 2 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7,010(1)(f),F.A.C. Ex parte Items - Commissioner McDaniel COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 06/27/17 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. 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 'lddie'c Corner ! ed Use Plannnri Unit nevelonmen`,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+1-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]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X SEE FILE <Meetings Correspondence Ve-mails Calls Met with Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold, David Genson 9.B. 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 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Planned Unit Development(PUD)to Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)for a project known as the Triad RPUD to allow development of 44 single-family dwelling units. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.75± acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-11, as amended by Ordinance No. 05-23, the former Triad Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD- PL20160002564] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM M SEE FILE NMeetings I !Correspondence ®e-mails Calls Met with Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold, David Genson 9.C. 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 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)for a project known as the AC RPUF=to allow development of 44 single-family dwelling units. The subject property is located on the northwest corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.76± acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-50,the former MAC Residential Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD- PL20160002565] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X SEE FILE MMeetings Correspondence Xe-mails (Calls Met with Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold, David Genson 9.D. 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 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from an Estates (E)zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)zoning district for the project to be known as the f=ount darn Road pp!Er,to allow construction of a maximum of 268 multi-family residential dwelling units or 156 single family residential dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types permitted in the PUD, not to exceed a trip cap of 157 p.m. peak hour two-way trips. The subject property is located on the east side of County Barn Road, approximately one quarter mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 38.59± acres; and by providing an effective date. [PUDZ-PL20160001398]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X SEE FILE FIMeetings ( (Correspondence Me-mails I ICalls Met with Bruce Anderson 9.E. 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 No. 2007-46, as amended,the 'Volf Creek RPUI ,to approve an insubstantial change to the PUD, to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only, and providing for an effective date. The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately one-half mile west of Collier Boulevard, in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 189± acres. [PDI-PL20160000404] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM XI SEE FILE NMeetings c<Correspondence Me-mails I (Calls Met with Bruce Anderson, Terrie Abrams and Bev Smith COUNTY MANAGERS REPORT 11.G. 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 for recording the final plat of Sereno Grove, (Application Number PL20160001884) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE <Meetings I (Correspondence Ne-mails I !Calls Met with Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold, David Genson and Sheri Roberts CONSENT AGENDA 16.A.2. 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 for recording the final plat of Maple Ridge Amenity Center at Ave Maria, (Application Number PL20170000724) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. N NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE Meetings I (Correspondence e-mails I (Calls 16.A.3. 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 for recording the minor final plat of yster Harbor at Fiddler's Creek Phase - Replat 3, Application Number PL20170000332. VI NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I 'Meetings Correspondence I le-mails 'Calls 16.A.4. 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 for recording the final plat of splanade Golt and Country Club of Napie. Phase 4, Parcel "L", (Application Number PL20170001594)approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. N NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ( 'Meetings 'Correspondence e-mails 'Calls SUMMARY AGENDA 17.A. 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 Petition VAC-PL20170000730 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the conservation easement described in O.R. Book 4293, Page 4106 of the Official Records of Collier County, Florida.The subject property is ocated on the west side of Airport Pulling Road, approximately one half mile north of Golden Gate Parkway, in Section 23,Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. IX NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I 'Meetings Correspondence e-mails Calls 17.B. 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 a Resolution providing for the establishment of a Conditional Use to allow an auto supply store with over 5,000 square feet of gross floor area in the principal structure (Sic Code 5531)within a Commercial Intermediate (C-3)Zoning District pursuant to Section 2.03.03.C.1.c.20 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The subject property containing 1.24 acres on Lots 12-18, South Tamiami Heights subdivision is located on the southwest corner of US "+ and Seminole Avenue, in Section 13, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (CU-PL20150001611) X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE Meetings I !Correspondence I le-mails I 'Calls 17.C. 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. Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97-70, as amended eiican Lake, a Planned Unit Development,to clarify the measurement of actual height of the accessory enclosed utility/storage structure is from the lower of finished floor elevation of the enclosed utility/storage structure or twelve inches above the FEMA flood elevation. The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (SR-951) approximately 1/5 mile south of Tamiami Trail East(US 41), in Section 15,Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 101.3+/-acres. [PDI- PL20160003463] DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE J4_NO I !Meetings I !Correspondence I le-mails I (Calls 17.D. 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 Petition VAC-PL20170001974 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1401, Page 2152 and a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1432, Page 1093 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; and approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Quit Claim Deed and Bill of Sale to transfer wastewater facilities from the County to the property own, The subject property is located on the west side of Bayshore Drive. approximately one quarter mile south of Tamiami Trail East, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. DQ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE Meetings ! 'Correspondence e-mails Calls s€ ` r =sIX3 = ! a I I a -i2> < -- acyyanzy g S_§y4 '3 I a4z 0 30 Q W „r m try 1N. Z o z v ao.= a _m :61! w4Fa .. psm OZ�= _- .� y cW7Z 0 08 i o 2 < w -ga .s- 23OZ m L. ,� '''o C o> O vc€ 5 mp.y6O 30E A z 4 0 to g ii ,7_-- ; 1 400 �j 5:2t•iiyq Iii 5't J tO , . I >qo K a5t.,WiE} rg:1,igo`3 D � i.!,,,, U - - .j=1-PA 3s 8 a PP� ih`- g =i° ; I g a o I }o Puwi 1 Pr li u i , ill L 3 P P I R _-\ 1 I = i s z .e3 I 1 / Ce �' 1 I1 I a ly I o I M ~ I lu Q I I _ i r L „I 113 111- _ l i 1 I _ it / b IO 2.19 �iridri II -. JI a II!' IMil —__ II 1// 9!,1 g W x :I---- 1 l I I_ g a 1' it I, i i 2 1/ 1 QQ i I I I 11 1 e ��`-3 ? l N N NM x li „I I I N 1Ity 11 11 a I1 / IIS . ,r_e,e ,.. 1 b 4, Q I 1 1 1 1 I l�1l11 1 8 I){I // I �� i i�' __ _ WI I� z I_ w d 1 R a'. ali S,,__ W C o _ 1 �II1M�I -��Jf/n}f-+j 1 ��qqc " mtvArm09 S9MnIdS NT'd _ I ��'b� r1 1 r1 E Rr, 0 1 5g �I 5 1A , #1 1 a - 1 p. ' � a ill .._ ! I 3 1 : / H H {:Alp il .rsimi inimil .I W Q Q1 . 418 E „v +; e r n ,.p...\/..\ ,. I 1_ 1 1 _ i i —II r' II` al y 3 L7iLr: i p' �� I II :, J - 11*,I !i1 Iq) J . 1 tf '''— ,ii S.1.*---S I , !y 1 ) 'i §118 1 „ -Q' 1 us- 1 Al 1 /ry • I' 11 n imp i 1 ! YYY „ 3 _ �31 C II �1 I n 1g I \ 3 S ^ FilsonSue Subject: Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold and David Genson regarding Addies Corner a d MAC and Sereno Grove Location: BCC Office Start: Tue 6/20/2017 2:30 PM End: Tue 6/20/2017 3:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill >2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MAC Triad)- 1/2 hour >3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies Corner- 1/2 hour > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 >(239)435-3535 >(239)435-1218 (f) 1 FilsonSue From: Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 3:25 PM To: FilsonSue Subject: RE: Meeting Request: MAC &Triad Thank you! Original Message From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 3:03 PM To: Dianna Quintanilla Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad Yes ma'am unless the workshop runs over in which case I will let you know. Sue Sent from my iPad >On Jun 14, 2017, at 3:00 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com>wrote: >2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MAC Triad)- 1/2 hour >3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies Corner- 1/2 hour >Correct? > Original Message > From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] >Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 2:55 PM >To: Dianna Quintanilla >Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad >Okay, 2:30 to 3:00 what is MAC? > However, keep in mind that he has a workshop in the morning and hope that it doesn't run over. >Sue, >2:00 pm on June 21<x-apple-data-detectors://0>st<x-apple-data-detectors://0>sounds great! I will send you an invite with address, directions, and info on parking. If you need anything else,just let me know. > Matt Spielman > Executive Assistant to Commissioner Brian Hamman Lee County Board of >County Commissioners, District 4 > (239) 533-2226<tel:(239)%20533-2226>office > (239) 485-2054<tel:(239)%20485-2054>fax http://www.leegov.com Sue >Sent from my iPad 1 a > >On Jun 14, 2017,at 2:51 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com<mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com»wrote: > > Do you have an hour? To cover 1/2 hour for MAC and 1/2 for Addies? > > Original Message > From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.netj >Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 2:44 PM >To: Dianna Quintanilla >Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad > > I hope you still have the 20th at 2:30 because that's the only time I have available. > >Sue > > >Sent from my iPad > >On Jun 14, 2017,at 2:35 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com<mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com><mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com»wrote: > >Good afternoon, > > Rich, along with Wayne Arnold and David Genson would like to meet with Commissioner McDaniel regarding the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: Addies Corner. > >Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: > Monday June 19th 9:00-3:00 > Tuesday June 20th 10:00- 12:00; 2:30-5:00 > Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0-5:00 > Friday June 23rd 11:30-3:00 > >Thank you. > > > > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 >(239)435-3535 >(239)435-1218 (f) > > ><image001.png> > > > > > 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. > 3 FilsonSue Subject: Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold and David Genson regarding Addies Corner and MAC and Sereno Grove Location: BCC Office Start: Tue 6/20/2017 2:30 PM End: Tue 6/20/2017 3:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill > 2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MATriad) 1/2 hour >3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies CornerC(2- our > > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D.Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 > (239)435-3535 >(239)435-1218 (f) > 1 N F In `"i Z Li-) LU w U CC I., a uD v CONi m J a-1I .1 Q L CO h toI aI hl 00 m V H - till awl m N In NJ .4 `� rri `-1 lO r<i 0 N N N N F N n L al Ln co N V N al al N CO h N CO N .-1 LU c-1 n w ^ ul ^ h h c-I h O LU Vl UDO O c-1 N V to V o0 V U O O O O N .-i 0 `l m 6 O O Z O M .-i O Ni O ,-i <-4vl O2 J Q a O a vl F F < LL vl O g C) O 0 CC Q w . w 0 Z Z w > CC m CO CC 0 Q (F7 Q z w 0 <, 0 O Z vl w w �_ w w Q w w w m F • F > F `n m Q CO H Y > CC o_ > 0 - Y J , C w w m V- O m 0 Q CO w CC w Q Q Z w w 0 0 Cr vl O 0 vl N F J J F Z w 0 F F w F w w vt �:. '# Q N Z C) F Q J Q w vl y N Z G Q V N d' w d' Q -:". "' LU 0 F FQ- 0 co V w I- >> C CC c b O O Q a m Q 0 < co Z cc w F w D1- O_ Q ': 1- 0 F Z ."'' U Q O Zup Q N ^ v ."1 N O1 m N lD v m .-i a) m al CO CO h N r-1 N Lu kr, .-I N m N .-i O Vl LO co00 .-i t0 O O .-i N < h m h QO W Ni O N .-1 O M m `� O N Z O M .-i O N O N .-i Vl Q a z 0 0 Li 0 N Z F- p4C EI H < LL Y O . -I --- Z w F O F w w w F m V` a F w w :, " 0 0 Z Z O O 2 (9 w cc ro o cow _ < H > > R. O Q `� 0 Q m F Q Y O > CC w Q Z j O — Y m F c LLZ, w m 0 cc in D V) w N Z D O m Q a d Q K d CO - 'F^ Q Z 2 Q Q _ LL c N Z 1D 0 Z 1,-7, Q n. w w Y w w w a w w a 0 O 0 cc V F > vi m e a CO F O H H w m Q O_ 0, CC Z FH O 0 2 0 -, , .,I i. I _ a t gi! '1§•'lk.'" i R ce Z'v Z ..4 E tti.2 E. 2.-t- g , , i' i g - 1 a 2 •i 1g '-z u w i 1 t.i °' z 0,8 < qiiiiiiii i i i e f, 4K ii IV- 1 P.: 1 . i i w . . . 1, :7; 1 1 1 ; 3 •ig 2 itil ii 1;1 .i. liZilligC; gt!Ili!..! 8 g 1 '§ ==1 1 i! 3 253 ‘N 1111 1".:;. I i f, !i u $ i3fil § -Si 4•1/ . . ++1 ` ! fAll '.11 T.1 1-1 ry5 4 1 1 1 : •-; 1 1 iidS gig,'-g.2 Eilai * ' } 6 48111G k 0 ,_..• ,WC, ---, , ----( , ---i ; k?,4 ti-; ' ki ,,;. n t r• = ;8 r.'. ; 1 / u c, a ›- ---. , ! 'i -i ,-i 7 "i !I I -•'; - li L ; r, "f) J J , r.i 16 02 : a = a 0 ii,..---- = •-• 11 — . -----, , • c( -,i ...; 1..' ' II ,: `- ' ..... ' , z ,, i t 0 ; 10., 2 - / :- •i' l:'',,,',1-`,".-',\ ' ; ,r 0 -1 . 1 46>.' I ,...--, I A ao, r 1 •,.. I 11'1 1 ?Ii 11 I .. -I f 1P1 Guri ,. g 1••••... 1, ......,..,.,; -' e e . i I -. - t I - r - • - ---E t-,1,"‘c ., , ----,,..,----- ' 3- s 4 I I I I ,L, I = fi,„ 7^ 1 : i, ,'ti : `19°'_.,, - ' _ __ . 1 .. t .A i t • _ '., ' -_ ,• - ) %..$1 Ii 1 chIi ---- --1.-i- 'al ac' -a, ' , fig/2i, 101 ' r ; ill i -1Pii- , ' i I , IL-1;E i N C c 1 1,,ii 1: ra , . A N ; ' Ill i Qt. ilt ; I I : 1 L—.......1 1,4t .' • " i I , t 1 ,,, i MP, I I. ' % t „ li, t %. , ..; , , , :,;,. I Ai IF. , ,,., 9 _ i i 1 i ..: i, ,i r ; i j ,....„yi LW ,.... Nowamod 6 _ __ 4 v ,.... ,ra ___, 0 ,t, ,,_, ,,,,.... a ; 1 -------- - - 112 1A• A kNo- - .- .1-,,l/ 1 ' I - . , : , : : •, out -,sv 1 V.' ..... ,..,- ..., _ _______ ..... ,,-- . ., .... I 1 i 'll tif i fi& i i g t 1 ! g 1 I1 ii s i ' 1 -...f.: ii 1' i J.1 ... . ,' , i s 1501 7 111111,1 111111 i1,s« lit ia► Q_ Y —3.4dPV—^i ''" 11111111 iliiiiii-F1 Illy.1' 1' i 1 1 J 1 ....., 3EE$ a is ilk ? ? ? a ? • 445:.• ti s !. �a' 0 �y� 33 ywP: � r r, i. g Cr -c_., n/ �v is 11 �„ l ..� j i I �I , a rt♦` , ce 1 .,.F f ' � d Q l rt ..-..„.._.:•. .._. 1 rt �;1 N� 2 '` • ,. LL ..;"a oil �; - �' I.1� L _i �I i VVV\ A ok i. 417D-or 3 I 1 a �, 14 -i i I ( y e I !V"s.zt ftia— `' tit _ _ @ IIN2t t1 j rll 1 MI 3 -g i rN, i �' i 1 , � „i ��-�jj .- ,4 k 1 i t`1 . - ryx Xo114 I - i c) r • -1 A o . , 1 4 1 1 I k .1 it F Ifs I 1 t 1 r Nails al riErfaillim ii ! r1 j i fTt Y 66 • g8 , ,rIId nh W N La zm g > n, o 'o w8i sma S 8 8 8 L=¢ Es U &-W W2 N imFw G g ?G588 if y oL ,;V:16 w o °S "- mawLagy ,6a g ; _pmom 5o Q o 3 � o _ Wagf = Ws` rg,z m 34, CO I— g 41d! o W �� x ° gW 4,Th- ii a °co' 3 w _ ° o as ° "°<7 as gum f ¢Fm,�z >` w �$ w g a �= y pct 'g 888 la W8E, ¢ l'-:4n' Wog m O ¢w a !' g"I '_ i V 1§ K " _ o i"", �= m €9 m'S U N,-,4 Z� v�ao oNo�y > 4s x m a 4 �� �8 gy$ � €� ¢LLo p ��'�"ago gwg 11 O Z � S{ ° n m n t: 4 .° i_ 1,j woLL _ ais i 1 likri 45-4,7[0 m_Q,m0 1 j 4. _8 �a�+' 1 Z .Hou ao$ 2 _oC.m° Ac; _a_ g 5 r 6 i�mU�¢� � � �C `�8 � � 38 � :b M7 � w� LLAE. w `�onb L71. f i oa LL F- U) Q C) w Q Q N W ZWO ZQ Al o € CO W Z N CC _�� Ii I NE _o, fie, g W O Z a m a� U NQSo i � rn Ill i Q WI se r 0 . X80 LO OO p �� " Ho a o m o sia _ h O a O OU ra *0� �46 U= Os= _° F == �i o > Z CO __Cl-z LU �& �r W � a ° n 3 ,0A y i os ›' J LLdff Q ` €� 'fit~ < Witi ao3 W a 8_,%s;ao 2 obi OBJ HO �:.::., I.LI "W § W, W 2 Z -• � E• II 4< . m ¢V o ig 8 g C. pa r. .j.s l\�/.��P1� x xm Q U u8 o gS 8< 8 w - ,, 8 ., - 2 Y 'o i a UJ U) m W s:==wm Nw mug =o' € §W 828‹.%Ws ea..., iI �� 4 g �gE0.5 Shi � 2 a 3.2 a alGY �-'x ci a Y '. ,g3" ams€ " ala x . - ;"_"4",1:21 S s W 3WWW� L - m§�? € l5 m .11 "wog : _ 1 pg, mm <_8 o = .o €�EiVe kgs VI X mW"=� w? s n -'-"."''j' =. g N ,1o=o n� o o " oW 8 d s Wz aa' '1a 205 e e i miEg '_T71 62 4 wain- - - ;s'"Jo woo-. _ �_ W ;: : � =max � o � W "_� `��.: � ��, �11 jii y, �,q. ayg b Y' p w E5 • 8° ::: �<"'� r€i%! - g g o f i g=W:v°42. .s= g a 1° a ., ai 2. Lao s'd =K€ =`8 _ i=s2 E aN =gizo%. p a .-_:8,•;•,'1 ga = oto .N,,,,,ft g o IF og o m= " p3seg�°� �_' _ 's5 4 5 " 5 €°°"5'J"PR3 s 7 °G V';':.1 w w 8 5 �w =�8� �8° g s :_ 3 Y N <W 2a wgi">mv 8 V'' Y " "&�o a V=° g ' ' - V401 a 4' m .4, $ got a '.; o E' o g 5-w gN o 2°'~5`Ps 55a 8 a HRH .%5! ,1 i n 016514 €f w :S n}w_ &= a0.2a „_€ - 2 g , S Eg. eke t w� ,.0566,412!F c o V ¢: w s e 5 1 g�? a5 E"4m Y' � e o € scIoYw. _w §s °„s La=. 2" S .. <o i'" A" o mows:° S _ Fw''idaR X€ eo 'w$�AgX0E° w We n!V i m 1 2 4 q -V ° 5< g=5d sa _ a €7c _ ]!'w s ° . N g.g 13"a J= 11g:m w5 g ' r` mE. 856"5°w - <=3 ys Yu,�eo aE q o i g g_ a w Po.°Ww °¢.m o • am �m-" ,o �m���o E g�' �ai� �nx�w 6 s° 73 W g <<<a a'41-e3 4'tiN <XR6 < e' O. Xig cs 5'a's § <w K�8g€3 woe Ia p P W Wg N g r .= o.6S�R g C7 W - w 1 Wx-. W, a O 0 i w wWWW �g 3�" Wsoo S6 N di g�'i 8L w sg"= n4 3565 Smm 3s5o ! W z '? ..!i. / W `You§ oo'a "§sggo wa„� N IAAE'LLSAOSaaY dS_.s•• • a ��'w gr, , y Egh I m Aga .. 9 m� ' L. ( 0y$N¢ in f o__. p a o j a"O mn i I\ , 1 s LZA0$ I i {- ¢ r V OO OSp}I..„, N co 0L 00, 1'00 OSS -1;1z0-.01.11- __ LL 1- __�__ W�O�G 22 �� I s'.•,.°:,•7:,,.. ,f6'LzO�L r o I ,w NS 101 .[e'101 _� I 1/�TfL� ,CB'l01 n M<S,IZA011 .o MLS.IimH I N..;. mN�o Z¢dLL 4�w J "I a ^ �I� I e Waw6 ._ 'l $ `N 0 Sj "lm ,�" - 52 a ^ .0.1.2 ,,E; 00 SOL I AO-201 I" ,00 SOL f8 301F O MLS.L2AOH MLS,IZLpN Mag.MOON o ML2.IimN _ o ww n b oI o o w o 1` o FA i ng _____.____ 8 .00 sol sz .3.° 8 .SZ W"S°l 3'0.S11�1 ,00SOL ?^ .W'S0l OMLS,I^mN of 3.LS.L2m5 OS,_.1 o MLS.ILmN aWWd ML2.1I.00ry to '... n 3'r%,Ol+l$ NF-'3'11'a7OL ,21-^,02,00'20, „ $$IWW $ w .W"201 y .00'20, C�� 00504 MLS.12mN W I M[S.ILmN a M<S.IZAON u W M.1.2.2.001,1 " I'? ''- b$ e • $ " o$ o ' 2 c ya8- m ._......__._._...._. R ` L 1_R I4' -1 1_ 1-. '-1 Il_� 1. „ 1__ �-� '" ^--} ;oo'sor - } ao"sor- }-ii - 8-r ao'sor} P W= --}}a's.Izma,_+_o Et mo,.4, um_1. 4. .s.Lx.ostc„_A~, T �_ f mp j< w 00SOL nw S'R 1 .00LOl ,;,,z..,--,--, ),,R .00 sol n $• :TA $ o MLS,LZAON q M<S.IZAO11 M<2,12m11 ,i. z o ML'.1Z.00N 1$1 $ b o -.Y♦ .W sol 1'Q .o.s sol r3°AO'SOI 1 .00'Sol $r w$ _o ...IZAON b E W, b M[S.IZAON 1 MLS.LZAON o o M[S MOON 1 R $ <� $ R 91 $ 0 siw .00 SOL 1.a .W'S01 t t�.OS L.00 SOI ,SZ ,SZ 005030. IH L, � a MLS.l2mN .. q M<S.IE.OS<--1 0l MLS.I EN IL, I o M<S,1Lmry to 9- g R 1 r 1 11 R 8 S � .2 Q J o W ,Of S9 '-.$o<'B6 MLS.IZAON /� I ,\` x.000[ MLS.IZDON� J ' I M sO imN MLs.LzmN - Z r (�� - LbH1.7VN1 1.0,Of 3.LS.IzmS _L3.0_011,4'3n"a P 1 o HQ Q N .O<'ifl- 1331LLS'JNINNNLL- -3.n o 31 EM r . I ?--I �3 el,SL in CC LU `g^ n ,OL'wi 3,[S.Iims l' o .00SOI 1. �r� .01'02 An. ,01 OS ,01'02 y0l"K' '.0L'12 I.010 \'t, o M<S.42mN W Z W O Z Q 6..W y o �� 3'0 S ��F ) I $ r Q O Z Q 0 �o 8 88 $ - n e d a ^, .a°n7l oo 000"ssI M<s.°L°Z020 1 (`7 W I_- N � .mom m4 mP P' m a J Z W =O R $ " ow _"`` S .°sL i�os'L S -,vs, o„Rm o r ll��� JII $ `,0l'OS .01'02 ,0112 i I,01'K Alt 9'w 1 W Q C7 r LL .K'f813.01.0,005 .o I'OS ,0l0S 112'ului '6.01.1211 QJ W -1C° Z L' SO SS<..0..61.0°11 0] f Tt 0- L ° o o n- 0 R j Z m S U L QoOQZW J u� � : a- o J Q O a Q O 1, 8 R 8 X ry n $ 8 n 8 8 .88 R $ g e $ QQ � a- Com') fir fT fPtr tr f frrr Ow R 2 : w a '2 4 a '2 ; : _ E 2 : e 2 2 yy ti RR 8 8 $ $ Q 0 < A 8 a o 8 E 8 0 8 8 0 2 8 8 8 8 .8 8 8 y 2 Y ^ A w : 2 3 : t S e e - m b e e 4 _ e r a e g 4 - g e g J m R ' ` 8 $ r 8 CO " 28888888 -88288882828 w $ � $ r r " 4 " n ry 3 J n ., • m 9 . 8 8 S' r r R 8 w . r wli 01i;, ii 1, a I��silli 7ltif Phil O CV z H —°' Z �4\]4. O T '2. ~ Z 4- '1: Z " Zo Zg � G w Lt,' §; '""C ) w a = 3Ltp, w 3 0 3 F-i a Q �'� g� c T o I� ° a g ,5 o n H-1 H w x o ow = w 3 yh�aIl z U _ w of TW o z z a x o a w Wmo W ,a oNW 0 Zg � z � � p � Eg 1 ' 6- 6 ° o6 < Z a gN 6 S m d a G g d 3o � o ? E ' ' s a a a E f E 2 :5 w i� � Oz ! o< W i 1 FA' z EER 0 ...4. W1— Om ilil W z of fig. ` t, ....=k,.- u"s ''ati 4 W l lb CO a F w Q W CNICCCC/ Z CO O 4 C! Q W < \‘' pie wI Z 0Nco Z � woCCZN �'7C) 11* Al o. -12 O W z on ^Qr cZ a WN LLI *4 D CC Ct fnr Zm�m°zWO pHVNN 3 o~ ° QWW ',4--- Z3oE, co 0. Oe 3 0=cc W 2c� e 0 zwC‘1 W a � O J `. IL oac .� 4.5 r 1� UQNO� a a vw Owo Q cc a oW IA 0 m,. cc 1 411I Z W CO D E36 g °1 a $ T m o @ c n �H,: Ii f j S 201 Z Z 8`11.2:'; 0 0 z .2x w r:', o_ 0 z ! p6< z < H _ o P EK z w , ° W52 o Z V �iow z o ts epQ �'ag ��a w w Q odd LII . fig O m., i •�• _ia 0��06 p; p o oar �f� P. Eo cL o Lm°LL a .. ..,:x t. 43 11 . ,.. I° .,_ P , g igtlti4.,,i2:;92rrE A.r?.4W!'.1 ,15“hRA A '''' $ Ld R Lc 6 a 2 r - w '84 I . E ,1 ilig€gi€:'1151,iplixqi ling! I.1i 'en! v .,. i !e!!5fe:.inigg ;II ;1=1.1i1 1.k.1 igi 61 1 t262E ! g - .m n c) 6 I 1-4 1 E- . u v, 74 z - - , z 0 g 21,1 E I OA:1g 5 0 z -5 ! ggg;,gg 0,22 gli6. 6 !6 R 2L;, gg. sgif.ggqi€tiilti-g geloii1eg.W 'g `,:9"' . 5 a 5 1 a a og g i ! i6 3 !go i g 1 4 el ! 6 ..!4 tii! ; ° 6 i 4 4:g2E 1 ' ' A 66 6- - 1 1 g gl -f § 2 ;1.- WEE I . E - .-' ° _i_ sA,513 ,g i 5 1.4 i 11 - 1 i '2 2 gZ p* i ; TP.Olii 2 i 2 i gig5 .1s. ',.:rir/k: A; E ; r R A ! 1 7 .11 A ! ! 1 1 g xi! E g iill;IN i= i g t 11!1 ;ii i.1;=i E4 S ! 201 i : :;Eiii 2; i i ; ii 111 i lithilli' l! ' ! h i!ig I; R5;tgi Pg g m =,- ! If ' '' 1 i i° iM i Elig1/14 ii ; i 4 .5i n ._ 0251; li m ,, 1? 1- A 6 T;p472.- 0 g - - = iil I'm 0, = ';'' II i E g ga 4 V , V gi..tihi= g ° 5 li ;IA III gili55 i g 0 ! g 4 ;poll g. ii g 10 ! 1; ggg . 2 i OP214 I X il 640 Enig gii11.1 1 1. go ii !PA 114 igN1 im ii gl .• g- i ! V Ig gi i :=7,7 1 It di isev4 .,1 1 !,:, ilglg !=i; qp..t mt, m: , ; i i: . i .. r 1 q n! !, 0 ' § : ;101°1* q ; ' vs g!glx LI ;W. .g 2 5! 2 g Ri 1 i N N i! 4 li 0 2 i: HI i z; i N i igifil41 !I q 1 P .iP illg. iggiil q il i',1 2 5! 1 i 14 ' i ! 1 I 0 qggi ..-,) - g;ggE It gt tg 6 gg g g .gi 1 ' i It 1 4! i li !!i i !; ; 1 ;10114:; !I' il i 0 ..gig,a gRa- :t5-21 .1 ,3 E. m El ,-- 1 q. i g E . 2 --2 25 ii !! 'Is in § 12 ! t :P.!.ti!tigi 15 -2 -1 SEO it% 'WE!. gl, gl "& 5' 'h ' , 1,1 n i ; n 1 t i il at "' ;-; I 2 il!mAIRg-gs !' °' 4 , -, .-, ; P 5 4 n xi. 1 15 2 „ I. -W. 112e IRAil.- .,1 lA !! 0 em 1 1 '3 / ' 1 8: 0 2 .' 1 .2' t i2 .-5g '1 it :2 '2-i z l'' 7 1 l'! ! - 1 ! P .1b 1 ! 1 4 r9.1;1§.4, ig -i fi :!ill ii ipi. ii q gi N 11 I qg 5 ' il gf, 5 gi ii ;i 11 il ° 51 01! ;5 i /5 8114111gil r i' I; . 1% ''2 1 ' ""'. "g !2 !,,, . i - g h. a gi z ,_, g 1,, g;Iii gill NN11 ;., gl gi ..: ; x g51 ! gg i ;: 6 4x gg gl 1. gi 1 ig ggg i €1 i 4 ig itgii.51i€ A ii xi d H 25..A 2... ggiiAlg ig /. ii 4g1 1 i 41. i 2A i .14 „ ,_, , . _ • . „ . „ .. „ 2 2 . i . ,. 2; ! !I 21 !!! .• g. i.257. IA g 1 1 gilgig ti ,3g g5 gi= ;'1 .e,' .? ' i ! 50 1 ii g t 5 ,-0 ! i ig i ge g g ? 2 52 15 5 i 5 ; 6 1 gg 01: i iiii 1 i V .1- .g i A A t ; j 55 5.4 , •t 2! g h , -i' ! „, 5.,,;. ii...t 1/5 gg '; 5 ! i i , - ° e. 1 I gee; =I VI H :x, 5igi .g g : li :: f n i 5' Lill H 15! '11001004g; igi101 24 !'q 0 0/ 11 I in .ihi ! lili 0 6 g g 12 44 igiegh.lgog.g4i,pglyggal, ig5 igg =1g /4 P g ; i 2 ii 4 2 : ! 2 i 'I Ei g ! i 3! a pi poiniEgui1.4§§,mIgh2§1A igg gli 15g, !Rg gl N ! : 6! 6 ; ; 4 1 5 I, li 1 i 1 i 1; q ql Wg ii il' i5/ lii !- ; i ' igli " l ' IP g 5 iii2 i.. ;IT Aill,,,l,tntz,'Rc : 6,;.!! 2 t2,t 2,2 Eri gl 'i'*e i.. eavgy° , 1 xy .. yllr ........ . .... . ... .. .1 . 1 i 1 1! �« 1 ,3.11 yy1 F4 _ml„ i21n ! LI ,m �zbY iYo5.-II •:; E$ ---2-4 ---- W o g o a o O €i:13 .. .@;1 110 it 8 l 3 \ W d 3 ,o o Iy!IPIA 1 g', 111E1111 !Oil sl;1101 ell Iii db 4 ,, z / \ > V Q .44 J (1_ I j , � I . I __ -• 7' h ' e a O 0 Z Q Q n 1- 2, 'l ,.. ,:, __.;.7 1,„!,1:- -,1 4 ,,., §- .... . _,.„...,...._ ,;;:, ,...., .. . ,... ,. _..... ,,, \ .,;..., ,, ,. N �jna ssroas rcitag ' - °!%; ;%. ..'� •,�hI O Z pz V E I I -, i9 11, IV8-1- q- fir. ` c\ \ ,.�:�� •• 800 oar: *k, ® ?- I I k. j '4 z d m ” 000,..,..„ 4 4 3 ,1 1 s 4 '' . olt s 4• .> o ! os .'''-e::'74* B _ . ,„ . , ....._ , . _._. . . , _ , „„„ .. _ , „„,....., 1 e., 191i, i 3 • li \ :2-1 "9"R .g w � g5 pgg 0£ p w 0 0 � d �N. .. �„izo� - 5� s.- z o o ¢e7 W a % s < (75 0 0 o I.; "5 'i az s Zed r r-s g .� W G WWF e E.,. — n a < � 3 Eu v~i d g 1 � _ g77 w w j $ N !1$ ns y 3c 11 i!5! < W d 1 i 1 1 li z$1,e g y i 1 6 i,sa i ill sal f s o w Li g s..@ SAt' e 5 a 4 a ¢ i 2 8 t l t 11 1,..1 LI r In01 u, 0 1 n I I r , : 1,. ....••• 1t i l l lel-!/ 1 ill Hi � ' it ii - Ip' 8 +^^^.•*.' \11-,--1-1-1-1 �tl L.7-7 I -til i 1i'i 'i,,, ,1 yy<< i 1 J ' p' �� g + yam=L ���I SII Q1,; '111r yII 11f ' '_f' f �,^ ^ ^^ 1(�,__------'�l�i ISI, a ii1 wi i II � ,i s n I'1 In n 111 - I i I 1 I III �} 1 , ^I II 111 ��� „ III HO II 11 III ,�-�- r.,:....•.:1 U 1)i L I III 61 q I n i �� JII IR- JII II` J / III I � r I — — — — $ — axvn�noe smwaas rnva ', Li z - z Z w I .- s\TI fr' : o 1- q =_ 1 1 Vie. ! '$= o I'. Ir 2a Izti I I i' se; 1® 1i I 1e1 2 `1 IIEo m II I i spa m -'i I- m N 11 - r I1 1 ® wa 11 1 i I I oo --`— —LI 'r1--- J L1 lip ----i i I pi E .3 'lq1 o m I , 1 is I I I ( i s Ia I :I I I I ��1 I i:T - m / ! I .4 I ' i I , $ 4 OLLN3 � `♦3/tlV NOWT.a 3 a (L n ' I 4, 4ipw — I N G I I 3 ---'-- - .4Ta1LCROlaN1KL '. I o I I I LL iroma .: I I I I m a 1 II I3 ', , r . ,, A i s , ,s € W - sI 22 d 1 t 29 - I -- _ __. � �� � - I r ra = !v F, II -_ e L re-si_ A = I i '4 7- \ 4 3g zz ., m -, 0 6 Si L ii az u vz z s � B � &E iQ fo 'o � 8g i � -.-_-.- __� x o 3n C w Z f f s F.-5 w E �'m mi m ❑ _ — ` -0 Z x`3000 ooV � 3 � c8 a 5 d =� Qua W 1 rl w 1 1 1 1h1 gaf .-7 r I 1 o 1 1 t ■t. , .s. ' +` . 1 1 1 ���11— -I 30o yr ' --- i111r. s 8I 3 S ,t,' V ' i I i i J §I{afn g �'• _ -4 1 I 1 i1 111 1 I1 1i o 11 II fl-'.1::':-.-.7_71-77_:_-._ z,..,:::-, 411 'It! _....--.. -i..�....._----- 111 c g8 1 I1 I11 i 1, M 111 I; II 1 11�..- _._---- - G �.` �� ••--,.-..--.._.-__2_ /- I_ I •I � \_.r" 3� I 1 1`-'� Ill--- I II I Tu -I II I 1 I! III 1 II I �--�- 2 ^,. II 11 11 IIi X111 =' F,. l 1) II 1 I I I!II I i '1111 1 1 Ly 14.44 11iIL J JIB1� V 11 I \+e\ — G ' r _... .__. .� � _ — Z :_- _ z _ .._. __ - _ , — I Z r , m 11 ;i ''`I 1 €�1r I 0d t m � 1j ` 1 m G m 1 1 n1 - If I I g E - r L 1 < r 1 a 1 o I. m m 1 1 3 N P. .G }� y�p: m i 4 i � o • a � / � e ' ,.1 ._._.. ._...._.... :i _ .._.._ ......_— _ - ----_..__ t z^;a Vag„ yy Y3NY NOIIN3130 . ( I '" 3'9LL cte� tt 6 N _ — _ 1 ' c 1:n .. /NOI10.13N v 1 3 19dNJS D\Inl\\A— 1 tl x O 1 , i i1 1' kII I; 11 1 � 1 -Y e ,....1 '. I 9 '. I i i I 1 1 t .1 gd S 4 1 I 9 2 X 1 iiiIMMEMENI 7 \ z no � Ew w f S -.2,A S S R s a s e p a fg. U 6 – S a W w m as a 4 a 5 a Ll ." R: ry ? o 71 wE"' W z5E'o4 > og8 z s I- o a". E : s§ ig1 i C II MI MI ME 2 iliCuoligp i I 10 1 r` LL j rr d� I 1 1 ). h LL Lv t I � 1 -3-1 'i I I I I I r o 7 E 4 ,t)-'-1 -;Nyg / ,,, v N--w1a+bwaas mva--..-',Q; `G 1 __ w i a 1 c _.o 1.1 _,_____, ------ir , , ,, ,_, x 1 ; , , iiii !p.,.-4 , , /// fl m ^o i€ol t. si r 0- ' 1 I 1 W 1 ,a m esi: E I Z m a G I r 1 . a m t „ 3@ II 1. I b - r c } gs, 5 s 3€ r :. a°� a °:, m 1 3../- WR $ 11M DI — , �rm e — o m R m '1' ! ��g 4 nm AE. a `I 11 € 1 ygNVtN " r /I m {. ... q .�, �d�l° 5.. 0, i i / 3. = _ 'in $ y. ,. 9- £ _ ..._ r .12 Oqz ALL 1 It 3 1 �I aW ' WAN NOLLN313N $ v I T I ^ .... Z _�a. /NOLLN3130 y ' g - ry ' 1 .... Y k J r 'e { PA. ` + w __ '.IS r)hINIM4 . ry Y --T- o b f 3. m o o e . o o e . O. o ! v € T ... 1 1 , .. , „ . ,,'-- `: I i / t I 4 i $ Zi g T 3g P FM—rj 5 ‘,1 g 7 gm 5 .� __ °z __ �� r a z w • d L�11�� s 3 }• m wm oto I Gs t . g g . r{. n @ 1 Y F� ___ __ m e a n o ^' F . 111 EDFo„ V Z 1 II 1 7 �_, 3,3rv. Z 1- 11 s o — 'I„Mir i' a4t'•10 i i s o a a Y 4 fj , — �.. ` a I'S �j r/ LL > E, s 4 2 c10-. q 12 !ill i P. _ �.�o"` @� wwi. I ` -f 5 �g .. S i g5 k F I€ I = m • SII,. i s v o _/i. \__ —. oY 9� «NNi I.... F3tN.. o u r., o o m ., a N a m UP a « o , q x Z 3 � 0 . s s. RADIO LANE 4 , t I @i I 6 s f i 4 2 i 1 sg rt gLL F.1' ��II�� ..............: MINI M'�MN NI MN MI . _ NN LIII� w rig 3 --� V Q a ,, Q• o i_. _ • :4 , 44 o'll ni II. ' Ild iii J I1 � o m eiiiiei f i v ici II 1 1. 1 I. t 9,.� �� sc ., -' i �I� .r v e -i vim+ _., , ._1 _ _ ,,, 1 Lc — T r — UA1E1MDlllNaSHlita 1 ' v ° d 6 a Ff�] S ' P =ems ! ,1 -gym �h11 o ° P. - I BEf s E x z €„ ;a E? ; Ih I , c gI _ I gt1 1 gl _ w �.. so a II.' I c " z a set€ d 1 _s e a 1 ss I s :j< x$ ;a i 1 a_ - i1s�.aii —— = ci I �3,3 SI ' 1 1-7 'E_ g� - r 1 . 3 1 'v,_ i —m Q R 38'51g grV4 i I w1 a E I l h 1 1 ' o g 4 -' v v e I e dLL� ¢1 11 a ;` 1 2 = i ... v kt-,iIJ 1 E�. 1 1 § I. —N a � � LL I. I is ; : i 1 h _ iii Pr i ti 2 14J m I 1 wtv€I y_8 I 1 I 1 1 S W �I Y ..._ u wnur—� Pi' me a li II 1 } DI I a t 1 _I 1 m V i o m e < g, o m e e ,u o v s pp -.... _1j,._________1:7_ -1,1 *.' o I I Sid Ff $ L F ' I F P .i e 9 i t 1 ! dg --- I (iq igi15. c d �) w` cHgga 1 H 1 1 I I I Ge. - r -—T I4.._ I 2--, ZO x E 3 ii I 5 I-. x W !I I.. II V Z Y o _.J U H,. U o• _ itiJ F.,' u , - L r a m 2g61 ' r II w F o m N -` o 1 - 1—'1 z S F a Z °o G r^. ,73 } 3 v v C7 �g Z Z O Z R z G s ti z € z4 _ V o =n o` o s rg h C U:_ 03 �� _ r2 t ;;iiS 3a ,,,t zb' ,:- ees s 1 gru . z�c . y O _ Im l': g :1P-'11.§.5g., PD w i 1 4 € g OE .g :, F a iof9Y4 mv 11 e` 0 1 o E '' , li i EE y 6 z $ = z E 4 g li _g� 4` „ afl x @y a P w J z Q w ? u e U= _ p 4 I:4 - o u` _ - a o 1 w s z Q ,,, 4 1 _ zI , i ' U! N z P _ 3=§ I ii H. a s dz a i 2 i 22 4 i g z zi ar -Ibi aay_ s 42 O ?� „lib I-' M3 6. m gg! g j t u F., "fiu ,aYAqgl. j i _ GWggivg ii. a�4 cg E w W c? V .� q ___ _ii g e.5n �]z E .4g02 I N rn ~ d ay€i$itg 'ili o ,-i. R I eek Q a 3 as "�$ �aWa z; � rs e � g� a� '�YS���a iE z y 3a, O Q p n � _ 8-� n _ 0 1' .sE g a s a? Y " .a� �- — L. a ° gid � _ r rcg�_ w o e s w r S a-Stall a' gr tit =e 0. E. I- ilP °° ac w a m 4 xf i s �i O �c Z a a psi`=-"' 1 gs1aE lir 3 ej S IP x p. q; -W O bye�� °$ $_ ' $<� F ,, w RI —,. — 6 ill ir -X11-.5 I s H sg ' z 7 o f MP: a = a.r, ...,.ftrI a z¢ fg r z i C7 Yoio I cm ill Vz ;[:' ;- alp EtLvvO. 1 ;!;vli MI o Iss zu. i z o I. a sk i'' 1_:: is' S ea s o0 o .: zAL r cc Z a bm s 1n!`ra to i'°1 _ _ I i la'p > a R O E 6 inwI a11.1 .1111 igI6 0 o_ e i 4, O o> .m.�,g skij,:a vq111 _dill ' a It s. ;N. a s < 0. \moi NV I 4 g ^ § w4 Itt I II i mLL e E f 8 � II 1 � E N n f 1 !� 3Z' Vm '.° a Q 3 li — xvo— -3f S ES i7' 1 iF 41 'x 4- a Y 33 sxe95••e8410; i iE tla 4 ;1 h1 i.1E; ' 'si 11 4 i. .. s:t5ssx.s 1 IO I-T E 1/5 9 iE ail I flo I I :a 1 iI O. ..--=, a."'" \, iC a i i i'' E it a i 14 -I :q 11 'sS E s_i. - / n 1 11 4a 4 , pli .1:a E's I.41 , 5 P 6 5/5555/55s s55 1 p, °t o 1 4 ii g IN'811;'' !Hi iii lei W E . = <"s `g-,!Ir1?5 .2Ys ilii 11 1 J. z ''-a 34 8 E7:`9,,„ 4 fE i;'e „ ! ° - _� '`g,'xzs zssr '3E - 1si- ' 14 a" 4 j e -- z „ „, i_.._� i--r—a S -„i 6E 4 `-'I 4 Eli; E a I a e, z g 1 i; id ii ilii�:il,f,l,sz!E s,II i' 0. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� ; q •a... _ P 485 i 1 sl_ i.4 4' II!hi eE A 1 a 1 Pir,xg`nn- • ri=1� 1 i 5 ilia ,,,,xa-aa i=n L�.Js F 4 A a.-Fxa s.aaxs._ < ,, I;E11 3 ago I 6 (.1111 sYa V 01 i I r IV :.111; <1 iii; • a i- ,;!x k q z II g 1 i ..�`i m 1.11 r =Q° !I ( b . 4i '� o R y_rar�J � , a4 Flo p€ " Iljr � ..o =" L JII II�rice J J .. :€ E u t. 9 �a 1 e �g E F z of 12 11 11 _ I= , !IN i s „i - 1 4 , ;i �� :, �� , i Ilii '� N I is 11„5 i 1 0 17 d1`Iliill lll?i 1 A 11 Ii )! I j 1 i I i i 3 I €ii,!!E ; �1 1 I: y I 1 t? 1 l , °I I a illi•1!" J _ iF J+ iil a e 1 III� •cif! i IIS du 'i� If�11;f, 'I li 1 I 1E 11 �,s ( i1 { it 1 IIII+ it Il •Veet l' o 1 i FE i` lig I;ii ga _. , 11 f 1I i q!1'1.10 _ I I 1; I It it 4 �Iii g n ft li l,•, i ;e 1 hI�f1�liilei"..1"1I1i I,. a1 ji + ! ,, i.N,I��I t. ;! �} I , �� a ii 1.IE'iliui.k 1 I',1 07 "I �!;.I Iigil ,�� ,: ; ( i i !' „, rill+ , .j„Fg,i {` ` nS�,i 111 , ! I{'� ze @99i ,,1'i f t�` "O' ' P 1 1 , 1,,i pI! il pINMII: (11 iF is it:ri 1 F rye, E 1 ill f;j,ke u~, Nill Ili i / , 7 Fill UOirlilI 12 I ��` {111! i1 F, S� ai. f,1 iii y ti ��iiiinip II 111111 II i � ' q I� .;puri il l i i I` EI:{I z 8 0” I I huh II ilii its dr s 1 !E i,i'1 ii Ei z gull� INIIIiIIlii: 1 AI ! + n ; c4 0 $IIMM11NI Igili lilgil i 111,1 I �` a2411 t1 ®ii,, illi �". 11.1,f1I,,:., o z 5 ,I p 1e< F w N 11 1:11111 ' S ,JA';- 1i i W..I �' !ill i f 11:1{1 i I1; 1 ,,YIgg :„. I o ,Illi i -y ' 0 7 !ilii I I. __jo °z NI dill I �` ,pe_41 tiIA 1 .�, _ NI ` I/+_. a iEFeaiill e ,„„ _ ,_=.I i F=`t V1 i 1 i 1 I 1 I ! '; t !p(I,;9 e 1, y Q { 111 __� r 9d S� >. :1 acI lii9�ae'E ; i III i Cl , 1` 11 S 3<i< ii 1 1 ,I �1I Iii I i - • ie if9 EE `..�/ g k 2 i„ IiiS I - I> a 2:1 1 1 I I' '1 I, 1 1 1 .1$No ■'1111:` i @ n ,, /.. !! i.; II I I 1' oa e I !f1 1 1 I ' i,i , ' I 1 =s -lr2 I s I„ ,. i i I, i 1tW t� '.1 11 F ; d i 1Ili i 1 11 1!i: iii I e _� .." I I,, fir r r ,11, "" I,e i I 1; i •F 41+ , Ai ,kg a 4 �` E , 1, ' 1 111111 1 Ii �' I �+•iii $ 1 g Nil ; 11 lilt Ili;! Il�. i I 1 t + jsil,tli� i�il 4! �P i 111 yil,sillll�:,ll,if h1 9 3 tilt' 11 i!1 $.1 A I Qe 1 ,I I ±1 i ' 1 , f 11ti, , 1 e fit `I `iii E : i 1 1 t 11 tr I1,hl i ffyll + I — —':1a � +i , 1 C I 'I �. ii{ 1 i�io1 sijiri 1 1 ;,1! ! i i4 9 iii i a 11:•1:i 111t f i 11!;111 i iE`li '�i�— F ; 8 aC 1 i i _ 1 , ..II ;11111i,!!!111 i ;i 1111 i 1 '�1 i"l ; „! e 1 i; t , i 1 1 VrEt414 I • i 1 ! § J1i11 S 1 1 •e ?iI i t r 1 i1si16�flip!] , 1piliF( I ' 1.11' ��.17 ie'i 1 1 i'1 i 4 E F r 24.5_, 11 I, i(r 11,111 1• j ii'iEtii 1 i Mil p i I Bial 1 `f i•ii:c 1 I 1111111 re!' ¢ iii MIS ( 7171E �: �1 EI i 1 1 i,,lti:iI+';i I if p"Iai;i 1 I hg i li i'! ;F se i , i E 1 i€ i s 1 I i 1!41,!1 VIII i1 ti 1�;,/,0 11 i i1ty1,9 Mil Il ZSI•i° 11 I i, !ii `i t Ilit 1!! I•+((1 1 I.i ti Ilii:I e 1 •:99 2e 8s.'li, ,e I E EI I . { ,. . .i.i. "55, 5 e 5 i ' Ap' eii =`;i.tE' i§y i9 a r5 t I�i 1 1 ,1711 "• gi eJ 1 j,1! ;� 1 i i= ! —F`i 1 i➢ , ; 1 ,iIt 1 f 1 l% t III I= F ; ; i 1 41 1 i IJi11 I i It 0, 1 ale �9 i ' s 1 i I i 1 I E i 1 //. e. • 1 ' • 1I, 1 tail? IEifit� 4 III --' I r �1 s,! f, 1 ; •' =l � ! i' '',��i 11 1 ii al a a_`i 1 i`i ail i i i 1. i �� �I71 ti i 1 I!1 11 ± NI; i.. ; I t{ y e �; d Bill it `i`Immii I:/,5 li!!! et , a• '`I (f, i 1 I i E; j It Is;s.:i a; , i !811 1 aF ' - . S.=+ , 1�1 la3 til I jI E'; a it e a si '3g a r e3 ; + it I§? 5..1__ iIE . g 71 a limy. LI o $ 1! iiii °i"! i LI a:9ai5 t i •i4a � a I 41 11! W Y tl iei §p iSe li ,III lit 0 ; 11 1i _ a13, iirIII! G . � c :!k gAs !t¢id � '° . . !I ii Ii ! ,l 1�p= Pi Ie6 0 ..1 €� A i E e E {{,i di i!i a IN41 111E il 8 i—'%° h I9 a_, s.1, 3 iia= r 0 j f Ns\ ' �� :! i�gE � idS I- i= SS S(' II.d vl '4 i i.. il 1 l„!ill itIli �(��1®� � i� n5, €e gg Jh iiiiIa11§I ; i c, _ � 1•liiiIi iiiA 'i BPI!\35.il IHDla;;. 9E aii is Atli I _ ? �i1i \ ei ' hi I` epi Ili 1 ,ei _< 11 ii! €ISL ik 4NA,=, \ i§'i F ! ..,,,,'„L':.1:.'0,:,'... SII AI moi: ' � , q - ` gb alis i' Nil i ii6iiii=.3! 1 L I i§ tl �" 8 oaf m .,1177„:,,,,,,,,,,:,_,,,.: !aii I!Anil'17 €' I�;i �,5 qo = i 151 tl I! `�tl I le 3r E2 IT i#!s ;aa a 5/.it,u i 5 i i ,3 r g € V in .01.1.i Pi ii !iii@-itl i , 1° 1 i 5 , ii; i ,1I �'a ii1i !i� 'iii- ;w a s�� tl OP Illilli:laii,.iii1.13tliliitl 3 //-,\ It ''ll''CLINIFIllir PI, Ai, P 11 me K\ aa► i r.i ii_1 , 'L i E.. g �a .., I 9i1i1`g 1! viii tl pp :1 QQ .g3 8 I1 i i§iFi• e� 1 tl 13§ • Sy § '"a 9 r lii II6IIIStl1i„ §5 en i / t tl i i i i i i 1 i 3 i S i I 3 tl 1 i 3 x 4 x ig I$ = l I I( I Mil a /1" lg ,� 82 a a g228 „,, x;0',5 , gs U a o O W n _ w n ;gig ,---.. i5 i kl 11 II '11:5'' 6!ih-, ET'J �... 71!I ti . , 11 ,I o ' z Z- d Os fili W s go I _iii oi' t 8zo. fw163 Ig t Y5e3 8. ggg • , z a a of N8 419 ii ...._ Li Pi1§; P --il 15 1 1\, ' il : 3 l" r 1� z 3 X22 IN „b 8 v a 14/q a _i gra 1 Z ze o -U it a„ ,In', O I z O \\ \ \ d \ 111 \ g \ o € z $ *s - r _° Y WOW N 9b c4 g , as :=1 U' 2 9is£ _ i ' 8 m o N$Nyo # i= t a in 13 z off \ r=' I� ` = -;fir. _ \ \ \\ ,� \\ �3 1 ` y' \ `� y. . c ] ill Ym \ \\\ \ °, wa ani q �;' 6Z15 - z -I a - $ ` w w¢ y:5 g I' Uz a ' J S2 it i z 61 — y w 4___;„... \\ �8 > e u ` 9 a I. w a�yy \`, Fi4e Si It 3 � q 9 �xa— a I ?§ i5,41g ii Mil 14 il4 71 ., Pg Ph 1 3 \ ` g giiilEnt gt ° i c34 n W e ..: o Bgi 5_yY = Y3 ` a�_ ag_ 1 :\ \ - €3 l F g!LIP.;11§ WIt/3150i$g asa SE o € i ' ijPI g :� / i w 3 i*.., $ o g 51 w x f U 5 a pp r . O 3555 / - ZO f \ w g g m 7�'s O 4' ?'W gliP Oa W Y3 a ” O yg I IW , ZI ' _ og illS ... FQ Yv-'0 F \ \ a � ' ,� ii411- Et p � = 11:o , _ w , f s a 0 jO n $ b0 x 3611$7 a ii"sd d O -t4"25= 0 ° 2 2W o,gtos z m`g g w F- r`-oao- - ° = a 'w-aV W=w¢ Lu W oawi? S 3 Via. 3"a=-m2oS Nom o 1 I ° x 5 2 5a4_ -. r8 w m G o. iXe8.6 szLgo a a �o "k o. "e, 3 Y Prcin2 F< 8 a~� 88 W` los & }„mga o ag<=zg g.: k ag <o O WHO CO �g?� w So a 5"o, w��° € ':W' W" I gW"ow°p g 2wz ga w > - w S x6':_.: m iy w I _ p 3.08 ?ogry - $ w3S R 0 ,, W 9 ¢o. '4 y Joh J Fa Fa a�a N w " „n�a S J o wtuz ¢ ° a a z oF8E 3 la ¢_ :�F-w�W y ZW^"gra o8 O g o 56 -g z ", K y pa 18g dgf5 E 5w: i,Y a =aS^ggw napP i w 4: i= m mi a 3 gi ° 11 ai 8 gli x=8 o g° Wo6_ OgF � a _ � . =z =a= ya¢ � "o � sp a� � �°W z 5p° � 3561 = 0� 5'g 8 8 �� as 8 is 8 ga an § LILA ale LL _�F:gd it ' _a-oo„1 R w .g gr,„ h 0 =a6L H-F- 83 Q CO n. W , _ CD T W _¢ a Q z Q . € o 58 1 i W f0CEzNCCo roma- • '4o d ov, 7 =n W 0JW = _1 l��r ��� ~ Wm < _ „ _ 0 Q 0 < D W : BEEFS. ,■ ^ O w Lag a5 W 8§ Q p r LLQ ■F _ = - W „J. Q 8\1_1 J dp Z �I-•„i ��',11 .'�'a_�, 4,4% rI11 _I. o �� Ia S as z co 1 v .. C.'�~ _,_—minim 0 �S°�� ° i.° J WU28 '6 F Pclg CO _J � J i ■ = a-” r 0 o ma Or y el'•... 1.642..'-'-'111124i1• ;,!1 _. 2 g g0 Q UC "7. ' a W's ill ' gP - .5,: l' EC2 a I ki: w co n-- cc 1 �: o ? 528 e5 '2 Sal oW25 " :i 7 Q 8 zSs ° i w y $ � ot�G° GL 3 uw ?..i.9 ..,i,, N� u� gWmiu�° "' 8 .81_ „ .a� .. egos k 2: 'Wg.-.".E E _ a 'a L;W . s 144_:; £; o aI = 11g ,AP. - s ;x Sws 1 m Wlnw __ _° 5,-,65W €s$ °= 8 8 g=w g = 2R.g < gW8 `g eg ,Q3Kyg_ - ted^x F ,11g2;;i021 Wg s w o g I'M W _5 £soft i RE "Q ho w " o a 8 g m'" le _. 05.4 .,60. a Y k" NPh2'& _ 9 8 i o z= 8m a Who Wag P z Wo 1o. I6,. o .9 6 ;EI' ", a . = g w3 Q o, a Fwa yow 5 ° s° " .5 g e 16 5 g HI', E Y . .. -g=wy . --€w 5 s h .,pv p,'. ± ,u,„„ 2 50 -° ,,s ;' $ w 3 w;.§S$_ X55 n W 8 a ,� =aA w3i-'w°" o 2 a i3 � t <.z w 83 ,-,6,“. W5 o W E "1,s=Y �X ' t Eg i ...00,1 e1 ve w gg <ao 2 'e <: a =€m I § 3R gip==€ $g §I.L__XV 2 3 h = I nab sno ��g w §.-- 86 p=2,6„60,-L6- L1a=85o 3o� w o 69 Wa a '24° 5Li'2g . e g: W y'Ma dW � o� � 8t'�a� aoy €o w 8 aw " F sk YQ "«<<a< <_°. j �a�a= <.."s g < o2y<"a 5555 qa 1 S 1 i os 5 .5 2- g :� X - " .,."m,0 m ° - " r " _ " a - X- E' ? w§ g as x E Gg .s° < . " ° w - . g 3 a < as .° s' i -( 54. RSV W CV N 14 32 d O o 1G= a=8= N ,IE f ?dl' wmw H Ti<s''"</n�11a Lai a9mwo _ ...11111 1 e . VI ._ ig_;ma 6 • a 0 E2 CD G 2� 2"eg §' I- 85 = m8 �5' d 8 v� R w� - -.__..___.• aG /p 8288'8i45 L, �,§ ,elliA <wg =¢ � w llllllll 1111111111 W3 's<Q> 01. 3 !Wp ^ z 3-e6.1Z05 .Z0•55L 3.51.16.05 A� E$o� o`' a" T000.mm_, aaooa -.Z9 far KCI KfSola/LL .01'05 .0105 ,0105 .0105 1 .04 t5 ,0109 „ ,1 0 551 W 696 005 1 011 � _ o ,_ , R '3'0.5111 I0P ' mo r3;2€ nm I $ 3 Hr PE o$_ yst tm n 8m _ m m • - _m o - m 8pd _•p • o e a r10 005 sz 3.6.05-0 ZsIzzzl m m t q - Sru� J./ ,9 ;1 sw .1r115s .o1G .oL J. -. o � my61..Aos 2E2 w r 8 (30 O1 3n a .09966 Keo KAN 1 10 1 .00'501 m q,wyl f el R '3n3'3i-3.0'M/')A9Y5 3,61,5-005 n _ q ^ o ,,,,,,, ,,,i1,70.,-/- l �m$ .09'58 t-ad lAVN1 J33t4L51W1C1�lM - g �L I .00"OCl KeL,KANL .... s600 O ,0.. 4-i- .Do'''ry';-Qz 1 , x',00 sos o nq n 1, < w `° n a ^n I Q x g B ro ,'z I z - g ..._. d J i I 3.6,5.005 1 3,61.5.005 l? I 16151p5 1 041 3.61 KADS • I .00'501 I ,00'501 I I ,00.501 30,+;._ . _ ,00'901 bl b n m �I 1 I l l_ a m 2I 3 61 K 0S 3.81,05-005 2 3-BI KA05 R '- 161,5.005 ,00'503. 1 00501 1 00,01 n - m ,Do'sa1 i ml R O.SI--1 - ^neol-L-9I -m11�'3 n'a.o2 $m m I L'3'n'a.Ot ,6'0 r- n 33 m 10 RI m mo w 2 12_ 161.5-005 r 361,05-005 ? 3.81,05-005 L t 164.5-005 I I ,W'S01 .1 1 .DD"SOl I N ,00'501 1 _ m d - N Pm m I W- m ;I. ,00'501 �� la 8 9 Ci o m R -.2-2 It t o1 a b z w �+ I1 `` _.... y^•,1 a n ., m $ R-� -18 05A0S'}'J ���3,Bl,�SlpSt T R o 4-161,KA_ 4. 2 m "-- t{ ao'ml +-� m 9-]--.00'9oI_ � t �=- ,,--6D°" - a d T a � s � ±T - i a m �� ' o� T a�;" x a I � o '� ,n • "I,� 3.61.5.005 I 3.605.005^ I ^i61,KA0S u£-4 3-61,05.005 i 1 .0501 -...1...4.„,,,, .00'501 ,00'501 '3'0,5 ,00'901 I 1'o -04 o I 9 2 0 3n'a.ol'lo`OW o n R S R S R' o m m 112 , I 161,5.005 ; 181.05-005 I 3.61.05-00S - 161.05005 I II..Zu 1 AD"601 3.,,,, .00'501 m I .00N'OL .0 o R6 ., .- E. d i O o ''D` o KKK d 9 - F 2Wi gI L 2 n 12 .5z 1Vsz 11 3.6t,5A05 1 181,KA05 161,5AOS -.4 r39�,1 H co I .00'901 1 .00'501 �� 1 ,00001 38�KA05 _ 1 Q 'SOI AI • 12 Am N m 2 d W - •1� 5d1' 2 R '�- •Iy ,der m • e m nu10 I _ - mn lij J n o s � K n ^_ .6015 1 Q . ,Kf0.5ZAON- .OI'T1 KCS,IZAON 6sT V-50"ZO Bf06 KCS.IZAN�LOl o Zu CC 0l As/. ` /�, .50'Z J/ f 1 .66•62(K s Z.O ( •C i m 1 r "'r ei o 2 161 QZ 0 Z Q art. _...... UJ co < HN1a m� 0 W zZ W = o Hu_ Y R 2 n $ R d 2 U4 n n n n 8 ^ R R n ,, n ., ^i r _..r, N J - O F- i 8 t t 2 „ R A ' w w R 8 n w r a p m R sa t 2 '6 2 e n P A s 8 X • n .- n iS - 86A $ $ $ $ 3im J CO < a ° at O 5 ; = = 2 iMAI = = = m N 8 ; : nm = nmR $ ^ RRRRm „ « n- Ne 00000- 00 g < ; 's ;, r :sb ; R8 'R 'A ^ a ^ izwttwtwttwwtt O � Zm2 gWr aV'Etgsm ^ _ tt -Et' E = gag8a8aa ^ aa = ^ 0 J W ' F- 0) m v m m � a = m m m r v m � a a e � m m m a a 8 a W m Q J J $ 88888888888888888 Q- O � Q O O n n _ 9, 1 n ,. T, V. n r ',31 ., 3 R r n m 42 J 9 QJ < a' c 1:,1010101010101088o0010000o : 1, 1, m1, 67> R 20 o a 0 J W C W CO CC Q E., sa2cs2. Q yy I t. YZ _E R 8 7 R$ - — ? as 8 R W' ' vi . F>-n N w-0 W O 5 E s � 2 g g FYe„1=a$4$ zZiO s 5 a 4 el / ¢ ae Jg0"1 3 'glig11Wi o ' 0. $ ; W H 1 p . _ d LTA`",-. -7-*17,-1",-. - ---"."-rall 1_--3�__1., ."L--�i�•n atf 1 g I i8 IW ��� �t1 ,I)N ill 1 di P I ,' i —_� E' 11.5LA 11111161 le I ▪ k..1 '7 ` I'� � _ �1 ' Z a �� m1 I,e ' I1I I • � 1 CC 0L. L. } 'I I ' w I I o s s{' ` I 2 I; R I n . 1^.,.;r.. „I 11 1; I 1 'I� 41 \ �1 I 5 do ' / I �\ r b 0 .a I m R I II % gri 5F' —'7.1 I Piltellii r--—II # fl 1 ti Min 1' 1 -1—11 Ilatill.111111'4 s I ?I I I i I , a _0? � I l 1 • i I1 N N g I !!k1 F ( I , . ,IA iY 19 I R i a S 1 i ei i t 1 ee` I a . - _ all`131(109 SWIMS>viva $ �: � cn . us — 99 '��l. ' jT' TjT Id d lIgrt -,,IR, ?Lj I .. 1 I a 1 I n i ' 4 ' '* I tl. 1 I iI'i a § 1 ,i MI 0. 9 Oz uC a I 1iI ` 0 * gn ' 3u „ -, 1I -- � 1�i. ' 1 11 j: I1 I ill. I. N 1e1 _ $ F d Id 3, ___ ME , .11 ...- — I 1 i '1 ,I 1:'-'‘ ' .1111-10- j ' Q. , I L 111 1 _--=i_ __�.� Sel gt i 1 II ` 4: ssME 1 J �:,� i (s,1\ 1 d ; \I E i 1 —l;= I `:.I a f Y l g .9 i -" '7'911111 a 3 gy N No V I 3 �£ a� z R S„3 -_ 11 leiIM S 4 = O11.1 �� 1 ��� (zw�z - kl .n:.�'� ems h w_ O_ l 6 w Z -14 F.: s a ° HI mali , 8 , ,.,,-, .0-, r �— I F C' $ �z u.m.. ii R �' g 2 `s 8 AI 1i J„ 8 g 0 , ) !I i, A., ;sl $ I 1 G 0. Z a y ,- i - + z z a Y V frl z N s Z O i i _ O Z Fo o G $$ J = U' 1.111 J f Y" Wiz . p 111-4 E n, , ,., co .,,: , . , I g , ,.., gg , . ts 7 t ,.i y $ i ail R =7. f; 5 11 62 : ; 1, .' y� Z� , i 6 ttgli I gi g-i '- i i p8 O t 4 = p9p9 V O d ` o z ik,, F1 kili, w a y6 _ a c. �.] y: w, m t 124 w z. H :, t g 1 ,.. t - ) . „, 11.! if . 1 6 . i 11 ' ; e` a` 4 1 • o , u' z A ' i % I IN w 4 . :. , , Ali � :� G� a.. ;. o N i i�` ,. qIli X53 H ,! 41 } 5150-165(6007.. 5100166660o94o 155/3 6ouo ld'..Id.ry I ooz mns'Muo Wel m.IIIZA 009 11$31HX33DVd5 N3d0 ,,,,, 'y 0569 91 0991 90 uoilm.og0w}sa,o�rya�.puold $ a I 'JNI133NION3 15V3 1 1 a 301:13A 3NId „o„, ni w g,s '3 c.- Vfila 'DNI"NOINOH'J O 1 aaaaaaaa �i i 1 +I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I a UL UVUI.) con�ln- sqq NC) C0o0 N <<<<<< 0 N0.-k-OOmk- O +IN+I+l+i+1 V Li O a a QFC F-Z 'Jd d1- 0 pro O 2 w K n10��00 50 ZZQ `2' = Z�> ,i2,- Z a � F'"' l0ja 4 F- Z 8 I I ¢a .n� - z 70 I I HP!H 'Mi �s 2 I- ,.,d ° .Uz mm w0Oo w o 07 1 I LL' 1Fri * ««o aS` �dOa 0 .`="ea gOOOQ zgzSn1iviDip -u UZ > 5 1- ."-o,t W zzzzw,,wo a aVVV O 2 a,2 I I zo�zZg� a aaaa0Qoo O V1a/fZ � a KuI I ,,?o?�...„ oOOOOoLi1- ZZZz Y„ a i.aoO 11111111 gw0 0. 00000 I 1 1 I „ I i0ava1 _. _............_ ...._.._.--".-- III I Ili 1 I mTT 0 u yg S g -- I I r I I f_ 1 'U 3 € ✓ I a o i - tI 1 h I , I y°y = I. I d __._.._ OKia 00/laas I'CVd EE \ I / ` I I I .,, 8 8 5 Y F Y F , ,. . SLSO-L66(622)xei SLSO L6S6E?.64.0 1S3M 60YE 13 sod.IE I 00,000s'a.pa 9,6e.0I113 0399 1181HX330Vd5 N3d0 ,,,,, ay g 8 2569 9l E99L 83 uonapo,pny to sa,ny!yai epuoli 153M '�NI733NI'JN3 llaoW a a s l 301 0180F1' w,�,� s s a✓ vNla DNI NINOH Tl '0 ax€ UUUU V U U «<««< V +I+I+I+I+I+I+I+i ¢ mnNraommm h UVUIJUU nt vnm�\000 n ¢¢¢¢¢¢ ='. NO.—.-00m.— O ##+l#+)4 03 Q Q QFC F- NV n0 0,— 't 00 Lel--. O a W Z N0.--00 �ZZZcc QO¢ ZOZ u 1- a z�ZZj¢ j Z 2 xj OxZZr w lL'w� u, ¢ nazaOEw Z � W\nZ Z� Z L. Z W\9¢0¢¢CZE O c�O1- D >ww O OZ KOO,ua C KLYm 0 ¢ Q> w Z I-. NZO,u » O 5� w 2 Z 1- 1-ZG�,, ¢¢¢¢Q Qj h 71 K[YOa I— 0 KQ aaaa— DoizO - nnn\nF 1 v n j u z > aI- 0 AE,ilh z ZZwwI,Z,lwwo ¢ ¢¢QQ ZO d0 o�wLLz� a Y ¢ b aaaa a �LL °z� o?�w� 0 00000 az ZZZZ9 � ,_o \1 / I I 1 I II • 11 ii J 1 / \ I 0,0 OWNdS 9Ylvd -1s F 77!!' 1 O a I 3 I u I I E w I 8 J I 0 i ' I g , 'I3 3 ,. � ' I r I I E 3 1 g 1 I _ `e _ __ __ I __�:\ I _- a,// I p g 8 2'.. ._ 8 1 \ I 8 I Y F z 4 70 HAGAN ENGINEERING Douglas A. Lewis June 12, 2017 Thompson Lewis Counselors at Law 850 Park Shore Drive, Suite 201-A Naples, FL 34103 Re: MAC and Triad RPUD and ERP Applications Review Updated Engineer's Report Dear Mr. Lewis, This letter is submitted to provide a brief review of the pending Collier County zoning applications and South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD)Environmental Resource Permit(ERP) application for the referenced projects. This is done consistent with our previous correspondence and May 25, 2017 agreement. This report is submitted to outline my findings from the review of the applications noted above that are available on line. We have also had a site visit, received photos, and held discussions with you and the adjoining neighbors. Consistent with the agreement we have addressed open space, drainage, access, and utility issues below: 1. Open Space Calculations Attached please find a PDF of the Area Analysis for the zoning and ERP applications. You will note that the ERP,which is a more detailed set of plans, shows a 55.2%open space versus the County calculations that show 61.6%open space. This is above the County zoning minimum of 60%on both independent and combined plans.. The big difference between.the.ERP and zoning plans is in, the open space/pervious area. The acreage goes from 11.86 for the ERP to 13.24 acres for the zoning applications. The ERP application shows a smaller open space pervious area. The preserve numbers match up well. The pavement area is also larger for the ERP application than the zoning applications. The spreadsheet has highlighted the items in blue that are lake or water management and in green that are open space. The yellows are the cumulative numbers that calculate out the percentages. The.SF W MD review of the ERP.application also found that the storage capacity in the water management area maybe exaggerating flood capacity. This could require a further increase in water management area. 2. Drainage • The proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9% of the site for stormwater management. This is wellbelow the typical industry standards of 15%percent for a dense single family project. The smaller than average water management facilities onsite will result in the need for additional fill. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • The preserve is bisected with a discharge swale and should be left outside of the water management area. The County may not accept the preserve with a drainage easement through the middle like this. • County and SFWMD drainage rules will require a reduced discharge from the site of 0.15cfs/acre. This should help with any overburdened outfall ditches. • A floodplain analysis was done to show that regional floodplain issues are not adversely impacted by the proposed development. The SFWMD is still reviewing this. • Inverted crown roadways proposed for the project should be efficient in directing stormwater internally and reducing costs. This also supports the higher density proposed. • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. The developer should bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including improved drainage swales. ERP cross sections show 3:1 slopes within the County's right of way which may not be acceptable. The swales will also need to be improved not only offsite, but onsite to maintain flow consistent with the resident's photos noting flooding in these areas. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision to the north includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into 1-75. Review of these swales(photos in link) find that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these. A stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales from the County and/or developer. • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. This interconnection will cause conflicts with the utilities and require a County right of way permit. • Perimeter berm elevations around the new project are proposed at elevation 12.3 NAVD. The expected flood waters get high above the edge of pavement of the existing roadway. Roadside swalesinthese areas it may be 3 to 1 or greater not allowing them to be sodded, but be used in native ground cover. This may not be acceptable in the right of way and need to be addressed during the County right of way permitting. The ERP should be consistent with these requirements and the flow way should be reestablished along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard. • The elevation differential may require that the reconstruction of Palm Springs Boulevard be elevated also to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 2O3B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com A. 1.- --- A some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The fact that the site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway with side yards directly abutting the roadway will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted,but should include a 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall to provide additional screening. Homes are going to be set close together it is possible that side yard equipment and would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The ERP shows retaining walls will be used in some areas to segregate the preserve from the water management facilities and may also be required to flatten out slopes as things are more detailed along Palm Springs Boulevard and/or coordinated into a perimeter wall for visual purposes. 3. Utilities • Utility provisions should be made to accommodate the project with connections to the existing utilities on Palm Springs Boulevard. • Looped water distribution system will benefit the community with better fire protection and water quality. a The sanitary sewer system will need to have two onsite pump stations to accommodate the centralized sewage collection. • A sewage force main connection will be required on Palm Spring Boulevard. • A regional pump station network analysis will need to be done to make sure that the existing pumps remain online when the new pump(s) are added. • The County's utility services should be more than adequate to accept the proposed development. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves(ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. 4. Access/Traffic • The Traffic Impact Statement shows only the single project. As this project is being processed with both applications. Cumulative impacts should be analyzed and distribution should be handled accordingly. Request for combined Traffic Impact Statement was not provided or addressed. These should be considered together as a single application for traffic impact analysis and turn lane requirements. • The Traffic Impact Statement for the project does not address the necessary improvements that may be required on Palm Springs Boulevard and/or the Radio Lane to accommodate turning movements. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • Alignment of the driveways between the MAC and Triad project will require coordination to prevent awkward driving motions. • The elimination of sidewalks and bike lanes in these neighborhood though will put people in the road right of way. The internal roadways are proposed with an inverted crown. This means that the middle of the road will have water in it during rainfall events. This puts pedestrians walking on the apron,which could be a hazard. • The tie in of the project inverted crown roads with the existing Palm Springs Boulevard will result in some grading challenges at the project entries. This will be exacerbated by needing to maintain the perimeter berm for the stormwater management requirements. The new roadway may need to be considerably higher than the existing roadway. • The swale along Palm Springs Boulevard will need to be maintained outside of the turning radii for traffic safety. Below is the link to recent site photos: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fkObn4vxlct2h5mnhwO I believe this provides an outline of the open space, drainage,utility, and traffic issues associated with the referenced application. These projects need to be considered together as the impacts of both need to be considered as one. Please look this over and let me know if you have any comments, questions, or require any additional information regarding this. Sincerely, Chris Hagan 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com FilsonSue From: Douglas Lewis <Doug@tllfirm.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 20, 2017 6:13 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Bob; Christopher Hagan; GundlachNancy Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564)& MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Attachments: MAC-Triad area analysis.pdf; MAC RPUD Review Report 06-12-2017.pdf; ERP Pages.pdf; CCF060617_0006.pdf; Submittal 1 05 Hadley Place W PPL Plans - Prepared.pdf; Submittal 2 08 Triad Open Space.pdf; Submittal 1 06 Plat - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 1 06 Plat0 - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 2 09 MAC Open Space.pdf Dear Board Members, In advance of the hearing next week, please find the attached and below for your review. I will update you on any progress between the neighbors, staff and the applicant. Best, Douglas A. Lewis TNT THOMPSON LEWIS ELcounselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC t i is Doug 1 # i_ k\ ?km. hl ., x°i a f" 1 3 L{ ' ;11;3 t,3 Ht:)!t arils 1 that .b �'€tilt: :Y d<,.__li-,a� „��! e.ts, t ., a at i i Z ;ti9� , {,ct� >ou '3..1=:-` t i��'d ,.s wa a .,'t ,.,,i ?. _„ C.. ..a .e..a is '*_ ° i7 z��f?;i�If a- ._ e _ t . j r �; _ ,l ned i ,, s= 1(239)316-3006. EL3w S_k ,. v_ ..�-. _ �iS i1+ ���t�...�s.15 Vii. _ r � L y Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1)avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent:June 20,2017 6:03 PM To: 'GundlachNancy'<NancyGundlach@colliergov.net> Cc: 'Bob'<bobcol@comcast.net>; 'Christopher Hagan'<Chris@haganeng.com> Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) 1 Nancy, This will confirm that we have not heard back from the applicant regarding our neighborhood concerns raised back on May 31, 2017. In follow-up to the below May 31st submission and in advance of the BCC hearing next week, please find the attached and below for staff and applicant follow-up (hopefully,we can get these items addressed, agreed to by the parties and solved prior to the hearing) 1. Regarding drainage,the existing drainage ditches along the east and west sides of the RUPD's simply do not work(I am having pictures of the drainage problem sent to your office tomorrow). The ditches are not draining properly, and according to my client,the water has not left the ditches since June 6th. In reviewing the ERP and PPL,the East and West drainage systems are connected by pipe under Palm Springs Boulevard. a. My client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to confirm that both the East and West side drainage ditches will be fully graded and improved by either the County or the applicant, so that they adequately and properly drain (all work to be completed prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project). b. Also, my client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require that the projects drain on both the East and West side drainage ditches and that either the County or the applicant commit to install a barrier(prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project)to help keep incursions and encroachments out of the drainage ditches. 2. Additionally regarding drainage and according to Chris Hagan,the proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for storm water management,and this is well below the typical industry standards of 15%percent for a dense single family cluster project. According to Chris Hagan and based on his review of the ERP,the applicant is making up for its lack of storm water management by draining into the preserve area in the Traid RPUD. a. PUD Hagan's office reviewed the ERP cross sections and noted that the applicant wants to put a retaining wall around the north side of the eastern preserve. Upon closer review of the ERP plans, it appears to Mr. Hagan that the applicant is looking to incorporate that preserve into the water management plan to provide storage for storm water. This is inconsistent with Collier County's rules regarding allowances in preserve areas. This inconsistency would disqualify the area from preserve status for onsite preservation. This would require additional offsite mitigation to compensate for this. b. To eliminate this issue, my client asks that Exhibit F to both RPUDs be modified to expressly prohibit any water discharge into to preserve areas. 3. Additionally regarding drainage, according to Chris Hagan, Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end and Palm Springs Blvd. does not comply with County standards. a. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be for the County or the applicant commit to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code, prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project, including the addition of improved drainage swales. As an alternative, my client is still open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access(in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. 4. The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. a. My client asks the BCC to reject this Exhibit E deviation request consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. 5. Regarding density, the Density Rating System outlined in the FLUE provides that"a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed,though not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the location and characteristics of the project." In this case and based on the location and characteristics of the project, the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West is for 42 lots(see attached), not 44 units as per the MAC RPUD and the plat for Hadley Place East is for 41 lots (see attached), not 44 lots per the Triad RPUD. 2 a. In view of the forgoing,why does the MAC RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs 42 per the PPL and why does the Triad RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs.41 per the PPL? 6. Regarding open space, LDC 1.08.00 provides as follow, "Open space, usable:Active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds,tennis courts,golf courses, beach frontage,waterways, lakes, lagoons,floodplains, nature trails and other similar open spaces. Usable open space areas shall also include those portions of areas set aside for preservation of native vegetation, required yards(setbacks) and landscaped areas, which are accessible to and usable by residents of an individual lot,the development, or the general public. Open water area beyond the perimeter of the site, street rights-of-way, driveways, off-street parking and loading areas, shall not be counted towards required Usable Open Space." a. RWA prepared document titled Triad Open Space and MAC Open Space showing 6.60 acres and 6.64 acres, respectively, of open space. 1. Can the applicant or staff provide supporting detail for the 2.28 acres of"Residential— Open Space" calculations as shown on both the Triad and MAC Open Space documents? b. It appears that most of the "Residential—Open Space" area is coming from required yard (setbacks). Please confirm. As such, I am only calculating 13,200 square feet or .3+/-acres as required yard (setbacks) as follows: 15 ft front yard, 15 ft rear yard and 5 ft for each side yard or 300 square feet times 44 lots= 13,200 square feet. c. The applicant has also filed its PPL. See the attached confirming a compliance problem with the 60% usable open space requirement as required by the Comprehensive Plan. d. Further,the applicant has filed its ERP for the MAC and Traid RPUD's. See the attached from Chris Hagan confirming only 55.2%open space for the MAC and Triad RPUD's based on applicant's ERP applications. e. In view of the clear problems as outlined above, my client requests that the"Site Summary"on the both MAC and Triad RPUD Master Plans should be modified to confirm how the 60%usable open space requirement will be met and to detail the specific"open space"calculations and break- downs. Additionally,the Master Plans for both the MAC and Triad RUPDs should be modified to show the distances between the preserve areas and the lot lines and the distances between the lake,dry detention areas and preserve. 7. The minimum rear yard setbacks for accessory structures in both the MAC and Traid RPUD's is 0 as measured from "lot boundaries", not easements. However,the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West and Hadley Place East show 32 lots+/-that back up to each other and that have 7.5 feet DE off the lot line and into the platted lot. 8. Also, Section N-N (see attached) places a 6 foot swale on the north property line and a 3 foot retaining wall against the existing rear of the existing properties with the preserve behind. A preserve adjoining residential does not need a buffer, but with the swale and wall and detention behind this would make it aesthetically inconsistent with normal perimeter buffering. a. My client requests that the Triad RPUD Master Plan be modified to show heightened and adequate buffering along the north property line in the event of any proposed swale and retaining wall. 9. Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require the applicant to seek to obtain permits for all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. 10. Finally, see also the attached, follow-up comments from Chris Hagan pertaining to traffic, access and utilities, etc. based on his letter to me dated June 12, 2017. I look forward to speaking with staff and the applicant as soon as possible to address the above items in advance of the hearing next week and will make myself available to meet with the applicant this week. Best, Douglas A. Lewis IT L THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive 3 Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawver.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC 1(239)316-3006. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (I) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent: May 31,2017 12:41 PM To:'nancygundlach@colliergov.net'<nancygundlach@colliergov.net> Subject:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Nancy, In follow-up to our phone call and in connection with the rezone applications referenced above, I have been retained by a_neighbor that resides directly adjacent to proposed.projects(Mr. Colasanti)and will be attending the hearings tomorrow to provide public input on these items. My client is very supportive of single-family use of the properties. However,he offers the following significant concerns and questions from Chris Hagan of Hagan Engineering pertaining to the proposed development of these properties (a summary engineering report from Hagan Engineering will follow by separate e-mail): • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. There is no sidewalk. The pavement is only 19 feet in width. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including the addition of a sidewalk and improved drainage swales. As an alternative,my client is open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into 1-75. A review of these swales (see below photos in link) by Hagan Engineering found that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these swales, a stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales by the County and/or developer. (At your direction, I can provide proof of the existing swale problem by historic photos from the residents of flooded backyards and roadways). • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. The fact that they are back to back makes this 4 easier. However,the traffic impact statement provided online was only for one project. These should also be considered together so any roadway impacts for turning motions, stacking, etc. would be combined and accommodated as a single project. • The onsite stormwater areas are less than the normal industry standards. This will require substantial additional filling. A floodplain analysis should be done so this additional fill will not adversely impact the regional floodplain. • Preliminary assessment of the existing roadway should be conducted and proposed roadways and finished floor elevations should be included in the PUD Master Plan to address concerns like the height (above existing grade) of the new roadway finish floors in relation to the adjoining properties. Accommodating the perimeter berm and roadways without discharging drainage out onto Palm Springs Boulevard will be difficult. Cross sections should be requested from the developer showing the slopes and heights of these elements and such should be included in the PUD Master Plan. • The elevation differential may require reconstruction and elevation of Palm Springs Blvd.to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway, and with side yards directly abutting the roadway,this will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted,but the PUD should include a requirement 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall and landscape buffering along the entire northerly project boundary and also along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard to provide additional needed screening. Homes are going to be set close together, and it is possible that side yard equipment would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. • Preserve areas should have exotic vegetation removed and be replanted with native vegetation from Collier County's approved list. No grading in these areas should be allowed. Additionally, • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD,my client requests that the dimensions of all existing easements be depicted on the Mater Plan. Also,that cross-sections be provided on the Master Plan(with elevations and required set-backs) for perimeter buffering, sloping, preserve areas,the lake area, and other features as depicted on the Master Plan. Click on the below link for photos of existing site conditions: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fk0bn4vxlct2h5mnhw0 Douglas A. Lewis T THOMPSON LEWIS L_ L counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 5 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC 1(239)316-3006. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. 6 FilsonSue r� J< fa From: Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 3:25 PM To: FilsonSue Subject: RE: Meeting Request: MAC &Triad Thank you! Original Message From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] Sent:Wednesday,June 14, 2017 3:03 PM To: Dianna Quintanilla Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad Yes ma'am unless the workshop runs over in which case I will let you know. Sue Sent from my iPad >On Jun 14, 2017, at 3:00 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com>wrote: > 2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MAC Triad)- 1/2 hour >3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies Corner- 1/2 hour >Correct? > Original Message > From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] >Sent:Wednesday,June 14, 2017 2:55 PM >To: Dianna Quintanilla >Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad >Okay, 2:30 to 3:00 what is MAC? > However, keep in mind that he has a workshop in the morning and hope that it doesn't run over. >Sue, > 2:00 pm on June 21<x-apple-data-detectors://0>st<x-apple-data-detectors://0>sounds great! I will send you an invite with address, directions, and info on parking. If you need anything else,just let me know. > Matt Spielman > Executive Assistant to Commissioner Brian Hamman Lee County Board of >County Commissioners, District 4 > (239) 533-2226<tel:(239)%20533-2226>office >(239) 485-2054<tel:(239)%20485-2054>fax http://www.leegov.com Sue >Sent from my iPad > >On Jun 14, 2017, at 2:51 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com<mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com»wrote: > > Do you have an hour? To cover 1/2 hour for MAC and 1/2 for Addies? > > Original Message > From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] >Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 2:44 PM >To: Dianna Quintanilla >Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad > > I hope you still have the 20th at 2:30 because that's the only time I have available. > >Sue > > >Sent from my iPad > >On Jun 14, 2017,at 2:35 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com<mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com><mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com»wrote: > >Good afternoon, > > Rich, along with Wayne Arnold and David Genson would like to meet with Commissioner McDaniel regarding the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: Addies Corner. > >Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: > Monday June 19th 9:00-3:00 > Tuesday June 20th 10:00- 12:00; 2:30-5:00 > Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0-5:00 > Friday June 23rd 11:30-3:00 > >Thank you. > > > > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 >(239) 435-3535 > (239)435-1218 (f) > > ><image001.png> > > > > > 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. 3 FilsonSue Subject: Bruce Anderson re Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment, County Bar Road PUD & Vanderbilt Commons PUD &GMP Amendments Location: BCC Office Start: Fri 6/23/2017 10:30 AM End: Fri 6/23/2017 11:00 AM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill Michelle 659-4943 Good morning, Sue! Thank you for your time on the phone. Bruce needs a half hour appointment to discuss three things: - tantial PUD Amendment 2) County Barn Road . • i on the Agen a)Vanderbilt Commons PUD &Growth Management Plan Amendments. Bruce will be the only attendee. Let me know if you need anything else. Michele M. Gowdy Real Estate Assistant CIiI.FFY P: SSI[?OSIO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239)261-9300 telephone (239) 261-9782 facsimile mmgowdy(p�napleslaw.com www.napleslaw.com 1 FilsonSue Subject: Bruce Anderson re Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment, County Bar Road PUD & Vanderbilt Commons PUD & GMP Amendments Location: BCC Office Start: Fri 6/23/2017 10:30 AM • End: Fri 6/23/2017 11:00 AM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill Michelle 659-4943 Good morning, Sue! Thank you for your time on the phone. Bruce needs a half hour appointmentto discuss three things: Wolf-Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment 2) County Barn Road P 3) (and if on the Agenda) Vanderbilt Commons PUD&Growth Management Plan Amendments. Bruce will be the only attendee. Let me know if you need anything else. Michele M. Gowdy Real Estate Assistant CII,I: ;v PASSIIX)\IO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239)261-9300 telephone (239)261-9782 facsimile mmgowdynapleslaw.com www.napleslaw.com 1 FilsonSue Subject: Terrie Abrams 630-244-4800 and Bev Smith regarding reduction in preserves Pristine Preserves Location: BCC Office Start: Mon 6/12/2017 1:00 PM End: Mon 6/12/2017 1:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill Ex parte Wolf Creek RPUD She is from Black Bear Ridge Developer Sobelco Terrie.abrams@gmail.com Commissioner,this is on BCC Agenda for 6/27/17—below is ex sum: LJ Wolf Creek RPUS ex sum-6.27.... 1 FilsonSue From: Michele M. Gowdy <mmgowdy@napleslaw.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 9:38 AM To: FilsonSue Subject: RE:June 27 BCC Meeting And you as well! Stay Dry! O Michele M. Gowdy Real Estate Assistant CHEFF)" PASSIUOMIO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239)261-9300 telephone (239)261-9782 facsimile mmgowdy(a�napleslaw.com www.napleslaw.corn This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain information that is confidential or privileged.If this e-mail is not addressed to you(or if you have any reason to believe that it is not intended for you),please notify the sender by return e-mail or by telephoning us(collect)at 239-261-9300 and delete this message immediately from your computer.Any unauthorized review,use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the law firm. From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] Sent:Tuesday,June 06, 2017 9:37 AM To: Michele M. Gowdy<mmgowdy@napleslaw.com> Subject: RE:June 27 BCC Meeting Perfect,thank you; have a great day. Sue From: Michele M. Gowdy [mailto:mmgowdv@napleslaw.com] Sent:Tuesday,June 6, 2017 9:36 AM To: FilsonSue<SueFilson a@colliergov.net> Subject:June 27 BCC Meeting Good morning, Sue! Thank you for your time on the phone. Bruce needs a half hour appointment to discuss three things: 1) Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment 2) County Barn Road PUD 3) (and if on the Agenda)Vanderbilt Commons PUD &Growth Management Plan Amendments. Bruce will be the only attendee. Let me know if you need anything else. 1 FilsonSue Subject: BCC Workshop - Strategic Planning Location: BCC Chambers Start: Tue 1/3/2017 1:00 PM End: Tue 1/3/2017 5:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill BCC/Strategic Planning/Review of Future Land Use Plan/Update on Eastern Collier Planning Area Restudies Workshop Mary Jo Brock—252-8383 IV* PUFr Collier County 1.Workshop 2.Strategic 3. GMP Overview BCC Workshop News Releases(...Agenda Sheet- ... Planning 2017- .,. -Restudies Up... Materials-01.03... 1 Yv rt p joAf 1,;(1, This is right out of the Board of County Commissioners 10 — year strategic plan To Preserve and enhance the safety, quality, value, character and heritage of our neighborhoods, communities and region. The residents of Black Bear Ridge have expressed their concern regarding surrounding development by attending County Meetings and sending in hundreds of letters and petitions. Because there are so many parcels involved and complications from a CSA the development has been approved in a piecemeal fashion without the consideration of the area in totality.To support our opposition on April 11,2017 the community attended the County Commissioners Meeting regarding the density change request by the Developer of Vanderbilt Commons. A brief recap of events to date is as follows to show the inconsistencies and piecemeal development approval - Without residential input a storage unit was allowed to be built in a plaza meant to be soft retail (Vanderbilt Commons) - The developer of Vanderbilt Commons is asking for more density and would like to put in usages that are either prohibited or go against intentions of how the property was to be developed - Historically the county has recognized the Pristine Drive Cost Share Agreements allocation of dwelling units in the Wolf Creek Pud. In 2007 an Ordinance added to Wolf Creek the 20 acre parcel requesting the preserve reduction. In the county minutes of March 21, 2013 the planning commission recognized and manipulated density to mirror the CSA and specifically allocated 80 units to that parcel preventing others parcels from utilizing units.Yet today the Vanderbilt Reserve (SobelCo) site plan states density^' 100 more units than allowed by the CSA. The county inconsistently upholds the cost share agreement. - On multiple occasions in the past and the present county minutes make it clear the intent of road improvements needed to support traffic outside of the community should not be borne by residents.The county has a developer bond in place to cover the cost of road improvements yet is asking BBR to pay for the roads.The bond should either be used as intended or released to BBR. Here is the latest development On June1,the Planning Commission will hear PDI—PL20160000404 Wolf Creek RPUD by the developer of parcels 3b and 9 to reduce preserves. If the proposal passes it will move on to a Commission Meeting on June 27, 2017.We are preparing to speak at both meetings and met with the planning staff several weeks ago to identify our concerns.As previously expressed none of this can be looked at in isolation or decisions will be made that only perpetuate negative impacts to the quality of living in Naples. IT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION This reduction in preserves is opposed for 7 reasons 1. II this owner reduces preserves on their property it brings the preserves down to the minimum required for the PUD and prevents Black Bear Ridge from installing passive recreational uses as allowed by the LDC and PUD.The developer should not be given preferential treatment and allowed unequitable fair share of maintaining preserves. - The breakdown of preserve per parcel is as follows. Black Bear Ridge —18% Vanderbilt Reserves "9% (with reduction) Raffia "26% Portofino "16% 2. By reducing the preserves to 9%where is the greenspace for their residents? 3. The surrounding area is a playground for documented wild life such as bear/ panther and turtles.This is tragic for our wildlife to be at the mercy of what the developer calls himself "opportunistic".This developer does not have Naples interest in balance with profit. It is unnecessary as the developer can only build 104 units. There should be a need if preserves are going to be reduced and in this situation there is no need. 4. When the PUD was amended unit density was added and the corresponding preserves should have been as well. 5. Where is the necessity? The county makes decisions on the good of the many not the few.This is a pocket of residential moderately upscale homes. If allowed to develop not how it was meant to be the benefits is for only a single developer and does not help Naples coffers and harms the home owners already in place. This is not a situation where a few owners are impacted for the good of Naples by providing compatible services, professional jobs or improving the tax base. 6. This builder has openly admitted in front of their attorney and ours they made a mistake and missed the land constraints. Their mistake should not be solved by the county at our expense. There are other ways for them to develop the property that will allow them profit and not impact the quality,value and character of our area. 7. To quote the county attorney dealing with a Collier issue "at the end of the day, it's a basic fairness issue" You are asked to please consider what is right and fair for our quality of life and Naples. Please exercise your stewardship. Respectfully, Terrie Abrams a Black Bear Ridge full time resident mal Terrie Abrams <terrie.abrams@gmail.com> pertinent pages from PUD documents showing allocation of du's 1 message marc alien <mallencny@yahoo.com> Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:19 PM Reply-To: marc alien <mallencny@yahoo.com> To: Terrie Abrams <terrie.abrams@gmail.com>, Mike Fuchs <flguy55@gmail.com>, Rob Nossen <thenossens@aol.com>, Beverly Smith <bevsmith116@gmail.com> here are pages from the Wolf Creek PUD ordinances with the references to the added units for mederos and for palermo cove going to specific parcels and not into a "pool" - also minutes from the BCC may 22, 2007 meeting when mederos was added with the discussion about only 80 du's being asked for with no density bonus in 2013 when palermo cove was added the verbiage discussing the 80 du's for mederos was crossed out as they no longer were restricting approval of building permits because vanderbilt and collier were done - see attached from 2013 Marc 4 attachments Ordinance 2007-46 eighty dwelling units assigned to Mederos pdf.pdf 104K .) Ordinance 2013-37 Wolf Creek PUD max units rafia part copy.pdf 165K Ordinance 2013-37 Wolf Creek PUD may be able to negotiate copy.pdf 165K .1 BCC Minutes 0522-232007 R 2007 add mederos copy.pdf 1096K May 22-23, 2007 Will Dempsey and Rick Mercer. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Mr. Pritt? MR. PRITT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. My name is Robert Pritt. I'm here on behalf of Prime Homes, LLC -- Prime Homes at Portofino Falls. It's owner of parcel number five, which we would like to add to the existing Wolf Creek PUD. I have with me -- I think you've named all the names, but Dave Underhill is also with us in case you need to have anybody testify as to planning, zoning, engineering matters, and we also have. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Abbo, who's the founder of the company here today, as well as Larry Abbo, Linda Socolow and also Steve Greenfield? As has been said, Rich Yovanovich is also here. I believe that Mr. Hoover is here also on behalf of the Catalina Land Group, owner of the balance of the Wolf Creek PUD. The background here is that we're requesting a rezone from rural agricultural and planned development, planned unit development, to residential planned unit development zoning district. And as was said, we're just going to add 20.26 acres and are requesting 80 dwelling units to be added to the existing Wolf Creek PUD. This would make for a total of 167.96 acres and a total of 671 dwelling units, which may be single or multifamily dwellings, and we also are going to amend the PUD document and the associated master plan. As also has been said in the introduction, the proposal is to reduce the maximum height of multifamily structures from 42 feet and three stories to 38 feet and two stories and to eliminate some uses. The location of the property is on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road approximately one half mile west of Collier Boulevard, and we can show you that on the map. This map here, it's kind of hard Page 70 general configuration of which is also illustrated by Exhibit"A" and Exhibit "A- 1". B. Areas illustrated as lakes by Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1" shall be constructed as lakes or, upon approval, parts thereof may be constructed as shallow, intermittent wet and dry depressions for water retention purposes. Such areas, lakes and intermittent wet and dry areas shall be in the same general configuration and contain the same general acreage as shown by Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1". Minor modification to all tracts, lakes or other boundaries may be permitted at the time of subdivision plat or SDP approval, subject to the provisions of the LOC. C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1", such easements as necessary (utility, private, semi-public) shall be established within or along the various Tracts as may be necessary. 2.4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY OR INTENSITY OF LAND USES A maximum of 674754 residential dwelling units shall be constructed in the residential areas of the project. The gross project area is 467,96188.78± acres. The gross project density shall be a maximum of 3.99 units per acre if all 6 -754 dwelling units are approved and constructed-. A minimum of 83 dwelling units will be assigned to parcels 1A - 3A due to the additional acreage being added to the PUD by the owner of those parcels. In addition, parcels 1A- 3A shall be entitled to incorporate any other density owned by the developer of these parcels. There shall be a maximum density of 163 dwelling units on parcels 1A- 3A. 2.5 RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS A. Prior to the recording of a record plat, and/or condominium plat for all or part of the RPUD, final plans of all required improvements shall receive approval of the appropriate Collier County governmental agency to insure compliance with the RPUD Master Plan, Collier County subdivision rules, and the platting laws of the State of Florida. B. Exhibit "A", RPUD Master Plan and Exhibit "A-i" RPUD Master Plan Amended, constitutes the required RPUD development plan. Subsequent to or concurrent with RPUD approval, a subdivision plat or SDP, as applicable, may be submitted for areas covered by the RPUD Master Plan. Any division of the property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the RPUD Master Plan Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1" -and LDC. C. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructural improvements regarding any dedications to Collier County and the methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities. Words struck-through are deleted;words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD PL2012-0650 Revised 5-14-2013 Page 11 of 26 H. Access points, including both driveways and proposed streets, shown on the RPUD Master Plan shall be considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property frontage. All such access issues shall be approved or denied during the review of required subsequent site plan or final plat submissions. All such access points shall be consistent with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution No. 01-247), as it may be amended from time to time, and with the Collier County Long- Range Transportation Plan. When ingress and egress improvements are determined, as necessary, right-of-way and compensating right-of-way shall be provided for and in conjunction with said improvements. J. All work within the Collier County rights-of-way or public easements shall require a right-of-way permit. K. All internal access ways, drive aisles and roadways, not located within County right-of-way shall be privately maintained by an entity created by the developer, its successor in title, or assigns. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier County shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. L. The proposed loop road located around the Mission Hills development, that would provide access for the project onto Collier Boulevard, is conceptually shown on the RPUD Master Plan and shall be a public roadway. It shall be designed and constructed to a minimum 30 mile per hour design speed. The construction costs of the loop road shall not be eligible for impact fee credits, but the developer of the roadway may be able to privately negotiate "fair share" payments or reimbursements from neighboring property owners. M. No building permits shall be issued for any of the additional 80 units approved in the 20 acres that is being added to this PUD until such time as Vanderbilt Beach Boulevard between Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Livingston Road, and CR 951 between Golden Gate Boulevard and Immokalee Road are substantially complete. N. Within 30 days of the adoption date of this RPUD rezone, the developers owning the property fronting Pristine Drive shall convey in fee simple to Collier County the right-of-way necessary for the two-lane construction of Pristine Drive. Each developer shall convey 30 feet for the Pristine Drive right-of-way. The anticipated width of the right-of-way is 60 feet. The turn lanes required for each individual project shall be accommodated within the project's boundary. Revised 5/31/07 to reflect BCC changes 17 Ok - Bev asked a couple of great questions on dwelling units and the Raffia addition from Palermo Cove So, in review Before the Mederos property was added in 2007 all of the dwelling units were assigned/allocated by the CSA and not in a "pool" - there were no unaccounted for dwelling units - all were assigned When the Mederos property N 20 acres was added in 2007, 80 dwelling units were added and the minutes from the County Commission on May 22- 23, 2007, when the ordinance was approved, have the representative of the property's owners saying that they were " not asking for any density bonuses ... so the site would be eligible for four dwelling units per acre and the requested density is actually 3.99." ... "we're asking for four units per acre essentially) (page 71 of minutes CCBoard May 22-23, 2007) so 80 units were approved(error in 1st page of ordinance that says 117) and in the 2007-46 WCPUD ordinance it refers (on page 17 of the traffic portion) to the "additional 80 units approved in the 20 acres being added to this PUD" so it seems the county "allocated" those units specifically to the Mederos property - they were not put into a "pool" in 2013 when the Palermo Cove property was brought in with Scenic woods, 83 units were added for the N 21 acres and these units were again assigned and not put into a pool 2013-37 Ordinance WCPUD pg 11 - "A minimum of 83 dwelling units will be assigned to parcels 1A-3A due to the additional acreage being added to the PUD." Also it says (pg ) "in addition. parcels 1A-3A shall be entitled to incorporate any other density owned by the developer of these parcels. There shall be a maximum density of 163 dwelling units on parcels 1A-3A." so - "other density owned" - what does this mean - who "owns" density unless there is an agreement like the CSA that allocates the units, otherwise they would be in a pool and it would be 1st come 1st serve as the county told us at the recent meeting therefore, the "owned" units must be those allocated by the CSA, which is 40 units each for the upper two parcels, which when added to the 83 would be 163 this would leave Vanderbilt Reserve 80 units from the Mederos parcel and 3A,3B had an allocation of 40 so the most that would be available to Vanderbilt Reserve would be 120 and if the parcel 3 allocation was split according to acreage - N 8 acres 3A and 12 acres 3B then there would only be 24 units(60%) to add to the Mederos 80 = 104 dwelling units All through the Wolf Creek PUD amendments when property was added it seems to have been assigned thus seemingly recognizing that there is no "pool" of units in the WCPUD and that they are owned according to the parameters of the CSA and the subsequent amendments Marc - 2007 minutes attached Tap to Download BCC Minut...ederos.pdf 792 KB mtt -. -. Aaava * ..101111111111rj L ............ for"' '6. I . "f , .' . zs oA IA 9� r� \'''S‘' til �,�-x ;��!!!a # a N' 7 - \ . 154 . _ it r 11111 t\........„,..----\ .. l'fl. „ Ilt , v1r11 u '- J All • ► ..., ,°iii ..r, ,w �." » , s c or n W ` _.—— aaY aa� �.....__.._.. *' s 1 , w 1 ri, a alp. i "lilt ' . di it 1. *041144 i , a IN•IP " 41 4► f -I' Zanzi�a�" :G i ,, Air Itso 1 .0 p10 4. __.. k , itlill TNS, ' r = ,h . K ar,�.tea 'diFco* vg- ' ►� ' 91. p"---: Ali, Nie Ate I "1 X11. 49 Ji r Ell tce-Wa .C , 4 r"OTAlik.". s r 4 '� %ri Pfd`ifi6 , i5- rg /' f7 /'f-� csfirit4 06/27/2017 Recommendation to amend Ordinance No. 2007-46, as amended, ti • Wolf Creek RPUD affirm an insubstantial change to the PUD, to add a preserve ex • • evises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only, and providing for an effective date. The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately one- half mile west of Collier Boulevard, in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,Florida, consisting of 189± acres. [PDI-PL20160000404] OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approve an Ordinance, which affirms the decision of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding an insubstantial change to the Wolf Creek RPUD, Ordinance No. 2007-46, as amended, to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9. CONSIDERATIONS: At the June 1, 2017 CCPC public hearing, the CCPC unanimously approved an insubstantial change to the Wolf Creek PUD to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration shown on the existing Master Plan for Parcels 3B and 9. The approval process for an insubstantial change to a PUD, due to its limited nature, has rested with the Hearing Examiner Office (HEX)or the CCPC. At the June 13, 2017, Board meeting, the Board directed staff to: 1) Develop and bring forward Land Development and Administrative Code amendments to provide for Board affirmation of the Planning Commission or Hearing Examiner approval of insubstantial changes to PUDs; and 2)To process PDI applications following the PDI process proposed in the interim The Wolf Creek petition is the first PDI that is navigating the new PDI process. As noted, the petition was unanimously approved by the CCPC at the June 1,2017,advertised public hearing. The applicant is proposing to remove approximately 4.05 acres of the preserve from "Parcel 3B & 9" shown on the existing PUD Master Plan, because the minimum preserve requirement for the PUD will still be maintained. _This change will reduce the preserve on Parcel's 3B and 9 from 7.11 acres to 3.06 acres. This modification does not seek to alter the minimum preserve requirement of 34.26 acers for the PUD. The specifics of the request are contained within the attached staff report. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact associated with the requested affirmation of the Board. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The requested action of an insubstantial change to a PUD will have no impact upon the GMP. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is an insubstantial change amendment to the existing Wolf Creek PUD(Ordinance No. 07-46,as amended).Pursuant to LDC Section 10.02.13 E.2 and Chapter 3, Section G.3 of the Administrative Code for Land Development,the Planning Commission or the Hearing Examiner is the final decision maker for insubstantial change applications.The BCC, on June 13,2017 directed staff to bring insubstantial changes to Planned Unit Developments to the Board of County Commissioners for affirmation of the approving CCPC Resolution/HEX Decision in order to amend the PUD Ordinance accordingly. The Planning Commission was guided in its decision by the criteria stated in Section 10.02.13.E.2 of the LDC: "An insubstantial change to an approved PUD Ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10:02,13.E.1 [criteria-for substantial changes] and shall... be based on the fmdings and criteria used for the original application ...." 06/27/2017 This item has been approved as to form and legality,and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval.(SAS) RECOMMENDATION: That the Board approves the Ordinance amending Ordinance NO. 2007-46, as amended to affirm the June 1, 2017 approval of the CCPC regarding the Wolf Creek PUD,insubstantial. change, PDI-PL20160000404,to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only. Prepared by: Mike Bosi,AICP,Director,Zoning Division, Growth Management Department ATTACHMENT(S) 1. [linked} 9G-PDI-PL20160000404-Wolf Creek RPUD (PDF) 2.Resolution and Ordinance forth coming (TXT) 3.wolf-creek-Ordinance-060217 (PDF) 4.Recorded CCPC Res 17-03 (PDF) 06/27/2017 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: Doe ID: 3305 Item Summary: This ite requires that ex parte disclosure be t ovided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this ite , : :. '• . . - -a to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending rdinance No. 2007-46, as amended, the Wolf Creek RPUD, to approve an insubstantial change to the PUD, to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only, and providing for an effective date. The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately one-half mile west of Collier Boulevard, in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 189± acres. [PDI- PL20160000404] Meeting Date: 06/27/2017 Prepared by: Title: Division Director-Planning and Zoning—Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 06/02/2017 4:04 PM Submitted by: Title: Division Director-Planning and Zoning—Zoning Name: Michael Bosi 06/02/2017 4:04 PM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Department Judy Puig Level 1 Division Reviewer Completed 06/05/2017 10:34 AM Growth Management Department James French Additional Reviewer Completed 06/06/2017 10:42 PM County Attorneys Office Scott Stone Level 2 Attorney Review Pending Growth Management Department Michael Bosi Level 2 Division Administrator Skipped 06/02/2017 8:34 AM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A.Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Pending Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Pending County Manager's Office Level 4 County Manager Review Pending Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 06/27/2017 9:00 AM V ll G arze A arok 1 p FilsonSue Subject: Rich Yo ne Arnold and David Genson regarding Addies Corner and MAC an Sereno Grove Location: BC • e- Start: Tue 6/20/2017 2:30 PM End: Tue 6/20/2017 3:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill >2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MAC Triad)- 1/2 hour >3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies Corner- 1/2 hour > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 > (239)435-3535 > (239)435-1218 (f) 1 FilsonSue From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 1:36 PM To: McDanielBill Cc: FilsonSue Subject: Further Sereno Grove Update Commissioner McDaniel, As a follow-up to my June 12, 2017 email to you, yesterday afternoon WCI/Lennar's requested changes to the Sereno Grove plat and construction plans ("PPL") were approved through the "insubstantial change" process (application #20170001891), despite the significance of the changes. Under Sec. 250-58 of the Code of Laws we should have 30 days from the June 20, 2017 decision to file an appeal. We advised county staff that we intend to do so. Despite this, county staff (Matt McLean) advised us that the PPL will be on the agenda to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners next Tuesday, June 27, 2017, essentially shortening our 30-day appeal period on the ICP to less than one week. We have advised Mr. McLean that we feel that scheduling the PPL for next Tuesday is premature and potentially prejudices our due process rights. However, we have received no indication that he intends to change it. Can you ask the staff why they would not continue the PPL until after the BCC, as the Board of Zoning Appeals, considers the ICP appeal? If the decision to approve the ICP is overturned, the PPL is not ready for consideration by the BCC. In the past week, I also learned additional information about the redesign of the wastewater and water distribution systems that was proposed and permitted to be accomplished as an "insubstantial change." WCI/Lennar now plans to run the water and sewer connections all the way from Livingston Road which is approximately 1/4 mile west of their western property line (not counting the access road), rather than use the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs that are approximately 12.5 feet to the east, as originally planned. The changes also include: (1) using an unlooped water system which can result in poor water quality, (2) a very long distance between the water connection and the further points in Sereno Grove which will likely result in poor water pressure, (3) a privately-managed sanitary sewer system that includes an extremely long force main and low flow, and (4) the removal of the requirement for a standby generator for the wastewater pumping station, which removes any protection against failure. According to the updated opinion of WCI/Lennar's own engineer, as filed with the county, the probable additional construction cost for the proposed changes have been increased and will be approximately $290,000, which does not seem to include engineering, permitting or filing fees or the additional costs of ongoing maintenance of the wastewater facilities. All of this was approved as an "insubstantial change." If you have any questions or would like to schedule a call or a meeting to further discuss these developments, please let me know. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts roberts.sheri a,att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 FilsonSue Subject: Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold and David Genson regarding Addies Corner and MAC and Sereno Grove Location: BCC Office Start: Tue 6/20/2017 2:30 PM End: Tue 6/20/2017 3:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill >2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MAC Triad)- 1/2 hour > 3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies Corner- 1/2 hour > > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 > (239)435-3535 > (239)435-1218 (f) > FilsonSue Subject: Sereno Grove - make sure it is on regular agenda Start Date: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 Due Date: Monday, May 22, 2017 Status: Completed Percent Complete: 100% Date Completed: Friday, May 26, 2017 Total Work: 0 hours Actual Work: 0 hours Owner: FilsonSue 1 FilsonSue From: BrockMaryJo Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 8:26 AM To: FilsonSue Subject: RE: Sereno Grove You're all set...thanks, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 239.252.8364 From: FilsonSue Sent: Monday, June 19, 2017 8:25 AM To: BrockMaryJo Subject: Sereno Grove Hi Mary Jo, Good Morning. Matt McLean let me know that Sereno would be on the agenda for 6/27/17 and just wanted to remind you that Commissioner McDaniel asked that it be on the regular agenda. Do I need to do anything special other than this email? Thanks, Sue 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 FilsonSue From: McLeanMatthew Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 3:32 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: FrenchJames Subject: Sereno Grove Sue, This Sereno Grove plat will be on the June 27 BCC agenda. I have talked to Sherri Roberts and advised her that it will be on that agenda and that if anything changes I will let her know. Col "r`er County Matt McLean, P.E. Collier County Growth Management Department Director-Development Review Division 2800 N.Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone:239-252-8279 Fax: 239-252-6945 How are we doing? Please CLICK HERE to fill out a Customer Survey. We appreciate your Feedback! 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 FilsonSue From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Monday,June 12, 2017 8:13 AM To: McDanielBill Cc: FilsonSue Subject: Sereno Grove Update Commissioner McDaniel, Once again, I would like to thank you for taking the time to meet with me, my neighbor and the representative of our Wilshire Lakes Homeowners Association ("HOA") on March 20, 2017, and for arranging to move this item from the consent to the regular agenda, which will hopefully continue to apply whenever the hearing is actually held. Unfortunately, since March things have not improved with respect to the development known as Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh. WCI/Lennar continues to refuse to speak to us and now they are seeking approval of changes to their plat and construction plans for Sereno Grove ("PPL") through a process termed an insubstantial change ("ICP"), in order to avoid ever needing to do so (application #20170001891). However, the changes they propose are not "insubstantial;" they involve a complete re-work of the wastewater and water distribution facilities for the PPL. In mid-April, we were advised that management of WCI/Lennar would meet with us to discuss our concerns, and we were asked to contact Rhonda Brewer, their VP of Community Development, to set up a meeting. called and spoke to Ms. Brewer on April 19, 2017, and provided her with my availability: three full days and one half-day from April 25 through May 2. She thanked me for being so flexible, but then never contacted me to arrange a meeting. Instead, WCI/Lennar was working behind the scenes to reconfigure their PPL, a revised version of which was filed with the county on May 24 along with their request for an ICP. As a reminder and by way of background with respect to the ICP, in February WCI/Lennar's agent contacted our HOA President to discuss WCI/Lennar's need for easements to tie into the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs for water and sewer, since no such easements exist. Use of the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs was assumed in WCI/Lennar's initial plans as it would be the most cost-effective location and alignment to provide the necessary water and sewer connections for Sereno Grove. Our HOA President advised the representative that she wanted to include me and my neighbors in the discussion so that we could resolve all issues at the same time. Initially, they agreed and a meeting was set for February 13. However, on or about February 3 when WCI/Lennar's counsel advised ours that WCI "did not see any benefit to discussing" our request to address the location of the roadway in their plan, WCI/Lennar's agent canceled that February 13 meeting. In connection with their current application for an ICP, WCI/Lennar has significantly reconfigured their plan, spending time and money to do so, to avoid speaking to our HOA about those stub-outs and, therefore, avoiding the need to address the positioning of their roadway so close to my home and the homes of my neighbors. In their revised PPL, they intend to move the utility connection locations to Livingston Road, which would result in a connection that is approximately 1/4 mile west of their westernmost property line, rather than use the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs which are located approximately 10 feet east of their easternmost property line. They then argue that, because of the time required to obtain the necessary permits to do this, it would create a "considerable economic hardship to the developer" and they propose that the wastewater facilities will now be privately owned and maintained. They claim that this self-imposed hardship entitles them to obtain approval for these changes through the ICP process. It is obvious that their unwillingness to address the positioning of their roadway so close to our homes has nothing to do with either the cost of doing so or the time necessary to re-work their plans. The alternative plan created by our engineer (who we hired and paid) was provided to WCI/Lennar in January; the changes included in that plan would be relatively cost neutral to WCI/Lennar and would also retain the same number of 1 lots of equivalent size. Rather than consider that configuration, WCI/Lennar has wasted time developing a new plan moving the water and sewer tie-ins for which, according to their own engineer's opinion, the probable additional construction cost will be over$210,000 (which does not seem to include permitting, filing or engineering fees). For less cost, they could have used our engineer's plan and been in a position to obtain approval of their PPL at the May 9 Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC") meeting, as originally scheduled. They chose not to do so, but are now requesting an abeyance from legal requirements in order to obtain approval for their significantly revised plan. WCI/Lennar has made it clear that they are more interested in spending their time and money pushing for approval for a PPL that is inconsistent and incompatible with the surrounding land uses, than make any attempt to recognize the rights of existing homeowners. Under their proposed PPL, myself and my neighbors will be forced to bear disproportionate negative impacts from the WCI/Lennar development in excess of those borne by any other homeowners within Sereno Grove or the surrounding communities. This is a blatant disregard for the property interests of existing homeowners. At this point, the ICP application has not yet been approved; it is currently in a resubmittal phase according to the county website. Last week John Houldsworth advised me that the PPL is tentatively on the BOCC schedule for June 27. Thank you for taking the time to review this and remain engaged on this issue. If you have any questions or would like to schedule a call or a meeting to further discuss these developments, please let me know. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts roberts.sheri a(�att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 2 FilsonSue From: McLeanMatthew Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:58 AM To: BrockMaryJo Cc: FilsonSue; BosiMichael; FrenchJames Subject: RE: Sereno Grove MJ, Jamie is going to call you to discuss. Co er County Matt McLean, P.E. Collier County Growth Management Department Director-Development Review Division 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone:239-252-8279 Fax: 239-252-6945 How are we doing? Please CLICK HERE to fill out a Customer Survey. We appreciate your Feedback! From: BrockMaryJo Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:53 AM To: FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>; McLeanMatthew<MatthewMcLean@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; FrenchJames<jamesfrench@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Good morning, GMD...can you confirm when Sereno Grove will be heard? Thanks, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@collierg_ov.net 239.252.8364 From: FilsonSue Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:51 AM To: BrockMaryJo Subject: FW: Sereno Grove i Happy Friday Mary Jo, Can you tell me if this has been moved again? It looks like it is now the June 27th meeting. Can you confirm? Thank you, Sue From: FilsonSue Sent:Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:25 AM To: BrockMaryJo <MaryJoBrock(c@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Thank you Mary Jo Sue From: BrockMaryJo Sent:Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:20 AM To: FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; McLeanMatthew <MatthewMcLean(«@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Good morning Sue,The below item has been moved to the June 13 meeting, and is still currently on the regular agenda. Thank you, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 239.252.8364 2 FilsonSue From: BrockMaryJo Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:58 AM To: FilsonSue Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Sue, I heard back from Jamie,they do not have a definite date yet, but will let us know when they do. Thanks, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 239.252.8364 From: FilsonSue Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:51 AM To: BrockMaryJo Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Happy Friday Mary Jo, Can you tell me if this has been moved again? It looks like it is now the June 27th meeting. Can you confirm? Thank you,Sue From: FilsonSue Sent:Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:25 AM To: BrockMaryJo<MaryJoBrock@colliergov.net> Subject: RE:Sereno Grove Thank you Mary Jo Sue From: BrockMaryJo Sent:Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:20 AM To: FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc:CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; McLeanMatthew <MatthewMcLean@colliergov.net> Subject: RE:Sereno Grove Good morning Sue,The below item has been moved to the June 13 meeting, and is still currently on the regular agenda. Thank you, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 1 FilsonSue From: BrockMaryJo Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:53 AM To: FilsonSue; McLeanMatthew; BosiMichael; FrenchJames Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Good morning, GMD...can you confirm when Sereno Grove will be heard? Thanks, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 239.252.8364 From: FilsonSue Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 8:51 AM To: BrockMaryJo Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Happy Friday Mary Jo, Can you tell me if this has been moved again? It looks like it is now the June 27th meeting. Can you confirm? Thank you, Sue From: FilsonSue Sent:Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:25 AM To: BrockMaryJo<MaryJoBrock@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Thank you Mary Jo Sue From: BrockMaryJo Sent:Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:20 AM To: FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; McLeanMatthew <MatthewMcLean@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Good morning Sue,The below item has been moved to the June 13 meeting, and is still currently on the regular agenda. Thank you, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 1 239.252.8364 ' Aged4nd Minutes i 1'.. 'SC, M.N.,.................i.S44.....a.....—..---.......4........--.-, . _....—......_ •`—.-'..". . .___.......—. ..........,............ ....... ..,,...—— File Edit View Lists Tools Reports Window Help td J ._.t; .. Search ' ,ili Save Er Close bl Abandon ' 2. ttistori .4 _..0 tf,,,,,• „-',L _ ..."; ..) , t , JIFinal Flat aeprovaL X I Quick Links Action Item 1D# 2965 ,..s4). 1.1,;1,7-•.tr,:,r,2,DKr...76-LT r.--!3; Boma of'it COM111.14(f.0* . ' ,..411321317 5,(Xl PM nrothno to lity Acorctit Sheet hart*: status: rZlifirr:itte..= 1SW:sniffed * kecerti oittrinneots 8 Ooristarti SaNerid2isti Byt _ Targot Me*ting 1 Z965 Fatal Rao arprotai E. Growth Management Dimi c.:1 Matthew McLean 1* 6:112317 RAI 14A Frue.) egulet Meebrg tii May S.2017 S00 AM Apen sponsor:(Optiorei)i .. Cwinefr 1 MO Enidyed di the Moe i* 11 Coonty Manapeis Report j 29& Boater Safety IQr*" 419-JP f,44:1 ea V6s dem hot,did May St:meet-so 6.1,the Jtme 1331.1 meddrg par Mad Mel 3133 6.,jkltde -Id,:9.,,YF: Apf(4,ettd by V2Pritir Berlina in Stair 3.sersi 1, Mark 36 ack.stas el Sipe 3 Ji.. Adigeol omer approver 1 3136 Proclamation-Natio 1 311S Reconsideration Pen Details2 Find Mote thxchasinci fkevia,,s Grafts Ravorw: , I' : °clads * No I-J No ;*I Attarm•y ftivnesw: Departrriortt Naiad Rapv,•tr: 2,355:Final Plat afft0'aii t-el Serena Guam Scott Saone 11.77.1 Dlthl avid kison Type:Action ltent h!Ns,tei-,quasi.j44ciall; Gros* Board Of County Cerraras Status Submitted This evr requires t.st 611 perscipsnts be sworn in [!J Meeting Tye 8112017 9 00 AM Work hems' 1 Maidtew McLean(Review C 0 Workflow 0 5,nich441-,:e F1,. ..hrl 116 bee I chtilsceti(Rovieir Corne,set ..__I___ o_ 1 Brea Resent/lion(R roe*Co 1Reeleiftet _ °escrwOLle OM littii I fl 1,Grawth Fitanagernert Depart 1 Mw McLean Addiacnal Renewer 0 Completed ./ 2.Scott Stone(Review Crimple 2,Devidl/tiThison(Review Slop 1 Chns Scot Addiutteuil Reviewer 0 Completed ./ 2,James French(&-notiv Cern 1 Je&ey 04.Kladwo,(Re.„,,,A. 1 Brett Rosenblum Addrucnal Rerietner 0 c.c,vcJee: .1. 3.Mark hada-on{Review Pen 1 Gromth Meriegement Dveartme Lend 1 Division Renewer 0 C OrvieleC / 3.Valerie Flerrir4(Review Co _ 4 County Managua Mee(Re 2 Scan Sons Level 2 Attorney Review 0 Coad ./' 5 Board eiCourgy Colgrgssio ... 3 StitM5ed..Tue 328/2017 g, Department Growth Menageme 2 James French Additional Renee 0 Completed / Submitted Br Matthew McLean ' 3 Jeffrey A.Klatzkow Level 3 Cenwity Agiorney's • 0 Completed Category:1 County Manager a .., Purchasing Renew No . 3 Niacin Isanksor A/edit:ens!Reviewer tra Perxthirg GrariLs Renoir No 3 Valerie Flerrirtg Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper • el Coml.-40*d di Adorney Review:Seed Stone Department Head Reviear.David. 4 County Manes Office Level 4 CO‘rty KIM*94( • a Perairv; Prepared Tim 3282017 603A 5 Ectatd tt C4.-inty Commissioner Meetrii 061317 09-00 AM 4 Pereeing Updated Wed 4/192017 5 00 P t Attachments a 4 444 ROM Type visitilityl Tide Rev g Staling File Pt*lic Ineation Map -1 1 File Public Onion of Coat 1 1 Ede Public Flat hlals ti -122-t-ttntttft.t 2" ' -- t A .....) .:,.1 -- is Biri ,- - ............ LI.......... A rialla. f- Ir. . .. , ' 111110 .. , From: OchsLeo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:12 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; BrockMaryJo Subject: Re: Sereno Grove 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 12:30 PM To: 'Sheri Roberts' Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Any time,we are here to help. Sue From: Sheri Roberts [mailto:roberts.sheri@att.net] Sent:Wednesday, May 3, 2017 12:26 PM To: FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject: Re:Sereno Grove Sue: Thank you so much for the update. We appreciate it. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts Roberts.sheri(a�att.net Mobile: (248)630-5194 From: FilsonSue <SueFilson(c,colliergov.net> To: "Roberts.sheriatt.net" <Roberts.sheri(a�att.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:27 AM Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Hi Sheri, I just received the following email regarding Sereno Grove and wanted to let you know. Please let me know if you require additional information. Sue Filson, Aide to William L. McDaniel, Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 �eWeb page, WEB PAGE: Subscribe to our mailing List: 11111011101 1 FilsonSue From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 12:26 PM To: FilsonSue Subject: Re: Sereno Grove Sue: Thank you so much for the update. We appreciate it. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts Roberts.sheri@att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 From: FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> To: "Roberts.sheri@att.net" <Roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:27 AM Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Hi Sheri, I just received the following email regarding Sereno Grove and wanted to let you know. Please let me know if you require additional information. Sue Filson, Aide to William L. McDaniel, Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 Web Page WEB PAGE: dismi Subscribe to our mailing List: From: BrockMaryJo Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:20 AM To: FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: CasalanguidaNick <NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; McLeanMatthew <MatthewMcLean@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove 1 Good morning Sue, The below item has been moved to the June 13 meeting, and is still currently on the regular agenda. Thank you, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E. Ochs, Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrockcolliergov.net 239.252.8364 Agenda;and Minute. �� . . File Edit View Lists Tools Reports Window Help _1 Nee .. A _;, `.4+ .j Search . a:,, Save&Close 'al Abandon • :J History ..,;1:1 .4 'ika' . .,i p ' Q Leeks . .►1 First Piot appro.si x ......... 4) ►kh,Pe rr,lloct>n4 Action Item ID f. 2965 Bested of Court' Commissioners i .isms 4,197317 503 F d tqw bop ler Xy?SCgrs.et Vont liarnea States: xmLz_rr=rnmzomn. 4Subreilled Recent Docievieots «^ DetsbP 5„trn,tted Bye Tartlet Meeting, 2965 Firal sat approval S Gnxisth Manager,ent Crev i T; Matte*Mslisen '.. 6`12017 900„JO(Toe).F egui3r Meetnng !v i'r Miry 9.2017 900 AM Ager Spansof!.(09_0an&), Cat.goryr KJ90 Employee el tie Mon ; 1;i 11 Cosesly Manager's Report r C z _a :933 24•10 S 11'01r orae se; O.T9-JF'.Moved dot ntaari from alio May'3tt:nseetevg to the June 13th�pat KISMcLs _a 3123 'M e nwtrg.�an x a = s+r g ;r€ cr i txlr Ialre4e Fleming in Stage 3,twit To Mark la;4ekson el*matte 3 4 ; ,iF vic= Gt a war j 313 Prodemmi e-Nabs. r j 3119 Reconsideretron ROO ;' i Details F!,.. M-t Purrhas4ria R.vi.mr, Grants Re.or., Details .^q 1f0 1. No I R .. Attom.,Fey.•,...: Department Hied Reyes, 2965:Final Plat wawa Scat Stone jGavial i:htkixo 1 Serene Grove Type:Action Item is this dart,gker+.1;1.t.a?o: From: BrockMaryJo Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:20 AM To: FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: CasalanguidaNick <NickCasalanquidaCa�colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi a colliergov.net>; McLeanMatthew <MatthewMcLean(a�colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Good morning Sue, The below item has been moved to the June 13 meeting, and is still currently on the regular agenda. Thank you, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E. Ochs, Jr. - County Manager's Office maryiobrock ,colliergov.net 239.252.8364 2 FilsonSue From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:57 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: Patrick White Subject: Re: Sereno Grove Commissioner McDaniel/Ms. Filson: I was just about to return Sue's voice message, and I saw your email (below). Thank you for your assistance with this. To date we have not been successful in our efforts to get WCI to engage in a discussion to resolve this. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts Roberts.sheri@att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 From: FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> To: "Roberts.sheri@att.net" <Roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:38 PM Subject: Sereno Grove Ms. Roberts, thank you for your telephone call of April 11, 2017 requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda for MayStn Please be advised that I contacted the County Manager and he has assured me that this item will be placed on the regular agenda. If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel, Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Subscribe to our mailing list: 111 1 FilsonSue From: HouldsworthJohn Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:51 PM To: FilsonSue Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Sue,you're Back!! Welcome From: Michael Delate [mailto:mdelate@gradyminor.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:44 PM To: HouldsworthJohn<johnhouldsworth@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Yep. 5/9? Not unexpected. From: HouldsworthJohn [mailto:johnhouldsworth@colliergov.net] Sent:Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:28 PM To: Michael Delate<mdelate@gradyminor.com> Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Mike, Better attend BCC meeting and bring attorney? From: BosiMichael Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:26 PM To: McLeanMatthew<MatthewMcLean@colliergov.net>; HouldsworthJohn <johnhouldsworth@colliergov.net> Subject: FW: Sereno Grove FYI Gentlemen. From: BrockMaryJo Sent:Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:16 PM To: OchsLeo <LeoOchs@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; PuigJudy <JudyPuig@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Item 2965 has been moved to the regular agenda. Thanks, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 239.252.8364 From: OchsLeo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:12 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; BrockMaryJo Subject: Re: Sereno Grove We'll make to place it on the regular agenda On Apr 12, 2017, at 12:55 PM, FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>wrote: Hi Leo, I hope you are having a good day. We received a telephone call from Ms. Sheri Roberts requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda for the May gth agenda and placed on the regular agenda. Commissioner Solis is abstaining so they are requesting Commissioner McDaniel pull it. Can we do that with this email or do I need to make a note and contact you when the agenda comes out? Thank you. Sue Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 FilsonSue From: BrockMaryJo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:16 PM To: OchsLeo; FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; PuigJudy Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Item 2965 has been moved to the regular agenda. Thanks, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 239.252.8364 From: OchsLeo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:12 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; BrockMaryJo Subject: Re: Sereno Grove We'll make to place it on the regular agenda On Apr 12, 2017, at 12:55 PM, FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>wrote: • Hi Leo, I hope you are having a good day. We received a telephone call from Ms. Sheri Roberts requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda for the May 9th agenda and placed on the regular agenda. Commissioner Solis is abstaining so they are requesting Commissioner McDaniel pull it. Can we do that with this email or do I need to make a note and contact you when the agenda comes out? Thank you. Sue 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 FilsonSue From: OchsLeo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:12 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; BrockMaryJo Subject: Re: Sereno Grove We'll make to place it on the regular agenda On Apr 12, 2017, at 12:55 PM, FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>wrote: Hi Leo, I hope you are having a good day. We received a telephone call from Ms. Sheri Roberts requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda for the May 9th agenda and placed on the regular agenda. Commissioner Solis is abstaining so they are requesting Commissioner McDaniel pull it. Can we do that with this email or do I need to make a note and contact you when the agenda comes out? Thank you. Sue 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 14.9emd a:, d Mule: . . File Edit View Lists Tc ciis 41eper.s Window ftelp .. NeA • iiii jo 2,„• 14 0. J .,.,, Search . il Save&°toe ..) Abandon • .'41 Hittory ...,...!, _it *,,)• .. . — % • -, • .1 F teal Piet aporocat x i Dol/ck t gilts Action Item ID# 2965 .!‘p My Pr g Documents &lard et Cs*-Cunthisseuemes. 1 -- i..-4111111917 5C0 PM )tithithrs;lot My Arsdrovel Short Nernst Statue: rIZiaM",====, '.4Subonifkid • Decent Documents * Diwiccui _ submit-ton ap: Target malahrgt _1 2965 Final Pet eidocosieJ S Grontn Management Cu Lsiji. Mattes McLean [il I EJ13121317 9.a.).:44(Tie).Flegule Meeting „Et 4Msy 9.2017 516D 04 Ago,. SPOI ents....109,9U41 1Ereryee ethe Mo -0 11 c0.040 ,. 49ses R.9. z .._,1 390 iptln ! j 2939 84410.Safety 2.Pco ''i':, 4;19-JP htzedlhe oerr,hoe'the Mei"rith toeeteg to the-Jure 13th triectrg on+Mae lleLe.r., 1 3121 ,,..mdfat(ed,c,04,e,,,,,,t, 418,VF fwevol by vdiehe;eating int:4.er 3,eel lc Mack luck-son al Stae 3 ,k,tied 0MS,opotever 1 3136 Prectecranem.-Natio I ' 1 "1.9 R*44"414"11 Elfc 2 Details Plottoslry Rev hr..- Grants feerfetft Detads d':. Ho 17: No CD Attorney R.' 11it I Departrneert H. Riv,*,,, 2965:Final Plat approval Swam Grove Scott Stone i--V--! David VMkison I-] Type:Action teen Ii tI-i.4e,-,;4wasi-iudolaPt Gm&Bolad of County Correia %Oft:Submitted This ien'resumes tat an pertcipards te swam it lri Meeting Tue 6112011 9 CO AM ‘,,,lcek been 1 Mathew McLean(Review C ri Workflow cf4 s.retheoreze Piesern * Etht Via" ill Ade Week Item 1 Chid Scott(Nonce COmfArt ----,-- 1 etett ROdeoblerr(ReNlefi Co sage Renewar I Descridlion J Due Date Status 1/ 1.Growth Manage-rave Depart :-' -- 1 Ma McLean Alkkicetal Rewe 0 Con'olocec / 2.Scan Stine(Review Caffein : 2.David Vidlidocei LPfteftew SI* .1 1 Chris Scott Addiacnal Reviewer 0 Co,n--Oet,tc fe 2-James French 1Rftftow Can 1 sten Rosevbh,T. Ad:Vowed Reviewer 6 Corm:teed i 1 -wi JA• A.lastaitow(Review 3 Mark Ma.---on(Review Pen ~ 1 Growth Management Det Level 1 Division Reviewer 0 Coiroletee _.if 3.Vere Herrin}(Review Co 4 Ccumv Maragera Moe(Re 2 Scc Stone Level 2 Atawnev Review 0 Completti I 5 Scent of Cowry Commiesio i ; („.,--,.....; .„1..4..c.i. lorvel-Zi-C-0.44,4.-r.:-.1.w.44.11144; it)'.-,;--si....;. i Suteelfti.rue 3+2&2717 Demitmest Gra.*magyegeme :I 2 James French ilidditional Renewer 0 Cute i Sulanted 1 :Mathew Mcinem ,- 3 Jeffrey A.pgattko0, l_evel 3&rarity Attomfty's • 0 Carsiond i Categoiy:11 County Manages Aids:mind Review'No -- 3 Mark Isar:keen AdditTCOBI Reviewer 0 Pendmp Greets Review No ..i -- 3 ' jilt Fleming Level 3 OMB GO4Okettlet • 0 Corpl.efeG Manley Review.Seca Stone Department Heed Review David ( 4 Courtly Men agree(Ace 'Level 4 County kteraper • #Pendirg Prepared Tue 32129176703A -l' 5 sad d co jrty com...,,,,vc.r..0 Room 0613117 OS 00 AM iiii Periling Updated:vied 41$2017 SOO p ti Attachments „..4 ,.: Type 1 visibility] Tine Rev: Slaws AFile Public Location Map -4.-4 File Public Opinion of Coet File Poetic Flat Map f-il ,_ i. a it i 11 ,. , _. Mk II:7:-.: ..-, P.. IS 0 i iii. ,.., t'''' ,,....- ''' . ,. -., • ...4.11 From: OchsLeo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:12 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; BrockMaryJo Subject: Re: Sereno Grove We'll make to place it on the regular agenda 3 On Apr 12, 2017, at 12:55 PM, FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>wrote: Hi Leo, I hope you are having a good day. We received a telephone call from Ms. Sheri Roberts requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda for the May 9th agenda and placed on the regular agenda. Commissioner Solis is abstaining so they are requesting Commissioner McDaniel pull it. Can we do that with this email or do I need to make a note and contact you when the agenda comes out? Thank you. Sue 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. 4 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:29 PM To: BrockMaryJo Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Thank you very much. Sue From: BrockMaryJo Sent:Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:16 PM To: OchsLeo<LeoOchs@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; PuigJudy <JudyPuig@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Sereno Grove Item 2965 has been moved to the regular agenda. Thanks, MJ Mary-Jo Brock - Executive Assistant to Leo E.Ochs,Jr. - County Manager's Office maryjobrock@colliergov.net 239.252.8364 From: OchsLeo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:12 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; BrockMaryJo Subject: Re: Sereno Grove We'll make to place it on the regular agenda On Apr 12, 2017, at 12:55 PM, FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>wrote: Hi Leo, I hope you are having a good day. We received a telephone call from Ms. Sheri Roberts requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda for the May 9th agenda and placed on the regular agenda. Commissioner Solis is abstaining so they are requesting Commissioner McDaniel pull it. Can we do that with this email or do I need to make a note and contact you when the agenda comes out? Thank you. Sue 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. On Apr 12, 2017, at 12:55 PM, FilsonSue <SueFilson(a�colliergov.net> wrote: Hi Leo, I hope you are having a good day. We received a telephone call from Ms. Sheri Roberts requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda for the May 9t" agenda and placed on the regular agenda. Commissioner Solis is abstaining so they are requesting Commissioner McDaniel pull it. Can we do that with this email or do I need to make a note and contact you when the agenda comes out? Thank you. Sue 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. 4 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue Sent: Wednesday,April 12, 2017 1:39 PM To: Roberts.sheri@att.net Subject: Sereno Grove Ms. Roberts,thank you for your telephone call of April 11, 2017 requesting that Sereno Grove be pulled from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda for MayStn Please be advised that I contacted the County Manager and he has assured me that this item will be placed on the regular agenda. If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Subscribe to our mailing list: 1 e --.:*.---r,1:;„ ^ i ,, Agendas and M,nutes ��?� � � = .: < File Edit View Liss Toots Repos Window Hep 5 i 'le.• A .J ' Id id . ' G Abandon • ,) History 4 *i• .s _,, / i - Starch � �. Sa4e8, ese > ' x Action Item ID# 2965 :; coe.n,a t«,etm ...,,,...-ti,r 'vs... ;,. ;,-i r,at,* $talcs'' fi �,�,-� 6 Subtotaled - Recent Documents ;:- 0,1 . p.,,s.:r. Sut+n.tte4 E. 'ars t Nttt.r..: _•>x•••rer1Ce, • Melt%WrLean . c.'3.2 co..P.-coy,•Pew ar+roe r • ,;:c rx:`s Lt,c,rat `, CateQ::r. _ . •.,, Co.„xt,1.1ar7l;er s F'e{:r! . ,� ,y `ra $ _ +T _,,,,, �. - ,-.. .,, -'s'` ,..,. 'het /*Details ,,r_has,r.;Ft..*.. vrartx Pe..e.• tic, t•o tie 14 th, Att:re., Fa.a..: DeCa.t^..art Nast Fe.,e:.. 2965:Final Plat approval Sect acre Card `i.,s:n Sereno Grove Tyre 4.tud'e ttem tr tI-,s.ter .,as,•u1.ar'' Grcvp Bova cf Co tj Ccocrra. This it r re,-4.+ret he!alr.c,par::to;hot,- ,^ Stew St,?ar"t or Meet,s I've 6.132Cti 9:4:V,' %%tr*aeras _ 1 Wethtx tkLear•iRe:feo C 1..14 Workf low 11 1 Ctrs Stec:(Re,,e,Cor*•,P.et 1 Ere Poser No"'sRevree.Co Sage i P.c.-wooer i Cesc/,tc,en 1 Coe Date f Status r/ Gte.. :Mar rte:Cetasr — '. t Scott Stone Rr cfi Co scfe p .ttx N.ctea :.o:•'.tral Pe•..ecer t-1,',."- / 2 David\.Illsto iRe.lea Sod Chr,:Scot ....:.teal Pe.-e:.e. -, . / 2 Jarnea French iPr.,es Corr p dcnsl Pe::e.+er / 3 'efftey:.l6at:Y.trxRe.+ex Ere.P erblyr . 3 Mark Iackson x,Rev,e*Per 3r:o..±Maoagerrxrt Cocas"e it,ei 1 CC,.s r Pe-.:r,.ser 0 / 3 `:'areae Fterr,rq(Re-ilex Cc 4 Cc r•,y Managers Offmce iPe Sc' St-;re Lc of 2 A.`.:rre;Pe,..e,. 5 Board cf Cot CM rosin a / &arra^ed Tv*3782'J1? _ / Cetortmer: Cron' tdarager+•+e 1 -a;cs FrefCF• -6. C(&Pe.e'.er 5,tors'ied E; Wattte's McLean 3 :eflee)...Catakux Leel 3 County Az:ore)s • - / Category 1' Cotst,fla raw s P,rcfastrg Peti,e* Ito 3 t.4•1/4 I aC_:srr u.,,:rat Pe.e:xr vo ice, " Starts Re.)es tic 3 .-ate4s r4r-+',r.; te:e.'33 !E:3r:ekee2er • 0 r_,•-r'' / :.tto net Pe+•,ex E,ct SS'u ee CeoarM+ent Heard Reye*va'.',d 4 County Manager's(Mice �t r=4_ r '-r a;"r • .at :-...e,- _ PreMred Tue 32-201 7 6 03:. c Er:•ar tt CrS;rt)Ccer•n,s s lore"' f-'ee:.rq CE ,';X:.I.' ,a Jp"ated 'trd 4 19201-5 LCC'P J Attachments O 'hst.i, r r P le • P„blit Locator Mad _ e Putt,C Spr,on M'_cst e P..ttic fiat M 3� J II It 2 II . t....! .. .-_ a'e a''e w From: OchsLeo Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 1:12 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; BrockMaryJo Subject: Re: Sereno Grove We'll make to place it on the regular agenda 3 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 7:25 PM To: Roberts.sheri@att.net Subject: Serireno Grove Ms. Roberts,thank you for your call today advising that Serrano Grove is scheduled for the May 9th consent agenda and requesting that it be pulled and placed on the regular agenda. I will speak with Commissioner McDaniel tomorrow and let you know his decision. Sue Filson, Executive Coordinator to Commissioner William L. McDaniel,Jr. Sent from my iPad 1 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 10:47 AM To: Sheri Roberts Subject: RE: Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh Hi Sheri,this will confirm that I have scheduled you to meet with Commissioner McDaniel on March 2, 2017 from 10:30 to 11:00 at the county complex office. Due to disclosure laws, please provide me with any additional names of neighbors that plan to join you for this meeting. Thank you and we'll see you on March 2nd Sue Filson,Aide to William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From:Sheri Roberts [mailto:roberts.sheri@att.net] Sent:Tuesday, February 7, 2017 8:37 AM To: McDanielBill<WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net> Subject:Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh Commissioner McDaniel: My neighbors and I would like to raise with you our concerns regarding the "Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh" development in Naples. Please see the attached letter and the attachments referenced in that letter. We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss. Thank you for your consideration. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts Roberts.sheri(a�att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 1 FilsonSue Subject: Sheri Roberts (248)630-5194 re Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh Location: BCC Office Start: Mon 3/20/2017 11:00 AM End: Mon 3/20/2017 11:30 AM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill i'pF FBF FnF F6F Ltrto Attachment 1 - Attachment 2- Attachment 3- Commissioner... Sereno Grove Pi...Sereno Grove A...Key to Markings... Commissioner McDaniel: My neighbors and I would like to raise with you our concerns regarding the "Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh" development in Naples. Please see the attached letter and the attachments referenced in that letter. We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss. Thank you for your consideration. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts Roberts.sheri@att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 1 Thank you for your attention to this matter. We and our HOA look forward to your support and assistance. Sincerely, 475.,411 5 { 4 't :4(1 .- 11,`µ k • .a .. til 1 i f • • •a a ;. i i a *T '• , ... i • i lo Ili 410 1 9 . 1 Labaiiihis• .• : 1" ' • , ,,, *f p4 to , ‘ ,,.f eilitt .... . * 6 ' 1 4-, 'p t DRAWING# 1 - SERENO AT NAPLES PUD/PELICAN MARSH PRESENTED AT SEPTEMBER 13 COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING. [NORTH IS TO THE LEFT-HAND SIDE] 3 N • PI L i ilia. t .ter DRAWING#2 - SERENO AT NAPLES PUD/PELICAN MARSH CURRENT PLAN The second issue observed in these two drawings is that Drawing#2 (Current Plan) includes four additional lots not previously shown when presented to you,the commission, for approval. Drawing#2 further encroaches on our back yards with the very minimal Type B border described above. Drawings#1 and#2 create a very small border with hardly any separation for the corner home at 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd. Water runoff from roads,traffic, noise and headlights will be on three sides of the house. We are the only homes affected so drastically by the WCI Sereno Grove plan, as you can see on the fourth attachment. Everyone else in our current community and the new community has a preserve or lake view. The planned road extends directly into our back and side yards. Our property values will plummet. Water runoff from so much roadway will exacerbate the water issues that we already have during the rainy season. Further,with the road noise, headlights from vehicles, lack of privacy and diminished view,we will be prevented from enjoying the property we purchased. In addition, our local wildlife,which includes threatened species,will also suffer. We were trying to be constructive by contacting with the developer in an attempt to resolve the issue with an alternative site plan,but WCI has been delaying their response to us while at the same time pressing ahead despite the concerns we have raised. We, of course, are also willing to work with Collier County staff. Since it now seems that an amicable resolution cannot be achieved, we need to consider our legal remedies. It is our feeling that no property owner should be placed in a position of having to spend significant funds on representation to achieve what should be common sense solutions that have been afforded to all other homeowners in the area. 4 February 7, 2017 BY USPS AND EMAIL Commissioner Bill McDaniel Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples,FL 34112 BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net RE: Disproportionate Adverse Impacts of WCI Sereno Grove Site Plan on our Homes in Wilshire Lakes,Naples To: Honorable Collier County Commissioner Bill McDaniel From: David and Linda Bankston—9664 Wilshire Lakes Blvd,Naples,FL 34109 Jim and Sheri Roberts—9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd,Naples,FL 34109 Larry and Jessica Doyle—9660 Wilshire Lakes Blvd,Naples,FL 34109 Dear Commissioner McDaniel: The purpose of this letter is to make you aware of information about the WCI Sereno Grove PUD that will cause our homes to absorb more impacts of the WCI development than any other homeowners in either Sereno Grove or Wilshire Lakes. We have tried to address this directly with WCI and even hired an engineering firm to develop an alternate plan that would address our concerns. However,after a great deal of delay, we were advised on Friday, February 3,2017, that WCI will not discuss this with us. Therefore, we are asking for your help in resolving this matter before it is too late. We all own homes in Wilshire Lakes that directly abut the proposed Sereno Grove,Naples, development. The first attachment depicts the current Sereno Grove construction plan; our properties are highlighted in yellow for your reference. As you can see,WCI has chosen to run their access road from Livingston Road all the way east to within 10 feet of our back property lines,then curve the road north and again east, effectively surrounding the Roberts home at 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd. The wall that was proposed earlier in the process to provide separation has been removed from this plan, and the normally 15 foot buffer has itself been reduced to only 10 feet. The buffer will be nothing other than a hedge and trees spaced 25 feet apart. Our homes, much like others, are designed to be open to the back each with a lanai area that is used much like a family room. We will be denied this use and enjoyment of our property if the development proceeds as planned. 1 Further, there is a viable alternative for the design of the development that would mitigate the impacts to our properties. This was first discussed with Grady Minor, WCI's agent for this development, on January 9, 2017, and then further refined in the following weeks. The second attachment reflects that alternate plan(the third attachment is a key to the markings). This redesign keeps the same number of lots with equivalent lot areas, and should be relatively cost neutral to construct. We presented this refined alternative plan to WCI on January 23, 2017 and, as indicated above,were advised on Friday that they will not even consider it. This blatant disregard for the property interests of existing homeowners is detrimental to the economic development of this area. If homeowners lose confidence that their property rights have any protection,the desire to purchase property in this area will suffer. In the course of addressing this issue,we have also identified flaws in the process that are equally detrimental to preserving homeowner property rights and, therefore,to economic development. There has been a lack of proper notice of this development in more than one respect. Two of the homeowners, including 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd. which is most impacted by the proposed roads,were not provided with notice of the September 2016 meeting at which the PUD was approved. The two homes that didn't receive notice are families who moved to Wilshire Lakes for positions with companies that recently relocated to the area. We only learned about the WCI development plans when a separate notice to vacate an easement in the area to be developed was received before the December holidays by one of us. After multiple objections to that easement vacation were filed with the county, including by the Wilshire Lakes Homeowners Association(the"HOA"),the HOA was advised last week by Marcus Berman that WCI has withdrawn its request to vacate the easement. We find it curious that after objections are filed, WCI has now simply withdrawn the request to vacate, denying us the public hearing that would otherwise be required. In addition,there has been some amount of misdirection relating to WCI's intended site plan in notices of the meetings held. At the time of the PUD approval,the board was provided in the official "notice"with a drawing of the proposed development that showed a green space adjacent to our properties. This was consistent with how other adjacent developments were treated— specifically the Marsala PUD received a generous preserve area around all of their adjacent lots. However, as indicated above and on the attachment we are providing to you with this, the document provided to the board and in the notice is not in fact how the developer intends to proceed. WCI's actual plan is not within the spirit or intent of the original approval, nor is it in keeping with notice provisions of the land development code. And most of all, it is not a good land planning solution. Below please find two images reflecting this change. We own the three northerly homes in the orange circle. 2 .11411M111111111111111Milv^ elmiluill7:4,--' I it--------„,--- ,, , viiir - • • • :3..‹,, : i, L,,: 0 _......_z_...., :, , ill . . ..,...i.„.1 . . . 11 it 1 II, .. , . U lg. 03 \::•',7-:. $1/ imm...a....womil '.' : • I . 1 13: 4 - e = 1 -v\':'.•• ;) Ilk , .. : , . , . 11 is . ....,:..........., .. , § 1 V---------77.11._-_,7:-: 1017-7.. I ialliill''' '. I '-'11- Irrli .................,... 1 _ ,,.... xi __.. ....1 - '-_-_:—:-----7-1-ill '11- .Li !!1.:,1 -- iiriiME' Ell 3 ' ''' .-- • I II I I I 1 •:',ii l'•"' i! ‘, , , ,f,H: r 1 4 iT) I _I , ir:HI ii.1.111111111111111. 1 .1 tz, L, / ‹ Eta , ,.. E ' ii , fB i § , ,-5. ;,, Q a II .; , 1111 .„. _ :1 ' 1 i II in li I 1m z 1. ° s \.--,,:,--- --- ---:- • , ,, , , _ 1 ' s 1 a rii 111 1 ! " ii 1 .41,04..1416mi 0 m......., a .I"' 21 g 3, .., ----1 ---- .--1---------- ill ‘ ,,t „,m„ .1 iwo. i::::::::::::::::ii;i:i;i: :i:i:i::i:i;:;iiiiiiiHi:: " i illillilliqiiillit iii •::.ii•:i".:i::iiii i ]?'ili!::iiiir- . 1 • 11 `g 1 I .., i;iiWa!ii. ia!ffii .HUiM 1 .. 1 eg , h3 „:1il , 3,:i 0:!i.iMH.:Hi2 i.MH ::::iiii ; :.•:;:i:-.:, :i ,:iiiii::::: : :iii ::.: ::.: :i:.., , 8 I .:" ":.',, :::::.:,:•:•:.:::;:::::::::: ::':::::::::: :•:,•,•:::'::: d PAH :11/11%':'m .. .".-1 -.. ...IIIiIi.:.:-:: iiI,.::,,,,ii:iIiii7' 1 '''i iT, '''I' EV.- ':::•.'..:•:.:.::•i:j::Pi4:iMil 11 1. - • 1 11111U1,:A}111 it[:::::•:•:•:•F:y: •:::::•::::::::::,:: ,, 0 i t , :" zu :::, :. .:.:::::::: :::::.:. •::ii, a II ; • o , ,, i , -------____:,,e . , ,iiiiiii 11? 2 I I 111111111111•111!111111111111111111111VIIIIIIIIIHNII!!!.111 1 - i IV ,i, , , , . ,. ,!iiiii.:1), • i - :-,:i:i:.:: 0 1 i.:i: iiiii: ::. iiiii•iii :.,:iiiiiii:•. i,:: :::: :::::i . 0.--„ a il 11 : i: ili!a: : i :.:ii;Iii'.i.:: :; ii:]iii:MilE...1 . le - x 11 I • r:-* .!.:..,., c li i 1 ff,].,iii. io.iiiiiili.i:i::1;i:.:-- ::1:i1; ini.e: 1 , ' ,. =;,--_-_„ ' _-iiss'- ir-----) .,. vill no . ,_ IR _,:::: 1 .,--, i Alli _-1 0- -11— ..p.r7Riiiiigy:ii 72 El 1 ill, , ..11Mill 7-i.' — RI — - . •• . ' •••....... . . „- --.... .. ^-•-•". , 11 VIV V 44 Vie kV 4V tv If51111,1 i l g i 4 -'' . • <I NI"14ggi...:;::...........;,,,..'" it-'" -:.k"--.1- ."/ gi 1 I g& g i - 1 liHili:iiiiill '' k , . v 4 1 10111.11 1 i 1 111 1 1 1 I 1,1114111.41' 11 Su :, ..,/ 1 11 .-- ' g'6 I 1 1 i 1/11/1 /1"/11 i/11111'.111114 ig 111111 1 1 101 1 l'' MI fs - ' ' .lg \ -..-k-. / I: ' \ ...../:-....„---., ,.,,.2 ".''''-'---\''''' g i \ /'. .';/ / d' ,V''.•":-...:' 11111 11111111:1111111:11111:21121 /• ': I .IL. / %, ..," ' '7/.•'.\ liti!l3iill.11.31”-!!!!-giiiitiglit5 /' '.1. / i 1 / , 7 ii / plEill111111111111111:111Sts•111111 i 'i A-1( s ii“I, • , / )!!! ‘ .$ igtl,m3391.gpullIssplap gal s'''' :.I..' I. I , ‘2,., .../..„ II ; Li /\1 ,,," -J , . iAl I !ill! l' iiiii /'1 ':-.,.. - / L1.1\>„:,',:e.''''''S'': 1-, I ,l' I `. ' '-• • • • 1....... i, . V, ' • • . • - g 't,,\..._____i I 1,,_,I ::::: 1‘ • . " g - •-1-- -, ---, •, 'Z'F-'.7... ...'..* - .••. __•,:-_ -.- - -- . . ti,., • • • . . . •. .•401"1111*timen..4-----' . .. . . . • • - -------,----------—....----- . i rsr E V i p (411kf ILI Q \III I i 9 Z , I. I < 4 W p t <4 .F.7 ; I al »___-_.J�.�.._-_—,-off`- ..�.._ a iii _— eE ---- -_. ' _.�..� f _ - -- -- 1 I F J a ,:1'2 I < 5 - t, R r� I ' 1 I.— 1 I <.— z + I i Al -44 8 L I \ I: gii _ �� $ ill I + 414cr 4a m I E s a C l m to O �',I , e a I a f-I ; rr-----------T--7- co / 1 I a r e O — In z 0 I + —f C114- I I � - v __ L I • z I l I : --) I !I m I, •.7-i . { _.III _1 _ --a Attachment 3 Key to Markings on Sereno Grove Alternative Plan 1. The proposed internal roadway and lot line relocations are shown in heavy black lines. 2. The sewer lift station previously located on the north side of the internal roadway to the southwest of Lot 61 is now on the south side of the roadway, so as to have the lift station be located on the west end of Dry Detention#3 where shown;that is labelled and depicted in black. 3. That lift station relocation allowed this portion of the roadway itself to be moved northward slightly by—15+' on the western end to—10'on the eastern end of that curved roadway section shown again in heavy black lines,to allow further separation from the northern or side yard of the Roberts' lot. 4. The blue lines reflect the location and cross-sections we believe would mitigate the impacts as best as possible with the 10' of landscaping to be located on the east side of the eight (8')foot high wall for relocated lots 13 &47 as shown in Cross-Sections A-A, with the wall on the top of the perimeter berm. 5. The same color lines and 8' wall height are shown on top of the perimeter berm as depicted for Cross-section B-B to the north of the Roberts' home. 6. The dwelling units to be located on lots 13 and 47 are sought to be limited to one story height for their habitable space; and 7. The red lines generally reflect the existing facilities as presently proposed for the location of the internal roadways and lot lines,for perspective. FilsonSue Subject: Rich Yovanovich,Wayne Arnold and David Genson regarding Addies Corner)nd MAC and Sereno Grove Location: BCC Office Start: Tue 6/20/2017 2:30 PM End: Tue 6/20/2017 3:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: McDanielBill >2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MAC Triad) - 1/2 hour >3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies Corner- 1/2 hour > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 >(239)435-3535 > (239)435-1218 (f) 1 3/16/2017 7:11 AM Legislative File Search Page 1 Doc ID ' Status Title Department Meeting — Category:09 Advertised Public Hearings(1 item) 2703 Rejected Recommendation to approve the single petition within the 2015 Cycle 3 of Growth Zoning 04/11/17 09:00 A Management Plan Amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for review and Comments response,for an amendment specific to the Vanderbilt Beach/Collier Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road approximately 1 mile west of Collier Boulevard. (Transmittal Hearing)(CP-2015-2/PL20150002167) � s rner no s[a,Ina/s[/a,tORZ,Z,177,21,7131B1193\S.WIYvoVYLc1000.0 d)GM Mica appal-wabwamd-ivad\alrwne\mu\xwo\\ ry 0 e a N z I � 1 1 IQ - afn I 1 J - PLATEAU ROAD COLLIER FUTURE COWER BOULEVARD EXTENSION BOULEVARD — — —� _ _ -a / 1 cow I Z a w W 05 ULY ce F a nal ❑ ¢ LL I r pre Q It d❑W W - D Q V X w WW m 0 W 00 L` C,3}W LY W = }a O FQ u_W W FW cU q 7Z .? 7 7z I W o Q I- ❑ b< 1 _ w mom I r � W I I W? I Z W \ W°2 - m - W .. - cr C7 z 1-0,x a>W w =t H W W Z I ZQ W I L-d q = at gi e Q D ZQ D 0 II I W Wj I pO I CD = j3 4 ❑ W I fn X m co WW WCG I 2 oa II IN¢ - F I _., . a FW J z E �I 0 0 SII I \i) Hc07 °zLL U , vF a. CO WI � Z �m III � I I 6a eo 3 O • Uw LLI HJ II HO I I r34-(0 " ivy 3 r> > ^^^� ¢ I �? ala 0 05s .-= m- . I W G .- pzI ~ vmi I III ( o ›I Q fn w I CO = I I .11IN3WtCI . . `l� w � — T � — � 7, _ � _I�r — �`� l a l\ . , a q R g F ao ci, z 1 r t.. - aF Hill- CO D❑ W JD>¢ 0 .73C LL W al l O.� I • OU d ¢O 0 0 W Z Q W m 0 I I N� lYJ W m w}fn W CL a4. La Zw- a QI-E� a WI QRZ Q ZZQ W Q W U I E-,� wQw WN <OZ� _ ❑co 00 OZp ❑ n-v co �❑ 1 U.. E C7w0 7z _, z x oma og w Q og Q¢ 1 I r w O 0 CL o § U._ U ❑ w wpceW www I-C./) w= Q ZD IYHo= ZIH wU XLn D Q ❑ d) < H HHO W H U`" ❑ W H W = Z § I20 Ea C1 O M f O V N ¢X O O W ; H ❑ >~ W H X m ''N 0.-0 L.L '}'L O .r.. HD H R U W Z J W 000000 CO 0 << WWWLLW ? ¢J ill CD r�iH ZUCKv)TROO Fw Q 3 W V)CnCO WCOCOCA 0 ¢ ❑ W D W — Z CO H H ` W W W W W W o w Z—o Q D W ¢ O Z mLi. wcnw 000000 wi wWW M QO � W - cr ix > ¢ 'a ¢¢¢¢¢¢ 0 W wm QU¢ +I +1 +i +i +1 +1 D U U D +i¢ +i oNorNi� rn� ¢>_¢ �¢ WOZUZI ° m ¢ W ww �o� 646 O ' E U) W WZ XQHQ Z •C) C: oi N r-N CO W w M Z CM 0 Z W Q Z W Z ❑ a W' U) ¢¢ a. W' J z o W OO W OHz > >- 0Zow cc cc to W'¢ ZZUUW � E- WO H UWP CD >- ¢UW JW �W Q w COMM ¢W z __ < LL D wx 11JR 2 65 O QW�2 JQW' 0a. U cK❑ ❑ HO W❑❑ J-1w0XUa cnwmiXCC W H gip¢ QrJ¢wzo m WW W z= UWW a. m0¢ OLL¢ > O� J w� 12 g H w ❑ WW ¢ce❑ D — H W J LL g cnCCW zCCr3>�in ¢� m— U❑D W-- U)u) ¢ JW ❑ cibo2 ¢ WLLW Cap W H WWF- D > 5555 = OJdOgpCLO = = DCC z co OmCID H o�wwFu_ UO VOW CC UwCC 2!Luw H� HQ ¢ 2WJ¢ WUcnHmQ 1* ❑ N CCDW WO�or¢D �U �ck 0- ��O WWa HO �i ri . f 0a.Z 0 0Qa. m H H H O z I oLAill Z V � aero M Nr Y Z< V r m dQi1. n 0°� �gf O O a3 . .-8' -.2 y 11 V N ed 1 . .i PPPP N ' g= r��t ~li i � I z 3 `$ to 111 1 ) U I ' �1 I' 1Q d to 5 � l 1 - (9178'3t') a`d021 331V>IOWWI 'a i i I iVNV•.� 33H01 •DOJ ONLSIX3 — 110 ___ -- ---C.' E AgOCATED ---- CHEE C�- �� Z 11 I a s$An 8 p i 1 ag8 I 'a ill: f � j1 ' X id ti:'1,1 I j I g :=md 41 r; w it I I Q •j Z Ce mh _ % V X 14, i'•--s ooC' oho o1 � ce < UH! 1. . d 11]i' ..g .. g b.% Itlb tz c7 1 i v, o< R:24 PF2 8 �� < U zzo ?..:1 ; JL lag C COIca j 50 • ..1, \` I 6 d 111 j) L...1 i •. ,1 1, .4 -a '‘ ;. •...• .•••• ......; ... -.•• •. > •...• 4 I 6 (3 ,'" 1 ,L________ -,- , . •. • . . ., 4 • • • .,• S .4 .-1"t. s. •, • .... • 9.. ' • A., Jm • i g1;33 ;, b 1II1• 91. - --i'' \ a ,- t EP gli Ili, ii Iglil 1711110 II s 51451- I 1. ~-T---- ,—ac.�ar --- -- mar 1 i a x r ii 0 iii r• El 9VYZ'6d ZZLZ 2008'TO I -� a ,p�CZntl M Td2u't1�RnV o--g I,� Y-<� d I ��< ma i'I NM motro.. otialt 0 , Board of Collier County Commissioners Donna Fiala Andy Solis, Esq. Burt L.Saunders Penny Taylor William L. McDaniel,Jr. District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 March 22, 2017 Mr. Gordon C. Handte 8672 Cavano Street Naples, FL 34119-9500 Dear Mr. Handte: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter received in my office on March 21, 2017, and your concerns and comments concerning the Addie's Corner Development. Your opinion is important to me and I will carefully consider all comments and information when this item comes back before the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. Again, thank you and if I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. ,f= Very tru .` yours, Willia L. McDaniel, Jr. Commissioner, District 5 WLM:sf 3299 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 303•Naples,Florida 34112-5746.239-252-8097•FAX 239-252-3602 FilsonSue From: TrochessettAimee Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 11:18 AM To: McDanielBill Subject: RE: Emailing - BCC Correspondence - Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf The return label on the envelope reads: Mr. Gordon C. Handte, 8672 Cavano Street, Naples, FL 34119-9500. From: FilsonSue On Behalf Of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 10:35 AM To:TrochessettAimee <AimeeTrochessett@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Emailing- BCC Correspondence-Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf Hi Aimee, did you happen to save the envelop for this one? I can't read the name or address. Thank you. Sue From:TrochessettAimee Sent:Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:43 PM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders(a colliergov.net>;SolisAndrew <AndrewSolis@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: Emailing- BCC Correspondence -Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf See attached correspondence received today at the BCC offices. Co ie r County Communication&Customer Relations Division Aimee D. Trochessett Customer Service Specialist Communication & Customer Relations Division 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 102 Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8075 1 TMEONT Collier County Commissioners Collier County Planning Commissioners MAR 21 L,ii Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner By Re: Addie's Corner development Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. We live in Esplanade Golf a 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. /1 e Address Date .tr v,.J► s-a-4 Cfc>1 I iQ tti — sn4,c el, LA,c r-s+ 2.. S', oit d ,et k w, ii !_ 6,cc: r(��I'r� C -f w/ 6.r 7 a ts..4.y a V24.744-406- Ot C L /14y4 i¢ o ft"( . m <F Y 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners Donna Fiala Andy Solis, Esq. Burt L.Saunders Penny Taylor William L.McDaniel,Jr. District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 May 12, 2017 Mr. & Mrs. Edmund Staley 8854 Vaccaro Court Naples, FL 34119 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Staley: This will acknowledge receipt of your May 10, 2017 letter expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Very r41)your• ba,4 al._ _ Wil i. m L. dDaniel, Jr. Commissioner, District 5 WLM:sf 3299 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 303•Naples,Florida 34112-5746.239-252-8097•FAX 239-252-3602 8854 Vaccaro Ct • Naples, FL 34119 te,tal (239) 963- 5365 MAY 1 2 2017 ejsone@aol.com C� May 10, 2017 William L. McDaniel, Jr. Board of County Commissioners Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 303 Naples Florida 34112 Dear Mr. McDaniel: 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 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 Immokalee 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. I'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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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, (11 Ot.1 e 4, Edmund J. Staley, Esq. Carol A. Staley FilsonSue From: FilsonSue Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 2:07 PM To: FrenchJames Subject: RE: Addies Corner Thank you very much. Sue From: FrenchJames Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 2:04 PM To: FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject: Re: Addies Corner Hi Sue! Thanks for the well wishes, I hope you had a great weekend as well.The project is still under review and the applicant is pushing for a CCPC date of 4/20/17 or 5/4/17. Based on CCPC action, we will schedule the item for the BCC afterwards. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Jamie Sent from my iPad On Mar 20, 2017, at 12:37 PM, FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>wrote: Hi Jamie, I hope you had a fabulous weekend. Can someone please let me know when the Addies Corner project will come back before the BCC? Thank you. Sue From: FilsonSue Sent:Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:41 AM To:JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Subject:Addies Corner Mr.Johnson and Smith: Would either of you gentlemen be able to tell me with the Addies Corner Project will be coming before the BCC? We are getting emails and it would just be nice to know when we will see it come forward. Thank you very much for any assistance you can give. Sue Filson, Aide to William L. McDaniel,Jr. 1 FilsonSue From: FrenchJames Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 2:04 PM To: FilsonSue Subject: Re: Addies Corner Hi Sue! Thanks for the well wishes, I hope you had a great weekend as well.The project is still under review and the applicant is pushing for a CCPC date of 4/20/17 or 5/4/17. Based on CCPC action, we will schedule the item for the BCC afterwards. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Jamie Sent from my iPad On Mar 20, 2017, at 12:37 PM, FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>wrote: Hi Jamie, I hope you had a fabulous weekend. Can someone please let me know when the Addies Corner project will come back before the BCC? Thank you. Sue From: FilsonSue Sent:Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:41 AM To:JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net> Subject:Addies Corner Mr.Johnson and Smith: Would either of you gentlemen be able to tell me with the Addies Corner Project will be coming before the BCC? We are getting emails and it would just be nice to know when we will see it come forward. Thank you very much for any assistance you can give. Sue Filson, Aide to William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel 1 FilsonSue From: BellowsRay Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2017 2:30 PM To: FilsonSue Cc: JohnsonEric; BosiMichael Subject: RE:Addie's Corner Hi Sue, Eric has this petition scheduled for the May 18th CCPC meeting and the June 27th BCC meeting. Ra Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Zoning Division - Zoning Services Section Growth Management Department Telephone: 239.252.2463; Fax: 239.252.6350 coi['ier comity From: FilsonSue Sent:Thursday, May 04, 2017 1:36 PM To: BellowsRay<RayBellows@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner Hi Ray, I hope everything is going well for you. I'm looking to find out approximately when Addie's Corner will come before the BCC. I know it was originally scheulded for the 5/4/17 CCPC agenda but I didn't see it on the CCPC's agenda today. Thank you Ray. Sue 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 FilsonSue From: Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 3:25 PM To: FilsonSue Subject: RE: Meeting Request: MAC &Triad Thank you! Original Message From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 3:03 PM To: Dianna Quintanilla Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC &Triad Yes ma'am unless the workshop runs over in which case I will let you know. Sue Sent from my iPad >On Jun 14, 2017, at 3:00 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com>wrote: > 2:30 for DR Horton: Hadley Place (MAC Triad) - 1/2 hour >3:00 for Barron Collier: Addies Corner- 1/2 hour >Correct? > Original Message > From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] >Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 2:55 PM >To: Dianna Quintanilla >Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad >Okay, 2:30 to 3:00 what is MAC? > However, keep in mind that he has a workshop in the morning and hope that it doesn't run over. >Sue, >2:00 pm on June 21<x-apple-data-detectors://0>st<x-apple-data-detectors://0> sounds great! I will send you an invite with address, directions, and info on parking. If you need anything else,just let me know. > Matt Spielman > Executive Assistant to Commissioner Brian Hamman Lee County Board of >County Commissioners, District 4 > (239) 533-2226<tel:(239)%20533-2226>office > (239) 485-2054<tel:(239)%20485-2054>fax http://www.leegov.com Sue >Sent from my iPad 1 > On Jun 14, 2017, at 2:51 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com<mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.corn»wrote: > Do you have an hour? To cover 1/2 hour for MAC and 1/2 for Addies? > Original Message > From: FilsonSue [mailto:SueFilson@colliergov.net] >Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 2:44 PM >To: Dianna Quintanilla >Subject: Re: Meeting Request: MAC&Triad > I hope you still have the 20th at 2:30 because that's the only time I have available. >Sue >Sent from my iPad >On Jun 14, 2017, at 2:35 PM, Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com<mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com><mailto:DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com»wrote: > Good afternoon, > Rich, along with Wayne Arnold and David Genson would like to meet with Commissioner McDaniel regarding the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: Addies Corner. >Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: > Monday June 19th 9:00-3:00 > Tuesday June 20th 10:00- 12:00; 2:30-5:00 > Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0-5:00 > Friday June 23rd 11:30-3:00 >Thank you. > Dianna Quintanilla > Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. >Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. >4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 > Naples, Florida 34103 > (239) 435-3535 > (239) 435-1218 (f) ><image001.png> 2 FilsonSue From: Jane Rollins <naplesjanel @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 <EricJohnsonncolliergov.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:naplesjanel@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 1 4 A, <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject: Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776. I a May 8,2017 1 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, 2 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. 3 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 7:32 AM To: 'Amy Lawlor' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Development Mr. & Mrs. Lawlor, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 22, 2017 email listing proposed changes you would like for the Addie's Corner Development. You opinion is important to me and I will carefully consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I can be of assistance to you in the future please do not hesitate to contact my office. Eiee William L. McDaniel, Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 it age' WEB PAGE: ,u,,,, , Subscribe to our mailing list: From:Amy Lawlor [mailto:amylawlor.interiors@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 4:33 PM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net>; HomiakKaren <KarenHomiak@colliergov.net>; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane<DianeEbert@colliergov.net>; FryerEdwin <EdwinFryer@colliergov.net>; ChrzanowskiStan <StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net>; SchmittJoseph <JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: Robert Lawlor<drboblawlor@gmail.com>; Amy Lawlor<amylawlor.interiors@gmail.com>; Barbara Coffey <coffeyba rba ra @ hotm a i l.co m> 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 1 I 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: •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. 2 a Sincerely, Bob and Amy Lawlor 8810 Vaccaro CT. Naples, FL 34119 3 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 6:46 AM To: 'Layton Elliott' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Development Mr. Elliott, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 17, 2017 email expressing your opposition to the proposed Addie's Corner Development. You opinion is important to me and I will carefully consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I can be of assistance to you in the future please do not hesitate to contact my office. site William L. McDaniel, Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 Web Page WEB PAGE: Subscribe to our mailing list: From: Layton Elliott [mailto:laytonelliott4@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 3:23 PM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net>; HomiakKaren <KarenHomiak@colliergov.net>; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane <DianeEbert@colliergov.net>; FryerEdwin <EdwinFryer@colliergov.net>; ChrzanowskiStan <StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net>; SchmittJoseph <JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Cc: Bobbi Elliott<antiochhm@yahoo.com> Subject:Addie's Corner Development May 17, 2017 Collier County Commissioners & Planning Commissioners i r 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: 41 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. 1 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: •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: antiochhmayahoo.com. Thank you for your consideration and I hope you can appreciate our concerns. 2 Sincerely, Layton and Bobbi Elliott 9110 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 3 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 1:39 PM To: 'William Nemeth' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner development - Collier County Planning Commission Project# 20150001776 Mr. & Mrs. Nemeth, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 17, 2017 email expressing your opposition to the proposed Addie's Corner Development. You opinion is important to me and I will carefully consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I can be of assistance to you in the future please do not hesitate to contact my office. William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 Web Page WEB PAGE: Subscribe to our mailing list: Original Message From: William Nemeth [mailto:wnemeth@icloud.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 1:34 PM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael<MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject: Addie's Corner development-Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776 Attached is a letter of comment regarding the Addie's Corner development. We appreciate your time and efforts in careful consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, William A& Laura D Nemeth 8652 Amour Court Naples, Florida 34119 wnemeth@icloud.com (216)496-2995 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 10:21 AM To: 'Irene Bond' Subject: RE: 5-18-17 Meeting Addie's Corner Development Mr. & Mrs. Bond, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 17, 2017 email expressing your opposition to the proposed Addie's Corner Development. You opinion is important to me and I will carefully consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I can be of assistance to you in the future please do not hesitate to contact my office. gee William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 We •_;e., WEB PAGE: Subscribe to our mailing list: From: Irene Bond [mailto:ibond2010@gmail.com] Sent:Wednesday, May 17, 2017 10:15 AM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; andysolis@collier.net; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net>; HomiakKaren <KarenHomiak@colliergov.net>; pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane <DianeEbert@colliergov.net>; FryerEdwin <EdwinFryer@colliergov.net>; ChrzanowskiStan <StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net>; SchmittJoseph <JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay <RayBellows@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> 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 i 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(2igmail.com or via cell phone at: 807-633-7269. Thank you for your consideration. Irene and Ward Bond 9158 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 Sent from my iPad 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:49 AM To: 'jmaiella' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Development Mr. &Mrs. Maiella, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 17, 2017 email expressing your opposition to the proposed Addie's Corner Development. You opinion is important to me and I will carefully consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I can be of assistance to you in the future please do not hesitate to contact my office. Ecee William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 Web Page' WEB PAGE: Subscribe to our mailing list: From:jmaiella [mailto:maiellajoe@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:42 AM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: BrownleeMichael<MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>; Lily<lily.maiella@gmail.com> Subject:Addie's Corner Development Importance: High May 17, 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 1 We are residents 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: • A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Joseph& Lily Maiella 8865 Savona Ct Naples, FL 34119 2 FilsonSue From: Tom Coffey <ticoffey@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: 1 _ i i , i i : .., •Do not permit a reduction of the existing preserve I 1 I •Limit the project to no more than the number of units that current zoning allows for 1 •Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories I I •A buffer of at least 100 feet 1 •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: ticoffey@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 2 FilsonSue From: Lois Pogyor <Ipogyor@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 12:31 AM To: McDanielBill Cc: FilsonSue Subject: Development of Addie's Corner Dear Mr. McDaniel: 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 FilsonSue From: Joe Pestana <jpestana@jppestservices.com> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 4:55 PM To: McDanielBill; BrownleeMichael; SolisAndy; burtssaunders@colliergov.net;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; angelafoodner@colliergov.net; davelykings@colliergov.net; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Development Dear Planning and County Commissioners, I am a property owner at 8636 Amour Ct in Naples and am writing about the proposed development of Addie's Corner. The most recent site plan I am familiar with has several aspects that could or will impact the value, level of enjoyment and safety of resident of the Esplanade development. The plan shows access to the Addie's development at our western property line. Getting in and out of our development is already difficult. I am not a traffic expert but this location seems to increase the pressure and chance of possible accidents. Is it possible to consider another location? I am sure you have already heard about the "view of the preserve" the Amour Ct residents were lead to believe we were looking at and paid substantial lot premiums for. I understand that is not something you have control over. What you do have influence on is the extent of the proposed removal of the existing preserve and requirement of a meaningful buffer zone. As I look at the proposed preserve, it is less than half of the existing preserve. This preserve was put in place prior to the current owner so they knew what they were purchasing. As I understand it the owner wants to reduce the existing preserve by over fifty percent. The preserve space was established for a reason. I suspect it was a conscious decision at the time based on environmental factors and other goals. I wonder what has changed besides ownership and the goals of a developer. If you allow them to substantially reduce the preserve please consider increasing the required buffer to at least 100ft along our common property line. I have taken a look at the Exhibit "A" Addie's Corner MPUD. I cannot decipher what this document proposes. What I can see is that more changes than stays the same and that speaks volumes. The goal of the developer is to maximize their return. I understand that however they purchased a parcel with limited access and permitted uses. The developers proposal appears to significantly change not only the permitted use of the parcel it will also increase the number of residents, size of the buildings, size of the parking lots, traffic, noise and ultimately the reduction of enjoyment for myself, my neighbors and my community. They appear to want to rewrite the rules. I hope you will consider restricting the number of residential units to a number that minimally impacts our community and the community at large. Other items like lighting that could be visible all night, dumpsters being emptied who knows when not to mention other noise pollution based on the final development. 1 In closing I understand that development happens and things do change. What I, my neighbors and other community residents are hoping for is a mindful approach that ultimately mitigates the impact on our homes and the enjoyment of them now and into the future. I have been told that the developer and our community have been communicating about building berms with vegetation and trees as buffers on the Addie's property as well as the Esplanade property. I have seen many examples of this in the local area so it is possible to create significant buffers. With some thoughtful restrictions and requirements combined with enforceable agreements between the developer and the Esplanade everyone involved and impacted could be satisfied. I am hoping a balanced approach and meaningful consideration of our reasonable requests could result in a mutually beneficial result. Sincerely Joseph Pestana 8638 Amour Ct Naples FL 34119 IP Pest Services The Pest Control Professionals Joe Pestana President Office:800.222.2908 Facebook Linkedln 1 Twitter Google+ JP Blog Tell us about your JP experience here! Q "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 inti 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 it 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 7:23 AM To: 'Ronald Fischer' Subject: RE:We are asking for your support on the proposed adjustments to Collier County Planning Project# 20150001776 Mr. & Mrs. Fischer, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 11, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From: Ronald Fischer [mailto:rfischer@certitudegroup.com] Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 7:42 PM To: McDanielBill<WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael<MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>; StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net> 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 1 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, Ron and Lynn Fischer 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 7:23 AM To: 'Ronald Fischer' Subject: RE:We are asking for your support on the proposed adjustments to Collier County Planning Project# 20150001776 Mr. & Mrs. Fischer, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 11, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From: Ronald Fischer [mailto:rfischer@certitudegroup.com] Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 7:42 PM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net>; StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net> 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 a into aewe CountryClub, � mmunty that had a biggerpreserveg kalee Rd. in les. After g in Kensington for 15 years, we wanted to m 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 1 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, Ron and Lynn Fischer 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 8:21 AM To: 'Heidi Holley' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner development Immokolee Rd and Collier Blvd Ms. Holley, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 11, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.collier>;ov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From: Heidi Holley [mailto:heidihimlerholley@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, May 11, 2017 8:18 AM To: McDanielBill<WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net> Subject: Addie's Corner development Immokolee Rd and Collier Blvd May 10, 2017 Dear Collier County Commissioners, Collier County Principal Planner and Chief Hearing Examiner, I recently bought a home and moved from Minnesota to Collier County in October of 2016.As a new resident of Florida I am concerned about the new development planned adjacent to our community in Esplanade, Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776.As a voting resident I am very concerned about the impact this project will have on the traffic, natural preserve and noise level.The amount of traffic on Immokolee Boulevard is already overloaded and very stressful to drive on. Part of our attraction to this area was the natural beauty of the preserve and I hope in no uncertain terms you will allow it to be reduced in an way. The removal of the exotic trees along our property line will add not only to greater noise levels but to a viewscape that is no longer serene and calming. Please ensure that the trees removed will be replaced by equally large sized trees. I am unable to attend the hearing as we are traveling to Minnesota for a few months. Collier County is our new home and I hope you will do everything possible to protect our property line.Thank you. Sincerely, Heidi Holley 9230 Rialto Lane Naples, FL 34119 1 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:38 PM To: 'Nancy DeMarco' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Development - Project#20150001776 Mr. Pittenger, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 10, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From: Nancy DeMarco [mailto:nancyd@carlawyernj.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:09 PM To: McDanielBill<WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael<MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner Development- Project#20150001776 Importance: High 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 Ladies and Gentlemen: 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 i 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. We encourage you to require the following: *A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet *Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, *Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property *Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Perry A. Pittenger 9091 Sorreno Court Naples, Florida 34119 Nancy DeMarco Legal Assistant to Perry A. Pittenger,Esq. Schiller&Pittenger,P.C. 1771 Front Street,Suite D Scotch Plains,New Jersey 07076 Voice:908-490-0444 Fax:908-490-0420 Email:nancyd@carlawyernj.com 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 12:59 PM To: 'William L McGee Jr' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Project#20150001776 Mr. McGee, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 10, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Original Message From: William L McGee Jr [mailto:willie581950@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:54 AM To: FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner Project#20150001776 Thank you for your attention. William L. McGee Jr. 1 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:00 PM To: 'martin Jacobs' Subject: RE:Addie's Corner Development Dr.Jacobs, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 10, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Original Message From: martin jacobs [mailto:mjacobs8l@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 12:45 PM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net> Subject: Addie's Corner Development Project#20150001776 I am a resident of Esplanade Golf&CC on Immokalee Rd., Naples. I understand that the developer is planning to reduce the preserve area from 8.85 acres 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. I 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 Ct. Even with the existing tree line,4 story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values. I encourage you to require the following : 1. A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet 2. Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories 3. Locate their buildings no closer than 100 'from Esplanade property 4. Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units I hope you can understand our concerns about this project. Please pass this on to Planning Commissioners. 1 Sincerely, Dr. Martin Jacobs 9235 Rialto Ln. Naples, Fl. 34119 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 9:48 AM To: 'Mindy Desrochers' Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Development Ms. Desrochers, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 9, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. all William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Subscribe to our mailing list: [,. From: Mindy Desrochers [mailto:mindydesrochers@gmail.com] Sent:Tuesday, May 9, 2017 9:37 AM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner Development Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: • A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Certainly, if built as proposed,the traffic impact would be horrific for entering and exiting Esplanade, potentially causing accidents. Please consider carefully the long term impact of allowing zoning to change. Sincerely, Bob and Mary Desrochers 9053 Sorreno Court Naples, FL 34119 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 1:59 PM To: 'DAVID FIX' Subject: RE:Addie's Corner development Project#20150001776 Mr. & Mrs. Fix, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 9, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Veil William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Subscribe to our mailing list: ccioi i ._. From: DAVID FIX [mailto:davedds@comcast.net] Sent:Tuesday, May 9, 2017 1:55 PM To: McDanielBill<WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael<MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner development Project#20150001776 May 9, 2017 My wife and I are residents of Florida and of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. Our property is adjacent to the proposed Barron Collier development at Addie's Corner on Immokalee Road in Naples. We are writing to you in order to express our concerns about the many changes to the existing PUD that Barron Collier is planning. First, we would like to have the the nature preserve maintained at he originally planned 8.85 i I i 1 i I acres. We would like to have an opaque Type C buffer of at least 100 feet along Esplanade Boulevard. We also disapprove of the construction of multiple four story residential buildings on this property. Driving along Immokalee, we see no other existing four story buildings. Barron Collier knew what the exixting PUD was when he initially purchased this property. There is no reason to even bother writing zoning laws if changes like this are allowed for one individual. Sincerely, Dave and Alayne Fix 8656 Amour Court Naples, Florida i 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 i 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 6:59 AM To: 'Howard L. Sosnik' Subject: RE:Addie's Corner, request for appointment with Board of County Commissioners Mr. Sosnik, This will acknowledge receipt of your April 11, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. Please contact Sue Filson, my Executive Coordinator at 252-8605 to schedule an appointment. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Ede William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Subscribe to our mailing list: From: Howard L. Sosnik [mailto:HSosnik@kspcwills.com] Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 7:01 PM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndy<AndySolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, request for appointment with Board of County Commissioners Dear Members of the Board of County Commissioners, 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. I am aware of the Planning Commission Public hearing scheduled for May 18th which will include these matters on its agenda. I would like to request a meeting with the Board prior to that, preferable the afternoon of May 16th or anytime on May 17th if these dates do not work please let me know and perhaps we can schedule a different time)to articulate some of our particular concerns including: • Require the developer to "step back" their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property • Provide landscaping and plantings to screen the newbuildings 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. Howard L. Sosnik 516-313-3239 Esplanade Golf&Country Club 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 9:18 AM To: 'Jane Rollins' Subject: RE: Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776. Mr. & Mrs. Rollins, This will acknowledge receipt of your May 8, 2017 email regarding Addie's Corner Development. You opinion is important to me and I will carefully consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. Staff has advised me that this petition is scheduled for the June 27, 2017 BCC meeting. If I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Epee William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 Wet) .age WEB PAGE: -77-77 Subscribe to our mailing list: From:Jane Rollins [mailto:naplesjanel@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 8, 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<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 1 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 tiamenity have outside amplified noise(there is a water management area at the north end of the property and water does Iamplify noise). I 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. 1 , Sincerely, Michael&Jane Rollins 9368 Terresina Dr.,Naples,FL 34119 l 1 i i 4 i 1 i 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:39 PM To: 'fcerminara' Subject: RE:Addie's Corner Mr. & Mrs. Cerminara, This will acknowledge receipt of your April 11, 2017 email expressing your concerns relating to the proposed Addie's Corner development. Your opinion is important to me and I will certainly consider all comments and information when this item is presented to the Board of County Commissioners. If I may be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel Subscribe to our mailing list: From:fcerminara [mailto:fcerminara@comcast.net] Sent:Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:09 PM To:SolisAndrew<AndrewSolis@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Cc: Sam H. Miller<shmiller@trumbull.com>; scerminara@aol.com; "Frank Cerminara" <fcerminara@comcast.net> Subject:Addie's Corner As residents of Esplanade, Amour Ct, we have been concerned about the planned development referred to as Addie's Corner. We are very apprehensive about two items in particular. 1. View. Taylor Morrison promised that the "Preserve " would always exist. We need to keep as much of it as possible through remediation and where buildings are situated. 2. Traffic on Immokalee and Collier Blvd is near gridlock at times ( Jan -April.) Adding another development will exacerbate the situation. i 46/11/11/0/111011/01100/11,100« -4=EMINIBMIliMir We at Esplanade need your help. Especially with our views, for which we paid lot premiums of$80-100 thousand or more. Thankyou for your consideration. Respectfully, Frank and Susan Cerminara 8644 Amour Ct Sent from my Verizon,Samsung Galaxy smartphone 1 i 3 i 1 i l 4 S 1 I i ti I 1 1 t 1 a g I I I i 4 I 1 1 2 . I 4 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 11:30 AM To: TrochessettAimee Subject: RE: Emailing - BCC Correspondence -Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf Thank you so much, you are the best. Sue From:TrochessettAimee Sent:Wednesday, March 22, 2017 11:18 AM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Emailing- BCC Correspondence-Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf The return label on the envelope reads: Mr. Gordon C. Handte, 8672 Cavano Street, Naples, FL 34119-9500. From: FilsonSue On Behalf Of McDanielBill Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2017 10:35 AM To:TrochessettAimee <AimeeTrochessett@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Emailing- BCC Correspondence-Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf Hi Aimee, did you happen to save the envelop for this one? I can't read the name or address. Thank you. Sue From:TrochessettAimee Sent:Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:43 PM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; SolisAndrew <AndrewSolis@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net>; StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: Emailing- BCC Correspondence -Addie's Corner 2017-03-21.pdf See attached correspondence received today at the BCC offices. COler County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 2 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 7:33 AM To: 'Miller, Sam H.' Subject: RE:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners Mr. Miller, This will acknowledge receipt of your email dated March 18, 2017, and the attached letter to the Collier County Planning Commission, expressing your opposition to the proposed rezoning proposal for Addie's Corner. Your opinion is important to me. I appreciate you sharing your comments with me and will carefully consider all comments and information when this item comes before the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. Again, thank you and if I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndrew<AndrewSolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: BrownleeMichael<MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 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 e a -.' .4"---,'"21:4',.,''':i;•,..!!".'„',.r:,.r..''''•"...'"'-'.--. • -� .,fir 'rte ,".'� I . 'r5 \ • tr \ , '-,,,'..;;'._':qt.'!:,,,, iti I rt^re, ,\•. \ gin yyue'. 2 !J Y1 'L-:.'i;: r 3.7: ..I•a#iCCCC£sjw s � # J FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 1:04 PM To: Frank McDermott Subject: RE: Esplanade Residents concerns about Addie's Corner Development Mr. McDermott, This will acknowledge receipt of your email dated March 16, 2017, and the attached letter to the Collier County Planning Commission, expressing your opposition to the proposed rezoning proposal for Addie's Corner. Your opinion is important to me. I appreciate you sharing your comments with me and will carefully consider all comments and information when this item comes before the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. Again,thank you and if I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From: Frank McDermott [mailto:mcdermott.frank@comcast.net] Sent:Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:55 AM To: FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>;TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill<WilliamMcDaniellr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndrew <AndrewSolis@colliergov.net> Cc: Brenda McDermott<brenda.mcdermott@comcast.net> Subject: Esplanade Residents concerns about Addie's Corner Development Begin forwarded message: From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frankt7a comcast.net> Date: March 16, 2017 at 9:45:30 AM EDT To: DianeEbert(a�colliergov.net 1 FilsonSue From: FilsonSue on behalf of McDanielBill Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 1:03 PM To: Mark Scimio Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Development Mr.Scimio, This will acknowledge receipt of your email dated March 16, 2017, expressing your opposition to the proposed rezoning proposal for Addie's Corner. Your opinion is important to me. I appreciate you sharing your comments with me and will carefully consider all comments and information when this item comes before the Board of County Commissioners for consideration. Again,thank you and if I can be of assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Bill William L. McDaniel,Jr. Commissioner, District 5 3299 Tamiami Trail, East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-8605 WEB PAGE: www.colliergov.net/CommissionerMcDaniel From: Mark Scimio [mailto:mascimio@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:26 AM To: pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane <DianeEbert@colliergov.net>; ChrzanowskiStan <StanChrzanowski@colliergov.net>; SchmittJoseph <JosephSchmitt@colliergov.net>; StrainMark <MarkStrain@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric<EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Cc: McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; SolisAndrew<AndrewSolis@colliergov.net>; SaundersBurt <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner Development 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 1 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Fiala COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA June 27, 2017 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. 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]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM XI SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails Calls Met w/ Sam Miller and other homeowners from Esplanade Golf& Country Club, JMeeting w/ Hearing Examiner, Staff Report 9.B. 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 04-41, as amended,the Collier County Land Development Code,which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area181 fleur de lis lane of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Planned Unit Development(PUD)to Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)for a project known as the Triad RPUD,to allow development of 44 single- family dwelling units.The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34,Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.75± acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-11, as amended by Ordinance No. 05-23,the former Triad Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD-PL20160002564] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X SEE FILE ®Meetings F<Correspondence ®e-mails Calls Meeting w/ Chris Hagen, Correspondence and Phone call w/ Cathy Gorman, Meeting w/ Hearing Examiner, Site visit and Staff Report IADVE TISED PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) 9.C. 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 amending Ordinance Number 04-41,as amended,the Collier County Land Development Code,which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD),to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)for a project known as the MAC RPUD to allow development of 44 single-family dwelling units.The subject property is located on the northwest corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.76±acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-50,the former MAC Residential Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD-PL20160002565] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails I (Calls Meeting w/ Chris Hagen, Correspondence and Phone call w/ Cathy Gorman, Meeting w/ Hearing Examiner, Site visit and Staff Report 9.D. 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 04-41, as amended,the Collier County Land Development Code,which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from an Estates(E)zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as the County Barn Road RPUD,to allow construction of a maximum of 268 multi-family residential dwelling units or 156 single family residential dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types permitted in the PUD, not to exceed a trip cap of 157 p.m. peak hour two- way trips.The subject property is located on the east side of County Barn Road,approximately one quarter mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 8,Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 38.59±acres;and by providing an effective date. [PUDZ-PL20160001398]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM N SEE FILE ®Meetings ❑Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls Meeting w/ Chris Hagen, Meeting w/ Bruce Anderson, Hearing Examiner, spoke w/ Karen Homiak, emails re: Street Lighting, Staff Report ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS (continued) 1 9.E. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be Vheld on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2007-46, as amended,the Wolf Creek RPUD,to approve an insubstantial change to the PUD,to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only, and providing for an effective date. The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately one-half mile west of Collier Boulevard, in Section 34,Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,consisting of 189±acres. [PDI-PL20160000404] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM ❑ SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence se-mails ®Calls Meeting w/ Bruce Anderson, Correspondence & Phone call w/ residents of Black Bear Ridge, email COUNTY MANAGER'S REPORT 11.G. 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 for recording the final plat of Sereno Grove, (Application Number P120160001884)approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. (Matt McLean, Director, Development Review Division) NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X SEE FILE I (Meetings ®Correspondence se-mails Calls Mail & Emails from residents of Wilshire Lakes Community, Discussions w/ Planning Commissioners CONSENT AGENDA 16.A.2. 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 for recording the final plat of Maple Ridge Amenity Center at Ave Maria, (Application Number P120170000724) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. ❑ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE Meetings ['Correspondence e-mails ['Calls 16.A.3. 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 for recording the minor final plat of Oyster Harbor at Fiddler's Creek Phase 1—Replat 3,Application Number PL20170000332. • NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM n SEE FILE ['Meetings ['Correspondence ❑e-mails ❑Calls 16.A.4. 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 for recording the final plat of Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples Phase 4, Parcel "L", (Application Number PL20170001594)approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. N NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ['Correspondence ne-mails ['Calls SUMMARY AGENDA 17.A. 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 Petition VAC-PL20170000730 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the conservation easement described in O.R. Book 4293, Page 4106 of the Official Records of Collier County, Florida.The subject property is located on the west side of Airport Pulling Road,approximately one half mile north of Golden Gate Parkway, in Section 23, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. 71 NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE [Meetings ['Correspondence [le-mails ['Calls 17.B. 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 a Resolution providing for the establishment of a Conditional Use to allow an auto supply store with over 5,000 square feet of gross floor area in the principal structure (Sic Code 5531)within a Commercial Intermediate(C- 3)Zoning District pursuant to Section 2.03.03.C.1.c.20 of the Collier County Land Development Code.The subject property containing 1.24 acres on Lots 12-18,South Tamiami Heights subdivision is located on the southwest corner of US 41 and Seminole Avenue, in Section 13,Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (CU-PL20150001611) N NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ❑Correspondence [le-mails ❑Calls 17.C. 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. Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97-70,as amended, Pelican Lake,a Planned Unit Development,to clarify the measurement of actual height of the accessory enclosed utility/storage structure is from the lower of finished floor elevation of the enclosed utility/storage structure or twelve inches above the FEMA flood elevation.The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (SR-951)approximately 1/5 mile south of Tamiami Trail East(US 41), in Section 15,Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 101.3+/-acres. [PDI- P120160003463] DQ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ['Meetings ['Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls 17.D. 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 Petition VAC-P120170001974 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1401, Page 2152 and a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1432, Page 1093 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida;and approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Quit Claim Deed and Bill of Sale to transfer wastewater facilities from the County to the property owner.The subject property is located on the west side of Bayshore Drive,approximately one quarter mile south of Tamiami Trail East, in Section 11,Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. VI NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM n SEE FILE ['Meetings ['Correspondence [le-mails (Calls e r County y STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION /Ill° 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 Q. Grady Minor and Coleman, Yovanovich an Koester, Naples, FL 34105 Associates, P.A. 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 1 of 21 May 9, 2017 It ' 111114 /. Alrists po 7;" o=© SITE PROJECT ewe* , LOCATION E;®8 RPUD o LOCATION fr ®® Q .. i 1.1L I SPUD Q O o ©� 2 w o 1 MPUD IMO rLz Immokalee RD -- TRACT TRA NrRA�rS �CT L1 o .H++1+]+1-1-1-11-1-H+ OM= ) I i`e-(id 4" IP A E � . —• ?— lir , l �bo Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2015-1776 Document Path:M:\GIS_Pequests\2016\06-June\06-17-2016 PL20150001776\workspace\site-location.mxd 3 1 a d 11 1 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 : A 15-foot wide landscape buffer easement, and farther west is an open space (to the north) 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: A 15-foot wide landscape buffer easement, and farther west is an open space (central) 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: A drainage easement and sidewalk easement are zoned Esplanade Golf and (to the south) Country Club of Naples RPUD (0.74 DU/AC), and a canal right-of-way. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 3 of 21 May 9, 2017 P.E5 Fa4 + BoSE # _Er .863> 8nt2' L d 838 V x6.,8641 totatie r 8636• . ..1,. v 8632. 8628 + �t 862 t 4+ y...�,. 8548 O J � !+" "8640 E sP is a Ebb 8546 ,. c 75376 --- fib'; a'e e R D 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 5A 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 PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 4 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 Current Peak Hour 2016 Existing Peak Direction Remaining LOS Service Volume/Peak Capacity Direction Immokalee Collier Boulevard C 3,300/East 974 Road to Wilson Boulevard Immokalee Logan Boulevard D 3,200/North 647 Road to Collier Boulevard Collier Immokalee Road C 3,000/North 1,026 Boulevard to Vanderbilt Beach Road 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 5 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 PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 6 of 21 May 9, 2017 Naples RPUD. Connections to preserves, on and off-site, are required by LDC Section 3.05.07 A.S. 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 PUDA-PL20150001776 Addle's Corner MPUD Page 7 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 8 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 9 of 21 May 9,2017 I 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 needed 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 10 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, PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 11 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 PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 12 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 zoning; 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 13 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 PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 14 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." PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 15 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." PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 16 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,page]. 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: PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 17 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 ifyou 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 18 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. PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 19 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 informed 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 PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 20 of 21 May 9,2017 PREPARED BY: ERIC JO ' . 40N, AICP, CFM, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: 5 - 8,) -/7 RAY/v1V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE ZONING DIVISION sr-'- ' ) MIKE BOSI,AICP, DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION APPROVED BY: 7 :.(ES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PUDA-PL20150001776 Addie's Corner MPUD Page 21 of 21 BrownleeMichael From: fcerminara [fcerminara@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:09 PM To: SolisAndrew; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; TaylorPenny Cc: Sam H. Miller; scerminara@aol.com; "Frank Cerminara" Subject: Addie's Corner Categories: PRINTED As residents of Esplanade, Amour Ct, we have been concerned about the planned development referred to as Addie's Corner. We are very apprehensive about two items in particular. 1. View. Taylor Morrison promised that the "Preserve " would always exist. We need to keep as much of it as possible through remediation and where buildings are situated. 2. Traffic on Immokalee and Collier Blvd is near gridlock at times ( Jan-April.) Adding another development will exacerbate the situation. We at Esplanade need your help. Especially with our views, for which we paid lot premiums of$80-100 thousand or more. Thankyou for your consideration. Respectfully, Frank and Susan Cerminara 8644 Amour Ct Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone 1 BrownleeMichael From: Thomas Kleck [tkleck@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:14 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Addles Corner Categories: Yellow 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 Et 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. 1. 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. 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. 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 Naryn- oot & P44I�Ged 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(a,comcast.net judykleck@comcast.net 1 BrownleeMichael 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 Categories: PRINTED 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. i BrownleeMichael From: Jane Rollins [naplesjanel @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 1-75,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, Michael&Jane Rollins 9368 Terresina Dr.,Naples,FL 34119 1 BrownleeMichael From: Lois Pogyor[Ipogyor@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 12:39 AM To: FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael Subject: Development of Addie's Corner Dear MS Fiala: 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 i BrownleeMichael 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. Co ler County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 1 BrownleeMichael From: Tom Coffey [ticoffey@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: •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: ticoffey@gmail.com or via cell phone at: 610-716-7915. 1 Thank you for your consideration and I hope you can appreciate our concerns. Sincerely, Thomas & Barbara Coffey 9114 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 2 BrownleeMichael From: William Nemeth [wnemeth@icloud.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 1:34 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner development- Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776 Attachments: collier commissioner letter- Naples Esplanade copy.pdf; ATT00001.txt Attached is a letter of comment regarding the Addie's Corner development. We appreciate your time and efforts in careful consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, William A & Laura D Nemeth 8652 Amour Court Naples, Florida 34119 wnemeth(licloud.com (216) 496-2995 1 BrownleeMichael From: jmaiella [maiellajoe@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:42 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; Lily Subject: Addie's Corner Development Attachments: BC 5-1-17_Esplanade-Plan plan view.pdf; ATT00001.htm Importance: High May 17, 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 are residents 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 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.We encourage you to require the following: • A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Joseph& Lily Maiella 8865 Savona Ct Naples, FL 34119 i BrownleeMichael From: Miller, Sam H. [shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 6:15 AM To: FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Thank you. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: FialaDonna [mailto:DonnaFiala@colliergov.net] Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 8:48 PM To: Miller,Sam H. Cc: BrownleeMichael Subject: RE: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment I will have my executive coordinator contact you for an appointment. Donna Fiala From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:28 AM To: Fiala Donna Cc: BrownleeMichael Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Dear Ms. Fiala, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 1 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 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. 2 BrownleeMichael From: Howard L. Sosnik [HSosnik@kspcwills.com] Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 7:01 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Subject: Addie's Corner, request for appointment with Board of County Commissioners Categories: PRINTED Dear Members of the Board of County Commissioners, 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. I am aware of the Planning Commission Public hearing scheduled for May 18th which will include these matters on its agenda. I would like to request a meeting with the Board prior to that, preferable the afternoon of May 16th or anytime on May 17th if these dates do not work please let me know and perhaps we can schedule a different time)to articulate some of our particular concerns including: • 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. Howard L. Sosnik 516-313-3239 Esplanade Golf&Country Club 1 BrownleeMichael From: Nancy DeMarco [nancyd©carlawyernj.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:09 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Development- Project#20150001776 Attachments: current view.pdf Importance: High 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 Ladies and Gentlemen: 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: *A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet *Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, *Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property *Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Perry A. Pittenger 9091 Sorreno Court Naples, Florida 34119 1 Nancy DeMarco Legal Assistant to Perry A. Pittenger,Esq. Schiller&Pittenger,P.C. 1771 Front Street,Suite D Scotch Plains,New Jersey 07076 Voice: 908-490-0444 Fax: 908-490-0420 Email:nancyd@carlawyernj.com CONNECT: sp 111 rfn This Transmission Is Intended Only for the Party to Whom It Is Addressed and May Contain Legally Privileged and Confidential Information.If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any use,dissemination,or copying of this transmission is prohibited.If you have received this transmission in error,please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail and return this transmission and all copies to us.Thank you. 2 BrownleeMichael From: William L McGee Jr[willie581950@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:54 AM To: FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Project#20150001776 Attachments: Addie's Corner.docx Categories: PRINTED Thank you for your attention. William L. McGee Jr. 1 Brown lee Michael From: Robert Knuppel [bob@knuppel.org] Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2017 8:34 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Esplanade and Barron Cooier PUD Categories: PRINTED I live immediately across from the recent rendition of at least 4 buildings in the PUD East of Esplande CC... The preserve is being deforested and the large buildings will destroy our view and there are unintended consequences of this building. We Need opacity by the developement to reduce light, and the sight of the buidings proposed. OUr HOA attorney attempted to gain requests for protection of the current views and ambiance in our developmet. This was recently unsuccessful. We suggested maintaing opacity of 80% AND BERMS TO REDUCE VISUAL SISTURANCES. These are not costly afjust ments. All were rejected in negotiations. This corner (Addies Corner) and others surrounding the colier boulevard and Immokalee is most dangerous at the present time and hopefully planning by DOT will recognize the danger of the placement of this activity corner.\ Thank you for your time. Robert Knuppel MD, MBA, MPH 8628 Amour Ct Naples, Fl 34119 908-812-5240 1 BrownleeMichael From: Frank McDermott [mcdermott.frank@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:55 AM To: FialaDonna; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; SolisAndrew Cc: Brenda McDermott Subject: Esplanade Residents concerns about Addie's Corner Development Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners.pdf; ATT00001.htm Categories: Yellow Begin forwarded message: From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank(c�comcast.net> Date: March 16, 2017 at 9:45:30 AM EDT To: DianeEberta(�colliergov.net 1 BrownleeMichael Subject: Meet w/Sam Miller re: Addie's Corner Location: DF Office Start: Thu 3/30/2017 2:30 PM End: Thu 3/30/2017 3:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: FialaDonna Picture from rear Email to Collier of Amour Cou... County Planni... shmiller@trumbull.com Mr. Brownlee, Thursday March 30th @ 2:30pm is good. I will be there. Several neighbors in our community have expressed the same interest and may wish to attend. May I bring some others with me? Thank you very much. Sam Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 1 BrownleeMichael 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, Ron and Lynn Fischer 1 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 2 I LEE CO COWER CO QUAIL PARKLANDS 8 9 10 11 12 FROJECT SATURNIA FALLS LOCATION 17 15 16 ,�- 13 DATION '` 14 \: N D0 OLOE CYPRESS "> zti' 22 23 24 F-7- rix 20 0 21 rn 1 [ , IMMOKALEE ROAD (C.R. 846) 29 2$ � 27 26 1 25 LOCA TION MAP NOT TO SCALE 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239)963- 5365 ejsone@aol.com May 10, 2017 Donna Fiala Board of County Commissioners Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Suite 303 Naples Florida 34112 Dear Ms. Fiala: 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 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 Immokalee 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. I'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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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, CfreArk Edmund J. Staley, Esq. Carol A. Staley I . 1 1 1 1 , \ 1 1 1 i 1 1 Z f., 2°,M \ / co co Y 1 P.' -rt el 0 i /. al CD . 4,1 4.4 4 cn , . , I ac, _...2 .. i -. .: -..., (N, t) , •.%4 __o , -......„ d -'CA ----c\. 3,.......... ___-. ,.. ---_-. \--) 3 ...... c..., A ,.. ......... a: 1 ... ..... it..z.) ....... ..... rt..,. . , ...._ _.... ,.....„ "Yr ' ‘ , ...... _. . - /fg ii 7 ' I BrownleeMichael From: Mindy Desrochers [mindydesrochers@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2017 9:40 AM To: BrownleeMichael Subject: Addie's Corner Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: • A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) Certainly,if built as proposed,the traffic impact would be horrific for entering and exiting Esplanade,potentially causing accidents. Please consider carefully the long term impact of allowing zoning to change. Sincerely, Bob and Mary Desrochers 9053 Sorreno Court Naples, FL 34119 1 BrownleeMichael 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. Thank you for your consideration. Irene and Ward Bond 9158 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 Sent from my iPad 1 BrownleeMichael From: DAVID FIX [davedds©comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2017 1:55 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Subject: Addie's Corner development Project#20150001776 May 9, 2017 My wife and I are residents of Florida and of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. Our property is adjacent to the proposed Barron Collier development at Addie's Corner on Immokalee Road in Naples. We are writing to you in order to express our concerns about the many changes to the existing PUD that Barron Collier is planning. First, we would like to have the the nature preserve maintained at he originally planned 8.85 acres. We would like to have an opaque Type C buffer of at least 100 feet along Esplanade Boulevard. We also disapprove of the construction of multiple four story residential buildings on this property. Driving along Immokalee, we see no other existing four story buildings. Barron Collier knew what the exixting PUD was when he initially purchased this property. There is no reason to even bother writing zoning laws if changes like this are allowed for one individual. Sincerely, Dave and Alayne Fix 8656 Amour Court Naples, Florida 1 BrownleeMichael From: Joe Pestana [jpestana@jppestservices.com] Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 4:55 PM To: McDanielBill; BrownleeMichael; SolisAndy; burtssaunders@colliergov.net; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; angelafoodner@colliergov.net; davelykings@colliergov.net; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Development Dear Planning and County Commissioners, I am a property owner at 8636 Amour Ct in Naples and am writing about the proposed development of Addie's Corner. The most recent site plan I am familiar with has several aspects that could or will impact the value, level of enjoyment and safety of resident of the Esplanade development. The plan shows access to the Addie's development at our western property line. Getting in and out of our development is already difficult. I am not a traffic expert but this location seems to increase the pressure and chance of possible accidents. Is it possible to consider another location? I am sure you have already heard about the "view of the preserve" the Amour Ct residents were lead to believe we were looking at and paid substantial lot premiums for. I understand that is not something you have control over. What you do have influence on is the extent of the proposed removal of the existing preserve and requirement of a meaningful buffer zone. As I look at the proposed preserve, it is less than half of the existing preserve. This preserve was put in place prior to the current owner so they knew what they were purchasing. As I understand it the owner wants to reduce the existing preserve by over fifty percent. The preserve space was established for a reason. I suspect it was a conscious decision at the time based on environmental factors and other goals. I wonder what has changed besides ownership and the goals of a developer. If you allow them to substantially reduce the preserve please consider increasing the required buffer to at least 100ft along our common property line. I have taken a look at the Exhibit "A" Addie's Corner MPUD. I cannot decipher what this document proposes. What I can see is that more changes than stays the same and that speaks volumes. The goal of the developer is to maximize their return. I understand that however they purchased a parcel with limited access and permitted uses. The developers proposal appears to significantly change not only the permitted use of the parcel it will also increase the number of residents, size of the buildings, size of the parking lots, traffic, noise and ultimately the reduction of enjoyment for myself, my neighbors and my community. They appear to want to rewrite the rules. I hope you will consider restricting the number of residential units to a number that minimally impacts our community and the community at large. Other items like lighting that could be visible all night, dumpsters being emptied who knows when not to mention other noise pollution based on the final development. In closing I understand that development happens and things do change. What I, my neighbors and other community residents are hoping for is a mindful approach that ultimately mitigates the impact 1 on our homes and the enjoyment of them now and into the future. I have been told that the developer and our community have been communicating about building berms with vegetation and trees as buffers on the Addie's property as well as the Esplanade property. I have seen many examples of this in the local area so it is possible to create significant buffers. With some thoughtful restrictions and requirements combined with enforceable agreements between the developer and the Esplanade everyone involved and impacted could be satisfied. I am hoping a balanced approach and meaningful consideration of our reasonable requests could result in a mutually beneficial result. Sincerely Joseph Pestana 8638 Amour Ct Naples FL 34119 4") Pest Services The Pest Control Professionals Joe Pestana I President Office:800.222.2908 Facebook l Linkedln (Twitter Google+ JP Blog Tell us about your JP experience here! Q '-"CONFIDENTIALITY STATEME This email and any files transmit,.; t tine i.onfidential and are intended-olery tor me use of the individual or entity to iAllitth they are addressed. If you are not the inti 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 it Pkk t 2 BrownleeMichael 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: •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 i •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 2 AGEND41.11111111 Co er Countyii!„ „,,,,.........„ STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: JUNE 1, 2017 SUBJECT: PETITION NO: PURR-PL20160002564,TRIAD RPUD APPLICANT: AGENT: DR Horton Mr. Patrick Vanasse 10541 Ben C. Pratt Six Mile Cypress Pkwy. RWA Inc. Fort Myers,FL 33966 6610 Willow Park Dr. Suite 200 Naples,FL 34109 I I OWNER: t Sarecino LLC, an Ohio Limited Liability Company 22720 Fairview Drive#150 Fairview Park, Ohio 44216 REOUESTED ACTION: The petitioner seeks to amend Ordinance Number 05-11, as amended, which established 1 the Triad Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), to reduce the residential density from 86 units to 44 units; to revise the Master Plan to reconfigure the I development area; to revise development standards; to add deviations; and to modify and delete development commitments; and by providing an effective date. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: I The subject property, consisting of 10.75± acres, is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Radio Lane and Palm Springs Boulevard in Section 34, Township 49 I South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the Location Map on the following i page.) I I 1 TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 1 Page 1 of 21 q =- n. 1© m o0 0 ©RMF-6 D 0 . , a a 9 E 5 a1 a a " s a 3 4 IlliblIN._ - o 0 0 o c 7/\/ ./ \>'''...-'..------- CD © O O 111( rr�ccR_ar ,,t RIC:�,(a� SITE LOCATION /• �[ > o c m o o c o 0 0 fir, I{I+I I C PROJECT i Pun .. LOCATION a c 6 RPMAA.. a , , a R •PMa s 3 4 RaLo Rb 11 i �.. ■ 31 a 2 1 , 1 RADIO LANE ..,- C3 mV L A RPUD PUD Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2016-2564 SITE DATA —341m-----1 1111p iiiu: TOTAL SITE AREA:10.751 ACRES ------ZONING PUDI ; I IIIIIIIIIl MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS: CURRENT USE:RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY_....... ' 44 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES A AMIE ----- , I ' I MASTER PLAN NOTES ;• N' EXISTING MASONRY WALL / w b- 1. THIS MASTER PLAN IS } • • + I { R m a I '� CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE r, ':r, :� =W I AND SUBJECT TO CHANGES m }. ;I V; :;.*_; ____=.,..-7._„.;.:_,,-7-...z.-..— I !- DUE TO AGENCY REVIEW 6 ;.� • 1 _ 1 ti= AND SITE CONDITIONS. 03 I Ir;.. 'f — ��/- -- t i .LI ce< ammo 12 d 2.ACREAGE AND THE DESIGN, a 1.• ' LOCATIONS AND vi ". ` I I ! ,M 1 e , CONFIGURATIONS OF THE c a �', .';. O I a°`k LAND IMPROVEMENTS ARE LL j f;....Z.; III �o !HI APPROXIMATE AND as ,. ;; 1 , PROPERTY I 5 is , SUBJECT TO REFINEMENT i�1- F::,: I. I BOUNDARY I I AT THE AND PLAT PPROVAE OF NS o t'. R I I I� R I I 1 R ` ; " 3.INTERNAL ROADWAY 4::;. •R LOT 15'TYPE•D° I • • DEPICTED ON MASTER PLAN o l',7:::. ��, LINE(TYP) I 11 I BUFFER IS CONCEPTUAL,ROW FOR ,, r:::• �' I SINGLE FAMILY. s a w 50' , r- is LL I'ROW ' 5'SIDEWALK I ` 4.REQUIRED PRESERVE:11.40 ce -:: 20' ER I I • ,I AC(15%OFt9.37ACOF I. . P ,, EXISTING NATIVE - X11 i PROPERTY BOUNDARY I i I o VEGETATION).PRESERVE }; •:3; - _ f ;I a I I ' PROVIDED:t1.40 AC. '-.1;2_4 i!__QELL.MLQN_i) __ - — a I — -..- - '1 I ` PRESERVES MAYBE USED TO SATISFY -✓jam • a THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS -_ _ _________�__------- - _PALM SPRINGBLVD.— - - Aa AFTER EXOTIC VEGETATION REMOVAL IN - - - - ------- ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS — --�_---� i 4.06.02 AND 4.O6.OS.E1.SUPPLEMENTAL ` I i .. 1 i PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANT ZONING:MAC RPUD MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE CURRRENT USE:RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY ''IT-- WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07.' t°te°""'0 1..01.10a 1ttMMUI PItGiatIIM-rub W.w�LtwuO.Im+�MYa'aiN�^WOWeWrMFmor r3oorW4YVM • DEVIATIONS ""uit": REQUIRES IN - REQUIRES MINIMUM LOCAL STREET RIGHT-Of-WAY WIDTH OF 60 FEET,TO ALLOW FOR A 50-FOOT mimic I ��� - - _-_� • RIGHT-OF-WAY MINIMUM WIDTH FOR THE PRIVATE STREETS. n \� ` FRONT DEVIATION#2 ' 5'SIDEWALK 1 REQUIRES THAT STREETS SHALL BE CLASSIFIED BY THE CROSS-SECTIONS CONTAINED IN APPENDIX B,TO ALLOW FOR AN INVERTED ROADWAY DESIGN,AS DEPICTED IN EXHIBIT C. 5'SIDEWALK DEVIATION#3 SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SECTION 5.04.06A.3.E,WHICH ALLOWS TEMPORARY SIGNS ON RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES LIP TO 4 SQUARE FEET IN AREA OR 3 FEET IN HEIGHT,TO ALLOW A I ' ROWr. � - NIf _____ _ TEMPORARY BANNER SIGN UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 32 SQUARE FEET IN AREA AND B'HEIGHT.THE TEMPORARY BANNER SIGNS SHALL BE UMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 90 DAYS DURING SEASON DEFINED AS ROW JANUARY LST TO MARCH 31TH PER CALENDAR YEAR. r, '^ DEVIATION#4 SEEKS REUEF FROM LDC SECTION 4.06 02.C,TABLE 2.4,WHICH REQUIRES A 15-FOOT WIDE 55'LOT WIDTH 2 Om TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER WHERE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING ABUTS MULTI-FAMILY i .-% RESIDENTIAL ZONING ALONG THE EASTERN PUD BOUNDARY,TO ALLOW FOR A 1S-FOOT WIDE TYPE A ,,,,,,,,,{O c LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THE EXISTING MASONRY WALL IIsm DEVIATION#5 SEEKS REUEF FROM LDC SECTION 6.06.02A.1 WHICH REQUIRES THAT SIDEWALKS BE 60'LOT WIDTH CONSTRUCTED ON BOTH SIDES OF PUBUC AND PRIVATE RIGHTS-OF-WAY,TO ALLOW FOR SIDEWALKS ON F I ONE SIDE OF THE ROW FOR ROADWAY STUBS WHERE INDICATED ON THE MASTER PLAN. It (j`@�- DEVIATION#6 SEEKS RELIEF FROM LOC SECTION 4A6AS.N.1.c WHICH REQUIRES ALL BODIES OF WATER, Eia ail' INCLUDING RETENTION AREAS EXCEEDING 20,000 SQUARE FEET,AND WHICH ARE LOCATED ADJACENT TO Aii'Sl 1 R.lR REAR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY,MUST INCORPORATE INTO OVERALL DESIGN OF THE PROJECT AT LEAST 2 OF THE �JI1 FOLLOWING ITEMS:I.A WALKWAYS FEET WIDE ANDA MINIMUM OF 200 FEET LONG,WITH TREES OF AN 11 PLAN VIEW DETAIL ' AVERAGE OF 50 FEET ON CENTER AND WITH SHADED BENCHES,A MINIMUM OF 6 FEET IN LENGTH OR 11 CORNER LOTS ABUTTING ROADWAY PLAN VIEW DETAIL PICNIC TABLES WITH ONE LOCATED EVERY 150 FEET.II.FOUNTAINS.III.PARTIALLY SHADED LOT ABUTTING ROADWAY TERMINUS PLAZA/COURTYARD,A MINIMUM OF 200 SQUARE FEET IN AREA,WITH BENCHES AND/OR PICNICTABLES TYPICAL TYPICAL ABUTTING THE WATER-BODY,OR RETENTION AREAS;TO ALLOW FOR ONLY THE INSTALLATION OF AN .. SCALE-27 SCALE 1'-20, AERATOR/FOUNTAIN. 50'RIGHT OF WAY s' SITE SUMMARY S/W 25'PAVEMENT Y 5 3` 5' u l .f____ 5N� USE ACREAGE R o s I ri � 1� RESIDENTIAL ±5.34 0 3' VALLEY YGyUTTER OTHER OPEN SPACE 11.62 ,7"i• \�r'v( 2% I I ,2% __-,„ Y ws,,"y'jv\�y� \��N �‘. ,x(7.>/ ��G �..' ,, , , i,. .``` '��D��p.•N-4e: ✓, LAKE/WATER MANAGEMENT ±0.92 "\\•t-••J,%.,, :• 6'••••?•moi\: `,••>-**"-' \\rte\` ACCESS DRIVE/RIGHT OF WAY ±1.47 WATER MAIN �a l TYPICAL ROAD CROSS SECTISANITARY SEWER MAIN PRESERVE AREA ±1.40 SCALE I.-Y :r.pi.. TOTAL 110.75 ;,,,,,,,, • l "i.T , O.,-f1.2017211.MX121713111019.6[00 Ite01(04 ,c07U2.MV.,aYURang 4p^^faW NwIMf40?I M,,219.1. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone will change the land uses from the currently approved 86 multi-family dwelling units to 44 single-family dwelling units. The Board approved the original Triad RPUD on September 27, 2005 under Ordinance 05-11 (see attached Exhibit B), and the subject site was rezoned from Commercial Professional and General Office District(C-1) and Commercial Convenience District (C- 2) to PUD. The residential structures shall remain at a height of 35 feet. The preserve area shall remain in a similar location, as originally approved, along the north and east property lines. The petitioner is also requesting the following changes to the PUD, and they are listed below: - Removal of a commitment to contribute towards the construction cost of a concrete panel fence at an off-site location in the neighborhood. (See attached Exhibit E: Fence Location.) - Removal of other commitments related to phasing, a bus shelter, and LDC redundancies related to transportation, planning, water management, and environmental requirements. The petitioner is also requesting Deviations related to: - Private street right-of-way width - Roadway drainage design - Size and height of a temporary banner sign - Reduction in landscape buffer width - Relaxing of a required sidewalk in"roadway stub"locations - Removal of one of the required amenities around a lake For further information,please see the Deviations Section located on page 13 of this Staff Report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject Parcel: The subject property is a 10.75± acre site is currently undeveloped, with a zoning designation of PUD Surrounding: North: Single-family residences in the Palm Springs Village subdivision, with a zoning designation of Residential Multi-family-12 District(RMF-12 (7)) East: Multi-family residences with a zoning designation of Saddlebrook Village PUD,with a density of 12.96 units per acre South: Radio Lane, a 100-foot right-of-way TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 5of21 i 1 1 I West: Palm Springs Boulevard, an 80-foot right-of-way and then the fI undeveloped land with a zoning designation of Triad RPUD, with an i existing density of 8 units per acre and a proposed density of 4.09 dwelling units per acre tt • 1 '1,-4., ''''' ,,,,t ii i 4 ,0 , , , 1Ti.:4 ...., ... , , , _ .. . •. ,Y 9 . , e Subject , ;tit . Property tilt AlEE R i , Ali ". (1. 11", 1 'e A,r ',t .rte ' .' . AERIAL PHOTO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN(GMP) CONSISTENCY: The proposed PUD Rezone is consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. See attached Exhibit C: Future Land Use Element(FLUE) Consistency Review dated April 6, 2017. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 6 of 21 t f 1 i 1 '. i Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the petitioner's 1 Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element E 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: i i "The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future 7` 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 i 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 I roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below l t an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application i has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the 1 following occur: 1 a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project t traffic is equal to or exceeds 2%of the adopted LOS standard service volume; 1 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; 1 and a 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. y 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." F r a The proposed PUD Rezone on the subject property was reviewed based on the then E applicable 2016 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the application indicates i that the proposed new residential development will generate approximately 50 PM peak hour two-way trips. The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments with the listed capacities: I I TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 7 of 21 is Roadway Link 2016 AUIR Current Peak Hour 2016 Remaining Existing LOS Peak Direction Service Capacity Volume/Peak Direction Radio Road Davis Boulevard B 1,800/West 1,135 to Santa Barbara Davis Radio Road to B 2,900/East 2,210 Boulevard Santa Barbara Davis Radio Road to B 2,900/East 1,737 Boulevard Collier Boulevard Based on the 2016 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed new trips for the amended project within the 5-year planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the CCME. In accordance with CCME Policy 6.1.1, a minimum of 1.40 acres of native vegetation are required to be retained for the PUD. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 10.02.13 B.S., Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Subsection 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading"Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analysis: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD Document to address environmental concerns.Approximately 9.37 acres of native vegetation occur on site, fifteen percent, 1.40 acres(.15 x 9.37)of which are required to be retained for the PUD. The location of the preserve along the rear of the property will align with preserve to the west within the Triad PUD. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 8 of 21 t f i 4 This project does not require review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), i since it does not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews identified in 1 Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition request, the PUD Document and Master Plan for right-of-way and access issues and is recommending approval. 1 Utility Review: The Utilities Department staff has reviewed the petition. The project lies within the water service area and the south wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Water and wastewater service is readily available via existing infrastructure along the project's frontages on Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane. Downstream wastewater system capacity must be confirmed at the time of Site 1 Development Plan (SDP) or Plans and Plat (PPL) permit review and will be discussed at a mandatory pre-submittal conference with representatives from the Public Utilities Engineering and Project Management Division and the Growth Management Development Review Division. a Any improvements to the Collier County Water-Sewer District's wastewater transmission system necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the 1 responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the Collier County Water- i Sewer District at no cost to the County at the time of Preliminary and Final Acceptance. Collier County Public Schools (CCPS) District Review: CCPS staff has reviewed the petition and has concluded that there is sufficient capacity for the proposed development i within the elementary and middle school concurrency service areas and within an 1 adjacent high school concurrency area. This fording is for planning and informational purposes only and does not constitute either a determination of capacity or concurrency for the proposed project. At the time of SDP or PPL review, the development will be `. reviewed for concurrency. This is to ensure that there is capacity either within the concurrency service area that this development is located in or within adjacent concurrency service areas such that the level of service standards are not exceeded. Zoning and Land Development Review: As previously stated, this PUD Rezone petition will change the land uses from the currently approved 86 multi-family dwelling units to 44 single-family dwelling units. The proposed building heights will remain the same as the previously approved height of 35 feet. Access to the subject site remains the same and will be from Palm Springs Boulevard. The subject site is mostly surrounded by residential single-family and multi-family development. Along the northern property line is an approximate 50-200-foot wide preserve area providing separation and buffering between the proposed single-family homes and the existing single-family homes. To the east, an existing wall and a proposed 15-foot wide Type A Landscape buffer shall separate the proposed single-family TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 9 of 21 residences from the existing multi-family residences. To the south, the applicant is providing the Code-prescribed, 15-foot wide Type D Landscape buffer along Radio Lane. To the west, across Palm Springs Boulevard, is a similar development to the Triad RPUD called MAC RPUD, which also proposes 44 single-family homes with similar development standards as the Triad RPUD. REZONE FINDINGS: 1 LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PUD findings are designated as PUD. Staff's responses to these criteria are provided below in non-bold font. 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the GMP. The Comprehensive Planning Section has indicated that the proposed PUD Rezone is consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report (page 5) and discussed in the zoning review analysis, the neighborhood's existing land use pattern can be characterized as residential and commercial lands. The residential land uses proposed in this PUD petition should not create incompatibility issues. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. Commercial, single-family, and multi-family zoning districts surround the subject site. The proposed conversion of multi-family to single-family will not create an isolated, unrelated, zoning district. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The district boundaries are logically drawn as discussed in Items 2 and 3 above. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 10 of 21 The proposed change is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes, because the petitioner wishes to develop single- family residences instead of multi-family residences. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. rt The proposed change from multi-family residential to single-family residential will reduce the overall density and intensity of land uses allowed by the current PUD. Therefore, the proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. 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 development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed change will not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. Staff is of the opinion this PUD Rezone will not adversely impact property values. Zoning by itself however may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market demand. il. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Most of the property surrounding the subject site is developed. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 11 of 21 to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The proposed development will comply with the GMP,which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship, because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be developed within existing multi-family residential PUD zoning. The surrounding single-family residential land uses would suggest, however, that the rezoning to single-family residential PUD is more compatible and in character with the surrounding single-family residential land uses. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD Rezone is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or county. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the county that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC. Staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific • petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require site alteration and these sites will undergo evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 12 of 21 1 Y The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals 1 and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by County staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that staff has concluded that the developer has provided appropriate commitments so that the impacts of the Level of Service will be minimized. 1 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners g. shall deem important in the protection of the public health,safety and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. x DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The petitioner is seeking approval of five deviations from the requirements of the LDC. 1 The deviations are listed in PUD Exhibit E. The petitioner's justification and staff E analysis/recommendation is outlined below. 1 I Proposed Deviation#1 1 The petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, "Street System Requirements," 1 which requires a minimum, local street right-of-way width of 60 feet to allow for a 50- ft foot right-of-way minimum width for the private streets. s Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states that the following in support of the new deviation: Minimum right-of-way width of 50 feet is requested for local streets within the TRIAD RPUD. This deviation is justified because of the size and the small-scale neighborhood character of this project. A 50 foot right-of-way for a residential street can successfully facilitate movement of the vehicular, pedestrian and bike traffic while accommodating all utility and drainage needs. The 50 foot right-of- way accomplishes traffic calming to provide a safer transportation system within the neighborhood. This deviation is commonly approved and has been effectively implemented in numerous residential PUDs throughout the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. Zoning and Land Development Review 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." TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 13 of 21 { { Proposed Deviation#2 Petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, "Street System Requirements," which requires that streets shall be classified by the cross-sections contained in Appendix B (6),to allow for an inverted roadway design, as depicted in Exhibit C. Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states that the following in support of the new deviation: The proposed inverted roadway design will not only allow for more efficient drainage of the neighborhood streets but will also provide immediate construction cost savings from not having to provide outside curbing. Moreover, this design requires fewer structures, connections, and drainage inlets that need ongoing maintenance, thus reducing long term costs for the HOA. A 3-loot wide, concrete valley gutter will be utilized to increase revetment durability and reduce long term maintenance concerns. The design of the roadway will still maintain a low point above the 25 year flood elevation. The reduced construction costs associated with this roadway design will allow for greater housing affordability, as the cost savings will be reflected in home prices. Furthermore, the reduced maintenance cost will also provide affordability benefits to the residents. The inverted crown design has been and continues to be used in numerous communities throughout Florida, it is consistent with engineering best practices and does not pose any concern from a public health and safety standpoint. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees a detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved, as the proposed deviation is a reduction in engineering standard from the current Land Development Code crowned roadway design requirement in Appendix B—Typical Street Sections for a Local Street. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends DENIAL 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#3 Petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and 8' height. The temporary banner signs shall be limited to a maximum of 90 days during season defined as January 1st to March 31st per calendar year. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 14 of 21 Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: Due to the property's location within the view of a busy arterial road and the high travel speeds along the roadway, the Applicant is seeking an increase to the allowable banner size to ensure visibility of this new community. The proposed deviation will allow for a banner sign located along Radio Lane in order to advertise new homes available within the community. The 4 square foot banner sign permitted by the LDC provides minimal visibility and likely will not be seen by vehicles travelling along Davis Boulevard, a 50mph 4-lane divided roadway. Additionally, the applicant is requesting that the banner be allowed for up to 90 days per calendar year to allow display throughout the peak winter season for home sales. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. Zoning and Land Development Review 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#4 Petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C, Table 2.4, which requires a 15-foot wide, Type B Landscape buffer when Single-Family Residential Zoning abuts Commercial Zoning, to allow for a 10-foot wide landscape buffer with Type B plantings along the existing public utility easement. Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: The western boundary of the property abuts a 30 foot wide, public utility easement, which in [and of] itself provides significant spatial buffering from the adjacent property. The plantings for Type B buffering will occupy approximately 7-8 feet. Any loss of open space within the buffer will be mitigated by the presence of the 30 foot public utility easement. The combination of a 10'buffer with Type B plantings and the abutting easement will meet or exceed the intent of the code by providing ample separation and screening. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 15 of 21 is Zoning and Land Development Review 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 #5 The petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.1 which requires that sidewalks be constructed on both sides of public and private rights-of-way (ROW), to allow for sidewalks on one side of the ROW for roadway stubs where indicated on the Master Plan. Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: The portions of roadway associated with this deviation and identified on the Master Plan abut the side yard of only one lot, whose front yard is serviced by the sidewalk along the intersecting roadway. The proposed sidewalk configuration meets the intent of the code by providing safe pedestrian access to all lots. Other than the identified stub-out locations, the proposed sidewalk network meets the requirement of providing sidewalks on both sides of the road and ensures that all homes are provided pedestrian access and fully interconnected to one another. The proposed deviation will not affect public health and safety, nor is it contrary to the intent behind the sidewalk requirements. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. Zoning and Land Development Review 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 Petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.05.N.1.0 which requires all bodies of water, including retention areas exceeding 20,000 square feet, and which are located adjacent to a public right-of-way, must incorporate into overall design of the project at least 2 of the following items: i. A walkway 5 feet wide and a minimum of 200 feet long, with trees of an average of 50 feet on center and with shaded benches, a minimum of 6 feet in length or picnic tables with one located every 150 feet. ii. Fountains. iii. Partially TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 16 of 21 shaded plaza/courtyard, a minimum of 200 square feet in area,with benches and/or picnic tables abutting the water-body, or retention areas; to allow for only the installation of an aerator/fountain. i Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: The design and positioning of the water management structures on this property was done in a manner to provide maximum drainage functionality and buffering from the adjacent Palm Springs neighborhood to the north, rather than serve as an amenity to residents. Additionally, such features as a walkway with benches and/or a plaza/courtyard would encourage activity along this buffered area, which the neighbors have made clear they would like kept to a minimum. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. Zoning and Land Development Review 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." PUD FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the Planning Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria:" I. 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 nearby area is developed or is approved for development of a similar nature. The petitioner will be required to comply with all County regulations regarding drainage, sewer,water, and other utilities. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 17 of 21 Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property and roadway access to the subject site. Additionally, the development will be required to gain platting and/or site development plan approval. These processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of, continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP. County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP. } 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering 1 and screening requirements. As described in the Staff Analysis Section of this staff report (page 5), staff is of the opinion the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The 60 percent open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time, a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and/or site development plans, are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal systems and potable water supplies to accommodate this project based upon the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 18 of 21 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 c. application of such regulations. This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development ,£ standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The petitioner is seeking six deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06 A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff believes that the five of the six deviations proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that "the elements may be waived 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 deviations are "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Please, refer to the Deviation Discussion portion of the staff report for a more extensive examination of the deviations (page 13). NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The agent/applicant duly noticed and held the required NIM on April 6, 2017. The neighbors in attendance spoke of their desire for the developer provide an off-site fence/wall that was a commitment in the current PUD Ordinance. For further information, please see Exhibit D: Neighborhood Information Meeting Notes and Exhibit E: Fence Location. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office has reviewed the staff report for Petition PUDA- PL20160002565, Triad RPUD,revised on May 12,2017. RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission, acting as the local planning agency and the Environmental Advisory Council, forward Petition PUDR-PL20160002565, TRIAD PUD, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to the denial of Deviation#2. TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 19 of 21 Attachments: Exhibit A: Proposed PUD Ordinance Exhibit B: Ordinance Number 05-11 Exhibit C: Future Land Use Element Consistency Review Exhibit D: Neighborhood Information Meeting Notes Exhibit E: Fence Location is ii TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 20 of 21 PREPARED BY: Akitt L 2 c NANCi��LACH, AICP,PLA D A 1`E PRINCL PLANNER ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION REVIEWED BY: -' ...--, / 7,-ki c , 7i0.1)A__,,,-- RAYMOV. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE ZONING t VISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION 5—)-- n MIKE BOSI,AICP,DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION APPROVED BY: 4/7 I " : FRENCH,DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE FA OWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT TRIAD RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 21 of 21 I 1 AGENDA ITEM 9-F er County y STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: JUNE 1,2017 SUBJECT: PETITION NO: PUDR-PL20160002565,MAC RPUD APPLICANT: AGENT: DR Horton Mr. Patrick Vanasse 10541 Ben C. Pratt Six Mile Cypress Pkwy. RWA Inc. Fort Myers,FL 33966 6610 Willow Park Dr. Suite 200 Naples,FL 34109 OWNER: Radio Lane Development LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company 22720 Fairview Drive#150 Fairview Park, Ohio 44126 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner seeks to amend Ordinance Number 05-11, as amended, which established the MAC Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), to reduce the residential density from 86 units to 44 units; to revise the Master Plan to reconfigure the development area; to revise development standards; to add deviations; and to modify and delete development commitments; and by providing an effective date. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of 10.75±acres, is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of Radio Lane and Palm Springs Boulevard in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the Location Map on the following page.) MAC RPUD,PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 1 of 20 sommen1=M11= �ItOFt cce,.c a a! vxry ,0„,1- p, RMF-6 C PM XII � © O a O O O O O THl�CTB e e • a , 1 a •E IlArillill - S a a Px%1 4 PUD O OO O Oa O O © o PH X 4.....". NNC ORE37 unt-RM" 2(7) ,/ 1� SITE o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c PROJECT ' LOCATION o 2 LOCATION 1-$�'I 1 L. PKStaI a T U —,-62.'..'=Ill / 5 s , B �x.TsktmirtARPUD \ e y I ♦ f t + , a 3 C-2 PUD "° 4, Me sva Kadlo KL ) , Rpm ..`1 N 1 O 2di NB •ate ._. 22 05 0 RADIO LANE 111 C-4 PUD Ca aaara PA; Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2016-2565 • SITE DATA TOTAL SITE AREA:10.78±ACRES ZONING:TRIAD RPUD HT1 'I"I""E MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS: CURRRENT USE:RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY 1 unmmn 44 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES �,� � .. _ I - JJI MASTER PLAN NOTES -�- -�- ---- - - _ _ - - PALMSPIt1NG BLVD. - _-_-- -, (_ 111 1. THiS MASTER PLAN IS --r - . 1 (' CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE W J , , � r ROPERTY 80UNDARY� �`r I AND SUBJECT TO CHANGES $ i �- _y;;-/- _ I ' DUE TO AGENCY REVIEW -. %z -j r° m I r' 0 15'TYPE"D• AND SITE CONDITIONS. k I - --. I .I I 1 i auun�sa m- I �_rj1 J� -, LI! I BUFFER 2.ACREAGE AND THE DESIGN, a ' -r� r J c I ' Z ! LOCATIONS AND y „rte- I I I F i CONFIGURATIONS OF THE z I _? API LAND IMPROVEMENTS ARE N ..-- I rr r-= I' I R i I W 10111 APPROXIMATE APPROXIMATE AND 2 - I - �.==-�- , I I I S .I�� SUBJECT TO REFINEMENT Ea7.,--_,.;,i.:;;--,-,-•_, I; I I I m E AT THE TIME OF PLANS LL "- '- R . 50' ' 5'SIDEWALK I Iv W AND PLAT APPROVAL. Zd Q :�:r`,=r',-_, 'ROW I . r rr 3.INTERNAL ROADWAY z Z .r r Ys_r-- REAR LOT IN 3 DEPICTED ON MASTER PLANK - ..j,,—',.f ! LINE(TYP) I I I I R 1 IS CONCEPTUAL,ROW FOR g r E SINGLE FAMILY. o �k4-"- -:—_,,,...,,___:=---,;)Lwr ( I i W 1. c - .-.crD.�_ETENTIO _ � L---------� I ' ' a g $ .0 4.REQUIRED PRESERVE:*1.30 AC(15%OF±8.64 AC OF '� - 1 �Z` ;1 BOUNDARY Y ill I I u 4 18 EXISTING NATIVE - ------= VEGETATION).PRESERVE PRESERVE m ®� r PROVIDED:*1.30 AC. N tW PRESERVES MAY BE USED TO SATISFY a.2 > '1 ' THE 10'WIDE TYPE`A'LANDSCAPE re °°n BUFFER REQUIREMENTS AFTER EXOTIC - - R p/3\ j li I VEGETATION REMOVAL IN l - ' ACCORDANCE WITH LDC SECTIONS L 4.06.02 AND 4.06.05.E1.SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTINGS WITH NATIVE PLANT I ZONING:PUD COMMERCIAL BUS STOP , @N MATERIALS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE CURRENT USE:BOWLAND BOWLING ALLEY 5'x8'CONCRETE PAD , I\ , \ WITH LDC SECTION 3.05.07! Merlin II.m7i„w cvom,onuam .nu-rvc,ea In ma .,...... .... ,M,zon.as roar 1300110X0iVI... G • DEVIATIONS 1 1 DEVIATION#1 I ....___ __ I - FEET,TO ALLOW FOR A 50-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY MINIMUM WIDTH FOR THE PRIVATE STREETS. , 1 1 _ FRONT DEVIATION N2 5'SIDEWALK CROSS-SECTIONS CONTAINED IN APPENDIX B,TO ALLOW FOR AN INVERTED ROADWAY I 5'SIDEWALK DESIGN,AS DEPICTED IN EXHIBIT C. __ DEVIATION tl3 SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SECTION 4.06.02.C,TABLE 2.4 WHICH REQUIRES A ROW .� ((fI+TT' __!,_ 15-FOOT WIDE TYPE B LANDSCAPE BUFFER WHEN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING ABUTS COMMERCIAL ZONING,TO ALLOW FOR A 10-FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH •OW TYPE B PLANTINGS ALONG THE E)OSTING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT. L0 DEVIATION tl4 SEEKS RELIEF FROM LOX SECTION 6.06.02A.1 WHICH REQUIRES THAT 55'LOT WIDTH I • - SIDEWALKS BE CONSTRUCTED ON BOTH SIDES OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RIGHTS-OF-WAY,TO ALLOW FOR SIDEWALKS ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROW FOR ROADWAY STUBS WHERE INDICATED • �_, ON THE MASTER PLAN. 7 O Im 60'LOT WIDTH DEVIATION 115 SEEKS RELIEF FROM LDC SECTION 4.06.05.N.1-c WHICH REQUIRES ALL BODIES OF WATER,INCLUDING RETENTION AREAS EXCEEDING 20,000 SQUARE FEET,AND WHICH ARE t LOCATED ADJACENT TO A PUBUC RIGHT-OF-WAY,MUST INCORPORATE INTO OVERALL DESIGN v i I OF THE PROJECT AT LEAST 2 OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:I.A WALKWAY 5 FEET WIDE AND A 11101 MINIMUM OF 200 FEET LONG,WITH TREES OF AN AVERAGE OF 50 FEET ON CENTER AND .414 I .. ' R� • , I WITH SHADED BENCHES,A MINIMUM OF 6 FEET IN LENGTH OR PICNIC TABLES WITH ONE '1_111 1 : REAR LOCATED EVERY 150 FEET.II.FOUNTAINS.III.PARTIALLY SHADED PLAZA/COURTYARD,A >:i 11 MINIMUM OF 200 SQUARE FEET IN AREA,WITH BENCHES AND/OR PICNIC TABLES ABUTTING Id PLAN VIEW DETAIL PLAN VIEW DETAIL THE WATER-BODY,OR RETENTION AREAS;TO ALLOW FOR ONLY THE INSTALLATION OF AN I CORNER LOTS ABUTTING ROADWAY LOT ABUTTING ROADWAY TERMINUS AERATOR/FOUNTAIN. TYPICAL TYPICAL SALE:1'.20 WALE:1..25 50'RIGHT OF WAY r 1 SITE SUMMARY 5' 5' S/W 25'PAVEMENT Sm USE ACREAGE u g a' 3, RESIDENTIAL ±5.31 . g VALLEY GUTTER OTHER OPEN SPACE ±1.71 >jy i' �Ov\ _„>r % .,ilk \j.�\.�yv,iO\�✓✓ \.�\\gyp?fid o\o�s-0; •• -- .• -.• 4..., •*. •.y.•.;-‘[..;•..V...,•„..-v.r.—t.I4.-I._-2-s9-?.6_‹f-,-,,,,,v1„v..,r.>.,,,.-i :$pM\�4N.. , ✓ LAKE/WATER MANAGEMENT ±0.95 iX • WATER MAINACCESS DRIVE/RIGHT OF WAY ±1.49 II °``SANITARY SEWER MAIN J TYPICAL ROAD CROSS SECTION PRESERVE AREA ±1.30 SCALP:1•.4 ,,P . TOTAL ±10.76 ,,, 4qn.l�xn w.£',Y �!SXXI/a eyPA 0710 Wflt mw0 Nem,AM nn,pm,K. ..620/).a*N 0T mm�mavMM \ • '�'"-i u PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezone will change the land uses from the currently approved 86 multi-family dwelling units to 44 single-family dwelling units. The Board approved the original MAC RPUD on September 27, 2005 under Ordinance 05-50 (see attached Exhibit B), and the subject site was rezoned from Commercial Professional and General Office District(C-1) and Commercial Convenience District(C- 2) to PUD. The residential structures shall remain at a height of 35 feet. The preserve area shall remain in a similar location, as originally approved, along the north property line. The petitioner is also requesting the following changes to the PUD, and they are listed below: - Removal of a commitment to provide a bus shelter along Radio Lane and to provide a bus stop instead to meet the needs of the Collier County Transportation - Removal of a commitment to contribute towards the construction cost of a concrete panel fence at an off-site location in the neighborhood. (See attached i Exhibit E: Fence Location.) - Removal of other commitments related to phasing, a bus shelter, and LDC redundancies related to transportation, planning, water management, and environmental requirements. The petitioner is also requesting Deviations related to: - Private street right-of-way width - Roadway drainage design in - Location of on-premises directional signs - Reduction in landscape buffer width - Relaxing of a required sidewalk in"roadway stub"locations For further information,please see the Deviations Section located on page 13 of this Staff Report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: Subject Parcel: The subject property is a 10.76+ acre site is currently undeveloped, with a zoning designation of PUD Surrounding: North: Single-family residences in the Palm Springs Village subdivision, with a zoning designation of Residential Multi-family-12 District(RMF-12(7)) East: Palm Springs Boulevard, an 80-foot right-of-way and then the undeveloped land with a zoning designation of Triad RPUD, with an MAC RPUD,PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 5 of 20 existing density of 8 units per acre and a proposed density of 4.09 dwelling units per acre South: Radio Lane, a 100-foot right-of-way and then vacant lands and a Circle K; with a zoning designation of Commercial Intermediate District(C-3) West: A 30-foot wide drainage easement, and then existing Bowland Woodside Bowling Alley, with a zoning designation of Woodside Lanes PUD (Commercial PUD) Subject Property NIN FC I- 'f- -i` '€. 4111114, .Rim. ,Ex,,.o �tV9 .., ,rt .,:;.w ''",•_ Calm cau*,v p+a+WlY Aa4r2n9f Nn�ct „�,'•'"" "'" D 33ft AERIAL PHOTO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP)CONSISTENCY: The proposed PUD Rezone is consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the GMP. See attached Exhibit C: Future Land Use Element(FLUE) Consistency Review dated April 6, 2017. MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 6 of 20 3 Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, Staff reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement 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 County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the [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. " Staff reviewed the proposed PUD rezone on the subject property based on the then applicable 2016 AUIR Inventory Report. The Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) submitted in the application indicates that the proposed new residential development will generate approximately 50 PM peak hour two-way trips. The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments with the listed capacities: MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 7 of 20 t Roadway Link 2016 AUIR Current Peak Hour 2016 Remaining Existing LOS Peak Direction Service Capacity Volume/Peak Direction Radio Road Davis Boulevard B 1,800/West 1,135 to Santa Barbara z Davis Radio Road to B 2,900/East 2,210 Boulevard Santa Barbara Davis Radio Road to 8 2,900/East 1,737 Boulevard Collier Boulevard Based on the 2016 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed new trips for the amended project within the 5-year planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the CCME. In accordance with CCME Policy 6.1.1, a minimum of 1.30 acres of native vegetation are required to be retained for the PUD. STAFF ANALYSIS: 4' Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 10.02.13 B.5.,Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Subsection 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading"Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analysis: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document to address environmental concerns. Native habitats on site consist solely of hydric pine flatwoods with approximately 8.64 acres of native vegetation currently on site. A minimum of 1.30 acres (.15 x 8.64) of native vegetation are required to be retained for the PUD. The location of the preserve along the rear of the property will align with preserve to the east within the Triad PUD. This 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 Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 8 of 20 i 1 i , 1 Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition request, the PUD document and Master Plan for right-of-way and access issues and is 5 recommending approval. Staff has also reviewed the revised bus stop commitment in r Exhibit F,Transportation item B, and is recommending approval. i Utility Review: The Utilities Department staff has reviewed the petition. The project lies within the water service area and the south wastewater service area of the Collier County I Water-Sewer District. Water and wastewater service is readily available via existing infrastructure along the project's frontages on Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane. Downstream wastewater system capacity must be confirmed at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP) or Plans and Plat (PPL) permit review and will be discussed at M a mandatory pre-submittal conference with representatives from the Public Utilities 1 Engineering and Project Management Division and the Growth Management Development Review Division. Any improvements to the Collier County Water-Sewer District's wastewater transmission system necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the 1 r responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the Collier County Water- Sewer District at no cost to the County at the time of Preliminary and Final Acceptance. R a Collier County Public Schools (CCPS) District Review: CCPS staff has reviewed the z petition and has concluded that there is sufficient capacity for the proposed development within the elementary and middle school concurrency service areas and within an adjacent high school concurrency area. This finding is for planning and informational 1 purposes only and does not constitute either a determination of capacity or concurrency ii for the proposed project. At the time of SDP or PPL review, the development will be reviewed for concurrency. This is to ensure that there is capacity either within the concurrency service area that this development is located in or within adjacent concurrency service areas such that the level of service standards are not exceeded. i Zoning and Land Development Review: As previously stated, this PUD Rezone petition { will change the land uses from the currently approved 86 multi-family dwelling units to Y 44 single-family dwelling units. The proposed building heights will remain the same as the previously approved height of 35 feet. Access to the subject site remains the same and will be from Palm Springs Boulevard. The subject site is surrounded by Commercial zoning to the south and to the west. To the E south, the applicant is providing the Code-prescribed, 15-foot wide Type D Landscape 5' E buffer along Radio Lane. Across Radio Lane is a vacant Commercial site and a Circle K gasoline station and convenience store. To the west, is a 30-foot wide drainage easement and then the Bowland Woodside Bowling Alley. The applicant is seeking a deviation to 5 provide a 10-foot wide, Type B Landscape buffer instead of the Code-prescribed, 15- foot wide buffer. € I The 6-foot high wall, fence or hedge required by the Type B Landscape buffer will aid in 5 screening and buffering the adjacent bowling alley. Along the northern property line is a MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 9 of 20 i i i if I preserve area varying in width from 60-180 feet that provides separation and buffering between the proposed single-family homes and the existing single-family homes along the northern property boundary. To the east, across Palm Springs Boulevard, is a similar development to the MAC RPUD called Triad RPUD, which also proposes 44 single- 4 family homes with similar development standards as the MAC RPUD. I REZONE FINDINGS: 1 i 1 LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report k and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 1 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PUD findings are designated as PUD. Staffs responses to these criteria are provided below in non-bold font. 1 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and 1 policies and future land use map and the elements of the GMP. The Comprehensive Planning Section has indicated that the proposed PUD Rezone is consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP. i 2. The existing land use pattern. i As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report (page 5) and discussed in the zoning review analysis,the neighborhood's existing land use pattern can be characterized as residential and commercial lands. The residential land uses proposed in this PUD petition should not create incompatibility issues. 1 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby 1 districts. Commercial and single-family zoning districts surround the subject site. The proposed conversion of multi-family to single-family will not create an isolated, unrelated, zoning district. i 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. i The district boundaries are logically drawn as discussed in Items 2 and 3 above. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 10 of 20 The proposed change is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes, because the petitioner wishes to develop single- family residences instead of multi-family residences. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change from multi-family residential to single-family residential will reduce the overall density and intensity of land uses allowed by the current PUD. Therefore, the proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project at this time. The project is subject to the Transportation Commitments contained in the PUD ordinance. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed change will not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. • Staff is of the opinion this PUD Rezone will not adversely impact property values. Zoning by itself however may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market demand. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Most of the property surrounding the subject site is developed. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 11 of 20 ti to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an ti individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The proposed development will comply with the GMP,which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship, because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be developed within existing multi-family residential PUD zoning. The surrounding single-family residential land uses would suggest, however that the rezoning to single-family residential PUD is more compatible and in character with the surrounding single-family residential land uses. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD Rezone is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or county. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the county that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC. Staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require site alteration and these sites will undergo evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as MAC RPUD,PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 12 of 20 defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding fi Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by County staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that staff has concluded that the developer has provided appropriate commitments so that the impacts on the Level of Service will be minimized. 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. ff To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The petitioner is seeking approval of five deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are listed in PUD Exhibit E. The petitioner's justification and staff analysis/recommendation is outlined below. Proposed Deviation#1 The petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, "Street System Requirements," which requires a minimum, local street right-of-way width of 60 feet to allow for a 50-foot right-of-way minimum width for the private streets. Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: Minimum right-of-way width of 50 feet is requested for local streets within the MAC RPUD. This deviation is justified because of the size and the small-scale neighborhood character of this project. A 50 foot right-of-way for a residential street can successfully facilitate movement of the vehicular, pedestrian and bike traffic while accommodating all utility and drainage needs. The 50 foot right-of-way accomplishes traffic calming to provide a safer transportation system within the neighborhood. This deviation is commonly approved and has been effectively implemented in numerous residential PUDs throughout the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. Zoning and Land Development Review 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, MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 13 of 20 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#2 Petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 6.46.01.N, "Street System Requirements," which requires that streets shall be classified by the cross-sections contained in Appendix B (6), to allow for an inverted roadway design, as depicted in Exhibit C. Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: The proposed inverted roadway design will not only allow for more efficient drainage of the neighborhood streets but will also provide immediate construction cost savings from not having to provide outside curbing. Moreover, this design requires fewer structures, connections, and drainage inlets that need ongoing maintenance, thus reducing long term costs for the HOA. A 3-foot wide, concrete valley gutter will be utilized to increase revetment durability and reduce long term maintenance concerns. The design of the roadway will still maintain a low point above the 25 year flood elevation. The reduced construction costs associated with this roadway design will allow for greater housing affordability, as the cost savings will be reflected in home prices. Furthermore, the reduced maintenance cost will also provide affordability benefits to the residents. The inverted crown design has been and continues to be used in numerous communities throughout Florida, it is consistent with engineering best practices and does not pose any concern from a public health and safety standpoint. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees a detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved, as the proposed deviation is a reduction in engineering standard from the current Land Development Code crowned roadway design requirement in Appendix B—Typical Street Sections for a Local Street. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends DENIAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has not 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 not demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Proposed Deviation#3 Petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5, "On-Premises Directional Signs," which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10 feet from edge of roadway,paved surface or back of curb,to allow a minimum setback of 5 feet from the edge of private roadway/drive aisle. MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 14 of 20 i 1 i i i Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: This deviation will allow locational flexibility for directional signage internal to the RPUD. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the 1 community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal. IAll directional signage will meet the Clear Sight Distance requirements in accordance with LDC Section 60.06.05. i i Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. v i I Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this t 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." i I Proposed Deviation#4 R i Petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C, Table 2.4, which requires a 15-foot wide, Type B Landscape buffer when Single-Family Residential Zoning abuts Commercial 1 Zoning, to allow for a 10-foot wide Landscape buffer with Type B plantings along the existing public utility easement. I Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states the following in support of the new deviation: 7 The western boundary of the property abuts a 30 foot wide, public utility easement, which in [and of] itself provides significant spatial buffering from the adjacent property. The plantings for Type B buffering will occupy approximately 7-8 feet. Any loss of open space within the buffer will be mitigated by the presence of the 30 foot public utility easement. The combination of a 10' buffer with Type B plantings and the abutting easement will meet or exceed the intent of the code by providing ample separation and screening. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has s 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." MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 15 of 20 1 i 1 I i Proposed Deviation#5 The petitioner seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.1 which requires that sidewalks be constructed on both sides of public and private rights-of-way (ROW), to allow for sidewalks 1 on one side of the ROW for roadway stubs where indicated on the Master Plan. z i Petitioner's Justification: The petitioner states that the following in support of the new z deviation: i i The portions of roadway associated with this deviation and identified on the Master t Plan abut the side yard of only one lot, whose front yard is serviced by the sidewalk along the intersecting roadway. The proposed sidewalk configuration meets the 1 intent of the code by providing safe pedestrian access to all lots. Other than the identified stub-out locations, the proposed sidewalk network meets the requirement of providing sidewalks on both sides of the road and ensures that all homes are provided pedestrian access and fully interconnected to one another. The proposed deviation will not affect public health and safety, nor is it contrary to the intent t behind the sidewalk requirements. t 5 Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated. 1 C Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has i 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 G has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at 1 least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." PUD FINDINGS: f LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the w Planning Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria:" 3 i 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 nearby area is developed or is approved for development of a similar nature. The petitioner will be required to comply with all County regulations regarding drainage, sewer,water, and other utilities. 1' 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed i 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 i MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 i Page 16 of 20 3 i I s continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be t provided or maintained at public expense. 1 Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property and roadway access to the 1 subject site. Additionally, the development will be required to gain platting and/or site development plan approval. These processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of, continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP. County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP. { 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering 1 and screening requirements. As described in the Staff Analysis Section of this staff report (page 5), staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. I i 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. , i The 60% open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the g LDC. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. u P; The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time, a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project's a development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and/or site development plans, are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate . expansion. . MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 17 of 20 3 i {p2 The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal systems and potable water supplies to accommodate this project based upon the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought. t 1 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such I 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 1 application of such regulations. t This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that 1 would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. x I The petitioner is seeking five deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with 1 the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06 z A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards I and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff believes that the four of 5 the five deviations proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that"the elements may be waived a without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and 1 LDC Section 10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviations are ft "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application f of such regulations." 1 Please refer to the Deviation Discussion portion of the staff report for a more extensive I examination of the deviations(page 13). 1 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING(NIM): ft E 5 The agent/applicant duly noticed and held the required NIM on April 6, 2017. The neighbors in attendance spoke of their desire for the developer provide an off-site fence/wall that was a commitment in the current PUD Ordinance. For further information,please see Exhibit D: Neighborhood Information Meeting Notes and Exhibit E: Fence Location. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office has reviewed the staff report for Petition PUDA- PL20160002565,MAC RPUD,revised on May 15, 2017. Ft. f RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission, acting as the local planning agency and the Environmental Advisory MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 18 of 20 kZti Council, forward Petition PUDR-PL20160002565, MAC PUD, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to the denial of Deviation#2. Attachments: Exhibit A: Proposed PUD Ordinance Exhibit B: Ordinance Number 05-50 Exhibit C: Future Land Use Element Consistency Review Exhibit D: Neighborhood Information Meeting Notes Exhibit E: Fence Location tS p[F� {E4 { MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 19 of 20 PREPARED BY: tiA(14(4EA, 13aW201-7 NANCY GA D . CH,AICP,PLA DATE PRINCIPArt LANNER ZONING D SION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION REVIEWED BY: -7:1: 72.et RAYMD . BELLOWS,ZONING MANAGER DATE ZONING IVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION MIKE BOSI,AICP,DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION APPROVED BY: I 1� 44."r-11*-t.a-- �]'-/ 7 f S FRENCH,DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT j i i f 1 MAC RPUD, PUDR-PL20160002565 May 22,2017 Page 20 of 20 BrownleeMichael Subject: Meet w/Chris Hagen re: rezonings in East Naples Location: DFs Office Start: Thu 2/11/2016 2:30 PM End: Thu 2/11/2016 3:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: FialaDonna Confirmed 2/10 2:30pm (VM) Hagan Engineering 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, FL 34102 (t) 239-228-7742 (c) 239-851-8239 As a follow up to our phone call the three new projects I would like to discuss with the Commissioner include the following: 1. County Barn Road 5 acre residential rezone property ID#00406600509 2. Triad RPUD—parcel ID number 65720320005 zoning amendment 3. MAC Builders PUD—parcel ID number 65720040000 rezone 1 ( NOTE'. THIS SITE PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND INTEDED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY.THE i OVERALL CONFIGURATION,DENSITY AND/OR INTENSITY DEPICTED MAY CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY BASED UPON SURVEY, ENGINEERING,ENVIRONMENTAL AND/OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS. NOTE. BUILDING FOOTPRINTS ARE FOR CONCEPTUAL PURPOSES ONLY. ®OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 2.28±AC. L I OPEN SPACE-R.O.W. 0.47±AC. ek:.. OPEN SPACE-BUFFER/OTHER 1.71*AC. I♦OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 1.31±AC. DETENTION/RETENTION 0.18±AC. MIMI'_ LAKE 0.69±AC. . POTENTIAL BUILDING ROAD/CURB/WALKS FOOTPRINT 1.09±AC. TOTAL SITE 10.76 AC. tQ 0.i:0 3 e Ry9 OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 2.28*AC. OPEN SPACE-RO.W. 0.47*AC. _ \ OPEN SPACE-OTHER 1.71t AC. OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 1.31*AC. _Ii �� - _ / -___ LATE 0.18±AC. o 7. I -- DETENTION/RETENTION 0.18*AC. TOTAL PROVIDED 6.64 AC. y TOTAL REQUIRED 6.46 AC. (60%OF TOTAL SITE) 0 T 0 ,---r- -T T _I-. r 63 z3 o co- I II—_- - - - - .------ ----------- . - -- r--W ::t: : !l5f1 3 O O OO R MF-8 Os z , , z 3 ,6 3 3 5 s e //X---- 0 0 0 0 0 O O O It RMF-12Q) SITE ruccar3r v,4t3.333„V f LOCATION r > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 © / Or,'; 4111 ' I I I [ PROJECTPUD )] . LOCATION I s 1 I I I RPUD .,., RPUD , c 3 2 O .3.10 Rp „ . —ill 0 N0 2 3 . 3 . RADIO LANE C-3 L RPUD PUD Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2016-2564 AREA ANALYSIS OF MAC AND TRIAD ERP AND PUD PERMIT APPLICATIONS COLLIER COUNTY PROPER IT APPRAI 'MrTOTALS PERCENTS PROPERTY PROPERTY WEST SIDE AC EST. EAST SIDE AC EST. 657200400 10 76 657203200,5 -.10.75 21.51 ERP PLANS MAY 2017 WEST SIDE AC EST. EAST SIDE AC EST. 657200400 10.75 6572032005 10.75 21.5 IN-BASIN 8.64 IN-BASIN 10.16 18.8 OUT-BASIN 2.11 OUT-BASIN 0.59 2.7 TOTAL 10.75 TOTAL 10.75 21.5 IN-BASIN BREAKDOWN LAKE 0.79 LAKE 0.78 TOTAL BUILDING 2.39 TOTAL BUILDING 2.4 4.79 TOTAL PAVEMENT 1.73 TOTAL PAVEMENT 1.72 3.45 WATER MGT 0.17 WATER MGT 0.14 PRESERVE 0 1.4 1.4 TOTAL OPEN/PERVIOUS 3.56 TOTAL OPEN/PERVIOUS 3.72 TOTAL: 8.64 TOTAL: 10.16 18.8 OUTSIDE-BASIN BREAKDOWN PRESERVE AREA 1.3 PRESERVE AREA 0 1.3 BACKSIDE OF BERM 0.81 BACKSIDE OF BERM 0.S9 1.4 TOTAL: 2.11 TOTAL: 0.59 11.86 55.2% MAC(WEST SIDE)BREAKDOWN TRIAD(EAST SIDE)BREAKDOWN LAKE 0.69 LAKE 0.62 POTENTIAL BLDG FP 3.03 POTENTIAL BLDG FP 3.08 6.11 PAVEMENT/WALKS 1.09 PAVEMENT/WALKS 1.07 2.16 WATER MGT 0.18 WATER MGT 0.17 OPEN SPACE: OPEN SPACE: RESIDENTIAL 2.28 RESIDENTIAL 2.28 4.56 R.O.W. 0.47 R.O.W. 0.47 0.94 BUFFER/OTHER 1.71 BUFFER/OTHER 1.61 3.32 PRESERVE 1.31 PRESERVE 1.45 2.76 SUB-TOTALO/S: 5.77 SUB-TOTALO/S: 5.81 13.24 61.6% 10.76 10.75 21.51 FE HAGAN Douglas A. Lewis June 12, 2017 Thompson Lewis Counselors at Law 850 Park Shore Drive, Suite 201-A Naples, FL 34103 Re: MAC and Triad RPUD and ERP Applications Review Updated Engineer's Report Dear Mr. Lewis, This letter is submitted to provide a brief review of the pending Collier County zoning applications and South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD) Environmental Resource Permit(ERP) application for the referenced projects. This is done consistent with our previous correspondence and May 25, 2017 agreement. This report is submitted to outline my findings from the review of the applications noted above that are available on line. We have also had a site visit,received photos, and held discussions with you and the adjoining neighbors. Consistent with the agreement we have addressed open space, drainage, access, and utility issues below: 1. Open Space Calculations Attached please find a PDF of the Area Analysis for the zoning and ERP applications. You will note that the ERP,which is a more detailed set of plans, shows a 55.2%open space versus the County calculations that show 61.6%open space. This is above the County zoning minimum of 60%on both independent and combined plans. The big difference between the ERP and zoning plans is in the open space/pervious area. The acreage goes from 11.86 for the ERP to 13.24 acres for the zoning applications. The ERP application shows a smaller open space pervious area. The preserve numbers match up well. The pavement area is also larger for the ERP application than the zoning applications. The spreadsheet has highlighted the items in blue that are lake or water management and in green that are open space. The yellows are the cumulative numbers that calculate out the percentages. The SFWMD review of the ERP application also found that the storage capacity in the water management area maybe exaggerating flood capacity. This could require a further increase in water management area. 2. Drainage • The proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for stormwater management. This is well below the typical industry standards of 15%percent for a dense single family project. The smaller than average water management facilities onsite will result in the need for additional fill. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • The preserve is bisected with a discharge swale and should be left outside of the water management area. The County may not accept the preserve with a drainage easement through the middle like this. • County and SFWMD drainage rules will require a reduced discharge from the site of 0.15cfs/acre. This should help with any overburdened outfall ditches. • A floodplain analysis was done to show that regional floodplain issues are not adversely impacted by the proposed development. The SFWMD is still reviewing this. • Inverted crown roadways proposed for the project should be efficient in directing stormwater internally and reducing costs. This also supports the higher density proposed. • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. The developer should bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including improved drainage swales. ERP cross sections show 3:1 slopes within the County's right of way which may not be acceptable. The swales will also need to be improved not only offsite, but onsite to maintain flow consistent with the resident's photos noting flooding in these areas. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision to the north includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into I-75. Review of these swales (photos in link) find that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these. A stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales from the County and/or developer. • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. This interconnection will cause conflicts with the utilities and require a County right of way permit. • Perimeter berm elevations around the new project are proposed at elevation 12.3 NAVD. The expected flood waters get high above the edge of pavement of the existing roadway. Roadside swales in these areas it may be 3 to 1 or greater not allowing them to be sodded, but be used in native ground cover. This may not be acceptable in the right of way and need to be addressed during the County right of way permitting. The ERP should be consistent with these requirements and the flow way should be reestablished along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard. • The elevation differential may require that the reconstruction of Palm Springs Boulevard be elevated also to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The fact that the site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway with side yards directly abutting the roadway will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but should include a 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall to provide additional screening. Homes are going to be set close together it is possible that side yard equipment and would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The ERP shows retaining walls will be used in some areas to segregate the preserve from the water management facilities and may also be required to flatten out slopes as things are more detailed along Palm Springs Boulevard and/or coordinated into a perimeter wall for visual purposes. 3. Utilities • Utility provisions should be made to accommodate the project with connections to the existing utilities on Palm Springs Boulevard. • Looped water distribution system will benefit the community with better fire protection and water quality. • The sanitary sewer system will need to have two onsite pump stations to accommodate the centralized sewage collection. • A sewage force main connection will be required on Palm Spring Boulevard. • A regional pump station network analysis will need to be done to make sure that the existing pumps remain online when the new pump(s) are added. • The County's utility services should be more than adequate to accept the proposed development. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. 4. Access/Traffic • The Traffic Impact Statement shows only the single project. As this project is being processed with both applications. Cumulative impacts should be analyzed and distribution should be handled accordingly. Request for combined Traffic Impact Statement was not provided or addressed. These should be considered together as a single application for traffic impact analysis and turn lane requirements. • The Traffic Impact Statement for the project does not address the necessary improvements that may be required on Palm Springs Boulevard and/or the Radio Lane to accommodate turning movements. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • Alignment of the driveways between the MAC and Triad project will require coordination to prevent awkward driving motions. • The elimination of sidewalks and bike lanes in these neighborhood though will put people in the road right of way. The internal roadways are proposed with an inverted crown. This means that the middle of the road will have water in it during rainfall events. This puts pedestrians walking on the apron, which could be a hazard. • The tie in of the project inverted crown roads with the existing Palm Springs Boulevard will result in some grading challenges at the project entries. This will be exacerbated by needing to maintain the perimeter berm for the stormwater management requirements. The new roadway may need to be considerably higher than the existing roadway. • The swale along Palm Springs Boulevard will need to be maintained outside of the turning radii for traffic safety. Below is the link to recent site photos: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fkObn4vxlct2h5mnhwO I believe this provides an outline of the open space, drainage, utility, and traffic issues associated with the referenced application. These projects need to be considered together as the impacts of both need to be considered as one. Please look this over and let me know if you have any comments, questions, or require any additional information regarding this. Sincerely, Awl Chris Hagan 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com HADLEY PLACE WEST WA PLAT BOOK PAGE SHEET 1 OF 2 A REPLAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 1,3 AND 5 AND ENGINEERING A,..5..+ns.w..Ie, DECARONSmESERYARONS .erd.[,e..,e., THAT PART OF VACATED CALLE DEL RAY P,ANE� 3.32 m°.aa o[n 1,... ..t„........,,,,,,.......__"—"°. PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.1FLoRIwD„ [ on,ax. . n a SN Urnz--n[Ma....VI-- PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 a s o m a e< . e a .1f1"',. SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST ar.As REOOROED iN,Te.RAP,, EORe,,S HE OPNc,AL COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA EPICRN OF THE SUBDIVIDED[ANDS HEREIN AND WALL IN NO v [r.`[M[re s o[enm n[Isar(.Mo c.w..,c,e.u[...No c.u.[.)Anti IesvarrsiN,m CIRCUMSTANCES BE SUPPLANTED IryBY ANY Dns fo.c)rvn stonw,[n xNwc<.[rrt PonPouz rm,IrtzPoxsmxm ron xNxrtxwc[. DIGITAL R E PLAT. MAY BE usvins 0.zz 1 mm.,srwvanr ran w,xrtrwc[. RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE NOT RECORDED ON THIS FLATT THAT MAY BE vrs�,.Y.E)wn..EVCxv.,nY rw,wNIENucC FOUND IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF THE COUNTY e onrn.T,n,,IA.n''''°"'xauow nm"'"'" y J fI ��,,��,�]� COUNTY APPROVALS' Aeem ron ® -.1 o^ II �. • - VT: .1 a COUNTY ENGINEERx[«,a wu[n cauxn. .,,rvr,T NWT.T m z,..,,. .A,rn=oar FF.L'ufgo.5310no=a5n= ,an=<..— [—a.c NQ \-,fief"": .ii ili ��� rano rs -:„1"--_ _.""-T".„. To coL co coutcy V ti,,,, , .xaI[m�R+[�w�Ex[ N, �mA»x.[7a VInoUa, VNm SEPxx raN�,m TD,»[usix[x,s z»m,n xexea+n,no�T msasnua TA .14 n. .,a.NNvs[ws[.vrrs m.E)u s.oxx n[n[a A,nw,n.[sPoxv,u,Y ran N+m[Nwa. p I!tamp,I COUNTY SURVEYOR M�M 9T M�N rs xr�M o�am nE�a ge axaRN� ,n ;'''7 1 I ^i T.'H,, p,,ANN "c..a.,N"an mrs—aY c court To wu[n caxa wa[n-s[.[n Nsmn. 1� ,_•\� '.. ��I 3 i mum L...„,...,,,,,.e '. :, )`o`::�ihln"„u.[.I r Naon Ili • ,I'—-- lam .s - 116'll r iIIIG,/t ''t SIUI -II COUNTY ATTORNEY . nam sx m n n[aN.e onnn[ as , n a PROJECT LOCATION a=p,T.wa. "`"`"""',Tmn''a_aY _ woia." s,s<,rwno m�,'?'1T ANT Ta saNc ° .Ty"r,�Isa T «,,^r�;a"a.-,`p tcc nc+ Far.�„T[a Tn[ ACKNOWLEDGMENT Asvn..r,colmr Ammer ' t=';R.«v mn[n: VI°.'`[15«[s°YsRn`,17A„:1,,ox,4°Aalc. or anwmPo ,T.w.. "'"'[v.rus V[T." c '" ! tE = a=7,51roa*tug , Oxon[..aa caP,..aIF'F"[r:LF'C S.TFa ma F.if3 e.Tn[r:o,.4 s[Bw mx.Ss""wxn Uv s ololc:A RUNG RECORD nACATED a .T. m r.Zo ,wa..",n[s,P.,s,ms T..s..o,tis a mu,n mmmOATS aaxa.'''•"``onE I,u emn a um ,my) Ano 5 Cwsrs a.N...xx.e. .moms nx[ vMswN P,ss.D[.T.an,.m,dt .- �• ..an oiz'':re'v,fo i"PD ca I,c.1 gc Gct.00 3L,,,,,,.,..., 0 _ NOTES'. fa Aa,, ERTIFIcATD aixaN.f:siENx 'E:Zi sum.EYORsrew,.c«P,..o,.,T.[n,f.:, Nn xx[x,s. a.1.,,ff k �o�:�.� ,w.s.IP ,s [ ze usT [errs Z3 75cfn n[mnos a caV[n mw.aanvw 4`1=1.07r'''''' F.a .wBNc a„ „. HADLEY PLACE WESTnw IPLAT BOOK PAGE SHEET 2 OF 2 A REPLAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 1,3 AND 5 AND ENGINLLOW NEEE JNDRIVE`u TE 200 THAT PART OF VACATED CALLE DEL RAY NAPLES , ORIDA�'o „ PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.1 `°P1°°CERTIFICATE OF;,om , ,. "tEs,RMEsp,s PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA 000,1 501 n GC .a "evJe aJ�Jw.m , t a 4 rwuurytlON '.. U 25 50 tl : f (w w%'oE g a Pr O :R . , 54,21.5.21 .t b P.uE�sev"eav aJt t n ss.v 50 10 m.io �ev .ta• .3 me m.v m.,9 �xPACr [. "' I . 8 >'' tm.m'e m�xs 8 J aJY`Jmm 5•21•571 20.20. f .8 $ 8 d 8 8 P5 • a PO PUT 0001, ��*`_'a_�� ��$mte$8m,9gg ;`'°d ge" gem.�ga ,d a ,..T.;», 12' 1 N Ovm M R i• ` u.x u Nwv'd 301 OW : 9 y : 11.`°- ua �J},y• Aff N�41..N1 5910 sy.ta I- t 4 x 8 n il_ `I e rt s T w • _PERMANENT// w nwco rnu to M f f ft-.o �g f xA • PERMANENT corm°,POW e ,. ro t $ ser row g '8 xe n a a ^$ m p$ r 8.: B 8 8 e .FOUND ML rn"mono rote a wu 8 8 -8 `8 `8 8 C17 20.75. 25.00.a1,11•53. M131•01•241 xose gFx ''.1 e aE na$ $ g' g` a, $ `m rax $a teem g J i .J ' l-" `.t J 8 d.m .aJ.• "..xtsxt t.® C T i t_� ,'' 1�td -! o_ r s.lm a�,d.d. 2_,.a. i 8 e f " 74P q xs 8 8W a"--4n $ 8 $ 'S 8 8e F8 "8 r 8 m _8 ago s g- g $-o 0' x g- g- g $,°301:;: J.�xe V.—Js.ra- SO ta so io Ji-.71-v' m.ld moo $g m n oEi W.'_ 10..1.E _39.ts __m.0 Tm,.' ,,...;_,..• 10,1,7 39.t25J'"'- t. s e '$ S's m C.$ %s ?aa =8 . I is �$ •C$ ^8 to t u mos..., Cou $8 -8 8. 8- S 8 8 8 8 _'e8 -r- Tr 1.od-7-f o mdt,t".wa:a ca* ffm >.. ou.. L J seE �7w -Ce �a,:. �°`p« uc a,"e WEST .eos.t>ti—�" HADLEY PLACE EAST DWA PLAT BOOK PAGE -'�` SHEET 1 OF 2 A REPLAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 2,4 AND 6 AND THA PART OF ,,,orv,ENGINEEE NGRTEBOD O R BER AADN VACATED CALLE DEL RAY NONE IN NAPLES FLORIDA;,o sD,a.r. O x Or PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.I TLOR TMMC„ ,EEYRE.P.M(.GEITIFIGATE Of p. O ILL TM FM us I-WoOSSJ. 7HENEM..«n or .`"°s DEF'AHD xEMN.we" PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 A. M DEDICATE TO ME ANEY ARE xONLORNE,r CATION.,TIE.: SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, NOTICE.THIS PLAT AS ED IN B GRAPHIC FORM IS ME OFFICIAL (R.D.n.)(KANDY STREET LAM xrsw SIRES. DEPICTION of MEOS�UBDMDED LANDS RERETN PND WILL IN NO ria .—,NORT-DUPNNED.REO.Inn.DF..AF..I.E.PDE.NN CUE)won COWER COUNTY,FLORIDA TI TANCES BE SUBDIVSUPPLIDED L IN T O ANY OTHER z EASEMMz R.F.)FOR nowNATER wnRrmENT PWRRS wax RswNieun FOR CIRCUMSTANCES OR DIGITAL FORM OF THE AUTHORITY MERE MAY BE 3. AL LANDscARE BuFFER Ms(LSE,RTN REmoxanun FCA wMFxxxaE. THAT ADDITIONAL RESTgCTONS THAT ARE NOT RECORDED ON THIS PUT _ MAY BE FOUND IN ME PUBLIC RECORDS OF ME COUNTY. 4. AL VAL ITANTDVACE xrs IL AL MN R[ MFwNCE. 5. AL AMISS Ms(Ac.)Rm,cswsaENY FOR IwMEMNOE uu T ',RIVE TT TER RPosrs xnuRxc roNNUTNx.WD Y APPROVALS: COUNTY ® ,I-._ . erl OUNT EL MUTE TO mLEw u n'En m mr Re.. . . . ,nv uNNrzxNAc E' -( 0. Ori ^ COENGINEER ' No DT^ o-"mII'i-� -��� rEDRDr,FOD M.a< IN,,.AD M a[D,I,ER caxn. NR.00T M�BAIN FOR MMM DU,Fa,NO DNN xFRF I,`A . a �/ N.omfROF[AgxEM,(DE)M NNMENAM y, ;,a � JACK 0[D RRIE To m L R woolly g(R a� SHORN HEREON MND RE D STIR FOR T1 A• Z ie ?lei,: 1�I.1 co,.cam.,FlAN.ER F �Rlg PO RMw ANi ■r L i It ' ■ M "a AY,[, �: Pil°N=(;)", 7I' I , �pvu REN SURVEYOR COWAN Merry.NS DF.OF N_SENM(e,` n tIII ��' �, 1, D,,.Ao°� — roN µ,� »M,[w,rR, nFvroR M; g- _ wL0E,0eoRwx, ,m. tmr "(;P:a.1 DrRR DPDN mak,-:!m_ 4iI rI aN�0.00o,MMMan CCEP,N,«OF TM MINIMS.DrNxsms AND/OR PRORENENTS MOORED.,,HE Pur. II lithTi a•Hn6 Ger 311.1 R 111 D. DFDRAT TO mEER coup,Ws FAvool<..IND,NE GREATER m.„5 TINE R[scNE NSTRR. COUNT/ATTORNEY M NDO,NFn,FRF a^: n"maINF w 'raw w M ND PROJECT LOCATION O TN p AD ,DER CORM,ATTORNEY INS_wM NOT NT SEAT E. DENTATE TO EC MIMED Ofi MANORS.PLAGE o.PINNATE TANSIES: Xad.".ND mFwTNN O< ,,, RF.4= llaGlA'N'Oace ATaM COUNTY COMMISSION APPROVAL DESCRIPTION WITNESS MALMYRON PRESIDENT,Dn.HOCEv, FLING RECORD PRINTED IMF !OMAN..PENTECOST TriartZ.=name' NM_my or 20 17.No.Am okirTralya:/"I,LAT ortoess wow PRINTED NINE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CIRO AA ra,EN.r.o=1R NOTES: SURVEYORS CERTFICATP I AL ONENSIONS ARE II FEET ma[RCM PART5 THEREOF. 701,..FOREGOING ccNP.vT.IND S rt '•^ xant[wED e[rDM CD cN 9[wu a FOE R v'ii'`u a L7NZExD Sc I[y) 711, AFI U [`rcc"iF,',[ d .1}1-1E SIdeJECI FARM rN sem) n�MxNW[EWeuc=WANE ^,Ns rnw n u wmix ME ,.OPLID INCE n I.AS N,rxDED. xc. ('' a,I[R[aHD nNMEUEMR DImERs wx,x ./�.w� ' ww.x oNI SET roman r0 R###' /1 .. wRrF MIVO.IMARD w swurml ---eaax 00 -"c..mNRsmn(unR� RFmnm ar cawER mMnr.aDREA NW.J.WM.PSN.LS/e)b DATE \� Aw PLAT BOOK PAGE HADLEY PLACE EAST yNGINEE_ING SHEET 2 OF 2 ENGINEERING SUITE A REPEAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 2,4 AND 6 AND THAT PART OF 5010 WILION INPLES FLOP,.34.100 VACATED CALLE DEL RAY soNsra F,O.CER.ONE TION0 isegz PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.1 "",x0=x.'.E,x'ESP5,,2,s2'02 PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA P Clliter TABLE a'!. - n x0.m.,v b=..: INISF01NW: ,m „., =2ar oP>:>z• x112 5,v bu ,. 115, '100 1„0.ar pa,9,'..0 510 x. 0105.,\4, s 51.05.1.11/410 Kr ,°iuo< 5010 50 IV 10.,> inl= C13 t Bi ax - a 5, ax ax } se 8Ei mn-a a c,1 = 2m 2„115. 1nmx.0 maw a ,c •..--Zxx loej-_ 3.���--T— ,��' los c=1 esW 11.1 ....... x.xS..,.0 nm' - T _glx,_I wA±P___30J2 b.l2ry31.iV 0.m_i2J2_1 N.,9'�" „ R UNE TAME m,: g " fi' �as 11.2, !i5"' 4" -5 " ' 1x10. n LK scram x \a ax w gi 00 ax ax =_ „ax x as 0.a x W f1=a ,..,0I. ,V J ,:?7-.-'"A. 1 1 ,0,0 _ ;i .A r.., I e0. L . 45, .t a" a"„'ti 7.,0185, a' 0.-s 02,1 x S. , 1105-100.0 LO Na0.03,11 30 02. '1 `31 i 0. �,0 0' 5410.1--!100.50.S g-�1a,0 j 1 :f`' .. 0 vaL2 SCOS1,5•5 NOM. a x x< FFx m `.,ad- 20,d >o,o� .0,a�, i I LIO 900,6'122 52. C. ,„2,0.5,x.0 5,,1 ~— ,1n—. I.So . __-.2.,,,,,,—..7,--I w� u -L' °81 w1x,-o,-wA. 7 - 55,:.Z.......... AnI) _$212_-41.I¢___,u,s-1_a.�o .F1y,.o. ..N�,_._m.t0___sx.u____XII-.x.>➢:_ r 2 r A s 11 2, aax $g= s = s -01 •ax s _110 2 1 P E _ L L L 4 L x011. .„,0� 0.15,0. „,0 -- 10.,0' .2.«' t 0„,0• - el �l i,5,....a, 'nos.,„'„• t 4 9 ai - SOON 1,muw.F1wa1 NOTE'. THIS SITE PIAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND INTEDED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY.THE OVERALL CONFIGURATION,DENSITY AND/OR INTENSITY DEPICTED MAY CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY BASED UPON SURVEY, ENGINEERING,ENVIRONMENTAL,AND/OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENT$. NOTE BUILDING FOOTPRINTS ARE FOR CONCEPTUAL PURPOSES ONLY. OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 2.28/AC. I I OPEN SPACE-R.O.W. 0.47±AC. - OPEN SPACE-BUFFER/OTHER 1.613 AC. MIIM OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 1.45/AC. DETENTION/RETENTION 0.17/AC. J 'Ilk LAKE 0.62/AC. O POTENTIAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT 3.08*AC • . EMMEN ROAD/CURB/WALKS 1.07/AC. $ TOTAL SITE 10.75 AC -5 t B OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 228*AC. ----/ / � ...�' a OPEN SPACE-R.O.W. 0.47/AC. . ,q„ • I -._.- :: _ — e al: OPENSPACE-OTHER 1.61/AC. o_;es OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 1.45/AC. z 3 a i _ _ LAKE 0.62/AC. @ � — 7 ,, ,•ii' DETENTION/RETENTION 0.17*AC. !Ii I §, TOTAL PROVIDED 6.60 AC j8 T F, r 160%OFOTALREQUIRED TOTAL SITE) 6.45 AC. A 1.._— 1-..- I a'. § a: - -1 °4 E 8 , J i RADIO LAI 1300/102 00 _ ,a, -------mll 111 ner c ,. PH IV Shy i' PH XII OO RMF-6 C E TRACTS s s a 6 , PH XI s a 3 , z , z a 4 PUD OO © O 0 0 0 0 0 PH wrmowa �� OO C ^ t0.— TYNE CREST 1,11. RMF.19(7) SITE v 0 0 0 o c Q� 0 0 0 PROJECT '4iii �� U LOCATION 0 0 2 LOCATION Igo I I '� PH VII - 9. , / C I h 6 s a 5 , z , J , z rilL "W°' —— L RPUD "2 PUD 9 ..w< "'A° a Haio HL ', RPUD III ,^t 2 CV --1 1 III '—, RADIO LANE PPP ''''...*'''''''''....... NN.'NN:''‘.1:111'1 wiL Ki VP 0 C-4 /c PUD )=1 14.7.4 Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2016-2565 ."." 4 , i . . ' ' I I I 4 74, - - ; , 1 ir 1 ' I 4 ' , 4.4., 1 'f::' RIPME -' 151 _ - SW E"I. • i 4 ' ' 1 ! 0 R .4. * fit 1 ' ' pfli i' t • ' ; \, • , , ,, • -,3-!;1 '.1 11;',•.,------ - .'4•1 z .. . ., .. . • 1 - PALM WRINGS WW1 EV‘120 _.. 4....:,, , ...„ . I ! r..,..-',, . ai,,,' -' , ,--4 ' ' °.'" ' ' e_ - te wo e ' , / ---,..-41-- ' . „.• ----------- ------------ .... ,,, ...,„,„_.,....„... _ —,,, ,14. ir , ..-1.4 -.7.4-1 ‘01, -e, fe, )!,„— & -. • ' , M. FM--..--77.7 i I ' it gi ,,,i1A 0 .. A, . .' -- —?"-- - ,.4f: -' 14 .,4 1,A%11==if- ',' _ ' I: 1 ;'i f ,. , -7----1 ly .4) IA ' # , # . a" 4k E Z 's -t.„..-- I ,co ,,,, r 4 i '1 .15).r'i•.:11:!,Tit:::1, 3 1,',::, IN\:r 3J1 ill' 3 ',. tri:?,,i' 1 , ,4 l'a* I • ,11 1 1 1 1 i I, , t -11 i q ' g 31:i 3' If F lii ..,,,,Z-•,- i '1-,„'-,„2-1.•.•--C--L,1.1.• 4, , , 1 r•ti!fy i ' •f; 1 ' ' f • 4$1 ?i ,I,1., •f, ,' F,,,, , f„,..!, ' A , 1,,,„_, 0 , I t-4cr ' li'44 r._:-.1.',:-..*:,-1.!.-.7.-2,4, t , - 1:-; ,, ,,gi__ ._.......1 L._7._.___r, ' ., . ._ -...!--,'-itr, es. .-....... .10. we. II p '''.•-1 ,..,-- L.,:11 .p.,to...,- : b "ll'th.-; - " ••• --t .t' vo 44)4,'"") ", 1;1 ff ,), ,1 471, 1 I 8 8 •. i'‘ .11.....j . r f:::1 .c.' ...t " , 7 - '• — , • : " •-.4...----- ....--=`, •. • 0100 1. I '. i A f 3.:3 f i , , •b I 3 j•-i '•'•-`1 i •1 it§ 3 , ` ` ,1, ' I t'•• ;,.' •-' I ' ''- :',...:-1.',,'II"''''',.1 1, ' ...,,A _ ; 1 , I e. a i a,+ ma> 4 ,lt x 41 t 0 : :3E: 1 % i ' i ' 1 i- 3 3 ',I ' .• .t,',. i.7 . rl i 1).-) .2,-47.,-,--,..-:„.. ,..J '' '' '--i,r t / ...., ' t-' ' 1 4 l't=gt r"t",,.‘',''', ti.'. `..1.'* +-T---," P. ., !! et'1 ! t"ti 1 Oi' . ' ' tt \<...::SL''a... it > ,y e` I ' ,.!i.s, e''''' .- V ;!".I.e. .0. i , ' . , ,., I ' 1 i i L'''' ' -- ,,, , ..,,,k,,,7_____ , ___ _ i 1' ' AL:—-...,, ,._-,' , . ' ,,,,,,__,...___, , ..' l' """'..*".....'''''''''... —r i ' • ' ' ,. • . •' 1 ';. 2 0 . -... A•N - L''"' 1 ', •0";,------ - - - -114 • - 4-- - .1.... 0 — 1 ; ' ' z ?).; I - ' I t. '4,1 ' i ,gi •; • , - t i• -4-4" ' :7;4: I k 14 tir I): 4... 1,. ?.... i ' . - q ....... '....• 2 ft3 ••: ., a ,-7 II t '11 P= i - 01 4 ' Pf ' 1 ''. " . , • .'- . L t i 1,,,.. ' L% F -0 .. \i , 'Ns 1 I 114RMIIINVF 0 ! ' s . fttf4t - . "" .• , Q ISi74 /1• 1111 1 ItidFil .* * 4 4 ,,,- .1. . > g t Ft- ‘.1 ? gill 'VC. a pi r.t.i. ;tqlliir 51.• .,1 ; , ;.!. ..i.f .111D 3 F, ifilvtil f. it, ;,- ...., !li ' g g ? 2 4:A ___ is) 't-e 1 i 111 ...1 .z,'§' iliiitA ,ry =0 - 0 4'.? , i P -4 w I g 44' gxig4g= k$tox.4 1 =1 w., e - t-zx' • .in41 a 3 F i k 1,6„.....g.. ..41i4 Z il ; ___/ ... ij 4 i x al $ 73 2 _�I«13+.!11, xriii a 4 i i ii 1 MI MI0 wit1 1 1 i i i g 4. o 11; I ,, I" I. s at j 'lus ! dalI- E V_ . r r. g t 1 , )- ' 1. .-- i, ?-.., le 1,,, l, ,,,,i_ 1, I _ :, '. : i :.:, 1 ;c:k---.. —. '' .11- , 3 — '''' — .-. —L—r — /, 41,::. .. _",. :, ,: ' ., 4 ' r ,,-,' ;he 1 , . !----- ,-- ,, ;.f.:--4.--s-b.': , , i t O- y ti �' p r +i3 a� Bf j. ';t3 2 r'�:I a' _ �� t t1 �. -- . K I � i c •i s t t �� l« 3D t e x is h m F i 1 y iia - a G � f� i - ' ,` ,c. • ` 1 g . [per ? --° .�."�'° s 11\< .pv v ,tet # , ._...._.. ? ,, iy{ .f 11 ,, 1 1 f a \ D y -".a._,._ {I` a i' \ 41446) s µ o $ill 0 3 .. $ `x _ --- i irs§1gia33/1 3` i ,�j : +le x � ' es.. r Q g € gill,- 1111-A ., 31 t, >2 '= . — ` 41,.rgpZ3 a h Fax C > 1 g ' Q _ a ' _ G O , — if;;;;;;i A v `ig1itig :a 1 fl ii, O - 1J/ I I I I }r.Kt.• :'''Ay'.,:.` MOM,IOti I`\\\l a e+k <i', 00:01,011",AOUNOAAV MSN Ali 't � �I .•- fi 1 IIr:::••;��y s ; i LEGEND ` 177A PROPOSED 1.1 r:•fiTLC��Y / — r ^. LITTORAL Alla L• 1, fOaMsu - w. ''s1ill IV (1x. dA.22. - 1 .....-:-..44-4r•;%lA vL bt :2 •.... FIA101tBASII F _ �1m^ ■ r� }(_ ,ti f r —.'j .s� �as BOUNDARY J I. I _ I�,. 1 k .`9u k i TIONS BASED ON NOM AMERICAN 1 .. } I I--4- n i� k 1 — --j I OM r fYro w�NwN.,s„ FROM w ? --. —1..t. l0 r' SlSi z WA MANAGEMENT SU M MARY T,, TER x Puwt Si .I'I m 1 i Io I I� b � ill'Aill 38 { kIN i • j� I J . i.—.-- �' — �'.. Ili -1 .� �L t BASIN*ABLE q. s. a... � I i �� � 111 ' I WKS, �afn 11 S I I i,1 (� m I ; ��M i I w I�„ ¢ L o 2 • t, k IF 4I ' M! 1 AREA ODE CONTROLLEDDRNAGE kk le I `F CONTROLLED K'u —'{F — "' — — � — T — — — - - w .0 MM9 �j -`� ' _ W DR.NORTON,INC. HADLEY PLACE sR% lCires'vr ova — l/I01N,Lon°°m cs3�`ie .... "` MASTER SITE PLAN -- ..,, �.. ...o +. ' 13001900.00 r"03 SMI 117"-, .=n•.. .1.7' ....,..-.0 7 = I,. rillrnr.qt1BLM''it ,, Z. ifillifilII1.111111li 11! -- _ 111___111, Ingl 1111 . SECTION A-A SECTION B-B SECTION C-C al 11111111 till III alp:;11 .0, .., ----"— ,..„, .. ,_ ,..7.1,.. „........... ..... ...,.., n., .. "' ...... '''' 6:47"--• .t :":" "''''`i,' . . .......... .=., ,. -. --_7 Z...1=.7,_=.'4.414..(--_-= _2 , .,.... = -- ., ^^.- _.. _ TYPICAL SECTIONS INDEX SECTION Cl-CI SECTION C2-C2 SECTION P-P ...'.'°. " 1. , . , . . ---....- .,.. _ ,, _ -, --, r•=4.„, --• ,.,...... ' ' ' : 1 ...-r--- • _,....- • „ , • .„.... - r , , - - _ -r-i r;-.. I • - . .. .,_. ..„. ...., ..._ . -a......,- SECTION 0-13 _ -.S.....,- '....— .........,' SECTION E-E SECTION F-E ' .... ..., ...., ;''' I 11111111111111111111111,1 .7.,-.-raz — ,...„ SECTION GO SECTION IT-II '`. JRCIER,E 10-Ala.4ECTKIN SECTION I I SECTION KJ SECTION P-P PREa111,04 DETENTION SECIION am..-.., =vat 1 . .... ,......., 1 ........ SECTION K-K SECTION L-L SECTION M-M 4., • SECTION SECTION Q-g . wulKSTNX,% wrs IWA OR.HORTON,INC. PRON.C. .- ,- HADLEY PLACE ;.• ..... INGINURING ......,..,rrea.orn .....-,...• .-7,,,,, ,,,, TYPICAL SECTIONS ._ —. 'I.3Zol 9 co co r""L'OA Now 90200E.7 BrownleeMichael From: Dianna Quintanilla [DQuintanilla©cyklawfirm.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 2:33 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: Meeting Request: MAC &Triad Good afternoon, Rich, along with Wayne Everett would like to meet with Commissioner Fiala regarding the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: MAC&Triad PUD Amendments. Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: Monday June 19th 9:00—3:00 Tuesday June 20th 10:00—12:00; 2:30-5:00 Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0—5:00 Friday June 23rd 11:30—3:00 Thank you. Dianna Assistant Quintanilla Legal Assistant to Richard D.Yovanovich, COLEMAN Esq. `LOVANOff"'IC Coleman Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300 KOESTER Naples, Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (239)435-1218 (f) 1 BrownleeMichael From: Douglas Lewis [Doug@tllfirm.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 6:13 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Bob; Christopher Hagan; GundlachNancy Subject: FW: Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Attachments: MAC-Triad area analysis.pdf; MAC RPUD Review Report 06-12-2017.pdf; ERP Pages.pdf; CCF060617_0006.pdf; Submittal 1 05 Hadley Place W PPL Plans- Prepared.pdf; Submittal 2 08 Triad Open Space.pdf; Submittal 1 06 Plat- Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 1 06 PlatO - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 2 09 MAC Open Space.pdf Categories: PRINTED Dear Board Members, In advance of the hearing next week, please find the attached and below for your review. I will update you on any progress between the neighbors, staff and the applicant. Best, Douglas A. Lewis THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law m 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-Iewis-1250057.htm I Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s).This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006.Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter.This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent:June 20, 2017 6:03 PM To: 'GundlachNancy' Cc: 'Bob' ; 'Christopher Hagan' Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) 1 Nancy, This will confirm that we have not heard back from the applicant regarding our neighborhood concerns raised back on May 31, 2017. In follow-up to the below May 31st submission and in advance of the BCC hearing next week, please find the attached and below for staff and applicant follow-up (hopefully, we can get these items addressed, agreed to by the parties and solved prior to the hearing) 1.Regarding drainage,the existing drainage ditches along the east and west sides of the RUPD's simply do not work (I am having pictures of the drainage problem sent to your office tomorrow).The ditches are not draining properly, and according to my client,the water has not left the ditches since June 6th. In reviewing the ERP and PPL,the East and West drainage systems are connected by pipe under Palm Springs Boulevard. a.My client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to confirm that both the East and West side drainage ditches will be fully graded and improved by either the County or the applicant, so that they adequately and properly drain (all work to be completed prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project). b.Also, my client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require that the projects drain on both the East and West side drainage ditches and that either the County or the applicant commit to install a barrier(prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project)to help keep incursions and encroachments out of the drainage ditches. 2.Additionally regarding drainage and according to Chris Hagan,the proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for storm water management, and this is well below the typical industry standards of 15% percent for a dense single family cluster project. According to Chris Hagan and based on his review of the ERP,the applicant is making up for its lack of storm water management by draining into the preserve area in the Traid RPUD. a.PUD Hagan's office reviewed the ERP cross sections and noted that the applicant wants to put a retaining wall around the north side of the eastern preserve. Upon closer review of the ERP plans, it appears to Mr. Hagan that the applicant is looking to incorporate that preserve into the water management plan to provide storage for storm water.This is inconsistent with Collier County's rules regarding allowances in preserve areas.This inconsistency would disqualify the area from preserve status for onsite preservation.This would require additional offsite mitigation to compensate for this. b.To eliminate this issue, my client asks that Exhibit F to both RPUDs be modified to expressly prohibit any water discharge into to preserve areas. 3.Additionally regarding drainage, according to Chris Hagan, Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end and Palm Springs Blvd. does not comply with County standards. a.My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be for the County or the applicant commit to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code, prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project, including the addition of improved drainage swales.As an alternative, my client is still open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access(in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. 4. The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally.This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge.This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. a. My client asks the BCC to reject this Exhibit E deviation request consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. 5.Regarding density, the Density Rating System outlined in the FLUE provides that "a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed,though not an entitlement.This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the location and characteristics of the project." In this case and based on the location and characteristics of the project, the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West is for 42 lots(see attached), not 44 2 units as per the MAC RPUD and the plat for Hadley Place East is for 41 lots (see attached), not 44 lots per the Triad RPUD. a.In view of the forgoing, why does the MAC RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs 42 per the PPL and why does the Triad RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs.41 per the PPL? 6.Regarding open space, LDC 1.08.00 provides as follow, "Open space, usable: Active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds,tennis courts,golf courses, beach frontage,waterways, lakes, lagoons,floodplains, nature trails and other similar open spaces. Usable open space areas shall also include those portions of areas set aside for preservation of native vegetation, required yards (setbacks) and landscaped areas, which are accessible to and usable by residents of an individual lot,the development, or the general public. Open water area beyond the perimeter of the site, street rights-of-way, driveways, off-street parking and loading areas, shall not be counted towards required Usable Open Space." a.RWA prepared document titled Triad Open Space and MAC Open Space showing 6.60 acres and 6.64 acres, respectively, of open space. 1.Can the applicant or staff provide supporting detail for the 2.28 acres of"Residential— Open Space" calculations as shown on both the Triad and MAC Open Space documents? b.It appears that most of the "Residential—Open Space" area is coming from required yard (setbacks). Please confirm.As such, I am only calculating 13,200 square feet or .3+/- acres as required yard (setbacks) as follows: 15 ft front yard, 15 ft rear yard and 5 ft for each side yard or 300 square feet times 44 lots= 13,200 square feet. c.The applicant has also filed its PPL. See the attached confirming a compliance problem with the 60% usable open space requirement as required by the Comprehensive Plan. d.Further, the applicant has filed its ERP for the MAC and Traid RPUD's. See the attached from Chris Hagan confirming only 55.2%open space for the MAC and Triad RPUD's based on applicant's ERP applications. e.In view of the clear problems as outlined above, my client requests that the "Site Summary" on the both MAC and Triad RPUD Master Plans should be modified to confirm how the 60% usable open space requirement will be met and to detail the specific "open space" calculations and break-downs. Additionally,the Master Plans for both the MAC and Triad RUPDs should be modified to show the distances between the preserve areas and the lot lines and the distances between the lake, dry detention areas and preserve. 7.The minimum rear yard setbacks for accessory structures in both the MAC and Traid RPUD's is 0 as measured from "lot boundaries", not easements. However,the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West and Hadley Place East show 32 lots+/-that back up to each other and that have 7.5 feet DE off the lot line and into the platted lot. 8.Also, Section N-N (see attached) places a 6 foot swale on the north property line and a 3 foot retaining wall against the existing rear of the existing properties with the preserve behind.A preserve adjoining residential does not need a buffer, but with the swale and wall and detention behind this would make it aesthetically inconsistent with normal perimeter buffering. a.My client requests that the Triad RPUD Master Plan be modified to show heightened and adequate buffering along the north property line in the event of any proposed swale and retaining wall. 9.Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require the applicant to seek to obtain permits for all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. 10.Finally, see also the attached, follow-up comments from Chris Hagan pertaining to traffic, access and utilities, etc. based on his letter to me dated June 12, 2017. I look forward to speaking with staff and the applicant as soon as possible to address the above items in advance of the hearing next week and will make myself available to meet with the applicant this week. Best, Douglas A. Lewis 3 I 1 I./ THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.htm I Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s).This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006.Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used,to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter.This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent: May 31, 2017 12:41 PM To: 'nancygundlach@colliergov.net' <nancygundlach@colliergov.net> Subject:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Nancy, In follow-up to our phone call and in connection with the rezone applications referenced above, I have been retained by a neighbor that resides directly adjacent to proposed projects (Mr. Colasanti) and will be attending the hearings tomorrow to provide public input on these items. My client is very supportive of single-family use of the properties. However, he offers the following significant concerns and questions from Chris Hagan of Hagan Engineering pertaining to the proposed development of these properties (a summary engineering report from Hagan Engineering will follow by separate e-mail): • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end.There is no sidewalk.The pavement is only 19 feet in width. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including the addition of a sidewalk and improved drainage swales. As an alternative, my client is open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into 1-75. A review of these swales (see below photos in link) by Hagan Engineering found that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these swales, a stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales by the County and/or developer. 4 (At your direction, I can provide proof of the existing swale problem by historic photos from the residents of flooded backyards and roadways). • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application.The fact that they are back to back makes this easier. However,the traffic impact statement provided online was only for one project.These should also be considered together so any roadway impacts for turning motions, stacking, etc. would be combined and accommodated as a single project. • The onsite stormwater areas are less than the normal industry standards.This will require substantial additional filling. A floodplain analysis should be done so this additional fill will not adversely impact the regional floodplain. • Preliminary assessment of the existing roadway should be conducted and proposed roadways and finished floor elevations should be included in the PUD Master Plan to address concerns like the height (above existing grade) of the new roadway finish floors in relation to the adjoining properties.Accommodating the perimeter berm and roadways without discharging drainage out onto Palm Springs Boulevard will be difficult. Cross sections should be requested from the developer showing the slopes and heights of these elements and such should be included in the PUD Master Plan. • The elevation differential may require reconstruction and elevation of Palm Springs Blvd. to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally.This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge.This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway, and with side yards directly abutting the roadway, this will result in a negative visual impact.The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but the PUD should include a requirement 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall and landscape buffering along the entire northerly project boundary and also along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard to provide additional needed screening. Homes are going to be set close together, and it is possible that side yard equipment would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs).These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. • Preserve areas should have exotic vegetation removed and be replanted with native vegetation from Collier County's approved list. No grading in these areas should be allowed. Additionally, • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that the dimensions of all existing easements be depicted on the Mater Plan. Also, that cross-sections be provided on the Master Plan (with elevations and required set-backs) for perimeter buffering, sloping, preserve areas,the lake area, and other features as depicted on the Master Plan. Click on the below link for photos of existing site conditions: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fkObn4vxlct2h5mnhwO Douglas A. Lewis FITHOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive 5 Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-do uglas-lewis-1250057.htm l Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006.Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S.Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. 6 Co er County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION 9 9 GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: JUNE 1, 2017 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20160001398 COUNTY BARN ROAD RPUD PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS: Owners: Applicant: Agents: County Barn Investors, LLC Jaxe, LLC D. Wayne Arnold,AICP 5800 Lakewood Ranch Blvd. 3435 Enterprise Ave, Ste. 25 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. North Sarasota, FL 34240 Naples, FL 34104 3800 Via Del Ray Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Charles R. Keller Trust Contract Purchasers: 2301 County Barn Rd Jaxe, LLC Bruce Anderson Naples,FL 34112 3435 Enterprise Ave, Ste. 25 Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. Naples, FL 34104 821 5th Avenue South Jaxe, LLC Naples, FL 34102 3435 Enterprise Ave, Ste. 25 County Barn Investors, LLC Naples, FL 34104 5800 Lakewood Ranch Blvd. North Sarasota, FL 34240 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from an Estates (E) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as the County Barn Road RPUD. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is located on the east side of County Barn Road, approximately one-quarter mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (See location map on page 2). PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 1 of 19 May 24, 2017 __. , , URI° `�r PUD - l ..,a.,, PUD UP I 1 > Radio RD RPUD Oa R F.6(4) ,-- E m ., :=7n co ie co . P e Davis BLVD �0 SITE CO C LOCATION c m i PROJECT cn V LOCATION cC m CO N . RPUD cme.egMc - a 1... _ I I Pu e.cu PUD: L-_—_. >\,:),,,,, �0 Rattlesnake Hammock RD , o, P Cu \� _ t I —T_ Location Map Zoning Map Petition Number: PL-2016-1398 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner seeks to rezone 38.23± acres, from E to RPUD, to allow a maximum of 268 multi- family dwelling units or 156 single-family residential dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types permitted in the RPUD, but not to exceed a trip cap of 157 p.m. peak hour, two-way trips. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: The subject project proposes a density of seven dwelling units per acre. This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding boundaries of the County Barn Road RPUD: North: A school with a zoning designation of Seacrest Upper and Lower Schools Community Facilities Planned Unit Development (CFPUD) and farther north is a church with the zoning designation of E and Avalon of Naples RPUD,and then farthest north is the right-of-way for Davis Boulevard. East: A church with a zoning designation of E and farther east a school with a zoning designation of E. East(to the south): An ornamental nursery with a zoning designation of E and farther east is a single-family home with a zoning designation of E,and then farthest east is Falling Waters Planned Unit Development(PUD). South: Stormwater management pond on property owned by Collier County with a zoning designation of E and farther south is right-of-way for Cope Lane, and farthest south are single-family homes with a zoning designation of E. South (to the west): Stormwater management pond on property owned by Collier County with a zoning designation of E and farther south is right-of-way for Cope Lane, and farthest south is vacant property with a zoning designation of Cope Reserve RPUD. West (to the north): Right-of-way for County Barn Road and farther west is multi-family residential with a zoning designation of Residential Multiple-Family-6 [RMF-6(4)]. West: Right-of-way for County Barn Road and farther west are two parcels, one developed with a church with a zoning designation of E, the other unimproved with a zoning designation of E with a Conditional Use (CU). West(to the south): Right-of-way for County Barn Road and farther west are vacant parcels with a zoning designation of E. PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 3 of 19 May 24, 2017 tr if D snact i Do F,a f i (j ( blfI 1 i) .t ,r .,..Q 11.9 Y" i r ,'"--113bim, Vl r,Ii iilrf'S a c.rr, rr.ry y: I .�r '.ffin " r iQja i. ., itit, :,. .„... iv . i .t 01- m DeWitt:3 ice* Burt L. S ; > c Saunders ne a'y 4§W Nig_ „ k _:+w - -':,s1 FALLING o ,„,.yw~ AVEiiiYJLTERs���'" ._...'''. 14 a 1"" ..w.._.1 '11 .1 ' NMI a '}.. Aerial(County GIS) GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): Staff identified the FLUE policies relevant to this project and determined that the proposed RPUD may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Please see Attachment 3 —FLUE Consistency Review 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 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 PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 4 of 19 May 24, 2017 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 on the subject property was reviewed based on the applicable 2016 AUIR. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the proposed new residential development will generate approximately 157 PM peak hour,two-way trips. The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments with the listed capacities: Roadway Link 2016 AUIR Current Peak Hour 2016 Existing Peak Direction Remaining LOS Service Volume/Peak Capacity Direction County Barn Davis Boulevard B 900/South 528 Road to Rattlesnake Hammock Davis Lakewood D 2,000/East 409 Boulevard Boulevard to County Barn Road Davis County Barn C 2,200/East 636 Boulevard Road to Santa Barbara Based on the 2016 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed new 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. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the CCME. A minimum of 2.72 acres of native vegetation are required to be retained for the RPUD. PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 5 of 19 May 24, 2017 GMP Conclusion: 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. 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 Subsection 10.02.13 B.5, Planning Commission Hearing and Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Subsection, 10.02.08 F.,Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below,under the heading"Zoning and Land Development Review Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analysis. Drainage: Stormwater Engineering Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD Document to address stormwater drainage concerns. The proposed RPUD is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area, provided the project's stormwater management system is designed to the current Lely Canal Basin discharge rate of 0.06 cubic feet per second per acre (cfs/ac). Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage for this project will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting with the South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD). Key portions of the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project(LASIP)off- site stormwater drainage infrastructure are currently in place and capable of adequately conveying SFWMD permitted stormwater discharges from this proposed development. Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD Document to address environmental concerns. Habitats on site are fragmented due to past clearing activities making it necessary for the applicant to request a deviation from an environmental standard of the LDC,to allow more than one acre of preserve to be created on site. Since a deviation from an environmental standard had been requested, review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) is required pursuant to Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. The preserve within the RPUD was selected by the applicant to retain the highest quality vegetation on the property. This habitat contains wetlands which accepts off-site flows from the east and together, with adjacent uplands, maintains a connection to the County-owned pond to the south and off-site undeveloped lands to the east. These undeveloped lands to the east, in turn, extend north on undeveloped property owned by Unity of Naples, Inc. and then west to a preserve within Seacrest School, allowing for use of the area as a corridor for wildlife. This corridor can be determined to be consistent with the preserve selection criteria pursuant to LDC Section 3.05.07 A.5, which requires preserves to be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors. PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 6 of 19 May 24, 2017 Landscape Review: No deviations to landscaping or buffer requirements are proposed. Collier County Public Schools (CCPS) District Review: There is sufficient capacity within the elementary,middle, and high school concurrency service areas for this proposed development. 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 the south wastewater service areas of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Water and wastewater service is readily available via existing infrastructure along the project's frontage on County Barn Road. Zoning Services Review: With respect to project density, staff compared this RPUD with the densities of the abutting and adjacent properties(see Attachment 4-Density Map). The maximum proposed density for this RPUD would be seven dwelling units per acre. Staff determined the density proposed for this RPUD would be acceptable given the fact that the subject property is located within a Residential Density Band on the FLUM of the GMP and that Avalon of Naples RPUD, another residential project located within close proximity of the subject property, was approved in 2015 with the same density requested for this petition. This RPUD proposes a range of residential uses including single-family detached, zero-lot-line single-family homes, two-family attached dwellings, townhouses, and multi-family dwellings. The petitioner proposes a maximum of 268 multi-family dwelling units, 156 single-family dwelling units, or any combination of dwelling unit types permitted in the RPUD, not to exceed a trip count of 157 p.m.peak hour two-way trips. Staff compared the principal uses proposed in this RPUD to those uses allowed nearby the subject property and determined they would be compatible. Staff determined that the proposed standards would be compatible with those allowed in the surrounding area. 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 nearby area is developed or is approved for development of a similar nature. The petitioner will be required to comply with all County regulations regarding drainage,sewer, water, and other utilities. PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 7 of 19 May 24, 2017 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 and roadway access to the subject site. Additionally, the development will be required to obtain SDP or PPL approval. These processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of, continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,objectives,and policies of the 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 StaffAnalysis section of this staff report(page 6), staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The RPUD is required to provide at least 60%of the gross area for usable open space. The Master Plan indicates that 60%would be provided, and no deviation from the open space requirement is being requested. Compliance would be further demonstrated at the time of SDP or PPL. 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 time of first development order (SDP or PPL), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has readily available supporting infrastructure,including public water distribution PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 8 of 19 May 24, 2017 and wastewater transmission systems, to service this project based upon the commitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will be continuously addressed as development approvals are sought. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations,or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case,based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The petitioner is requesting 10 deviations, requiring an evaluation to the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this RPUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Each deviation requested by the petitioner is itemized and analyzed in the Deviation Discussion section of this staff report on page 12. Except for Deviation#2,staff supports all deviations as 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 Growth Management Plan. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals, 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 proposed RPUD will not create an isolated, unrelated,zoning district. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The square-shape boundary of the RPUD logically follows the external boundary of the parcels assembled for the rezoning. PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 9 of 19 May 24, 2017 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed rezoning is necessary if the petitioner desires to develop the property with multi-family residences. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed RPUD 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 PUDZ Ordinance, which includes provisions to address public safety. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed RPUD is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area, provided the project's stormwater management system is designed to the current Lely Canal Basin discharge rate of 0.06 cubic feet per second per acre(cfs/ac). Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage for this project will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting with the 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 this RPUD 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 basic premise underlying all development standards in the LDC is that their sound application,when combined with the SDP or PPL process,gives reasonable assurances that PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 10 of 19 May 24, 2017 a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of an abutting or adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. 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 zoning; however, the multi- family uses and proposed design standards cannot be achieved without rezoning to an RPUD. 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, associated development standards, and developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. 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 RPUD would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP or PPL 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 regarding Adequate Public PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 11 of 19 May 24, 2017 Facilities (APF), and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except what is 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 (LOS) will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the RPUD Document. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. Key portions of the LASIP off-site stormwater drainage infrastructure are currently in place and capable of adequately conveying SFWMD permitted stormwater discharges from this proposed development. 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: The petitioner is seeking ten deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are directly extracted from PUD Exhibit E. The petitioner's justification and staff analysis/recommendation is outlined below: Proposed Deviation #1 "Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.2 which requires dual sidewalks on local roads internal to the site, to allow a sidewalk on one side of the roadway where the property is permitted with single loaded homesites. Appropriate crosswalks shall be provided at crossing locations." Petitioner's Justification: The applicant responded to this request as follows: The developer wishes to construct sidewalks on only the side of the street where homes are located. It is unnecessary to construct sidewalks in areas of the community where no homesites are proposed. Constructing the sidewalk on the side of the street where homes are located will provide safe and convenient access to the pedestrian network for all residents. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Transportation Planning staff recommends approval of Deviation #1, noting the approval is consistent with other project deviation approval recommendations, where there will only be structures on one side of the street. As shown on the Master Plan,this deviation would only be applicable in two areas. One area is along the entrance road by the amenity center, and the other area is along the eastern property edge. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request as limited on the Master Plan, 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." PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 12 of 19 May 24, 2017 Proposed Deviation#2 "Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and 10 feet in height. The temporary banner sign shall be limited to a maximum of 90 days during season defined as January 1 to March 31 per calendar year." Petitioner's Justification: The proposed deviation will allow for a banner sign located on the proposed wall along County Barn Road in order to advertise new homes available within the community. The 4 square foot banner sign permitted by the LDC provides minimal visibility and likely will be difficult to read by motorists travelling along County Barn Road, a 45 mph 2-lane roadway and separated from the travel lane by 100±feet. Additionally, the applicant is requesting that the banner be allowed for up to 90 days per calendar year to allow display throughout the peak winter season for home sales. Due to the property's location on a busy road, high travel speeds along the roadway and the setback from edge of pavement, the Applicant is seeking an increase to the allowable banner size to ensure visibility of this new community. The requested banner size is in accordance with deviations approved for similar residential projects throughout the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: A deviation for relief from the sign size has been sought and approved in several other projects, such as Esplanade Golf and Country Club, which was approved for an eight-foot tall sign,not the 10 feet this petitioner is seeking. That sign usage was limited to 28 days,not the 90 days this petitioner is seeking. That petition also cited"the project's location on a busy road with high speeds along the roadway and the [implied large] setback from the edge of pavement." The Esplanade project is located along Immokalee Road,where there is a wide canal,as well as the six-lane Immokalee Road. That project was approved for 1,233 units on 1,658 acres. This current project proposes 268 multi-family units, 156 single-family units, or any combination of permitted uses listed in the RPUD, not to exceed a trip cap of 157 p.m.peak hour, two-way trips on 38.23±acres. Immokalee Road is, as noted, a six-lane,divided arterial roadway, whereas County Barn Road is an undivided two-lane collector roadway. The petitioner is seeking two other sign deviations that staff is supporting. Those signs deviations should provide enough flexibility for the development without this deviation. Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL of this request, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has not 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 not demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Proposed Deviation #3 "Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a,which requires on-premises directional PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 13 of 19 May 24, 2017 signs to be setback a minimum of 10' from edge of roadway paved surface or back of curb, to allow a setback of 5' from edge of roadway paved surface or back of curb." Petitioner's Justification: This deviation will provide locational flexibility for directional signage internal to the RPUD. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal. All directional signage will meet the Clear Sight Distance requirements in accordance with LDC Section 60.06.05. Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the master planned developments throughout Collier County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning staff anticipates no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, 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 "Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6, which permits two (2) ground signs per entrance to the development with a maximum height of 8' and combined area of 64 s.f., to allow for two (2)ground signs per entrance with a maximum height of 10' and combined area of 80 s.f." Petitioner's Justification: The subject property will be accessed via County Barn Road, a collector roadway with relatively high travel speeds. Due to the property's location, and high travel speeds along County Barn Road and the 100'setback from edge of pavement of County Barn Road, the Applicant is seeking an increase to allowable entry sign height and area to ensure visibility. Further, sign height is measured from the centerline height of the adjacent roadway. The site will need to place 3' to 4'of fill material on-site to reach a finished grade. The sign location is anticipated to be located at or slightly higher than the finished grade; therefore the additional height is warranted. This deviation request is similar to numerous other requests approved for master planned communities within Collier County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning staff anticipates no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, 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." PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 14 of 19 May 24, 2017 Proposed Deviation#5 "Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C,which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height and prohibits the existing ground from being altered under the sign,to permit an 8-foot high wall on top of berm." Petitioner's Justification: The additional 2 feet of wall is necessary to provide a buffer from the adjacent road traffic noise and the ground must be altered to meet water management criteria. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning staff anticipates no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, 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 "Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.H, which requires if any required turn lane improvement requires the use of any existing County rights-of-way or easement(s), then compensating right-of-way shall be provided at no cost to Collier County as a consequence of such improvement(s) upon final approval of the turn lane design during the review of the first subsequent development order unless waived by the County Manager or designee, to permit no additional compensating right-of-way as long as the existing County Barn Road swale cross section can be maintained." Petitioner's Justification: The typical cross section will be maintained. The right-of-way is currently 200 feet. 50 feet of right-of-way was taken from the subject property as a part of the LASIP project. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Transportation Planning staff reviewed this deviation and determined that the normally required compensating right-of-way is not needed in this instance, because there is adequate right-of-way way existing for the current and projected needs on County Barn Road. Furthermore, the current two-lane road configuration is adequate to address the projected traffic for this road segment, including drainage, pathway, and sidewalk facilities. For these reasons, it is staff's opinion this deviation is reasonable. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, 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." PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 15 of 19 May 24, 2017 Proposed Deviation#7 "Deviation 7 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J, which limits cul-de-sacs to a maximum length of 1,000 feet unless existing topographical conditions or other natural features preclude a street layout to avoid longer cul-de-sacs,to permit cul-de-sacs up to a maximum of 1,100 feet with placement of no through traffic signage." Petitioner's Justification: A portion of the proposed residential development tracts require access via cul-de-sacs. The 1,000'length will need to be exceeded in order to gain adequate vehicular access to all development areas within the PUD. The cul-de-sac can be identified with appropriate signage indicating that the roads are not through streets. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The Fire Code Administrator reviewed the proposed Ordinance and has no comments or concerns at this time. Additionally, staff notes that a full review will be conducted at the time of SDP or PPL. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, 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 #8 "Deviation 8 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, and Appendix B, which establishes a minimum 60-foot wide local road right-of-way,to allow a minimum 50' wide right-of-way. This deviation applies when the developer proposes to develop local streets in lieu of a private drive or access way." Petitioner's Justification: The proposed 50'wide private road right-of-way is sufficiently wide to accommodate the required roadway improvements. Utilities and sidewalks can be placed within easements outside the private right-of-way if necessary. The internal project roads will be private and the standard public right-of-way is not necessary for internal traffic volumes. Dual sidewalks will be provided on local street locations with homesites and a 23'setback will be required between the garage door and back of sidewalk. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Transportation Planning reviewed this deviation and concurs with Zoning staff that this deviation request is reasonable. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, 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." PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 16 of 19 May 24, 2017 Proposed Deviation#9 "Deviation 9 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.H.1.e.ii, which permits a maximum of 1 acre of required preserves to be created for property with less than 20 acres of existing native vegetation, to permit 1.3 acres of preserve to be created." Petitioner's Justification: The deviation is warranted because the highest quality vegetation that exists on-site is located in the southeast portion of the site and is approximately 1.40 acres. In order to meet the County required native vegetation preservation requirement in an area contiguous to the proposed preservation area, 1.32 acres of preserve will need to be created. This is consistent with plans presented to the SFWMD. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Environmental staff reviewed this deviation and concurs with Zoning staff's approval. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, 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 #10 "Deviation 10 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02 A.1., which requires sidewalks and bike lanes must be constructed within public and private rights-of-way or easements,which are adjacent to the site prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for construction authorized by a final subdivision plat, site improvement,or site development plan,unless otherwise determined by the County Manager or designee, to allow no sidewalks and bike lanes to be constructed for the development." Petitioner's Justification: Relief is requested from this requirement understanding that the applicant will construct a right turn lane that is not warranted by the Collier County's Right of Way Handbook, and therefore, should not be required. However, the Developer proposes to construct the right turn lane in lieu of the sidewalk because it will preserve capacity along County Barn Road, and more importantly, avoid NB traffic flow conflicts and rear-end collisions. The capacity and safety benefits achieved by constructing the right turn lane far exceed the benefits of constructing a sidewalk that will only extend the length of the property and will not connect to other sidewalks because none exist along County Barn Road. There is adequate r/w along the east side of County Barn Road if the County decides to construct a sidewalk in the future. At this time, the County is planning to construct a multi-use path on the west side of County Barn Road. This should be conditioned with the following: 1. The right turn lane will be 185 feet long. PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 17 of 19 May 24, 2017 2. The adjusted swale section will allow for a sidewalk on the west side of the County Barn right of way. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Transportation Planning staff reviewed this deviation and determined this deviation will better serve the safety concerns of the public by retaining the free flow of traffic on County Barn Road. Staff requested the right-turn lane to reduce traffic conflicts on this two-lane road segment; however, the traffic volume generated by this development does not warrant this request. Additionally, the sidewalk along the east side of County Barn Road is not currently planned within the next five years; however, a multi-use pathway along the west is identified and partially funded in the Collier Metropolitan Planning Organization's pathway priority list, as well as the Florida Department of Transportation's Five Year Work Program. It is staffs opinion this deviation request is reasonable. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING(NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on December 8, 2016. The applicant's team consisted of Wayne Arnold, Michael Greenberg, Bruce Anderson, Chip Youman, Jim Banks, Brent Addison, and Sharon Umpenhour. Discussion items included LASIP, tree removal along County Barn Road, types and sizes of dwellings proposed, needed sidewalk/lighting/guardrail improvements to County Barn Road, permitting timeline, conservation areas, water management and drainage, school capacity, roadways accommodating school buses, construction trucks on County Barn Road, affordable housing, loss of green space, height of structures, density, and traffic. One member of the public commented that LASIP ought to be completed prior to allowing construction on this project. Please see the NIM summary in Attachment 2—Application and Support Material for additional information. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report on May 19, 2017. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the CCPC, acting as the local planning agency and the Environmental Advisory Council, forwards Petition PUDZ-PL20160001398 COUNTY BARN ROAD RPUD, to the Board with a recommendation of approval subject to the denial of Deviation#2. Attachments: 1) Proposed Ordinance 2) Application and Support Material 3) FLUE Consistency Review 4) Density Map 5) LIDAR Map 6) Legal Notifications PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 18 of 19 May 24, 2017 PREPARED BY: S 7// ERIC JOHN r,AICP, CFM,PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: RAYMOND ZONING MANAGER 'ATE ZONING DIVISION r.- r?- C) MIKE BOSI,AICP,DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION APPROVED BY: S-.r- -2 3-// 7 ES FRENCH,DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PUDZ-PL20160001398 County Barn Road RPUD Page 19 of 19 BrownleeMichael Subject: Meet w/ Bruce Anderson Location: DF Office Start: Mon 6/26/2017 4:30 PM End: Mon 6/26/2017 5:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: FialaDonna Good morning again, Michael. Thank you for fitting us in such a tight schedule. Please tell Ms. Fiala we hope she has a speedy recovery. Bruce needs a half hour appointment to discuss three things: 1) Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment 2) County Barn Road PUD 3) (and if on the Agenda)Vanderbilt Commons PUD & Growth Management Plan Amendments. Bruce will be the only attendee. Michele M. Gowdy Real Estate Assistant CHEFFY PASSIDOMO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. ATTVR :ITS AT LAW 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239) 261-9300 telephone (239) 261-9782 facsimile mmgowdy(a�napleslaw.com www.napleslaw.com 1 BrownleeMichael From: Marlene Sherman [mwsherman@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 4:06 PM To: FialaDonna; Henning Tom; Hiller Georgia; TaylorPenny; Nance Tim Subject: Need for sSidewalks and street lights on County Barn Road Categories: PRINTED Original Message From: Marlene Sherman [mailto:mwsherman@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 11:39 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Sidewalks and street lights for County Barn Road Commissioner Fiala: I attended the June 1st meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission where the advertised hearing for PUD-PL2016001398 for 38 acre property on the east side of County Barn Road and south of the Seacrest school. The Neal Communities are seeking to create a new townhouse community similar to their Avalon Development on the corner of Davis Blvd and County Barn Road. Two persons from Glen Eagle Community spoke in regard for the need for infrastructure on County Barn Road (street lights and sidewalks) before more development is approved for property along Country Barn Road. However, I do not believe this matter will impede their PUD approval. I use County Barn Road regularly and I agree there needs to be street lighting. Is the need for street lights a matter that should first needs be brought to the attention of the County Commissioners before any action would be taken? Marlene Sherman Chairman, External Community Relations Committee Countryside Golf & County Club This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com BrownleeMichael From: Marlene Sherman [mwsherman@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 4:24 PM To: ScottTrinity; FialaDonna; TaylorPenny Subject: Need for Street lights on County Barn Road Categories: PRINTED Ms. Scott: I was referred to you by Eric Ortman(MPO) who told me you would be the one to start with in my pursuit of street lights on County Barn Rd. The lack of street lights on County Barn is becoming a hazard to night time drivers. The Collier County Water Management Division has now completed deep and large drainage ditches on both sides of County Barn Road. This road is two lane and currently without street lights. To my knowledge there is no long term plans to install street lights along this roadway which acts as a conneior road between Davis Blvd and Rattlesnake Hammock. I attended a Collier County Planning Commission meeting last week where Neal Communities has purchased 38 acres fronting on County Barn Road. Neal Community is now building and selling their Avalon Development at the corner of Davis Blvd and County Barn Road. It appears approval of the new Neal PUD for 200 town homes will be granted. The property will be gated with the only entrance/exit onto County Barn Road. Additionally, there is another large parcel of land advertised for sale just south of the above mentioned property. To my knowledge, the County has no plans in place for the needed infrastructure, such as side walks and street lights, on the County Barn two lane road with the deep drainage ditches on both sides. The MPO does have 2020/21 project for a bike trail in their Tentative Work Program. I believe the County needs to consider planning for street lights and sidewalks on Country Barn Road since there are other properties affronting this roadway that are currently being advertised for sale. After dark, County Barn Road,with the NEW deep water drainage ditches, on both sides of the road, presents a hazard to night time drivers. Will you assist me in getting street lights, on County Barn, in the Collier County long term planning budget? Marlene Sherman Chairman, External Community Relations Committee Countryside Golf and County Club (239) 352-9876 © Virus-free. www.avg.com 1 BrownleeMichael From: Marlene Sherman [mwsherman@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 11:39 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Sidewalks and street lights for County Barn Road Categories: PRINTED Commissioner Fiala: I attended the June 1st meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission where the advertised hearing for PUD-PL2016001398 for 38 acre property on the east side of County Barn Road and south of the Seacrest school. The Neal Communities are seeking to create a new townhouse community similar to their Avalon Development on the corner of Davis Blvd and County Barn Road. Two persons from Glen Eagle Community spoke in regard for the need for infrastructure on County Barn Road (street lights and sidewalks) before more development is approved for property along Country Barn Road. However, I do not believe this matter will impede their PUD approval. I use County Barn Road regularly and I agree there needs to be street lighting. Is the need for street lights a matter that should first needs be brought to the attention of the County Commissioners before any action would be taken? Marlene Sherman Chairman, External Community Relations Committee Countryside Golf & County Club This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.corn 1 BrownleeMichael From: ScottTrinity Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 4:38 PM To: Marlene Sherman Cc: ScavoneMichelle; FrenchJames; PattersonAmy; FialaDonna, TaylorPenny Subject: RE: Need for Street lights on County Barn Road Ms. Sherman, Thank you for your email. I hope all is well with you. Ms. Scavone (she is copied on this email) will coordinate a response for you from our Traffic Operations section as it relates to your street lighting request. Best Regards, Trinity Scott, Transportation Planning Manager Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees &Program Management Division Telephone: 239.252.5832; Fax: 239.252.6610 trinityscott@colliergov.net From: Marlene Sherman [mailto:mwsherman@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 4:24 PM To: ScottTrinity; FialaDonna; TaylorPenny Subject: Need for Street lights on County Barn Road Ms. Scott: I was referred to you by Eric Ortman(MPO) who told me you would be the one to start with in my pursuit of street lights on County Barn Rd. The lack of street lights on County Barn is becoming a hazard to night time drivers. The Collier County Water Management Division has now completed deep and large drainage ditches on both sides of County Barn Road. This road is two lane and currently without street lights. To my knowledge there is no long term plans to install street lights along this roadway which acts as a conneior road between Davis Blvd and Rattlesnake Hammock. I attended a Collier County Planning Commission meeting last week where Neal Communities has purchased 38 acres fronting on County Barn Road.Neal Community is now building and selling their Avalon Development at the corner of Davis Blvd and County Barn Road. It appears approval of the new Neal PUD for 200 town homes will be granted. The property will be gated with the only entrance/exit onto County Barn Road. Additionally, there is another large parcel of land advertised for sale just south of the above mentioned property. To my knowledge,the County has no plans in place for the needed infrastructure, such as side walks and street lights, on the County Barn two lane road with the deep drainage ditches on both sides. The MPO does have 2020/21 project for a bike trail in their Tentative Work Program. I believe the County needs to consider planning for street lights and sidewalks on Country Barn Road since there are other properties affronting this roadway that are currently being advertised for sale. After dark, 1 County Barn Road,with the NEW deep water drainage ditches, on both sides of the road, presents a hazard to night time drivers. Will you assist me in getting street lights, on County Barn, in the Collier County long term planning budget? Marlene Sherman Chairman, External Community Relations Committee Countryside Golf and County Club (239) 352-9876 Virus-free. www.avg.com Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 BrownleeMichael 1 e From: marc alien [mallencny@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 8:00 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Re: PDI — PL20160000404: Wolf Creek RPUD by the developer of parcels 3b and 9 to reduce preserves Categories: PRINTED Re: PDI - PL20160000404: Wolf Creek RPUD by the developer of parcels 3b and 9 to reduce preserves Dear Commissioner Fiala, First, let me be clear, I am not against development, nor against this developer's right to develop his property. The property is, however, within a residential planned urban development, Wolf Creek, and development should be in keeping with the agreements and ordinances associated with the RPUD, and should be compatible with other developments in the RPUD. There are two facets to this proposal; preserve reduction and residential density, although only one is being considered with this PDI. To be properly assessed the project should be looked at in its entirety, not piecemeal. Please consider the following: With respect to the preserves: There were no excess preserves or excess native vegetation prior to 2013 when a portion of Palermo Cove was brought into the Wolf Creek PUD. As noted in the CCPC minutes of 3/21/2013, it was intended that there be no net effect upon preserves and no increase in density in the Wolf Creek RPUD and Palermo Cove PUD, with the 2013 WCPUD and Palermo Cove amendments. Thus, the apparent "excess" should not have existed. The excess appeared when the required preserves for SFWMD, which were more than the county's native vegetation requirement, were added to the WCPUD map exhibit as preserve, but not taken into account as required native vegetation because only a portion was required. The excess was an unintended consequence and a reduction should therefore not be approved. With respect to the density: While other county PUDs may have dwelling unit "pools", Wolf Creek dwelling units have been allocated to the different parcels in the PUD, initially by a Cost Sharing Agreement* and subsequently by 1 county ordinances** as parcels were added to the PUD. This was done with intent as documented in county minutes*** CCPC minutes from 3/21/13 document specific allocation of dwelling units to prevent them from being "used" by other parcels, which would change density Parcel 9 was allocated 80 dwelling units for a density of 3.99 dwelling units per acre when it was brought into the Wolf Creek RPUD in 2007 - that was the request and that was what was approved Parcel 3b, representing N 60% of the original parcel 3, would be allocated — 24 dwelling units based upon acreage and the original 2004 CSA post transfer of units to Falls at Portofino Thus, parcels 3b and 9 have N 104 dwelling units allocated to them under current ordinances and agreements - this yields an allocated density of N 3.3 du's/acre Comparable densities are: Black Bear Ridge - density 1.97 built out (^' 4 allocated) Raffia(WCPUD portion) - '' 2.3 Adjacent Island Walk - 3.04 Falls at Portofino - ' ' 6.85 - these were initially high end town homes selling in the N $500K range - the allocation plan was for one higher density multifamily project on the periphery of WCPUD with lesser density elsewhere There is a companion application PL20160000157 which proposes a 215 dwelling unit project with N 88% of the buildings being 7-9 flex units - this is a high density row house type development of N 6.82 du's/acre - more than twice the approved/allocated density. parcels 3b and 9 do not have 215 dwelling units allocated to them and there is no request to increase the approved density the developer is claiming density he does not appear to have At every juncture, the county has historically upheld the allocation of dwelling units within the Wolf Creek PUD, documented in meeting minutes and ordinances. The county should be consistent and continue to recognize the historical allocation and not allow a claim for unused but allocated dwelling units within the PUD. In conclusion please consider: 2 The PDI for a requested reconfiguration of the preserve map and decrease in preserves should not be approved as there should be no "excess" preserves. The companion PL 20160000157 should not be approved as the requested number of dwelling units is more than twice that allocated. The high density row house type development is not compatible with the original plan and not in keeping with the majority of the adjacent developments. Note that there is no opposition to development according to parameters of the original plan; a development of —104 dwelling units, which may be multifamily, possibly with a mild or moderate increase in density, but this proposal is not that. We have met with the developer in an attempt to work out something mutually agreeable. They have been unwilling to consider any compromise in their proposed density, to which they are not entitled according to allocation. Thank you for your time, Respectfully, Marc Allen, 7347 Acorn Way, Naples FL *OR 3635 PGS 1672-1699, recognized as valid and enforceable as documented in various county meeting minutes **Ordinances 2007-46 and 2013-37 ***BCC minutes 5/22-23/2007, CCPC minutes 3/21/13 3 BrownleeMichael Subject: Meet w/ Bruce Anderson Location: DF Office Start: Mon 6/26/2017 4:30 PM End: Mon 6/26/2017 5:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: FialaDonna Good morning again, Michael. Thank you for fitting us in such a tight schedule. Please tell Ms. Fiala we hope she has a speedy recovery. Bruce needs a half hour appointment to discuss three things: 1) Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment 2) County Barn Road PUD 3) (and if on the Agenda)Vanderbilt Commons PUD &Growth Management Plan Amendments. Bruce will be the only attendee. Michele M. Gowdy Real Estate Assistant CHEFFYPASSIDOMO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. TTOILKIII ET LAW' 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239) 261-9300 telephone (239) 261-9782 facsimile mmgowdy(c�napleslaw.com www.napleslaw.com 1 lv /' BrownleeMichael From: Sheri Roberts jroberts.sheri@att.netj Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2017 8:38 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh Attachments: Ltr to Commissioner Fiala 2.7.17.pdf; Attachment 1 -Sereno Grove Plan 1.11.17.pdf; Attachment 2-Sereno Grove Alternative Plan 1.23.17.pdf; Attachment 3-Key to Markings on Sereno Grove Alternative Plan 1.23.17.pdf; Attachment 4-Sereno Grove Plan in Context 1.11.17.pdf Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Commissioner Fiala: My neighbors and I would like to raise with you our concerns regarding the "Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh" development in Naples. Please see the attached letter and the attachments referenced in that letter. We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss. Thank you for your consideration. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts L/ Roberts.sheri cr,att.net ���" // t/0„ Mobile: (248)630-5194 cfril4 • - / "i - / i In ° ,4 ` , / Ji* po ,,Q;4/4-3 .--t/' 2 y I 1,i ./ 21 ?,‘tvi.t, krliA1 February 7,2017 BY USPS AND EMAIL Commissioner Donna Fiala Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 303 Naples,FL 34112 DonnaFiala@colliergov.net colliergov.net RE: Disproportionate Adverse Impacts of WCI Sereno Grove Site Plan on our Homes in Wilshire Lakes,Naples To:Honorable Collier County Commissioner Donna Fiala From: David and Linda Bankston—9664 Wilshire Lakes Blvd,Naples,FL 34109 Jim and Sheri Roberts—9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd,Naples,FL 34109 Larry and Jessica Doyle—9660 Wilshire Lakes Blvd,Naples,FL 34109 Dear Commissioner Fiala: The purpose of this letter is to make you aware of information about the WCI Sereno Grove PUD that will cause our homes to absorb more impacts of the WCI development than any other homeowners in either Sereno Grove or Wilshire Lakes. We have tried to address this directly with WCI and even hired an engineering firm to develop an alternate plan that would address our concerns. However, after a great deal of delay,we were advised on Friday,February 3,2017, that WCI will not discuss this with us. Therefore,we are asking for your help in resolving this matter before it is too late. We all own homes in Wilshire Lakes that directly abut the proposed Sereno Grove,Naples, development.The first attachment depicts the current Sereno Grove construction plan;our properties are highlighted in yellow for your reference. As you can see,WCI has chosen to run their access road from Livingston Road all the way east to within 10 feet of our back property lines,then curve the road north and again east,effectively surrounding the Roberts home at 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd. The wall that was proposed earlier in the process to provide separation has been removed from this plan,and the normally 15 foot buffer has itself been reduced to only 10 feet. The buffer will be nothing other than a hedge and trees spaced 25 feet apart. Our homes, much like others,are designed to be open to the back each with a lanai area that is used much like a family room. We will be denied this use and enjoyment of our property if the development proceeds as planned. 1 { Further,there is a viable alternative for the design of the development that would mitigate the impacts to our properties. This was first discussed with Grady Minor, WCI's agent for this development, on January 9,2017,and then further refined in the following weeks. The second • attachment reflects that alternate plan(the third attachment is a key to the markings). This redesign keeps the same number of lots with equivalent lot areas, and should be relatively cost neutral to construct. We presented this refined alternative plan to WCI on January 23,2017 and, as indicated above,were advised on Friday that they will not even consider it. This blatant disregard for the property interests of existing homeowners is detrimental to the economic development of this area. If homeowners lose confidence that their property rights have any protection,the desire to purchase property in this area will suffer. In the course of addressing this issue,we have also identified flaws in the process that are equally detrimental to preserving homeowner property rights and,therefore,to economic development. There has been a lack of proper notice of this development in more than one respect. Two of the homeowners, including 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd.which is most impacted by the proposed roads,were not provided with notice of the September 2016 meeting at which the PUD was approved. The two homes that didn't receive notice are families who moved to Wilshire Lakes for positions with companies that recently relocated to the area. We only learned about the WCI development plans when a separate notice to vacate an easement in the area to be developed was received before the December holidays by one of us. After multiple objections to that easement vacation were filed with the county,including by the Wilshire Lakes Homeowners Association(the"HOA"),the HOA was advised last week by Marcus Berman that WCI has withdrawn its request to vacate the easement. We find it curious that after objections are filed, WCI has now simply withdrawn the request to vacate,denying us the public hearing that would otherwise be required. In addition,there has been some amount of misdirection relating to WCI's intended site plan in notices of the meetings held. At the time of the PUD approval,the board was provided in the official"notice"with a drawing of the proposed development that showed a green space adjacent to our properties. This was consistent with how other adjacent developments were treated— specifically the Marsala PUD received a generous preserve area around all of their adjacent lots. However, as indicated above and on the attachment we are providing to you with this,the document provided to the board and in the notice is not in fact how the developer intends to proceed. WCI's actual plan is not within the spirit or intent of the original approval,nor is it in keeping with notice provisions of the land development code. And most of all,it is not a good land planning solution. Below please find two images reflecting this change. We own the three northerly homes in the orange circle. 2 "r 44 6 '4 9 P V ' III!, • -* 1 ; • -- - •--T • •,,, 00 r---- ......- . . , X1' 1 ) I., ,. 1 ♦ S Y-" k . , . I. • ` 7 tom- , 1i1 rt a t , b i t. DRAWING# 1 - SERENO AT NAPLES PUD/PELICAN MARSH PRESENTED AT SEPTEMBER 13 COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING. [NORTH IS TO THE LEFT-HAND SIDE] 3 .. •♦ '. 4 , • 1' 1 ,' ' /iS‘-'4•11)3 M a. x.. c•ast. a i ? !°E�.-v i , 41111\ olio : mot, st,. .. ,1 1 s y , wr DRAWING#2-SERENO AT NAPLES PUD/PELICAN MARSH CURRENT PLAN The second issue observed in these two drawings is that Drawing#2(Current Plan)includes four additional lots not previously shown when presented to you,the commission,for approval. Drawing#2 further encroaches on our back yards with the very minimal Type B border described above. Drawings#1 and#2 create a very small border with hardly any separation for the corner home at 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd.Water runoff from roads,traffic,noise and headlights will be on three sides of the house. We are the only homes affected so drastically by the WCI Sereno Grove plan,as you can see on the fourth attachment.Everyone else in our current community and the new community has a preserve or lake view. The planned road extends directly into our back and side yards. Our property values will plummet. Water runoff from so much roadway will exacerbate the water issues that we already have during the rainy season. Further,with the road noise,headlights from vehicles,lack of privacy and diminished view,we will be prevented from enjoying the property we purchased. In addition,our local wildlife,which includes threatened species,will also suffer. We were trying to be constructive by contacting with the developer in an attempt to resolve the issue with an alternative site plan,but WCI has been delaying their response to us while at the same time pressing ahead despite the concerns we have raised. We,of course,are also willing to work with Collier County staff. Since it now seems that an amicable resolution cannot be achieved,we need to consider our legal remedies.It is our feeling that no property owner should be placed in a position of having to spend significant funds on representation to achieve what should be common sense solutions that have been afforded to all other homeowners in the area. 4 Thank you for your attention to this matter. We and our HOA look forward to your support and assistance. Sincerely, OP • "/Iir f � iI • 5 £ � i. a Ywa, o ' Z = 6. E +i it a I jI f: 1 "I ' I1 '0)4P �I�y. 3 ugg 7 Ri .ii.1 A II 'S \�'•1 :.._iwiwiirwiiiwl "^1.- 1:: ✓ Itr + -,+n '� f ' F r I I I f—€� it i C A II-- � -- ._ a O 1 ....A2 it —� ----,''11.11111 �1'111,1 ' '�t' . I_. ._- - ; o i . 1. A a ``a 11-- iii a 1� 1 l ' _ I"•it i ____hiii a 1 ' 1 y -,- €i 4 f -ffill_ li ' —— . —— — .4 ' ' 1 ir.nr.', - 1111 I; 0 — ii 1 I� s >I 1 OVA'p i c r;;, •i 1 �17 1 E 2 Ii i. £f I) i. � iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii EE E ll s I t> I i' ii •V 27{ 1. .... `�. ll Ht 7 t �, is I 1 1 a iv I� ' 1 A 1 11 1 A 1 1 - a A a l 1 r', I � ?i<;.`?!ii _ I �f/ 1 1 - µ 1 a 1 _" 1 1 - . b¢ 1 ;1 1 I II i� — ',...7.„10.0„,..0 ,1,-,is �rf��A. 4 _- I -4-.101 a •O 3- ,ii. ... i tl _Y B ee 2 1, tt ib .1 k,k tr 4`, l+tr bf i)ttr!all. i1�A Ill 4 © 4 f 1 ,,11i. { ! --_•;•z• i v,' - '9i! -21 g a r 3 iY Li dltd(;r}lg1:k�#3 F ,i `r 'sI 1„ 3 !tit€f i 5 3 0 i,F}g•a1111 �E1 P t ( r ��`� . it s � 1 f8 n ii8$ii�''- hi; 1 g tttS{,:ss{ts:{, tt{.i{se I �¢t t ,il ' •I.. /,' ii } Mi? 33111v. li93dt� Sl#!' • :j i j 1, 1 q. J p , gitit 117�1a1a1i17lit''J91'1.41tit {:{{ i £ 'i-r �sk' :'?S,' 1 1iki- h'tjtli{i t aild i`f! £ 1 £ (j it. :;•'\''...*; I I it 1 i 1 t • 1, t I t t azo{i} ,-" / 11_ 1, cf.:— ,f 1 ( 1 4-..., tttWC.sN k • • ' ,,' ........-,...----------::::......=------ CZ:_::::::, w„wrollmmaM+a • . . � 1 BrownleeMichael From: Sheri Roberts [roberts.sheri@att.net] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 3:54 PM To: FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael Subject: Update on Sereno Grove Attachments: Exhibit A June Sereno Grove Plan.pdf Categories: PRINTED Commissioner Fiala, In follow-up to our February 7, 2017 communication sent on behalf of us and our neighbors, I would like to update you on events that have occurred with respect to the development known as Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh ("Sereno Grove"), particularly since the plat and construction plans for Sereno Grove ("PPL") are scheduled to be heard by the Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC") next Tuesday, June 27, 2017. As a reminder, the access road for Sereno Grove is planned to extend eastward from Livingston Road for approximately 1/2 mile to within 10 feet of our back property line, then curve north and east, effectively surrounding our home at 9670 Wilshire Lakes Blvd., Naples. The current plan is attached as Exhibit A (our home and those of our two neighbors are highlighted in yellow). On January 9, 2017, we raised concerns with WCI/Lennar's agent regarding the placement of this portion of the roadway, to no effect. In February, WCI/Lennar's agent contacted our Wilshire Lakes Homeowners Association ("HOA") to discuss WCI/Lennar's need for easements to tie into the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs for water and sewer, since no such easements exist. Use of the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs was assumed in WCI/Lennar's initial plans as it would be the most cost- effective location and alignment to provide the water and sewer connections for Sereno Grove. Our HOA President advised the representative that she wanted to include us and our neighbors in the discussion so that we could address all issues at the same time. Initially, they agreed and a meeting was set for February 13. However, on or about February 3, when WCI/Lennar's counsel advised ours that WCI "did not see any benefit to discussing" our request to address the location of a portion of the roadway in their plan, WCI/Lennar's agent canceled that February 13 meeting. In mid-April, we were advised that management of WCI/Lennar would meet with us to discuss our concerns, and we were asked to contact Rhonda Brewer, their VP of Community Development, to set up a meeting. We called and spoke to Ms. Brewer on April 19, 2017, and provided her with our availability: three full days and one half-day from April 25 through May 2. She thanked me for being so flexible, but then did not contact me to arrange a meeting. Instead, WCI/Lennar was working behind the scenes to reconfigure their PPL, a revised version of which was filed with the county on May 24. That filing was made in connection with a process termed an insubstantial change to plans ("ICP"), in which WCI/Lennar sought approval of changes to the PPL in order to avoid addressing our concerns (application #20170001891). Despite their use of the ICP process, the changes are not"insubstantial;" they involve a complete re-work of the wastewater and water distribution facilities for the PPL. To provide further detail, WCI/Lennar now plans to run the water and sewer connections all the way from Livingston Road which is approximately 1/4 mile west of their western property line (not counting the access road), rather than use the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs that are approximately 12.5 feet to the east, as originally planned. According to the opinion of WCI/Lennar's own engineer, as filed with the county, the probable additional construction cost for the proposed changes will be approximately $290,000, which does not seem to include engineering, permitting or filing fees or the additional costs of ongoing maintenance of the wastewater facilities. Not only do the new plans increase WCI/Lennar's costs unnecessarily, but the proposed changes result in an inferior and inefficient design which, in certain respects, raises public health and safety concerns. The changes include (1) using an unlooped water system which can result in poor water quality, (2) a very long distance between the water connection and the further points in Sereno Grove which will likely result in poor water pressure, (3) a privately-managed sanitary sewer system that includes an extremely long force main and low flow, and (4) the removal of the requirement for a standby generator for the wastewater pumping station, which removes any protection against failure. In its ICP filing, WCI/Lennar further claimed that its private ownership and maintenance of the wastewater facilities is necessary because the legal requirements it must otherwise meet will create a "considerable economic hardship" on them. If there is any"hardship," it is a hardship that they created by their unwillingness to work with us. Despite all of this, the county staff approved their ICP request on June 20, 2017. It is obvious that their unwillingness to address the positioning of a portion of their roadway so close to our home and the homes of our neighbors has nothing to do with either the cost of doing so or the time necessary to re-work their plans. The alternative plan created by our engineer(who we hired and paid) was provided to WCI/Lennar in January; the changes included in that plan would be relatively cost neutral and WCI/Lennar would retain the same number of lots of equivalent size. Rather than consider that configuration, WCI/Lennar has wasted time developing a new plan involving a costly move of the water and sewer tie-ins. For less cost, they could have used our engineer's plan and been in a position to obtain approval of their PPL at the May 9 Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC") meeting, as originally scheduled. They chose not to do so, but instead sought, and received, an abeyance from legal requirements in order to obtain approval for their significantly revised plan. Under Sec. 250-58 of the Code of Laws we have 30 days from the June 20, 2017 decision to file an appeal. We advised county staff that we intend to do so. Despite this, county staff advised us that they have scheduled the PPL to be considered by the BOCC next Tuesday, June 27, 2017, essentially shortening our 30-day appeal period to less than one week. WCI/Lennar has made it clear that they are more interested in spending their time and money pushing for approval for a PPL that is inconsistent and incompatible with the surrounding land uses, than make any attempt to recognize the rights of existing homeowners. Under their proposed PPL, we and our neighbors will be forced to bear disproportionate negative impacts from the WCI/Lennar development in excess of those borne by any other homeowners within Sereno Grove or the surrounding communities. This is a blatant disregard for the property interests of existing homeowners. Thank you for your time in reviewing this email. If you have any questions or would like to schedule a call or a meeting to discuss these developments, please let us know. Kind regards, Sheri and James Roberts roberts.sheri(a)att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 2 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Burt Saunders COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 06/27/17 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. 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]. SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails I iCalls Numerous letters and emails (51); Meeting with Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold and David Jensen; May 22nd Town Hall Meeting — Numerous attendees spoke about project (85 attendees) 9.B. 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 04-41, as amended,the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Planned Unit Development(PUD)to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)for a project known as the Triad RPUD to allow development of 44 single-family dwelling units. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.75± acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-11, as amended by Ordinance No. 05-23,the former Triad Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD- PL20160002564] SEE FILE ®Meetings Correspondence ®e-mails ['Calls Meeting with Rich Yovanovich and Wayne Everett; Emails from Douglas Lewis and Scott Lepore Numerous emails (21); Neighborhood Petition from 128 Black Bear Ridge Residents; Meetings with Terrie Abrams, various Board Members of Black Bear Ridge, Steve Bracci; Meetings with George Vuko and Bruce Anderson COUNTY MANAGERS REPORT 11.G. 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 for recording the final plat of Sereno Grove, (Application Number PL20160001884) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. SEE FILE 1—Meetings I !Correspondence ®e-mails (Calls Emails from Sheri Roberts CONSENT AGENDA 16.A.2. 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 for recording the final plat of Maple Ridge Amenity Center at Ave Maria, (Application Number PL20170000724) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE (Meetings Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls 16.A.3. 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 for recording the minor final plat of Oyster Harbor at Fiddler's Creek Phase 1 - Replat 3, Application Number PL20170000332. SEE FILE ®Meetings Correspondence De-mails (Calls Meeting with Anthony Pires, Terry Cole and Valerie Lord 16.A.4. 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 for recording the final plat of Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples Phase 4, Parcel "L", (Application Number PL20170001594) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE [Meetings ❑Correspondence ( le-mails ❑Calls 1432, Page 1093 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; and approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Quit Claim Deed and Bill of Sale to transfer wastewater facilities from the County to the property owner. The subject property is located on the west side of • Bayshore Drive, approximately one quarter mile south of Tamiami Trail East, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I !Meetings (Correspondence Fie-mails ❑Calls \ 3 CD \ \\\ / ) 4 ,EEEE Ln \ ,, cu `\\\ 0'42' 64' 0 $ ®_c.:n.1 ® z °=a2 . 1, L--y----_-_-., CA 7m$ • I \0 ! » U 1 ( } k .0 L o § i F, r2 E / ( c E 2 w L'I'I 0I7 & in E \ \ . E ® § / . - E t w 1 g \ ! E \ { � Z _ ! is E _ { \ ) a \ 2 m no rn \ E \ \ E E _ ~ i o \ } / 0 8 « , \ \ , 0 E \ E \ , ii o E ) / - e° ii hili a' g CI E �. li \ \ \ ik CO / } > ` a C } 1 § 2 \ .c \ } \ / } 01 MI t g w g ` f \ j) \ \ E °Z C kip 5>- j � / � k\k \ \ � \ / \ 12 as 0 , _ - a � § 3 a 5 ` 2 E. a o ) |] e ; ; % ) t C - / q / �u � / `smumi moo ma / ». \ /<a Z c O 2 Cr) 3 g \ .R \ co e o n : . CO LykinsDave From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18; 2017 10:24 AM To: SaundersBurt Cc: LykinsDave Subject: FW:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG Mr. Saunders, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' ; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' ; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' ; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' ; 'Donna Fiala@colliergov.net' Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' ; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' ; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' ; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' ; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 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 LykinsDave From: Robert Knuppel <bob@knuppel.org> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2017 9:10 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Esplanade cc v Barron Collier and Addiies Corner As you know there is at least 4 buildings proposed by BC across from the Esplanade and Amour Ct.The lack of opacity and height of the buildings will destroy our view. Obviously there will be noise, more traffic and traffic intersections that are dangerous.We now have difficulty emerging from Esplanade onto Immokalee. Diplomacy and negotiation from an asymmetric table has been futile. We simply asked for movement of the buildings easterly, increased opacity, assistance with berm development to help hide lights and noise, critical positioning of the buildings to preserve the preserve. BC increase in use of the preserve decreased the preserve by more than 50%. At this point it would appear building an high berm and an attractive foliage covered wall and increased opacity would not be that costly and opacity can be increase as long as the buildings are kept at 50 feet. The buffer can be at least 30- 50-feet. We ask for your assistance in protecting the preserve and our views. Thank you for you time. Robert Knuppel MD, MBA, MPH 8628 Amour Ct Naples, Fl 34119 908-812-5240 1 LykinsDave From: Terrie Abrams <terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 2:36 PM To: LykinsDave Subject: Re: Black Bear Ridge Thank you so much for your quick response. Please schedule this time for us. Kind regards, Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 > On May 3, 2017, at 2:22 PM, LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>wrote: > >Terrie, >On behalf of the Commissioner, I will be pleased to assist with the scheduling of an appointment. Would Monday May 22nd be suitable for you and others who plan on attending? If so, 11 am is available for your consideration. Please advise at your convenience. > Regards... > > Dave Lykins > Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders >davelykins@colliergov.net >3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 > Naples, FL 34112 > P: (239) 252-8603 > > > Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. > > Original Message > From:Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] >Sent:Tuesday, May 2, 2017 4:45 PM >To: SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net> >Cc: LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> >Subject: Black Bear Ridge > > Hello Burt, > > Black Bear Ridge would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the latest developments surrounding our community and how we move forward with the county on dealing with road improvements. We greatly appreciate the time and support you have shown us. > > How do we get on your calendar? > > I tried scheduling a meeting with Nick Casalanguida but received no response. LykinsDave From: Terrie Abrams <terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:50 PM To: CasalanguidaNick Cc: MarcellaJeanne; ScottTrinity; LykinsDave; Bracci Steve Subject: Re: BBR phone call - May 5 , 2017 Nick, It is far more professional to engage during our face to face meeting so I apologize for not being able to help myself here and comment again. My last email ... I promise. Can we all agree that the PUD ordinance says the "developer" will be responsible for intersection improvements? Isn't that what developer bonds are for? And, shouldn't the county have required agreement from the developers so that proper security bonds could have been obtained by the county? You had mentioned the multiple developers involved couldn't sort things out. Isn't that where the counties expertise lies in establishing funding for infrastructure in a clear and concise fashion. Versus something that has been hanging out there for years that the " best of the best "thinks is a can of worms ? This goes back to your statement this morning that the county required the developer agreement but never read it (supposedly). We Black Bear Ridge citizens do place public trust in the County — to enforce the developer obligations transparently and fairly, as part of the County's public service. Not to let it slip and then later attempt to place the financial burden on taxpayer-owners. I am very sorry if you were offended by my Bruce comment but could not figure out the relevancy to our conversation when you mentioned "Bruce was a dear friend". My background is the private sector so keeping business and friendship was a clear distinction. I look forward to our meeting. Thank you very much for your time. Kind Regards, Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 On May 5, 2017, at 11:28 AM, CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida(&,colliergov.net> wrote: Good Morning Terrie, Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this morning. Your recollection and summary of our conversation is not quite accurate. We work transparently and fairly for both you in public trust as a citizen and public service for the developer and our Board. I will schedule the meeting and I will certainly keep an open mind. I have the copied Mr.Anderson and Mr. Lykins so that both parties area aware and the Commissioner of the district is also informed. Jeanne, Please work with Trinity to set this meeting up. Please make sure Trinity invites all interested parties. Please see my comments below underlined.... - the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. 2 The county reviewed and approved all documents that were part of the public process and enforceable by the County. We did not create, review, or approved the private agreement. That was done outside of the County's review. It was completed and signed prior to any county staff seeing it. We set the requirements for a joint infrastructure project that collectively handled all of your combined traffic impacts. How the individual parties chose to fund those improvements, the timing, and stipulations were privately agreed upon. - we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 Thank you, I will ask Jeanne to make sure all sides can attend the meeting in a an open and transparent environment. - your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson I do not appreciate the mischaracterization. Bruce is a professional colleague and I respect him immensely. You will find that Bruce and I have had many professional disagreements. I will treat both parties without bias and make my recommendation to the Board based on past practice. - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. I have asked Trinity to evaluate a left turn lane in lieu of a signal. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. The burden you currently have or do not have will be based on approved ordinances, transfers of obligations through contracts, and private agreements. I cannot make a determination based on the limited discussion we have had. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 <image001.png> From:Terrie [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 11:03 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> Subject: BBR phone call- May 5 , 2017 Hi Nick, Thanks for the call this morning. Just a quick recap. 3 -the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. - we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 - your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson 1 - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. We look forward to meeting with you and finalizing an appropriate quick action to resolve this mess. Kind Regards, Terrie 630.244.4800 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. 4 LykinsDave From: Jane Rollins <naplesjane1@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 8, 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 1-75,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. 1 Sincerely, Michael&Jane Rollins 9368 Terresina Dr.,Naples,FL 34119 2 LykinsDave From: Howard L. Sosnik <HSosnik@kspcwills.com> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 7:01 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Subject: Addie's Corner, request for appointment with Board of County Commissioners Dear Members of the Board of County Commissioners, 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. I am aware of the Planning Commission Public hearing scheduled for May 18'which will include these matters on its agenda. I would like to request a meeting with the Board prior to that, preferable the afternoon of May 16th or anytime on May 17th if these dates do not work please let me know and perhaps we can schedule a different time)to articulate some of our particular concerns including: • 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. Howard L. Sosnik 516-313-3239 Esplanade Golf&Country Club LykinsDave From: DAVID FIX <davedds@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 1:55 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Subject: Addie's Corner development Project#20150001776 May 9, 2017 My wife and I are residents of Florida and of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. Our property is adjacent to the proposed Barron Collier development at Addie's Corner on Immokalee Road in Naples. We are writing to you in order to express our concerns about the many changes to the existing PUD that Barron Collier is planning. First, we would like to have the the nature preserve maintained at he originally planned 8.85 acres. We would like to have an opaque Type C buffer of at least 100 feet along Esplanade Boulevard. We also disapprove of the construction of multiple four story residential buildings on this property. Driving along Immokalee, we see no other existing four story buildings. Barron Collier knew what the exixting PUD was when he initially purchased this property. There is no reason to even bother writing zoning laws if changes like this are allowed for one individual. Sincerely, Dave and Alayne Fix 8656 Amour Court Naples, Florida 1 LykinsDave From: William L McGee Jr <willie581950@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:54 AM To: Fiala Donna; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Project#20150001776 Attachments: Addie's Corner.docx Thank you for your attention. William L. McGee Jr. 1 William L McGee Jr 8674 Amour Court Naples Florida 34119 9 May 2017 RE: Addie's Corner Development Collier County PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT #20150001776 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country club, along Immokalee Road. The current view entering the property is completely wooded and secluded to the east of our entrance. I am told the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. With this change the residents are likely to see the 4 story buildings and also increase the sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment on my street. This will seriously degrade the views and property values. I would like to ask that you consider these requests: Limit the heights of the buildings or require step-back heights. Locate the building further east allowing for a larger buffer. Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. I hope you understand our concerns and treat this as if you were a neighbor. Thank you for your consideration, William L. McGee, Jr. Geraldine M. McGee LykinsDave From: Nancy DeMarco <nancyd@carlawyernj.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:09 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Development - Project#20150001776 Attachments: current view.pdf Importance: High 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 Ladies and Gentlemen: 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: *A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet *Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, *Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property *Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Perry A. Pittenger 9091 Sorreno Court Naples, Florida 34119 i Nancy DeMarco Legal Assistant to Perry A. Pittenger,Esq. Schiller&Pittenger,P.C. 1771 Front Street,Suite D Scotch Plains,New Jersey 07076 Voice:908-490-0444 Fax: 908-490-0420 Email:nancyd@carlawyernj.comrr CONNECT: SP !i7 I This Transmission Is Intended Only for the Party to Whom It Is Addressed and May Contain Legally Privileged and Confidential Information.If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any use,dissemination,or copying of this transmission is prohibited.If you have received this transmission in error,please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail and return this transmission and all copies to us.Thank you. 2 4 A 2 Z4 1i 1 _ / I r '& , V ' , ,,, i . v t -, A v4:, • ,,.,..‘ ,1.,1, ,s'l J 4 E_ 5 g , .71-,.-: 8 P ij ti .i. EO II 131 • Li rtb. El 0 111611 _0 s ';' ltd , • .a, p I 4?� r- 1ill g . r , - ', 43 `., 172 6 ?x PA E ti .i r W LykinsDave From: Heidi Holley <heidihimlerholley@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 8:18 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner development Immokolee Rd and Collier Blvd May 10, 2017 Dear Collier County Commissioners, Collier County Principal Planner and Chief Hearing Examiner, I recently bought a home and moved from Minnesota to Collier County in October of 2016.As a new resident of Florida I am concerned about the new development planned adjacent to our community in Esplanade, Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776.As a voting resident I am very concerned about the impact this project will have on the traffic, natural preserve and noise level.The amount of traffic on Immokolee Boulevard is already overloaded and very stressful to drive on. Part of our attraction to this area was the natural beauty of the preserve and I hope in no uncertain terms you will allow it to be reduced in an way.The removal of the exotic trees along our property line will add not only to greater noise levels but to a viewscape that is no longer serene and calming. Please ensure that the trees removed will be replaced by equally large sized trees. I am unable to attend the hearing as we are traveling to Minnesota for a few months. Collier County is our new home and I hope you will do everything possible to protect our property line.Thank you. Sincerely, Heidi Holley 9230 Rialto Lane Naples, FL 34119 1 LykinsDave 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, 1 Ron and Lynn Fischer 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 2 LykinsDave 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; Johnson Eric 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, 1 Ron and Lynn Fischer 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 2 LykinsDave From: Tom Coffey <ticoffey@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: 1 •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: ticoffey@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 2 LykinsDave From: Lois Pogyor <Ipogyor@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 12:36 AM To: SaundersBurt Cc: LykinsDave Subject: Development of Addie's Corner Dear Mr. Saunders: 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 i LykinsDave 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 i 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. /1f4eLA. Gt ,.i 07P V4ccarc Gt_ 31141 17 Name Address Date LykinsDave From: Thomas Kleck <tkleck@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:17 AM To: SaundersBurt 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 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 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 2 LykinsDave From: jmaiella <maiellajoe@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:42 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; Lily Subject: Addie's Corner Development Attachments: BC 5-1-17_ Esplanade-Plan plan view.pdf; ATT00001.htm Importance: High May 17, 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 are residents 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 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.We encourage you to require the following: • A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100'from Esplanade property • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely,i Joseph & Lily Maiella 8865 Savona Ct Naples, FL 34119 i ' i' vVP!Iii <u 1 o u.) >- T C 00 Z I ;141 0 _J z_.....i..01 i Z 311411 1 LL,ZI I O.III ii/li CL 0 ;co 0 E i < g f: H CO 0 ‹ QW I CO rpi t„1111 i #111111. I 4' fl". ,ek ., . , ., 7r1 . „ I • , 1 1 1 .. likieri —,„ 'CH' ififEr '75;11.0 .:, , -- . rill B. r . i awl ,,- .,. a_..,2„„,„ AoL 1.0 i_iiry.,-: PA no .. P. ' • xt .1.1 til i NZ 1 ,,,,t. .: —MI6.* ,•' .9. lig _ go , it 1 ,.,,,, • ‘ 3 . ow do_ ill! ,.. : -,.... ,..., . ,... P- ------- 3 -... i,,. ,' . !, fl, , - RI t..!r—P,-19,4181 "•i'•__? 1 s ' I ' „„,,, . -.. ?......, , , .... 4 :.•'' '' I !, ,i ilrklk..:711112,i 'il -'2.-1,11 . :!•.•, :4 .. 1 t4_. 1914:111S -:-", ' .s... ._..._ 6 it.,............„_, ,i.. Lw.immi ., _...... —41. —' r it.:,! i.\I . - .• r1=116 W..''1.'.1-4ji*iji"I .:;:r.cf\::::;:lr''.' 1':'1- „.....,:, ' '::,-,'''''-'::''':,_' 'Fr"-g4'''''.''''::';',.!:::::-",'' ', --.• '‘''' ':':';'-' '.,111 ., # . . . ' AN ' ',-'44. • ,„ .,..... . ', '''' — — ''''',,,, . i•i,,1i,... .. .... .. . CD •0'. '''''14..''' ' 4' '''- ' it . ,. . it . • . -V.•T ,-,::..' .''''. .. ,.'.4:4 4- 4 4.'4 \ jolt. ., . ... -- .... ,... - - ,...„, .. . -. '-- . . • .."'” '."7--'—^-,<..„—••-,_ . ---- iiii'-'7.:': -<-:;T::. —_,.,— - - . ' 4 LykinsDave 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. 1 LykinsDave From: William Nemeth <wnemeth@icloud.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 1:34 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner development - Collier County Planning Commission Project# 20150001776 Attachments: collier commissioner letter- Naples Esplanade copy.pdf; ATT00001.txt Attached is a letter of comment regarding the Addie's Corner development. We appreciate your time and efforts in careful consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, William A& Laura D Nemeth 8652 Amour Court Naples, Florida 34119 wnemeth@icloud.com (216)496-2995 1 FROM THE DESK OF WILLIAM & LAURA NEMETH May 17,2017 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 To: BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'Donna Fiala@colliergov.net' DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net My wife and I are residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club,along Immokalee Rd. in Naples.The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area consisting of many tall trees. It lies to the east of Esplanade Blvd.and was a significant reason for our choosing both the development and lot where we have settled. We understand the developer of the adjacent property 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 are aware that two types of exotic trees must be removed.The narrow buffer and removal of the exotic trees would result in residents seeing the buildings through what is left of a thin tree line. The thinned tree line will increase sound and light which will negatively impact the enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree line, four-story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values.We encourage you to require the following: •AType C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100'from Esplanade property 8652 AMOUR CT, NAPLES, FL 34119 • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units.(current zoning allows far less) The attached pictures show the current view,side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction.We hope you consider our concerns and realize the negative impact it will have on our community. Sincerely yours, r‘. ( 1°11/V1 William A. Nemeth & Laura D. Nemeth ._,.�.. w y. •. .� .._. .. v ._ y M • 4 8652 AMOUR CT, NAPLES, FL 34119 LykinsDave 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: 1 •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: antiochhmPyahoo.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 2 LykinsDave From: Pam Toorock <pamwrighttoorock@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 2:13 PM To: SaundersBurt Cc: Pam Toorock Subject: Town Hall Meeting District 3 Dear Mr. Saunders, I attended the Town Hall Meeting for District 3 yesterday at North Baptist Church. I appreciate your candor and thoughtfulness with regard to the concerns expressed by those in attendance. I also attended the Open Session on Addie's Corner last week.The end result of that meeting was"there is little we can do" as this project was approved in 2011. To summarize my concern, of the 11 current projects which opened yesterday's meeting, 6 directly affect the traffic on Immokalee Road. A road which will "fail" in 5 years.The projects discussed do not include Tree Farms nor the Pelican Nursery development which will have tremendous impact to the "failure" of Immokalee Road.As some expressed yesterday, Immokalee Road has already"failed" . Despite these realizations, we continue to add projects and traffic to the "Activity Center" of Collier and Immokalee Roads. I will not repeat what you already heard yesterday but do suggest that the traffic survey which was completed is flawed. In my opinion, it would be prudent to conduct another traffic survey after the current bridge construction is completed on Collier and Immokalee Roads. We would then see the affect of this new construction as I do not believe it will significantly relieve the congestion we now see on Immokalee. I thank you for your continuing support of our concerns and would like to add, "something has to be done "NOW"! Pam Wright-Toorock The Quarry 9390 Coper Canyon Court Naples, Florida 34120 1 LykinsDave From: gheben@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 2:57 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: No U-Turn at Immokalee Rd &951 Commissioner Saunders, Thank you for having the Town Hall Meeting last night. I did not speak at the event, however I would also like to voice my concern regarding the intersection of Immokalee Rd and 951. Specifically the U-Turn which allows one to travel East on Immokalee Rd, make the U-Turn, then travel West on Immokalee. Or should I say "the former U-Turn". It is nonsensical that this U- Turn has been taken away. I live in Pebblebrooke Lakes and my family and I use the Immokalee Rd entrance/exit getting in and out of our community. Taking away the U-Turn has made trying to travel West on Immokalee Rd not only burdensome and inconvenient, but also more dangerous. I see no explicable reason as to why the U-Turn has been taken away. There is a cement barrier on the North side of Immokalee Rd that protects the construction workers @ Addies Corner. This barrier has been there for a long time. Nothing has changed. But now all of a sudden no U-Turn. There is no risk to worker safety by having a U-Turn there. Absolutely none. So instead of being able to make the U-Turn in the morning, we had to go East on Immokalee Rd well past 951. Unfortunately we ( my wife and I both work West of 1-75 and my son drives to Gulf Coast High School) cannot make U-Turns at the first two areas that allow U-Turns because the volume of traffic traveling West on Immokalee Rd will not allow one to do so in a safe manner. These U-Turns do not have traffic signals. Cars are traveling at high rates of speed and are bumper to bumper traveling West on Immokalee Rd East of 951 as I'm sure you know. We would literally have to go out a couple of miles and it was still difficult to make a safe U-Turn. And if we did make the U-Turn safely, we've already spent an extra 10 minutes. So then we tried turning South onto 951 and then make a U-Turn in front of Publix at Pebblebrooke Shoppes.. This too is risky. Although the North flowing traffic on 951 is not as bad as the West flowing traffic on Immokalee Rd, the width of the lanes to make the U-Turn are narrower and negotiating the turn is more difficult . One has to make the turn slower, thus exposing oneself to oncoming traffic for a longer period of time. And again, 10 more minutes added to the commute for no apparent reason in my mind. But an unintended consequence has evolved out of this misguided decision to eliminate the U-Turn at Immokalee Rd and 951. People are driving out of Pebblebrooke, illegally crossing the Eastbound Immokalee Rd lanes and going into an oncoming turn lane and then making a 90 degree left hand turn onto Westbound Immokalee Rd. Very dangerous. Not only dangerous to them but also to the Westbound drivers who are not expecting cars to appear in front of them. I haven't even mentioned the fact that the CCSO is now giving drivers tickets for making the U- Turn @ Immokalee and 951. `Just pouring salt into the wound. So in closing, I hope you will look into this issue. On the surface, one would think that eliminating a U-Turn at an intersection would not have much of an affect on one's quality of life. But this elimination really has. And there doesn't seem to be a good reason why it was done so. Thank you for your time and thanks for making the County Commission sane again. Sincerely, 1 Greg Heben gheben@comcast.net 2 LykinsDave From: Cheryl 011ila <cherylollila@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2017 11:30 AM To: SaundersBurt Cc: Roger Gifford; Jackie Cahill;Joe Boudreau; Chip Harrington Subject: District 3 Town Hall Meeting on 5-22-17 Attachments: Commissioner Saunders.docx Good Morning, Commissioner Saunders, I am the President of the Quarry Community Association (QCA), Inc. and met you at the Town Hall Meeting on Monday. Attached,for your review, is a letter from the QCA Board of Directors concerning topics discussed at Monday's meeting. Sincerely, Cheryl 011ila 1 DATE: May 25, 2017 TO: Collier County Commissioner Burt Saunders RE: Town Hall Meeting — 5-22-17 Dear Commissioner Saunders: Thank you for taking the time to allow me to introduce myself to you at the Town Hall Meeting for District 3 on Monday evening at North Naples Baptist Church. I commend you for taking the initiative to hold the meeting and allow residents the opportunity to ask questions and articulate our concerns. As the President of the Quarry Association (QCA), Inc., I believe I speak for many Quarry homeowners that wearevery concerned about the level of development Immokalee Roadr our community and the impact it will have on traffic o As you know, over half of the 11 projects Road.reviewedlt beat yond d comprehensionnday's i directly impact the traffic on Immokalee to me that, while representatives from the Growth Management Department explained the status of the projects, representatives from the Transportation Engineering Division (standing right next to them) explained that Immokalee Road is scheduled to "fail" by year 2021, due to worsening traffic congestion resulting from continued planned development in this area. To make matters even worse, these projects do not yet comprehend the development of Tree Farm or Pelican Nursery — further exacerbating the traffic congestion. I asked you and the representatives at the meeting why you would continue to approve projects when you know that Immokalee Road will be unable (and some would argue is currently unable) to handle the increased traffic load. I also explained that my understands notis t aot thelVaVaunnderbilt Beach Road extension from Collier Blvd. east willcompleted 2023. You and the representatives at the meeting agreed with my understanding. When I asked what is the County's response to the residents along the Immokalee Road corridor to deal with all of this there are congestion tanned `"minor" traffic t f you could provide, the response was thatp relief points, for example, modifications to Tree Farm Rd. These planned modifications are clearly inadequate; otherwise, your Transportation Engineering Division representatives would not be advising that Immokalee Road will fail. I support development in our area. However, I am unable to understand how the County Commissioners, in good conscience and the important decision-making role they were elected to perform, can support these projects when they know the roads can't handle the new development. Furthermore, why would the Collier County Planning Commission support projects that allow for high-density populations (i.e. Addison Place — a 240- unit apartment complex on the northwest corner of Immokalee Road and CR951)? I respectfully request, on behalf of Quarry homeowners who oppose development along Immokalee Road with a known failed road to support the development, that you and your fellow Commissioners place a moratorium on further Immokalee Road development until you can address the traffic situation. It does not make any sense to allow for continued growth and development when a road is scheduled to fail. You must fix this problem before you continue to add to the nightmare of traffic congestion in our area. Sincerely, Cheryl 011ila Cheryl 011ila President, Quarry Community Association (QCA), Inc. and on behalf of QCA Board Members: Joe Boudreau Jackie Cahill Roger Gifford Chip Harrington LykinsDave From: Bill White <cupologist@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 7:57 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: New full-time Quarry Homeowner " Dear Commissioner Saunders: As a new home owner in the Quarry I am copying part of Cheryl 011ila's well written letter dated 5/25/2017. ... "However, I am unable to understand how the County Commissioners, in good conscience and the important decision-making role they were elected to perform, can support these projects when they know the roads can't handle the new developments. Furthermore, why would the Collier County Planning Commission support projects that allow for high-density populations (i.e. Addison Place — a 240- unit apartment complex on the northwest corner of Immokalee Road and CR 951)? I respectfully request, on behalf of Quarry homeowners who oppose development along Immokalee Road with a known failed road to support the development, that you and your fellow Commissioners place a moratorium on further Immokalee Road development until you can address the traffic situation. It does not make any sense to allow for continued growth and development when a road is scheduled to fail. You must fix this problem before you continue to add to the nightmare of traffic congestion in our area." Sincerely, Cheryl 011ila" Commissioner Saunders, please place a stop to any further development along Immokalee Road before we are put in a situation to sell are homes due to the County Commissioners' poor planning. I am sure you realize the value of our homes will decrease. Who in his right mind would want to live in this area and fight the traffic battle daily? Looking forward to hearing your comments. Thank you. William L. White 9189 Treeside Court, Naples,F1.34120 "That you may walk worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing Him, being fruitful in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God.". Colossians 1 :10 2 LykinsDave 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: •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 2 LykinsDave From: Michael Toorock <mtoorock@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 8:09 AM To: SaundersBurt Cc: DAVE THOMAS Commissioner Saunders: I join with Dr.Thomas and countless others calling upon you to place a moratorium of developments such as Addie's Corner and Tree Farm until our county's infrastructure can support the immense increased burden that will be imposed by these projects. Our every day lives will become unbearable and our property values will plummet. I know I would not be fortunate enough to live in The Quarry had the Planning Board not permitted our development. However,there is development and overdevelopment, and we are at that point now. Please use your good offices for the thousands who will be affected and not a few developers. Thank you for your time and attention. Respectfully, Michael S.Toorock Sent from my iPhone 1 LykinsDave From: Linda Weid <Iindaweid@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 8:14 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Concern regarding development Dear Commissioner Saunders, I am writing to express my deep concern over the planned development along the Immokalee road corridor. As a Quarry resident, I have experienced first hand the adverse impact the current traffic has on our day-to-day lives. I can only envision the challenges we will endure once the Race Trac and Addison Corner are complete. The future development of the Tree Farm and Pelican Nursery will only compound the issue. We purchased a home in The Quarry 9 years ago. We choose Collier County because of its natural beauty and solid economics. I fully comprehend the importance of growth and development to sustain a thriving community. However, the proposed aggressive development will have the opposite effect. Future "land use planning"must consider the function of existing infrastructure. If not, our lifestyle will be compromised and our home values reduced. As our elected County Commissioner, you are responsible for providing services to protect the health, safety,welfare and quality of life of the citizens of Collier County. As these planned developments move forward, I encourage you to keep these responsibilities in the fore-front &treat it as your top priority. I look forward to hearing from you. Linda Weidmaier 9787 Nickel Ridge Circle Naples, FL 34120 1 LykinsDave From: gheben@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 9:34 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Re: No U-Turn at Immokalee Rd &951 Commissioner Saunders & Mr. Lykins, Thank you for giving us the U-Turn back! And thank you for listening to our concerns! Sincerely, Greg Heben From: "SaundersBurt" <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net> To: gheben@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 2:35:11 PM Subject: No U-Turn at Immokalee Rd & 951 Mr. Heben, On behalf of Commissioner Saunders, thank you for taking the time to attend the Town Hall meeting Monday night. As you observed during the meeting, the issue you described in your email was shared directly with Commissioner Saunders, Growth Management and County Transportation staff that were in attendance by several residents with similar concerns. The issue is clearly understood and it is anticipated the Transportation Division will be reviewing the situation to determine what remedies, short term and long term that may be available. Thank you for taking time to follow up from the meeting with an email and share your thoughts. We look forward to seeing you at similar meetings in the future. Regards... Dave Lykins Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders davelykins@colliergov.net 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (2192„252-8603 cotger County Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:gheben@comcast.net [mailto:gheben@comcast.net] Sent:Tuesday, May 23, 2017 2:57 PM To:SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net> Subject: No U-Turn at Immokalee Rd & 951 Commissioner Saunders, 1 Thank you for having the Town Hall Meeting last night. I did not speak at the event, however I would also like to voice my concern regarding the intersection of Immokalee Rd and 951. Specifically the U-Turn which allows one to travel East on Immokalee Rd, make the U-Turn, then travel West on Immokalee. Or should I say "the former U-Turn". It is nonsensical that this U- Turn has been taken away. I live in Pebblebrooke Lakes and my family and I use the Immokalee Rd entrance/exit getting in and out of our community. Taking away the U-Turn has made trying to travel West on Immokalee Rd not only burdensome and inconvenient, but also more dangerous. I see no explicable reason as to why the U-Turn has been taken away. There is a cement barrier on the North side of Immokalee Rd that protects the construction workers @ Addies Corner. This barrier has been there for a long time. Nothing has changed. But now all of a sudden no U-Turn. There is no risk to worker safety by having a U-Turn there. Absolutely none. So instead of being able to make the U-Turn in the morning, we had to go East on Immokalee Rd well past 951. Unfortunately we ( my wife and I both work West of 1-75 and my son drives to Gulf Coast High School) cannot make U-Turns at the first two areas that allow U-Turns because the volume of traffic traveling West on Immokalee Rd will not allow one to do so in a safe manner. These U-Turns do not have traffic signals. Cars are traveling at high rates of speed and are bumper to bumper traveling West on Immokalee Rd East of 951 as I'm sure you know. We would literally have to go out a couple of miles and it was still difficult to make a safe U-Turn. And if we did make the U-Turn safely, we've already spent an extra 10 minutes. So then we tried turning South onto 951 and then make a U-Turn in front of Publix at Pebblebrooke Shoppes.. This too is risky. Although the North flowing traffic on 951 is not as bad as the West flowing traffic on Immokalee Rd, the width of the lanes to make the U-Turn are narrower and negotiating the turn is more difficult . One has to make the turn slower, thus exposing oneself to oncoming traffic for a longer period of time. And again, 10 more minutes added to the commute for no apparent reason in my mind. But an unintended consequence has evolved out of this misguided decision to eliminate the U-Turn at Immokalee Rd and 951. People are driving out of Pebblebrooke, illegally crossing the Eastbound Immokalee Rd lanes and going into an oncoming turn lane and then making a 90 degree left hand turn onto Westbound Immokalee Rd. Very dangerous. Not only dangerous to them but also to the Westbound drivers who are not expecting cars to appear in front of them. I haven't even mentioned the fact that the CCSO is now giving drivers tickets for making the U- Turn @ Immokalee and 951. Just pouring salt into the wound. So in closing, I hope you will look into this issue. On the surface, one would think that eliminating a U-Turn at an intersection would not have much of an affect on one's quality of life. But this elimination really has. And there doesn't seem to be a good reason why it was done so. Thank you for your time and thanks for making the County Commission sane again. Sincerely, Greg Heben gheben(a�comcast.net 2 LykinsDave From: kathleen frisch <kathleenfrisch@icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 4:17 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Immokalee Road Dear Commissioner Saunders, I am writing to express my deep concern over the planned development along the Immokalee road corridor. As a Quarry resident, I experience first hand,the adverse impact the current traffic has on our day-to-day lives. I can only envision the challenges we will endure once the Race Trac and Addison Corner are complete. The future development of the Tree Farm and Pelican Nursery will compound the issue. We moved to Florida three years ago to escape the slowly decaying state of Connecticut. We choose Collier County because of its natural beauty and solid economics. I fully comprehend the importance of growth and development to sustain a thriving community. However, the proposed aggressive development will have the opposite effect. Future "land use planning"must consider the function of existing infrastructure. If not, our lifestyle will be compromised and our home values reduced. As our elected County Commissioner, you are responsible for providing services to protect the health, safety, welfare and quality of life of the citizens of Collier County. As these planned developments move forward, I encourage you to keep these responsibilities a top-of-mind priority. I look forward to hearing from you. Kathleen M. Frisch 9735 Nickel Ridge Cir. Naples, Fl. 34120 1 LykinsDave From: happiness50 <happiness50@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 5:48 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Immokalee road and more development Dear Burt, Recently, I went to the planning hearing for variances on Addie's Corner planned unit development at Immokalee Road and County Road 951. I went to that meeting to hear what would be built just east of the main entrance of the Esplanade Golf&Country Club. Already living the traffic nightmare that currently exists. It was stated by the head of the county Transportation Engineering Division that Immokalee Road will fail (not handle the traffic load) in three years. That should have gotten the attention of planners and it should be put before the county commissioners immediately. Stop the development. Put a moratorium on all building, both commercial and residential, until the roads can handle the increased density. Fix the problem before and not after. Act don't react. Thank you for taking this into consideration. 1 LykinsDave From: Robert Jozaitis <rjozaitis@verizon.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 7:24 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: New development off Immokolee Rd. After MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_162994_1883319304.1496186630210" X-MB-Message-Source: WebUl X-MB-Message-Type: User X-Mailer: Alto (Android;2.7.2) X-AOL-IP: 76.101.197.117 X-Originating-IP: [76.101.197.117] =_Part_162994_1883319304.1496186630210 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mr. Saunders, We live in a development off of Collier and Immokolee Rd. With the proposed new property being developed East of Esplinade I appears that it will become a traffic nightmare. Currently, without this new development, it's a traffic problem. Especially in season. I am asking to please reconsider this plan until the highway is proven to handle the immense amount of traffic that will be generated with this senseless development. Sincerely, Robert Jozaitis 9351 Marble Stone Dr. Naples, Fl. 34120 rjozaitis@verizon.net Sent from Alto =_Part_162994_1883319304.1496186630210 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <p dir="Itr">Mr. Saunders,<br> We live in a development off of Collier and Immokolee Rd. With the proposed new property being developed East of Esplinade<br> I appears that&nbsp; it will become a traffic nightmare. Currently, without this new development, it's a traffic problem. Especially in season. <br> I am asking to please reconsider this plan until the highway is proven to handle the immense amount of traffic that will be generated with this senseless development. <br>Sincerely,<br> Robert Jozaitis<br> 9351 Marble Stone Dr.<br> Naples, Fl. 34120<br> <u>r</u>jozaitis@verizon.net<br> .</p> <p dir="Itr">Sent from Alto</p> = Part 162994 1883319304.1496186630210-- 2 1111 A 111111111111001111M11110 LykinsDave From: Linda Weid <lindaweid@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 8:14 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Concern regarding development Dear Commissioner Saunders, I am writing to express my deep concern over the planned development along the Immokalee road corridor. As a Quarry resident, I have experienced first hand the adverse impact the current traffic has on our day-to-day lives. I can only envision the challenges we will endure once the Race Trac and Addison Corner are complete. The future development of the Tree Farm and Pelican Nursery will only compound the issue. We purchased a home in The Quarry 9 years ago. We choose Collier County because of its natural beauty and solid economics. I fully comprehend the importance of growth and development to sustain a thriving community. However,the proposed aggressive development will have the opposite effect. Future"land use planning"must consider the function of existing infrastructure. If not, our lifestyle will be compromised and our home values reduced. As our elected County Commissioner, you are responsible for providing services to protect the health, safety,welfare and quality of life of the citizens of Collier County. As these planned developments move forward, I encourage you to keep these responsibilities in the fore-front&treat it as your top priority. I look forward to hearing from you. Linda Weidmaier 9787 Nickel Ridge Circle Naples, FL 34120 i LykinsDave From: Darrell and Cheryl Hay <drygrass926@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 12:07 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: District#3 Town Hall Meeting My wife and I recently attended the Town Hall meeting for District 3 held on May 22, 2017 re: Addie's Corner at Immokalee Road and #951. With the acknowledgement that Immokalee Road will fail in the near future we were distressed to learn that there are no plans to avoid this catastrophe. In fact plans are such that they will accelerate this mess. It seems that the only reasonable short term decision is to establish and implement a building moratorium. We pray that you and the planning board have the courage to act responsibly. Darrell and Cheryl Hay, Quarry residents. 1 LykinsDave From: Jane Rollins <naplesjanel @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:naplesjanel@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 <SherrvGreco@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>;Johnson Eric <EricJohnson@ycolliergov.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, 2 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. 3 8854 Vaccaro Ct Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963- 5365 ejsone@aol.com May 10, 2017 Burt L. Saunders Board of County Commissioners Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail,Suite 303 Naples Florida 34112 Dear Mr. Saunders: 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 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 Immokalee 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. I'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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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, a„„fe Edmund J. Staley, Esq. Carol A. Staley ,j24tAct, Get/"Peli� ,5411-(2 i iZ / 4 n-1 0 • cri Z CD - ---' ----- , .:., p•s• C-'\ i 1.0 C:\.. ......\_, ti) — _....i., ._ .-% ..,f...., - ____... ..i,_ 1. = ("--- (Vs) ,. . c• W, =..• 2.,' 4 , ; ......... „....4ci ..7.... _—.) ..., \) 6 t -2.• U ............... =.. r'' . • ... o :-...... ---, . K Vt -=: itti rl /V/ 1 1 ( g Commissioner Saunders Town Hall Meeting 5-22-17 1. Robert Zingali, RJZ1019@aol.com, 239.207.7446 2. Pat Vaia, patvaiachwg9@comcast.net, 724.244.9128 3. Carol Baribeau, cbaribe@msn.com, 724.244.9128 4. Karl Fry, karlfry@comcast.net, 239.777.3962 5. Clement Soffer, csoffer@soffergrove.com 6. Carol Barkauskas, naplescarol@yahoo.com, 239.572.0187 7. Greg Barkauskas, naplescarol@yahoo.com, 239.572.0187 8. George Kupel,gwkupel@vahoo.com 9. Marianne Kupel,gwkupel@yahoo.com 10. Bujar Lame, butchkorea@yahoo.com, 239.826.8183 11. William Kinsley, 775.5224 12. Jim Glase,glasegolf@earthlink.net, 239.598.9374 13. Loretta DeMarco, dlemarcoF3@comcast.net, 239.253.4369 14. Mario Rodriguez, Mario-rodriguez1983@yahoo.com, 239.302.0772 15. Dan Sullivan, dan@greenlinksnaples.org, 239.682.5976 16. Greg Heber, 239.304.3240 17. Lisa Heber, 239.304.3240 18. Stacey McCurdy, Stacey.mccurdy@gmail.com, 239.304.5458 19. Tim Jerzyk,tpierz53@gmail.com, 502.645.2080 20. Megan Jerzyk,tpjerz53@gmail.com, 502.645.2080 21. Les Wicker, leswicker@aol.com, 239.514.3500 22. Roy Fairweather, 564 95th Ave. N. 23. Rob Nossen,thenossens@aol.com, 239.591.3956 24. Jim Parish, japarish@comcast.net, 239.641.3854 25. Judy Bromley,914bromley@gmail.com 26. Darrell Hay, drygress956@yahoo.com, 920.251.0621 27. Cheryl Hay, drygress956@yahoo.com, 920.251.0621 28. Beth Brainard, bethbrainard@naplespathways.org, 781.424.2413 29. Noreen Linane, noreenlinane@gmail.com 30. Frank Tatro,tatrofe@gmail.com 31. Dale Wohlers, pdwohl6@gmail.com, 239.566.2981 32. Peggy Wohlers, pdwohl6@gmail.com, 239.566.2981 33. Theresa lamurri,tiamurri@comcast.net, 239.591.4403 34. Jack Arcurie,Arcurie@aol.com, 239.353.1368 35. Gary Bromley, bromley914@centurylink.net, 239.348.1179 36. Carlos Huerta, Carloshuerta16@yahoo.com 37. Dawn Huerta, Carloshuerta16@yahoo.com 38. Tony Palladino, tony@palladinocustomhomes.com 39. Gerald Feeley,gpfmf@comcast.net, 239.530.1325 40. Katie Sullivan, katie.sullivan512@gmail.com, 239.595.3194 41. John Nicola, jnicola23@yahoo.com, 239.229.9541 42. Bob Walker, bjwalkers@comcast.net, 239.825.5781 43. Gary Surace,garyrn@yahoo.com 44. Faye Sutton, fcsutton@louisville.edu, 239.405.5199 1 Commissioner Saunders Town Hall Meeting 5-22-17 45. Bob Sutton, fcsutton@louisville.edu, 239.405.5199 46. Diane Ebert, jodiebert@regan.com, 239.593.1103 47. Cheryl 011ila,cherylollila@hotmail.com, 248.904.7890 48. Henry Bachman, h.bachman@iece.org, 239.325.9234 49. Steven Bracci,steve@braccilaw.com, 239.596.2635 50. Jim Stark, jrstark@netscape.com, 816.260.1943 51. Diane Zingali, dzingali@iohnrwood.com, 239.207.7454 52. Michael Toorock, pamwrighttoorock@gmail.com, 201.314.6353 53. Pam Toorock, pamwighttoorock@gmail.com, 201.314.6353 54. David Weinberger, hedylw@aol.com, 239.593.0402 55. Hedy Weinberger, hedylw@aol.com, 239.593.0402 56. Kristi Bartlett, kristi@napleschamber.org 57. Sandy Fleming,akmbmom1@yahoo.com, 239.269.1936 58. Theresa Puglise, bretzgirls@aol.com, 239.877.1336 59. Wallace Lucas, royalstars98@yahoo.com 60. Jacqueline Lucas, royalstars98@yahoo.com 61. Harlean Norris,clnoofl@aol.com, 239.304.0771 62. Ed Hubbard, hubbsbuflo@hotmail.com, 239.793.5468 63. Sheila Solomon, jerrymsolomon@gmail.com, 410.207.3340 64. Jerry Solomon, jerrymsolomon@gmail.com, 410.207.3340 65. Steve Abrams, steveabrams53@gmail.com 66. Robert Genovese, cmcgeno@centurylink.net, 239.774.7044 67. Richard Rogan, rmrogan40@gmail.com, 239.530.1379 68. Beverly Smith, bevsmith116@gmail.com, 201.396.7197 69. Terrie Abrams,terrie.abrams@gmail.com, 630.244.4800 70. Richard Smith, richsmith457@gmail.com, 201.396.7625 71. Susan King, slk1151@aol.com 72. Nancy Ferrare, nfer348272@yahoo.com, 234.455.3983 73. Bruce LaPierre, planner46@ycomcast.net 74. Glen Bruins,gabruins@yahoo.com, 239.304.0120 75. Arlene Bruins,gabruins@yahoo.com, 239.304.0120 76. Pete Lombardi, ple11988@yahoo.com, 239.417.2555 77. Patrick Dolbad, 239.417.2555,gm@nhgcc.com 78. Garrett Beyrent, 239.298.2070 79. Debbie Walters, ecw34119@gmail.com 80. Ed Walters, ecw34119@gmail.com 81. Dorothy LePore, Dorothy.lepore@yahoo.com 82. Matthew Renner, mattr@golfheritagebay.com, 239.384.6165 83. Gayle Hahe,gayle@nnbc.life, 239.597.2201 84. Edmund Staley, ejsone@aol.com, 239.963.5365 85. Carol Staley, ejsone@aol.com, 239.963.5365 Majority(90%+spoke in opposition to any additional development on Immokalee Rd/CR 951 intersection/corridor, including Addie's Corner,Tree Nursery, etc.) 2 LykinsDave From: Michele.Bajek@aol.com Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 9:01 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Fwd: GL Homes-Proposed Plaza called Naples Garden Shops (immokalee/Logan Blv) Dear Mr Saunders: I had forwarded a concern below to a previous commission. I feel there is a need for a pedestrian bridge on Immokalee Rd anywhere between Logan& Collier Blvd. In addition to concerns of students crossing, we have a great bicycle path/walking path residents could safely access (reducing vehicle traffic) if there was a safer way to cross immokalee road. Thank you in advance for your time. Michele Bajek Saturnia Lakes Resident Begin forwarded message: From: Michele.Bajek@aol.com Date: November 7, 2016 at 1:03:04 PM EST To: TomHenning@colliergov.net Subject: GL Homes-Proposed Plaza called Naples Garden Shops (immokalee/Logan Blv) Mr. Henning: I attended a community meeting held by GL Homes at Saturnia Lakes for their proposed Plaza at Immokalee Rd& Logan Blvd. I liked the proposed plan. However, I asked GL Homes if they planned any pedestrian bridge for this shopping center with two schools nearby and students walking, riding bikes and was told there was not one! I strongly urge either the county, GL Homes or both work together consider this with the potential of increased pedestrian traffic. I have attached below an example of a pedestrian bridge. Thank You Michele Bajek i * *coo Sprint 10 : 32 AM conteches.con 71'irastfT ir ENGINEERED SOLUTIO LykinsDave From: Dale Dear- 3257 <Dale.Dear@colliersheriff.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 11:26 AM To: Jim Busby Cc: Ilfgm@longshorelake.org; SaundersBurt;jim.monson@outlook.com Subject: Re: Intersection of Immokalee and Valewood Jim, First of all thank you for writing in. As you know we have been stretched thin during season and as you elude to below "season" is over. What you may not know are the efforts we take daily to make sure our community is safe. I have noted your concern of the Valewood intersection and can assure you and the members of the board that your intersection is just one of many dangerous intersections in the county we have the daunting task of making safe. We have kept the Valewood and Tarpon Bay intersections in our sights for some time now and now that we have more time to divide our resources you can be assured you will be seeing more of us. With respect to the excuses you mentioned we not longer have of not providing more resources I say please understand our frustration. I can show you many emails of the same nature of intersections through the county where dangerously operated dump trucks, speeders, and red light runners plague our streets. We run our deputies ragged covering as many priority complaints as humanly possible. I have personally conducted details at this intersection and understand fully that it is an issue. In closing I ask that you keep patient, but keep your eyes peeled as we are going to light up Immokalee Rd like a landing strip very soon Kind Regards, Sgt Dear Sent from my iPhone On May 9, 2017, at 10:39 AM,Jim Busby<nicaboynecorp@aol.com<mailto:nicaboynecorp@aol.com»wrote: Dear Mr. Saunders, and Sgt Dear, I am writing both of you not just for myself, but on the behalf of many neighbors in the Longshore Lake Community. Sgt Dear may/may not already be aware of me as I have contacted the Sheriff's office on multiple occasions over the past 4 months begging for more officer presence at the intersection of Immokalee and Valewood. As a tennis instructor who travels around various Naples communities,this intersection, is hands-down the most dangerous one in Collier County, and getting worse every day. I have been told by the Collier Sheriff that resources are stretched thin due to season, and assistance is limited. We as a community understand that, and appreciate what is done county-wide by our officers. But this problem at this intersection is especially dangerous. As one of the last lights before the expressway, it is regularly blocked with cars who do not respect the law requiring the intersection to remain clear.This can cause residents from Longshore, Quail West, Quail Creek, etc.,to have to wait extra lights just to make a simple right turn. As a result, impatience grows, and risks are taken. Cars are running red lights in ALL directions. Especially from the east-west traffic on Immokalee.Traffic heading West has grown due to all the development, and again, with the interstate in sight, running a red light to get to the 1 expressway has become common on nearly ever light change. Even more disturbing is the constant running of the lights from the dump trucks carrying 60,000 lbs of gravel. When one of them hit one our neighbors, serious injury or death will be a certainty. Gentlemen, season is over.The excuses about not being able to provide more presence are less, however the danger remains the same, and the police presence remains nearly non existent. Despite my requests, I have only seen one posting at that intersection -on a Sunday morning of all times-the lightest inconsequential traffic day of all. During weekdays, our children commute to/from school through that intersection every day. Every one of us living in these subdivisions are going through this high-risk intersection every day. So what can be done?The board in Longshore has requested that a DO NOT BLOCK intersection be painted on the road. Nice idea, but when someone is sitting right on top of it, and not worried about ever seeing an officer making an example of anyone, it will blend in with the scenery. After all,there is a sign that says the same thing already. What about red light cameras, if physical enforcement is limited? Naples already has cameras mounted on nearly every light pole,watching intersections.To what benefit currently?The dump truck drivers get paid by the load, and if running red lights makes them more money than what they lose from citations or threats of CDL license revoking then the lawlessness will continue to be more profitable. As stated before, I have personally made nearly a dozen calls to the sheriff imploring more be done there. Mr. Saunders and Sgt Dear, we in this community are putting you both on written notice of the situation, and that something must be done.The dangers of this intersection can no longer fall on deaf ears through phone calls. Our safety and our children's safety needs to be made a higher priority. I have included board members from our community in this email, and look forward to you engaging us in a solution that will protect us. Sincerely, Jim Busby 11488 Mallard Ct Naples, FL 34119 847-845-3847 This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action induced by or in reliance on information contained in this message. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of the Collier County Sheriff's Office. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Collier County Sheriff's Office by emailing helpdesk@colliersheriff.org quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. the Collier County Sheriff's Office accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the colliersheriff domain. 2 LykinsDave From: Jim Busby <nicaboynecorp@aol.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 11:42 AM To: Dale Dear Cc: Ilfgm@longshorelake.org; SaundersBurt;jim.monson@outlook.com Subject: Re: Intersection of Immokalee and Valewood Sgt Dear, thank you for the prompt reply, and we really look forward to seeing the spike in Collier revenue due to all the citations issued!!! Please forgive us if we honk and cheer as we pass by the officers. Clearly the year round residents are the biggest offenders, the tourists just have no idea where they are going. I hope Mr. Saunders will be able to reply and provide more assistance to our mutual goal. I know that things such as red light cameras can be controversial, but I have lived in areas where I personally disliked them, but concede they were very helpful. While not a moving violation, the cost of a red light ticket usually is around $100. Enough to stop a dangerous habit quickly. Season will be upon us again it seems by next week, and as things get stretched again, a permanent solution provided by the Commissioner is the ideal conclusion. Sincerely, Jim Busby Owner/President Nicaboyne.com 866-442-9100 Original Message . From: Dale Dear- 3257 <Dale.Dear@colliersheriff.org> To: Jim Busby <nicaboynecorp@aol.com> Cc: Ilfgm <llfgm@longshorelake.org>; burtsaunders <burtsaunders@colliergov.net>;jim.monson <jim.monson@outlook.com> Sent: Tue, May 9, 2017 11:26 am Subject: Re: Intersection of Immokalee and Valewood Jim, First of all thank you for writing in. As you know we have been stretched thin during season and as you elude to below "season" is over. What you may not know are the efforts we take daily to make sure our community is safe. I have noted your concern of the Valewood intersection and can assure you and the members of the board that your intersection is just one of many dangerous intersections in the county we have the daunting task of making safe. We have kept the Valewood and Tarpon Bay intersections in our sights for some time now and now that we have more time to divide our resources you can be assured you will be seeing more of us. With respect to the excuses you mentioned we not longer have of not providing more resources I say please understand our frustration. I can show you many emails of the same nature of intersections through the county where dangerously operated dump trucks, speeders, and red light runners plague our streets. We run our deputies ragged covering as many - priority complaints as humanly possible. I have personally conducted details at this.intersection and understand fully that it is an issue. In closing I ask that you keep patient, but keep your eyes peeled as we are going to light up Immokalee Rd like a landing strip very soon Kind Regards, Sgt Dear 1 Sent from my iPhone On May 9, 2017, at 10:39 AM, Jim Busby <nicaboynecorptc�i aol.com<mailto:nicaboynecorp(a�aol.com» wrote: Dear Mr. Saunders, and Sgt Dear, I am writing both of you not just for myself, but on the behalf of many neighbors in the Longshore Lake Community. Sgt Dear may/may not already be aware of me as I have contacted the Sheriffs office on multiple occasions over the past 4 months begging for more officer presence at the intersection of Immokalee and Valewood. As a tennis instructor who travels around various Naples communities, this intersection, is hands-down the most dangerous one in Collier County, and getting worse every day. I have been told by the Collier Sheriff that resources are stretched thin due to season, and assistance is limited. We as a community understand that, and appreciate what is done county-wide by our officers. But this problem at this intersection is especially dangerous. As one of the last lights before the expressway, it is regularly blocked with cars who do not respect the law requiring the intersection to remain clear. This can cause residents from Longshore, Quail West, Quail Creek, etc., to have to wait extra lights just to make a simple right turn. As a result, impatience grows, and risks are taken. Cars are running red lights in ALL directions. Especially from the east-west traffic on Immokalee. Traffic heading West has grown due to all the development, and again, with the interstate in sight, running a red light to get to the expressway has become common on nearly ever light change. Even more disturbing is the constant running of the lights from the dump trucks carrying 60,000 lbs of gravel. When one of them hit one our neighbors, serious injury or death will be a certainty. Gentlemen, season is over. The excuses about not being able to provide more presence are less, however the danger remains the same, and the police presence remains nearly non existent. Despite my requests, I have only seen one posting at that intersection -on a Sunday morning of all times-the lightest inconsequential traffic day of all. During weekdays, our children commute to/from school through that intersection every day. Every one of us living in these subdivisions are going through this high-risk intersection every day. So what can be done? The board in Longshore has requested that a DO NOT BLOCK intersection be painted on the road. Nice idea, but when someone is sitting right on top of it, and not worried about ever seeing an officer making an example of anyone, it will blend in with the scenery. After all, there is a sign that says the same thing already. What about red light cameras, if physical enforcement is limited? Naples already has cameras mounted on nearly every light pole, watching intersections. To what benefit currently? The dump truck drivers get paid by the load, and if running red lights makes them more money than what they lose from citations or threats of CDL license revoking then the lawlessness will continue to be more profitable. As stated before, I have personally made nearly a dozen calls to the sheriff imploring more be done there. Mr. Saunders and Sgt Dear, we in this community are putting you both on written notice of the situation, and that something must be done. The dangers of this intersection can no longer fall on deaf ears through phone calls. Our safety and our children's safety needs to be made a higher priority. I have included board members from our community in this email, and look forward to you engaging us in a solution that will protect us. Sincerely, Jim Busby 11488 Mallard Ct Naples, FL 34119 847-845-3847 This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action induced by or in reliance on information contained in this message. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of the Collier County Sheriffs Office. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the Collier County Sheriffs Office by emailing helpdesk@colliersheriff.org quoting the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. the Collier County 2 Sheriffs Office accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the colliersheriff domain. 3 LykinsDave From: Jim Busby <nicaboynecorp@aol.com> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 11:18 AM To: Ilfgm@longshorelake.org; SaundersBurt; 3257@colliersheriff.org; jim.monson@outlook.com Subject: Re: Intersection of Immokalee and Valewood Mr. Saunders, Sgt Dear was quite prompt and proactive with his reply, and we are grateful and hope that progress happens. But we have not heard from you. What is the standard reply time and acknowledgement for an elected official? Your input and help is needed for a long term solution. Sincerely, Jim Busby Original Message From: Jim Busby <nicaboynecorp@aol.com> To: Ilfgm <Ilfgm@longshorelake.org>; burtsaunders <burtsaunders@colliergov.net>; 3257 <3257@colliersheriff.org>; jim.monson <jim.monson@outlook.com> Sent: Tue, May 9, 2017 10:39 am Subject: Intersection of Immokalee and Valewood Dear Mr. Saunders, and Sgt Dear, I am writing both of you not just for myself, but on the behalf of many neighbors in the Longshore Lake Community. Sgt Dear may/may not already be aware of me as I have contacted the Sheriffs office on multiple occasions over the past 4 months begging for more officer presence at the intersection of Immokalee and Valewood. As a tennis instructor who travels around various Naples communities, this intersection, is hands-down the most dangerous one in Collier County, and getting worse every day. I have been told by the Collier Sheriff that resources are stretched thin due to season, and assistance is limited. We as a community understand that, and appreciate what is done county-wide by our officers. But this problem at this intersection is especially dangerous. As one of the last lights before the expressway, it is regularly blocked with cars who do not respect the law requiring the intersection to remain clear. This can cause residents from Longshore, Quail West, Quail Creek, etc., to have to wait extra lights just to make a simple right turn. As a result, impatience grows, and risks are taken. Cars are running red lights in ALL directions. Especially from the east-west traffic on Immokalee. Traffic heading West has grown due to all the development, and again, with the interstate in sight, running a red light to get to the expressway has become common on nearly ever light change. Even more disturbing is the constant running of the lights from the dump trucks carrying 60,000 lbs of gravel. When one of them hit one our neighbors, serious injury or death will be a certainty. Gentlemen, season is over. The excuses about not being able to provide more presence are less, however the danger remains the same, and the police presence remains nearly non existent. Despite my requests, I have only seen one posting at that intersection -on a Sunday morning of all times-the lightest inconsequential traffic day of all. During weekdays, our children commute to/from school through that intersection every day. Every one of us living in these subdivisions are going through this high-risk intersection every day. So what can be done? The board in Longshore has requested that a DO NOT BLOCK intersection be painted on the road. Nice idea, but when someone is sitting right on top of it, and not worried about ever seeing an officer making an example of anyone, it will blend in with the scenery. After all, there is a sign that says the same thing already. What about red light cameras, if physical enforcement is limited? Naples already has cameras mounted on nearly every light pole, watching intersections. To what benefit currently? The dump truck drivers get paid by the load, and if running red lights makes them more money than what they lose from citations or threats of CDL license revoking then the lawlessness will continue to be more profitable. As stated before, I have personally made nearly a dozen calls to the sheriff imploring more be done there. Mr. Saunders and Sgt Dear, we in this community are putting you both on written notice of the situation, and that something must be done. The dangers of this intersection can no longer fall on deaf ears through phone calls. Our safety and our children's safety needs to be made a higher priority. I have included board members from our community in this email, and look forward to you engaging us in a solution that will protect us. Sincerely, Jim Busby 11488 Mallard Ct Naples, FL 34119 847-845-3847 2 LykinsDave From: Jane DeTullio <jdetulli@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 8:36 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Development along Immokalee Commissioner Saunders, I would like to weigh in on the proposed development of Immokalee Road. As a resident of The Quarry, I have seen traffic increase considerably just over the past three years to the point that I plan my routes carefully, exiting off of Immokalee as quickly as possible to minimize delays. I shudder at the real possibility that it could get exponentially worse if the developments that are under consideration are approved. Apparently I am not alone. The Transportation Engineers have analyzed the expected traffic loads resulting from the proposed developments and have concluded that the traffic design on Immokalee will fail by 2021. 2021 is around the corner, and yet there doesn't appear to be a plan to stave off the expected traffic burden. How can this be? We look to representatives such as yourself to have the best interests of Collier County residents foremost in their minds, to show leadership in complex matters that may affect multiple constituencies, and to demonstrate long-term thinking through policies drafted and decisions made. Development is warranted only when it is sensibly planned for and proven to be a need. As far as I can discern,there is little planning, and resales of homes and condos in Naples are down due to the surfeit of new construction. The beneficiaries of these actions would appear to be developers, not residents. If there is another way to view your decisions, I am open to it; however, as the facts stand, my conclusion appears to be substantiated. Give me some reasons to think otherwise. Respectfully, Jane DeTullio Writer. Editor.Tutor jane@jdwordsmith.corn www jdwordsmith.corn 732.598.7724 1 LykinsDave From: christine Shanahan <courtreporter90@comcast.net> Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2017 3:44 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Planned Development I support fully the position of the Quarry Board of Directors. Furthermore, I'm appalled at the continued approvals issuing forth from officials who obviously have a complete disregard for the consequences of their actions to the residents in this area. Whatever your motivation, it's not good enough to degrade the property values already existing by building beyond the capacity of the roads and infrastructure to support it. Christine E. Shanahan LykinsDave From: gheben@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 9:34 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Re: No U-Turn at Immokalee Rd &951 Commissioner Saunders & Mr. Lykins, Thank you for giving us the U-Turn back! And thank you for listening to our concerns! Sincerely, Greg Heben From: "SaundersBurt" <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net> To: gheben@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 2:35:11 PM Subject: No U-Turn at Immokalee Rd & 951 Mr. Heben, On behalf of Commissioner Saunders, thank you for taking the time to attend the Town Hall meeting Monday night. As you observed during the meeting, the issue you described in your email was shared directly with Commissioner Saunders, Growth Management and County Transportation staff that were in attendance by several residents with similar concerns. The issue is clearly understood and it is anticipated the Transportation Division will be reviewing the situation to determine what remedies, short term and long term that may be available. Thank you for taking time to follow up from the meeting with an email and share your thoughts. We look forward to seeing you at similar meetings in the future. Regards... Dave Lykins Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders davelykins©colliergov.net 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (239 252-8603 Co er Coity Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:gheben@comcast.net [mailto:gheben@comcast.net] Sent:Tuesday, May 23, 2017 2:57 PM To: SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net> Subject: No U-Turn at Immokalee Rd &951 Commissioner Saunders, 1 Thank you for having the Town Hall Meeting last night. I did not speak at the event, however I would also like to voice my concern regarding the intersection of Immokalee Rd and 951. Specifically the U-Turn which allows one to travel East on Immokalee Rd, make the U-Turn, then travel West on Immokalee. Or should I say "the former U-Turn". It is nonsensical that this U- Turn has been taken away. I live in Pebblebrooke Lakes and my family and I use the Immokalee Rd entrance/exit getting in and out of our community. Taking away the U-Turn has made trying to travel West on Immokalee Rd not only burdensome and inconvenient, but also more dangerous. I see no explicable reason as to why the U-Turn has been taken away. There is a cement barrier on the North side of Immokalee Rd that protects the construction workers @ Addies Corner. This barrier has been there for a long time. Nothing has changed. But now all of a sudden no U-Turn. There is no risk to worker safety by having a U-Turn there. Absolutely none. So instead of being able to make the U-Turn in the morning, we had to go East on Immokalee Rd well past 951. Unfortunately we ( my wife and I both work West of 1-75 and my son drives to Gulf Coast High School) cannot make U-Turns at the first two areas that allow U-Turns because the volume of traffic traveling West on Immokalee Rd will not allow one to do so in a safe manner. These U-Turns do not have traffic signals. Cars are traveling at high rates of speed and are bumper to bumper traveling West on Immokalee Rd East of 951 as I'm sure you know. We would literally have to go out a couple of miles and it was still difficult to make a safe U-Turn. And if we did make the U-Turn safely, we've already spent an extra 10 minutes. So then we tried turning South onto 951 and then make a U-Turn in front of Publix at Pebblebrooke Shoppes.. This too is risky. Although the North flowing traffic on 951 is not as bad as the West flowing traffic on Immokalee Rd, the width of the lanes to make the U-Turn are narrower and negotiating the turn is more difficult . One has to make the turn slower, thus exposing oneself to oncoming traffic for a longer period of time. And again, 10 more minutes added to the commute for no apparent reason in my mind. But an unintended consequence has evolved out of this misguided decision to eliminate the U-Turn at Immokalee Rd and 951. People are driving out of Pebblebrooke, illegally crossing the Eastbound Immokalee Rd lanes and going into an oncoming turn lane and then making a 90 degree left hand turn onto Westbound Immokalee Rd. Very dangerous. Not only dangerous to them but also to the Westbound drivers who are not expecting cars to appear in front of them. I haven't even mentioned the fact that the CCSO is now giving drivers tickets for making the U- Turn @ Immokalee and 951. Just pouring salt into the wound. So in closing, I hope you will look into this issue. On the surface, one would think that eliminating a U-Turn at an intersection would not have much of an affect on one's quality of life. But this elimination really has. And there doesn't seem to be a good reason why it was done so. Thank you for your time and thanks for making the County Commission sane again. Sincerely, Greg Heben ghebenCa�comcast.net 2 LykinsDave From: Beth Summer <bethsummer73@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 10:48 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Immokalee Rd Traffic and Future Development Hello Mr Saunders...We live at The Quarry community, 9184 Ores Circle. It has been a wonderful place to live until recently. It has become a nightmare driving on Immokalee and from what we have read, it will become worse. It is my understanding that in 3 years the traffic will have failed due to poor planning for all the future developments about to happen. What happens if there is an evacuation for a hurricane?The planning for future traffic obviously has not been properly vetted. I urge you to put a moratorium on all developments until a transportation plan for future heavy traffic can be put into place to handle the nightmarish traffic that all of us, as residents, are enduring right now.This needs to be addressed before it is too late. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Mark and Elisabeth Summer bethsummer73@gmail.com 1 LykinsDave From: Denise.Dennie@sanofi.com Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 7:09 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Congestion on Immokalee with future buildings Dear sir I was shocked to hear that additional build out is planned on Immokalee near my residence in The Quarry. As you know, there is already significant congestion and with the additional homes and shops being planned,the roads will certainly fail to hold the amount of cars that will be driven in the near future. I urge you to please stop the planned additions so that we may maintain some semblance of a peaceful life in Naples. Thank you for your support Denise and Keith Dennie 9060 Siesta Bay Drive, Naples, FL 1 LykinsDave From: Dr Thomas <drthomas510@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 10:11 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Re: Commissioner Saunders, hopefully you and all Commissioners will have the courage to do the right thing NOW and not later! Thank you for your service. Thank you for having your administrator get back to me.This is a serious problem that needs addressed now. Planning has failed, maybe some members need replaced. What's done is done,you must exert the power of your office to address the problem. I know that what has been approved has to go through as law suits would follow but you need people working for you who don't just like to hear themselves talking. The ground swell is starting Regards, Dr. David Thomas Remember, God Bless America!! >On May 30, 2017, at 9:35 AM, SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>wrote: > Dr.Thomas, >On behalf of Commissioner Saunders, thank you for taking the time to prepare an email and share your thoughts. For the record, your observations and concerns are noted. The issue you have stated will be shared with the Transportation Division in Growth Management for consideration. > Dave Lykins > Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders >davelykins@colliergov.net > 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 > Naples, FL 34112 > P: (239) 252-8603 1 > > Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. > > Original Message > From: Dr Thomas [mailto:drthomas510@gmail.com] >Sent:Tuesday, May 30, 2017 7:52 AM >To: SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net> >Subject: Commissioner Saunders, hopefully you and all Commissioners will have the courage to do the right thing NOW and not later! Thank you for your service. > > > 2 LykinsDave From: LINDA TOGIAS <lolatogias@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 12:12 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: OVER DEVELOPMENT! Mr. Saunders, My husband and I live in the Quarry. We are but two people who are extremely concerned about the upcoming development in our immediate area. Roads are horrible now but to consider roughly a thousand more vehicles is unimaginable! Roads need to be improved to say the least!!! We will continue to stay on top of this huge problem along with all our immediate Quarry neighbors as well as surrounding communities! SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE BEFORE NOT AFTER!! Linda and Chuck Togias 1 LykinsDave From: Pete Bartolik <pete@bartolik.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 12:48 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Development at Immokalee Road and County Road 951 Hello commissioner, I live (year-round) at 9091 Graphite Circle,Naples, in the Quarry community . I was not able to attend the recent meeting on development in District 3, but I am alarmed at the report that i read in the Naples Daily News and from members in this community that attended. I'm not opposed to development, nor am I a "Not in my backyard" objectionist. However, it's become increasingly clear that Immokalee Road is already struggling to handle traffic -particularly during season. To learn that Transportation Engineering Division projects it will "fail" by 2021 left me incredulous. I urge that Naples implement a more manageable process for proceeding with development so that growth does not exceed infrastructure capacity. best regards, Pete Bartolik 508-259-2108 pete@bartolik.com i LykinsDave From: Olga Johnston <olgamjohnston@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 12:28 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Immokalee Corridor Overdevelopment Dear Commissioner Saunders, I am writing to voice my concern of the Immokalee Road overdevelopment. I join thousands of other residents who call for the end to this overdevelopment until the appropriate road infrastructure is built to accommodate this proposed and future development. I urge you to consider the public reaction to your planned development- as an elected public servant, it is your duty not only to do so but to ensure that planned developments serve the interests of the public, ensuring our health, safety and welfare. I look forward to hearing how you plan to serve our community in this matter such that our interests our protected. Olga Johnston 9047 Breakwater Drive Naples, FL 34120 1 LykinsDave From: Jim Janetz <jjanetz46@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2017 5:36 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Overdevelopment As a recently elected commissioner representing my district I am asking that you and your fellow commissioners place a moratorium on further development in North Naples. I recently read a study by county traffic engineers which states that Immokalee Road will "fail" by 2021. Yet commissioners continue to grant new permits for development without considering a lack of roads and infrastructure. Please vote to stop further development until a solution to our traffic problems can be developed. Thank you, James R Janetz 6105 Montelena Circle#6104 Naples, 34119 1 LykinsDave From: Deb Mc <debmc4700@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday,June 1, 2017 9:30 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Fwd: overdevelopment Forwarded message From: Deb Mc <debmc4700@gmail.com> Date: Wed, May 31, 2017 at 12:29 PM Subject: overdevelopment To: BurtSanders@colliergov.net Dear Mr. Saunders, We are residents of Indigo Lakes. We, like all our neighbors, are gravely concerned about the rampant overdevelopment being approved in our immediate area.As an elected official of our county, we implore you to do your part to obtain a moratorium on any future building in the Immokolee/Collier area. As you should already be aware,the traffic on these two roads has already exceeded critical mass. Any future development will obviously exacerbate this mess. Please let us know what you plan to do about this matter. Sincerely yours, Jim and Deborah McCarthy 1 LykinsDave From: Robert Black <rblackmd@gmail.com> Sent: Friday,June 2, 2017 6:44 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Immokalee Road Dear Commissioner Saunders, I presently live at 8785 Hideaway Harbor Court in the Quarry Community in Naples, Florida. When the development of the Quarry began approximately 13 years ago,there was minimal road traffic, very little commercial development. and a few small residential communities in the surrounding area. Things have changed dramatically.Now the Quarry is bordered by a very busy Immokalee Road, with heavy traffic 24 hours a day. The noise pollution from road traffic is very evident throughout the southern portion of our development, especially noise traveling directly from Immokalee Road across Boulder Lake into the residential area. I am very concerned with the proposed plans for additional new communities and developments, a new school, more commercial buildings, and the extension of Collier Blvd. (951). Already during peak season the traffic and noise have become unbearable. It is essential that any further development be put on hold until these issues have been addressed. Immokalee Road needs to have many more lanes in each direction, along with several turning lanes at the intersection with Collier Blvd(951). At the present time, we already often wait for three cycles of light changes before being able to turn left onto Collier Blvd. from Immokalee Rd. With regard to noise pollution, sound barrier walls should be erected between the entrance to the Quarry and the entrance to Heritage Bay. The traffic noise from Immokalee Road, in this particular area,travels directly over Boulder Lake into our residential community at an unbearable level. Commissioner Saunders, please address these issues before proceeding with any further development. I understand that at a recent public hearing for variances of this development, the head of the county Transportation Engineering Division stated that Immokalee Road would not even be able to handle the expected traffic from the proposed development. Hopefully, you understand my anxiety and fear as a resident in this community. I would appreciate a response to acknowledge that my concerns are being taken into consideration. Thank you. Sincerely, Robert Black 1 LykinsDave From: Arnold Angeloni <arnoldangeloni@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 12:39 PM To: SaundersBurt Cc: 'Adam Radler' Subject: Immokalee Road "Failure" in 2021 Attachments: Ltr to Commissioner Saunders about Immokalee Congestion - 05251.pdf Dear Commissioner Saunders, I recently received the attached letter from Cheryl 011ila, President of The Quarry HOA, describing an impending planning failure involving development near the Immokalee/Collier Road intersection that will result in what the Transportation Engineering Division describes as a "failure" for Immokalee Road by the year 2021. As you know, our national politicians and government are held in poor esteem by our citizens and deservedly so for a variety of reasons. However, state and local governments, thankfully, seem to be functioning fairly well. I would think that local governing bodies in Southwest Florida would avoid over-building on a road that the Transportation Engineering Division predicts will fail in 2021. Given these facts, I believe that the moratorium on development on Immokalee Road that Cheryl 011ila proposes makes sense. Regards. Arnold Angeloni 9257 Quarry Drive Naples FL 34120 651 329-4867 1 � C LykinsDave From: Douglas Lewis <Doug@tllfirm.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 6:13 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Bob; Christopher Hagan; GundlachNancy Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Attachments: MAC-Triad area analysis.pdf; MAC RPUD Review Report 06-12-2017.pdf; ERP Pages.pdf; CCF060617_0006.pdf; Submittal 1 05 Hadley Place W PPL Plans - Prepared.pdf; Submittal 2 08 Triad Open Space.pdf; Submittal 1 06 Plat - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 1 06 PlatO - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 2 09 MAC Open Space.pdf Dear Board Members, In advance of the hearing next week, please find the attached and below for your review. I will update you on any progress between the neighbors, staff and the applicant. Best, Douglas A. Lewis T L THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error.please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent:June 20, 2017 6:03 PM To: 'GundlachNancy' <NancyGundlach@colliergov.net> Cc: 'Bob' <bobcol@comcast.net>; 'Christopher Hagan' <Chris@haganeng.com> Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) 1 Nancy, This will confirm that we have not heard back from the applicant regarding our neighborhood concerns raised back on May 31, 2017. In follow-up to the below May 31'submission and in advance of the BCC hearing next week, please find the attached and below for staff and applicant follow-up (hopefully, we can get these items addressed, agreed to by the parties and solved prior to the hearing) 1. Regarding drainage, the existing drainage ditches along the east and west sides of the RUPD's simply do not work (I am having pictures of the drainage problem sent to your office tomorrow). The ditches are not draining properly, and according to my client, the water has not left the ditches since June 6th. In reviewing the ERP and PPL, the East and West drainage systems are connected by pipe under Palm Springs Boulevard. a. My client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to confirm that both the East and West side drainage ditches will be fully graded and improved by either the County or the applicant, so that they adequately and properly drain (all work to be completed prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project). b. Also, my client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require that the projects drain on both the East and West side drainage ditches and that either the County or the applicant commit to install a barrier(prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project)to help keep incursions and encroachments out of the drainage ditches. 2. Additionally regarding drainage and according to Chris Hagan, the proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for storm water management, and this is well below the typical industry standards of 15% percent for a dense single family cluster project. According to Chris Hagan and based on his review of the ERP, the applicant is making up for its lack of storm water management by draining into the preserve area in the Traid RPUD. a. PUD Hagan's office reviewed the ERP cross sections and noted that the applicant wants to put a retaining wall around the north side of the eastern preserve. Upon closer review of the ERP plans, it appears to Mr. Hagan that the applicant is looking to incorporate that preserve into the water management plan to provide storage for storm water. This is inconsistent with Collier County's rules regarding allowances in preserve areas. This inconsistency would disqualify the area from preserve status for onsite preservation. This would require additional offsite mitigation to compensate for this. b. To eliminate this issue, my client asks that Exhibit F to both RPUDs be modified to expressly prohibit any water discharge into to preserve areas. 3. Additionally regarding drainage, according to Chris Hagan, Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end and Palm Springs Blvd. does not comply with County standards. a. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be for the County or the applicant commit to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code, prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project, including the addition of improved drainage swales. As an alternative, my client is still open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. 4. The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. a. My client asks the BCC to reject this Exhibit E deviation request consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. 5. Regarding density, the Density Rating System outlined in the FLUE provides that "a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed, though not an entitlement.This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the location and characteristics of the project." In this case and based on the location and characteristics of the project, the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West is for 42 lots (see attached), not 44 units as per the MAC RPUD and the plat for Hadley Place East is for 41 lots (see attached), not 44 lots per the Triad RPUD. 2 a. In view of the forgoing, why does the MAC RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs 42 per the PPL and why does the Triad RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs. 41 per the PPL? 6. Regarding open space, LDC 1.08.00 provides as follow, "Open space, usable: Active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds, tennis courts,golf courses, beach frontage, waterways, lakes, lagoons, floodplains, nature trails and other similar open spaces. Usable open space areas shall also include those portions of areas set aside for preservation of native vegetation, required yards (setbacks) and landscaped areas, which are accessible to and usable by residents of an individual lot, the development, or the general public. Open water area beyond the perimeter of the site, street rights-of-way, driveways, off-street parking and loading areas, shall not be counted towards required Usable Open Space." a. RWA prepared document titled Triad Open Space and MAC Open Space showing 6.60 acres and 6.64 acres, respectively, of open space. 1. Can the applicant or staff provide supporting detail for the 2.28 acres of"Residential— Open Space" calculations as shown on both the Triad and MAC Open Space documents? b. It appears that most of the "Residential—Open Space" area is coming from required yard (setbacks). Please confirm. As such, I am only calculating 13,200 square feet or .3+/-acres as required yard (setbacks) as follows: 15 ft front yard, 15 ft rear yard and 5 ft for each side yard or 300 square feet times 44 lots= 13,200 square feet. c. The applicant has also filed its PPL. See the attached confirming a compliance problem with the 60% usable open space requirement as required by the Comprehensive Plan. d. Further, the applicant has filed its ERP for the MAC and Traid RPUD's. See the attached from Chris Hagan confirming only 55.2%open space for the MAC and Triad RPUD's based on applicant's ERP applications. e. In view of the clear problems as outlined above, my client requests that the "Site Summary" on the both MAC and Triad RPUD Master Plans should be modified to confirm how the 60% usable open space requirement will be met and to detail the specific "open space" calculations and break- downs. Additionally,the Master Plans for both the MAC and Triad RUPDs should be modified to show the distances between the preserve areas and the lot lines and the distances between the lake, dry detention areas and preserve. 7. The minimum rear yard setbacks for accessory structures in both the MAC and Traid RPUD's is 0 as measured from "lot boundaries", not easements. However,the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West and Hadley Place East show 32 lots+1-that back up to each other and that have 7.5 feet DE off the lot line and into the platted lot. 8. Also, Section N-N (see attached) places a 6 foot swale on the north property line and a 3 foot retaining wall against the existing rear of the existing properties with the preserve behind. A preserve adjoining residential does not need a buffer, but with the swale and wall and detention behind this would make it aesthetically inconsistent with normal perimeter buffering. a. My client requests that the Triad RPUD Master Plan be modified to show heightened and adequate buffering along the north property line in the event of any proposed swale and retaining wall. 9. Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require the applicant to seek to obtain permits for all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. 10. Finally, see also the attached, follow-up comments from Chris Hagan pertaining to traffic, access and utilities, etc. based on his letter to me dated June 12, 2017. I look forward to speaking with staff and the applicant as soon as possible to address the above items in advance of the hearing next week and will make myself available to meet with the applicant this week. Best, Douglas A. Lewis fi L THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive 3 Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used,to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent: May 31, 2017 12:41 PM To: 'nancygundlach@colliergov.net' <nancygundlach@colliergov.net> Subject: Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Nancy, In follow-up to our phone call and in connection with the rezone applications referenced above, I have been retained by a neighbor that resides directly adjacent to proposed projects (Mr. Colasanti) and will be attending the hearings tomorrow to provide public input on these items. My client is very supportive of single-family use of the properties. However, he offers the following significant concerns and questions from Chris Hagan of Hagan Engineering pertaining to the proposed development of these properties (a summary engineering report from Hagan Engineering will follow by separate e-mail): • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. There is no sidewalk. The pavement is only 19 feet in width. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including the addition of a sidewalk and improved drainage swales. As an alternative, my client is open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into I-75. A review of these swales (see below photos in link)by Hagan Engineering found that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these swales, a stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales by the County and/or developer. (At your direction, I can provide proof of the existing swale problem by historic photos from the residents of flooded backyards and roadways). • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. The fact that they are back to back makes this 4 easier. However, the traffic impact statement provided online was only for one project. These should also be considered together so any roadway impacts for turning motions, stacking, etc. would be combined and accommodated as a single project. • The onsite stormwater areas are less than the normal industry standards. This will require substantial additional filling. A floodplain analysis should be done so this additional fill will not adversely impact the regional floodplain. • Preliminary assessment of the existing roadway should be conducted and proposed roadways and finished floor elevations should be included in the PUD Master Plan to address concerns like the height (above existing grade) of the new roadway finish floors in relation to the adjoining properties. Accommodating the perimeter berm and roadways without discharging drainage out onto Palm Springs Boulevard will be difficult. Cross sections should be requested from the developer showing the slopes and heights of these elements and such should be included in the PUD Master Plan. • The elevation differential may require reconstruction and elevation of Palm Springs Blvd. to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway, and with side yards directly abutting the roadway,this will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but the PUD should include a requirement 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall and landscape buffering along the entire northerly project boundary and also along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard to provide additional needed screening. Homes are going to be set close together, and it is possible that side yard equipment would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. • Preserve areas should have exotic vegetation removed and be replanted with native vegetation from Collier County's approved list. No grading in these areas should be allowed. Additionally, • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that the dimensions of all existing easements be depicted on the Mater Plan. Also,that cross-sections be provided on the Master Plan(with elevations and required set-backs) for perimeter buffering, sloping, preserve areas, the lake area, and other features as depicted on the Master Plan. Click on the below link for photos of existing site conditions: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fkObn4vxlct2h5mnhw0 Douglas A. Lewis Tig THOMPSON LEWIS EL counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 5 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-do uglas-lewis-1250057.htm I Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. 6 Ln N lD rl Z Ln Co Z w U C W O_ l0 nrN co i--1 ni1 N Q u1 co N to Ol Ill V co M V 111 l0 l0 V N 11, .--I 00 • .-i I^ 00I •-i r-1 M 01 CO O N N ti N N V M ."1 tD N V O M N H 1n Z Orl NLn N O1 n W V N V IN N O Ln 01 Q1 N 00 h N 00 n H Lf1 N i=x'.:W • ul 1� 1� e-1 1� 0 ul v1 LO O O .--1 N V tD C CO UVO6O O N ,-i O `-' M O OO Z OMO Q 3 o_ 0 J 0 F Q Q Z O Q cc O s w J 0 0 aw o L'-' o Z Z p g ~a 5 ~ 00 m ~ co ¢ = w p 0 cc - N 0 NN 7) Q Q w - - w w p o w 'n \ Z > O ~ D W N M 1n M Q m I- Y O 1' O_ > Vl J I- w \ W 00 o_ O N O N N0 co 1= O Q m a F Z w I- a - w F w O • w w 0 d w 1i w 1^n Z = ~ Q Q Q a w cn Q Z G Q Q w LL. a Q 00 o r a O . uLU > 3 m O_ F F- Q O_ m Q O_ 0- w w w O Q 0,-- 2 0 0 Z LL 0 N J � Z Q ~ l0 ~ .-1 0 41 M I� l0 V ln r-1 ci 01 M 01 W 0J N N r-1 N Q C w ^ w ^ e-I N N CO N .-I 0 t!1 l0 M Co .-i L0 O O .-1 N V N M r I..- w< a s' e U Q O OO N O O N c-1 O M 00 `� O N Z O rn .-i O N O .-1 .-i 1ti O K Q, Z Q it _J 0 J 0 N ........ w a. F O Q O_ V7 0 cc e-i Z w F O O W W W 0 m LD Q F- J w Q a ). W O O W O Z O (� w > K CO 0 > 0 Q S w ~ O N O Z v1 J 0 J W > cc co > > i__ D V r D V Y w 00 W w Q w w w m \ F. F- K Z w v1 0o Q 'n o Q m FQ- Q Y > CC w Z > O - Y ~ .. .L6-' w m 0 0O U) N g Lo N m 1L O cc Q CO a w w Z Q Kul Q a w F- w O w w en O 1n w N Z F- m Q J Q °1 1n in w --L.-. 2 Q Q w LL 0 a CC a J O OcI- O p v > vii m J ', 0_ Co ~ F- Q H co U O w z o_ a ,'. W ? 0 2 0 FE HAGAN Douglas A. Lewis June 12, 2017 Thompson Lewis Counselors at Law 850 Park Shore Drive, Suite 201-A Naples, FL 34103 Re: MAC and Triad RPUD and ERP Applications Review Updated Engineer's Report Dear Mr. Lewis, This letter is submitted to provide a brief review of the pending Collier County zoning applications and South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD)Environmental Resource Permit(ERP) application for the referenced projects. This is done consistent with our previous correspondence and May 25, 2017 agreement. This report is submitted to outline my findings from the review of the applications noted above that are available on line. We have also had a site visit, received photos, and held discussions with you and the adjoining neighbors. Consistent with the agreement we have addressed open space, drainage, access, and utility issues below: 1. Open Space Calculations Attached please find a PDF of the Area Analysis for the zoning and ERP applications. You will note that the ERP,which is a more detailed set of plans, shows a 55.2%open space versus the County calculations that show 61.6% open space. This is above the County zoning minimum of 60%on both independent and combined plans. The big difference between the ERP and zoning plans is in the open space/pervious area. The acreage goes from 11.86 for the ERP to 13.24 acres for the zoning applications. The ERP application shows a smaller open space pervious area. The preserve numbers match up well. The pavement area is also larger for the ERP application than the zoning applications. The spreadsheet has highlighted the items in blue that are lake or water management and in green that are open space. The yellows are the cumulative numbers that calculate out the percentages. The SFWMD review of the ERP application also found that the storage capacity in the water management area maybe exaggerating flood capacity. This could require a further increase in water management area. 2. Drainage • The proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for stormwater management. This is well below the typical industry standards of 15%percent for a dense single family project. The smaller than average water management facilities onsite will result in the need for additional fill. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples,Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • The preserve is bisected with a discharge swale and should be left outside of the water management area. The County may not accept the preserve with a drainage easement through the middle like this. • County and SFWMD drainage rules will require a reduced discharge from the site of 0.15cfs/acre. This should help with any overburdened outfall ditches. • A floodplain analysis was done to show that regional floodplain issues are not adversely impacted by the proposed development. The SFWMD is still reviewing this. • Inverted crown roadways proposed for the project should be efficient in directing stormwater internally and reducing costs. This also supports the higher density proposed. • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. The developer should bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including improved drainage swales. ERP cross sections show 3:1 slopes within the County's right of way which may not be acceptable. The swales will also need to be improved not only offsite,but onsite to maintain flow consistent with the resident's photos noting flooding in these areas. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision to the north includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into 1-75. Review of these swales (photos in link)find that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these. A stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales from the County and/or developer. • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. This interconnection will cause conflicts with the utilities and require a County right of way permit. • Perimeter berm elevations around the new project are proposed at elevation 12.3 NAVD. The expected flood waters get high above the edge of pavement of the existing roadway. Roadside swales in these areas it may be 3 to 1 or greater not allowing them to be sodded, but be used in native ground cover. This may not be acceptable in the right of way and need to be addressed during the County right of way permitting. The ERP should be consistent with these requirements and the flow way should be reestablished along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard. • The elevation differential may require that the reconstruction of Palm Springs Boulevard be elevated also to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The fact that the site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway with side yards directly abutting the roadway will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but should include a 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall to provide additional screening. Homes are going to be set close together it is possible that side yard equipment and would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The ERP shows retaining walls will be used in some areas to segregate the preserve from the water management facilities and may also be required to flatten out slopes as things are more detailed along Palm Springs Boulevard and/or coordinated into a perimeter wall for visual purposes. 3. Utilities • Utility provisions should be made to accommodate the project with connections to the existing utilities on Palm Springs Boulevard. • Looped water distribution system will benefit the community with better fire protection and water quality. • The sanitary sewer system will need to have two onsite pump stations to accommodate the centralized sewage collection. • A sewage force main connection will be required on Palm Spring Boulevard. • A regional pump station network analysis will need to be done to make sure that the existing pumps remain online when the new pump(s) are added. • The County's utility services should be more than adequate to accept the proposed development. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. 4. Access/Traffic • The Traffic Impact Statement shows only the single project. As this project is being processed with both applications. Cumulative impacts should be analyzed and distribution should be handled accordingly. Request for combined Traffic Impact Statement was not provided or addressed. These should be considered together as a single application for traffic impact analysis and turn lane requirements. • The Traffic Impact Statement for the project does not address the necessary improvements that may be required on Palm Springs Boulevard and/or the Radio Lane to accommodate turning movements. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • Alignment of the driveways between the MAC and Triad project will require coordination to prevent awkward driving motions. • The elimination of sidewalks and bike lanes in these neighborhood though will put people in the road right of way. The internal roadways are proposed with an inverted crown. This means that the middle of the road will have water in it during rainfall events. This puts pedestrians walking on the apron,which could be a hazard. • The tie in of the project inverted crown roads with the existing Palm Springs Boulevard will result in some grading challenges at the project entries. This will be exacerbated by needing to maintain the perimeter berm for the stormwater management requirements. The new roadway may need to be considerably higher than the existing roadway. • The swale along Palm Springs Boulevard will need to be maintained outside of the turning radii for traffic safety. Below is the link to recent site photos: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fkObn4vxlct2h5mnhwO I believe this provides an outline of the open space, drainage, utility, and traffic issues associated with the referenced application. These projects need to be considered together as the impacts of both need to be considered as one. Please look this over and let me know if you have any comments, questions, or require any additional information regarding this. Sincerely, • — Chris Hagan 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com F I 11 / 1.,„c Q Z1 yI I I 0 Z I a LL x iRS?AS W Q .-4" . 2' LLi S x a W- w Z s V se, m S g W v g Q Y r x g e e x m O 3g I a — x v ' s ci 1 311 W i h$ Zia 'i''11!' I = v ZQ„0 \ / § i4 3 ? e s p _QggA6 S Ifl ,, 8 11 I O I : .=,, k lig11 _ I ri, I 1,1 I ,46 5 1: � I ., ,. . ,�.�.. .>I I ri---- i� I I � re I I lit. 1 = av I� I� w i1I ,; o a I y I I f i Iii z I I *:a t< L �I I I � I� I I I I �. � � . . / : : ! i . o r_4'''•,-.o In � r fix : dt IF— ms II-R aII 'l , � y --p't ., / ! it- � 3 -J `�.I j .€ — — -- I - H _ill I / � ' I I I 1 1 ; ;, "'i�1 . Ill .' IIS ' I i I l a i I;;a33 " " o I II � k 1 l i i i a S";'.,...,1 ,,,,-.„„- ,::16- . 11 6 6 11 $ Is ry !, i Ya i 1 ._ - Mil j -r�5 ,6#-----,--,----',—,41.4.. hl. _ ) ._ • fr, ILTI m e A • `r41 � I11 ms�_ i R l y E ,,�1 I !' T I I( _ =,l , 9, ,.. . 1 ^a ° I nl � I' 1 1 € W xI # t li ri � I I ^ 1 I_ . R iI I I I I d s 9 IE I I 3 I .' ''• ..:-. ii j 1 I ' „ 1 : ' i •%•.. • ( .',. , . og .'•• ', tftillil - j : i t I lin ' 1 il - '' 3 Eri ,) ' _, 1 . 41 g - 5 gpfi { (jy ,/, i �• g „t ....-:Z°:1' e .,, I I ,,, ,. i 3— - �',t'l ..i r;_ — _ _ ——_ __'”- SSI I 't a `. Q r=fix J , °'., II ii `I i I 1 vI R i 1 F p g g4 1 a: 1 Q$ �,; R__7 1 s 1 yy 0.= 5 dQo N N P I P ,r '� 4 t 5� O £ II' 11 Z QI 3 q ffrV E a € i ,, N 1, 11 z :_. 60,0111 WM MN Oh w: t as 111111j11 ,5 _ §+� o N E m g ' 1 AI - 1,��;' 4 ~ 48 0 / : - i i 6-a i ei__ _ rif y 1 11+ Z s i ' IS i E Jf1 y y " b° O G Z Er i r 1 o 1} a pVa Z z n g f- ! } Y 77 wE ; Pi w: Hw . O I ii V 1 F"# .. Y 2 f 6 as ig x2 i 1Jri 11 : Z W x" 'e\yy 1 111§ 3 i • q a vri .1 a .5 a ,gt § € o 8 v a- 1 _ , e mil g I. gg p 4 O= 1a / T- ! , �Y N 1 1 g tl i U r ' z = d ,_,, 1 i a E 1 e s 4 ot^ 1 if .! o oz6z z Y O , . , „, . $ I '''' w j , i B moimmiiim . I I 11 alAll: } V Fy i tl 3 1 I $ F. - 1 1 : MEMO I gat Iit i I : IZ ' _,:,`' , 11 , ,, li ti G" .. i ---.__.. r�lwwmmlloln..vuo— ' ... I .r. -7- _ (2 I N' I .I" y Q, I • fl G i. fffffi�� I b ° ` 1 1 0 l fffi� t 9 �,I �^ j fi t t e \ FieE Gi0 1 .I . 1e E° �; X111 ` 4' \‘ Ili ii I' 1 it 1 P I I g'. 7, 1 0 !,1 ...-;:. ----.-_1 t:51L;11-,1,1—: 1 . . Al le! ' I 'a 1 A, 1 ;I 1 <5", '� i.t ) ( 3 1 '; :_ _.1 '' .,1 —-• � 41: I,e f .,a° . ~ IIILL l �3 1 1 1 t A �� ,Il •3 '�'(1 '. "r {z, V/.�1 0t its sii It ( I E~..,E �1 I E f I�" E lul A �1 4- 414 1 _ -.-... 1 'mai1, j it a l ,11-11,'-ti-I, t '•, 1, ,,,„,,,t_. .. ,,L.7, ,_,.. .. 1, i 1 �ITgI 1 , x 1� Iii 0 t tl , X1[0 ,� 1 Feil i+d G� 1 tiI 'I..i = S �-+ i'�. � IIIt i E 1 ' �F. I> 1 IrI I �i' I II µms•gg - x a . o I I X71 1-' r o Z �. s 3w 1 �_ o ) P 1 ' 114 a ? 4 ,- f J l `1 1 ...UMW to xE I s 1 8 y g11p I '�g a �.. 44 & j ll � xt.if Tam+ L II 1 `c _�' 3 $ 1I1III 1iE 3 0- t t i , , , Igigillfg=g 1 $ I t , ,v. O a A x@ Z m 3 i , iIIUIVUV fi yy g&'&0 Oxen:"a c �^ o �g "�� Y s= Om 6aetr .k V $ 1 -moi c / ii .22mmimm..om 1 71 cci' i 111411t„I l L i * STM. 1 1 NE II. MO I 6 f 1 IrEl 111111 NI NM 11 OM -- MI 1 I ... ... 2.**.' 1 „ t ' ,j. i i ;7'H I - •••\....1.- O 1 4,-.R:.... 'C'Iitt . .. r' p� A 'W " N.,,, •4,,Plif -ate 1 4-4 E ; ^! ! • . 4--- i eW244, 1 ' i ;If I y R_ t �t $w y C € e 1-;.-31124,'•'-** t' . ?: IS 11Th z 1 r zs ;`z` .`� 3 I !� �L_-- {� -I 1 '.- "4.,-li'•**1 22 1.."., I 1� p Ii im: %!r l s: . 4.74= --- a g . j Si 12 2, a x Z I sruw '17:: .R z 6K1%G6 - A ---------- --1-41 2 ,''1'' : -:---—11--;'7:7:t ._ \L ;,,,,,:11 X31 �, Nii Y.i .,i t7.:7.-.7.7..--,.....)4 •. .0 a 4 x 1,i igh iiA6 f. ,I ii 111 c. 1 '' til ak 7 I 7, 72.,_,IFTL: . t*41, TT •s•T i i i � £i Rill III 111 i I I Y ♦if aa *1 r i M gggiiigri 11 6'1' y q +e 1III & z z + u II b S T 1111111111111 lidlihiltiti h O H •% O W ,, Za C T a gN � � W w '0 ,Eo r� W a z 3 w 3 a 3 Q m � °r H g o w z a z w � � GS a � o Vsd Hw x o w z w am z z0 N- W = 3 a a i D a w s Q o of T W N ° aQ = = = Z � 3o .m O w Z 3 LLO ¢ a -6 Q H d p4 .„ woo a s u 3 0 1L�L1� ^o w c Z w F w a ¢ ¢ v p p 0 g C n w, w 0_ , m < , „, n m m , 7 0_'L`' On O g, <LEF> f % mom °z R A ' g, CA D a is n��'ui.is tang w 8 w az W U a wWQ acc C/D �■rl cup) .cf- 1 V OJ 0 Z CO, M 0 c s �'" o flq to W Z LL COCC , 'mss. , e : ; Z =^ o ~ ° Q w W N Z ��m � o �r U �_ J .-. �o o X �, Q. rn o a C O e Z 3 O J a` "' Q (24 omi F- J d X -�`3 $® b �Z C/] W UO co 0 ? of F 5 u ZW � U ® , ltbAy.R z Od:a.w G: II— U ct CC 0 i gilliiiii) Li- (..) .411 z V �fL '�t°"�, m 00.."."Y�ym o _ f a� b t �`ai� 'o wu:ati� T 0 0 Z 0Ez U = °z o=sQ a � fo `Os° zaOR � 2Rg zw g w= 4. ZU =ow n ,FgwQro 8�W Q :,c±1 .7445 p 6# aW .7:g-i''.7:g-i'','' �" Eo O a 1Pc mN .2 L! a 51 S4 ll5 is .Era o i7, z F S i Z 3 as i = i ° gg. �.'@i zF :q gig= i i 1,0g a fQq 3@ CI A z 4 6 .i`sid.•e3oecn35ag.it. , ? ea §5eale o .. 74 z w a r Z 0 zzS E _ - eF; .i oWyE - 4 S ' 03d'3' i e 'iis s g s 9 } b g a timi1hki 44 , &.p p si iL 2; € :='5 .€ii ;€1 iol ai > ! 31 5-$ F' 3s4Fe. e r - E•a a g •5 =5$ E 5 aG 4a s @ 5 A =5F°i' k a 5 �o d 9: -_. 5 _ 3= his i e. i' 5 �_ .h € a 4. bh gg E-3=••g r ri a3� g`'Cd1 8i, le S a a3 a}n ' ;;WW1° a 5 ' 3:'p Itii= ya 4 i; :� d a � 5 3iE 'a3=i i i ei eg3e 6 ' g3 a£ _ 5� a 1 a § la E- €s 5 a i a51„i5: ! i 05 nig g a - 3 1W g; ge ! s/ ! t 95 4 ' § i a V., 0.0 9i $ a 1_ ca•,A !its BgE Ci € 5g 5i l3 i 3 E 3 1 „ s ,1 s �o £k 5 g � as a= i 5 4 0 $1_� � ” a qs'y ; = P a _e z . ga p 1 ; a 4 3a3 5 a 1e3: E a °€: E ap.b85g a ae �i =; ° a s3 a° J a '� =E _�iv ' €n ?ie°5 €=' '' 7: H 401 b;r ie4iiit i5 §P 11 1t a 1.i R a s € LLo $3 i■ ; 4 55 8 F E a` xa€ _ ..z= ib55 i a ;Oi o Z C A F ii } 1' . _ _; S i g ; � u i4 � ; =b- 5�� a 3!6 � �£ i p ��5ea o:s5 ;������ �° a= Ne �5 b =g� � �iE : Ia I!3 2 5 i-,6 i5 evg58a yA 1 < k ? I "`-- a a �2 6ode E a s �� s b 3 .�° . � Z�s _ s �� 3 > n}= s e� ie'o t; ? u 125 n 3S -'ix 3 _ ESa s 1g a Dp +5r ..`a4 s a.� a5 - �'a a f 5� 3--d Y 3 ¢ xa i n _ �E5g €a 3 a ■■ as t € g E a; gE a g o °1$ ilei r ;E3, €; 3i 33 3IIa 3 3 VE i i' 1i ¢c n ; 3y� 1 i G'3' i 1' cG6 az5= 1 gi4ii p [ £a 4' h ! 1 ; I` o Sa°"d A's � � a rz „e. s so's _ n°i a a i - .I ad le �, _ii: i3 e'- 8 5 l- l3 1 i 5 =. :; - 36 a 5g a 55.3 c i• 4 i '.ie a 3 :€-�E @�'== ;nil _g a w .?a i s€2 E e F .a g si ' s ss s : a3 `s gat ,5 so : € PP S € i ;€e E ' F F 61 ! is OP i ; se ' ; ; 2 : g2 5, ti 3 RI °s 3 i; i % 5a i 1s A•. 4'1;iti it- oa a i ; t a d i€ i c 6 tl. 10 5 la - n s e� 3 33 :i, ti ea? 9 a 8 i _- i ' a j a s -3 ag E r - s Y ? n: a e, '3; ;14 i$s as n Q E 1 g i 4 is E : • h. tti '11 < ., 151 1 !. 61 14 • W\ W oP imi!gi 1111 1 ! !!, s_ O o a FiiBrl. oEma Kd iiW z > a o E l}_ z Ivilgil l 'i r! 15E1 3I i m '— °d / \ /oEs iawFF! 111151� 1py81119i 3, G Go c .'..t tee. _ .. _ _ a O i z Z .a4 Q ! Q a = .. ' ti-..1 Z w a - ! F 4 0 _ .. : , -,.. -,. ,‘.,...-., '4,--:,,,,,, , ., d ,,, I . C :.-- z , ,.‘ _ i`A'19 N ��'v 6 O \h , .may � F I J Q \ .. ,..,:. ,,,* - 0 z r G w J \ t N11 t -.. , a - 5 V V - \ l' i z dr u 4 T - - 1:: // F { F 8 P i 0 , 4 t ia 44 s§ sg Ygae-^sg ap� = :5 it 0 p§ n E.1 E N3,5 e/5= _t_e 8 S S e_T P d" 0d4... � 3' g Cs 9 W w W 2 - q d N y § i 1 aa'i ti `m p0!ill e: l3 a g .E F ' o'" u = 1 s g 111 3g iii;!lit ; !! ;! i i f s g1110 o W 9 ' ? stl 9<' �'k € w o ?:' _i 0 ' i U WA Of :« ?'figfxf € 8 E SIS - E E _ 7 S Q / 2 I•. L 1" Ili LI L _�} Iii ii' Gs i li i� i Iq q M„,'.` „ \. 1� t j 111 iii , I 11 lit _i I. Iiis � 1 ' H R 'q .1 ;11 Ill - I� 11 I1 R`�,`'a ♦111 II III SN I1 11 III ( ,-�_ r....__,___-,,i t I.. 111 111 hi II I 111 i �� JI IL Jll ' 1IL J / I'1 il' i A — 2 — A 011VA3'VIOe s0TERIdS wry \.`\ I z 3 % 7,,.,r7„-, f,F----- —... -- '. , ,r— I __, . , ______,- .:. ,t_ ,_ 0 .., ,-:: ,- ,g„ .., . . , 13, ..4. , , . ,., ,_. ,1,. . : la, 1 Lt . . ' w I fi r;`' 1-1 ,1 1 I ci m II mI +p �.u� ro ,-7, I t, I ® [' i ” 1 1 TI id. I 11x1 m " I' I - I I I c --t — 1' 'I I-- -1 r---- I il____ ---1 1 1 ' e^ sa<i<OE g Z`,' 1a It `1 I I z z��o m I 11 m " , I 1 a, ; or � ' e 1 i` F II' , I€ ,.�{_.I " I I1 Fg"Iaatl3s I I i 1 I €g w A' I lI - " I. ,� T 4 tl� q . ` II 1 �`F I� I 1_ 1 1 m 11.71: 3 ' I I 1 8 4 �_ 1�a1 I it I I - I I ;'I N, o" gi: yy GY�.3 1 1 -:I -I I r i ,;,7,I€I 1 o �:m i • (\am\\\��'�-tl3tltl NOLLN3l30 3 I I 1 I '- 017i ' \\ /NOLLN313tl — — — I H p., w $0 7...-.. ..,.'; �\� rt t- � I �I 1 3 133NJR 7NINIML I /94 - I Is ++I — --- _-4 •--- - .♦ �& . ' ,Q 1E6 1r ImilI HH 1 — I --- 3'a ' a8 °' i r am 1 1O , L� � 1 R ¢ I a 1 - 2_ -11 11 , g s . 11 R \ 5 .. s I :\ 1F • 2 ni_ 6 f IIibEi - L !uu1tI ,. b F t 3 I -. 11 12I Et g W c Sg 8 i s II J g` U zi = LzC - wr ' ' c S Y ssw w s rite_ _ Z z8 2 wf i y iW I I I I oin IM IM MN N ii I. o�a1 � i ... 1 # *_ x __ ds - WQ s= woa = 0Qo { .Mb `'` a = • _ _1. _ i 0X6 2 I / ai.', m R t 1.. :% III t 141 - iii I QIP i, Il Ill . $ M ', I`..i.. ,/ 0 1 F I' 1, W hili a 1 P J 1' n. ' 1( -- �' ---"�i 1 ,_Iii- - "--.._ �_...-. 1 g $ !\ _ `� 11 I I' III 1 I11 to i R` ' N�-7 �� ill I 111; II II 1 IIII ,d 1 ( j —--1.... 11 I 1 11 I{ I ill C" �i1! I i J L U i ___ - .._ — I u v 3'1f o S`JNMdS IcIva -c t a - ) z - _. r.. .. ..- _.. _ . .e - - Z "Pi ' i I ig:gym _ f ea;F! b I -1 m - I � o o,. -p. 4... fid_ .. I I t6 i ce 17, p 6 ,c, r.,„); I , P ;..n, I is ' I • .y , -- tl IL 541 ^ ( 3 I 85 � 1 31`i. I N a I a 11, ' 3' xl J Lir. _ 1 i`'I'''''41 "------7. .-," , '1 i� Y a� I 3.3. i s 1, P I A I I1`,,'t t; ' I 1 kI N :',/ m r I I 1 �e e j � vaw xoiu+�ao ,� ( I _ 1 3 y g J _____/" I"' ,.� x f O WN 14 tnT ...—.5 W�, r ' 1.14'z.,":i Iw m II 1 a i int L f , I 3 i `-if1 ?r._T'` ; i i i I F gf 5 gY F i 1 % g 1 i A L 4. ii m }g?g og. G `S i E s� il✓m < .1Ess'EZ EE G o a g : iz .W"S - s 2 m sa [4-a al >Egi :— VzpN-P8' " a _ `Li ..Z Na- " W E z s a s i`, > 1 Z In Wo 3- I: q 3 o S N o 0 0 3w w s a o m W 3� LL a 5 5 d Y`eeg Z gg . vVl7 — C3.$I0, a C7 1. g§ i ff i ..I F 312'2 . .a + ■�■ i .a+ '+'{ : : : _ : ¢ z e$ '$ °p r 1 51 5 8 g� O Q o dao Y=F 1- o S 1 I l cr q> 4 � 6�= 5W � Vi 3 0 $ rg o Wat' - 5 Q if 2 I I I iz__g g g , ; 0 0 O , ,. b , x \ L. 1 : : : j ,ggao °'o3 L'. zola a 3 e `,.`.` __ �� 11t I11 '1 1 ' 'ii tjl 11 F 71� a --r, a t..<-.:744-1 , i I k 11 IFS I 61111 , 1 Ild 11 ,gl , 1 -11 r1 `I II # I11 I I i I: II 1 ^I— t L 1 I. II t71 11 I Li! 1 11 g 2 y o C ll 1f, I lfilll I I I I y ral I II'i A `I t c �� �I y �)i iii 1 _ - h....4 "_ _Y'" ,y,, I\ Z M. _. . _�. .'37--; p mronavloa sowaas H-na .1 _— _ ,--_ Z z— __:____••-- .. � mac.m ., 4f1., Imo_.�'.. i 7 es i �,+ I ow 'E ' tj i' 1 3 I C! 3 _ . `I H .J �� 1 � a y „ Il 1. a 1 I Z o 77 ���/ It I � I I ,m� ' F w z '... 1 Y I F' t 1, II 1 O Q a I I 1 , 1 �I i i Q ' '. " , 1/1,. ,scig L I ; . — Is.`0 lel._„n € L_ "p� li _�s 1 11 a 7 : 1 fl I a F 1 1 r r I 1 ,$ 3 e? 13 e m 1 �' =I ��� 1 "� 1= ��I -€ 61 • 'i1( s zge3ais a a 1 i a p 1 8 a. .- w a .. r1 ,,,.n inni 1I ji i 1nYa I I II ' 1a1 °/` � ,rn �' "� 1 sII 8 q \ vv3wrioluF a n 1 ,, I ' i'4i it �1 ii El I airy€ae C of i'" n � !111' 04' qq 1 s -, VI lsl3ll 5 L�'i•� d Ips i ' I 3��Y� wW I. _ � 111 i S. •- '' II i " g P, "g 'i i '.. 1 'g "i i 5 r)110[II In 2 1 2 ? +. -----• ..._ ... pc.__._ _ __-..', .___.._ .......___ 1^' 111 4. M o - iu L y \\ x 11\ \ / : 3 -1.1 .i t i I, I riii L !111. I •I� s F E, sg I ti i y3 a 3e S Lmi.t1N g 3 s L4 0 • r . l ii "I, 1I I 21 4 w ., i_\� ,-1`I- -t-ii II 1 i i r i r m i I ry I ry =20 *}�;M4;1 II F II II I, Iiii 1 s t ._. I A I I h I s i `: k -i i 11 �'� E I _... ns= a � . g ;s 1. gl 3 4..# OA18 hwnaS wlVd _... 1 'rr - S _ CL I- u e ..�--.r� 11�. t• a / ,Ad „ BM , J O ,i10 €°I ` m rN 1 11 z E + + t 1I s g O. 1 ” t. ,, m I�I 11 s M a; 1 ,/1 is s or .e i0 I. I B I g IR _ iill a Bii y" -111111 a �_.. - e I INE i t ,11 A III 1 —nag, -tI . Sry s4 sa : m az 1 g= i.l �g llibB ' a - cI zQ I I �tig i i $1 $s; N sp� ,o P 1 .5 I i i . I!! i ° 1 _ 1 R t3a5 I r10 a ,t!l !vzH I agI w aygym }�iPvm ; 1 1 I' X I n re m 11 1_4111 4 V3ntlNOlIBM g /NOON3130 v I 1 r ,. _ 1 Y:;.,"- mwail; 1 _ 1. O t s 81 - ry m Y '^ I b o m m v ry o w u . ry o I1 R l — - I 1 1 F • a z c i E g I 1 4 F i s s 1 i 3 a ei sg 0.1 li 't:: _ IIIIMI p mINICM rill u g w W c -.. au M IR. �" a 5;, e i Rm - - - - m o 4 • Lu 74 cc 174 i 13 . — s 1 I �� I p 8 z z IN„m Ir. I I � re w l - = LL W— 3i o ,Rei $ a ■ I _ / 3a Ie T. "kik I— 1 4 Iii.' . a pl; ' g I g=1 1 =xd I I, ., . /^'' . 5 m e _ I�� � I 8 J o m �I'. 4"', W_. s i t X90 :,Y I ® ,m ._. a I idz kyrg z i m en 15 ' - e ——— mo 8 m a a m m a o IT q V, Z = RADIO LANE ? ` dG 3 I ffff I F f I i I I e 2 f { `I i LI ,..__ ,, fil_mill. 2 III mcivii v, m a g 3 a 8 rn 6- Q Vo 6 1 = E ,, I Ie 1 Fl I aIII Y1 � SI9 " ei " a me a " g I 1j A 1 4111 I ,, III ' € I I 11 J�.I iI 1 -- _ •.,, 1 4 A :,, 4 In a Q $_ __ _ .. _.— .J ,. _.._ — OAl$SOWUdSWNd --�: -III 'O U w I- Q '1:L.'"" —.1 e 1 Ila 6.°9& L0 pr: i s.s3 vssmll a- .... _ a i1 ° m _ I r5• m ii h I —g z 1 a s 'I s 4 N _. I w lit 1 , 1 �e 3 h 1 ¢ 1 '1' I I' 1 � @ a� I 451 y 4 i € w - —Y ' SI 11 f c a:1: r , t CI I 11 I` tA L15161£ Ii. I `aid 1 - 1� 1 A 1 —— I L o 't!" as €— — 1 .L.........5.5.• X15 w•. ^•—N a J •- ,:: 11 I I �.__ _. _.. F f 5s as �..r i. 1 .0 w h ®,�„: I a a $ ry "3 1 1 a€ I1 q. _ I L, 1 II 1 : i ., — '$P otN 7.1 I I € a o ` I N 1 °I. g 1 6 IT, !II I : 09� �l I o� I°� lo aegg . I ...i -1zP1V� x1a g3s r " 1 I ^J ;h 9 g ��� --1 1 ii O 1 S s I it 1 _� ��! ; . _ i 1 >j.o w 0 I; a 1 a 1 =1 21 $ m -1 0 m " o m P N o —o A " y _� -—_1 - k 1I. I1 1 s b/ � Y 1; f I $ z y4 I Y I i 44 xg a 'n 9,i 1 s 0, •1 L.. 1 I q - S 1 1 I i mit h I O�+� �. a:_ i ryii1i u w 'a 1" 1i a cT :.� _ i w 4 W 8. Y m a a a 3 O 2 W T a 10 -1.-r---- c = S Ag--= I 4. o . a€ G 48 :a g o /g z o z 0 w u' o 3 ,„ z 4z� = U?s _ § ogo= dw E o 2 §- ;.!zW ,; I i 9 z _ se 5g. 0 5 s N ca :: .,.. : ,g,,.-,,,:::::.. ,..,f:<, _ :,. A: as x E _. w I § , �$ €fie II i k”41 est", ,, p . , , m 11 b pi s il iU 11 Oft,A E _ - n i W 5 r a; T-- "E `§ as a g ~gi 9 € a - iS 2= 1 W"_ W' i � z o xI W R�� {Wy Y 0 3, U. 3 n N e Ili . z U = «Q� Z U^. a 5 i u 5 w MIL. z a a a' b si . s 3a I F z z � s / " g; ; a w s 1 a ;41 aegii., It; it ii G. p '� �_���iC7x a a 'ss e--.o,.- a-. a _ _ C7 F z; .x Ee o C E e cam � '�B g rCges �� � N 1 i lig ;n:!!poi l! 3 a4 _ - s4 5 � a� 33 3 p a� a e Z `� £ iF7.'" ts= ggee i. V. x `� ` �i 8 W q W ¢ t3 e2 p `�=cfgig =° 3 a▪ 8 adst_� pi,L x H a g/ 1-1516gesgxs gi€ Iaa:`sg, e: W • e wlQ= z x x«,�. q�, d it lii 2i s i 4 - 6 Gg V i S 1 sg a �g =11.k U it II! �; ei �e z ii A WI 0 z ���� as _ _ Z a �j� 2 z ��� a q ;h aF� ' o ` pp; PEp s 41 q .. I I it G I I- z IV'Ji ,yCD ip`. E�; $a 3 1 IE ! L' UC7 u p . ; I � q as a5 F" x...w� I alas' 0 a O d $ii U a Y a - S.`' ` /r r j_3 v v ,Mii a�' :0, 0 ,.," ..'-] ,.'S .3 111 ! ril i A 8 � I x . i I a$ 4 � . ' xe 9 c s fi ii i 1�`00 a ?, .7 a ! 7- .i 3=s,, " 6 sa _ e z s 2 it a Ili! '$ } 11 1 s,„„.„,„_y I i1 1_r•� yl°s t 19 fi f IN 1} b ; ;a `r� 1 ji, d] $ i #� :!t#e 3• i f' ;t i II (, r_ayr _ - 1 ±pl § �t i`}i 3 41 ; ,l Fi al i! a;3S 0 1 11'ilii s I,', it i . -dk:ifx:k• .g ne 17 .91; i; g g lata Ea #F, io 11 1 w :.aa - - _ , °._., ” s�g i!1 1 ii i,Ti ei��9 lip dti ii igg i=s l:�' is k .� �' i €!'��3!' t s6!t{ts!i!�t ! ,�!j it ������������I������������l��;�, a t sta }`s;pp 1a i? VIII!” $!!NI a. F P = A ! 1 1 ,...e4r,,,•'..> t� $ !;i I�,,! illi!�• i!�a�t�!�i _n — 5 - is a-ez aa:�.c::: ,.tl'.. u i -t S f z^3.35.595.e, U „13 ? ! _r? w 21 ° 11 1, X. '-' w , 1 41 % o I—— 1 . , n 1 �t! �-�(0) N ..„011=-7111• a b o� !�= l.. iii , . II'I (0 S i _ o l �I bi marI E J . L. €u 1I-7-1xM a 53 xx s p„ a i i!:4 Z1 lev .71 ll / to 1 i ..,1 i I 11 t ' — ■ .. 1 1Uii1' II ! I'l r1;u it isl '1 11 :; i Ii � '.ii"! p 1Iii ��1� i I 'r11� 4 �jl ;�1 0 .- I j, I, I i1 III j1 vi g i auMir • 11!111 II II hi II(11111 = i I ; I: .{ a=I i;vi - 1 Iii d{ 1'114 ti'fi:1i'I I 1, g ' i�lii,i'IIL't11�',d�tIl g le � i1..1111/1111.. di him 1' . 1 e 1 I}lhlII• ' ., d s 111 IIIIIM Ir Cr 11,1 v =, 11, ilial 11 I, ,' I 1 1 11 1,i a' �mionl�l PI Y Y F''1; `I t 1,of It I J i, IP , 1 I r�1nIhhl 11 II I i�i i 1j, fall!OP ' I l l.. 11111111iii { I,ji 11 !: 1 I\ n j I ,i F c®.1111111lu i ' II== I ! I6 11 e'!i)'I!'i lr \ ,1 11,i 1±1I s I1�ltummn ilk PI i!H1 li / i 1 ;{ 114 a L�flliiiiiiis - 4. J i s jP l I i i it 3 Egg::: i'. s ' 1 P I t 9'° tljll ` 1 1II nal 6 -- '! 1 Ills I 5 i lit I;1 i 1 ill Z o ululnt "Illi I tl,l 1l 1• i o I3`1.111din111 r 1 i IS °� ghliMI; I 11 ; I 1' .�. s 1gI'`IIII o Z 6 w 1� t 1 : 1 w 1 � 1� I5� IiI!I l ; '� �I � 1_141 E& ' I N I I i 11 1 ' 1 Illi Ili 11 I1 11N t iiig nil 1 li [7.< I i pi 11 t ' i @ l 'I I ) ,I` Iy II3i; 4I >s �ii Iii 1 I il ill IF f_/iCd5'g • �@ 2.I. 99 Tom^ ::x F !.C'I: --• I> Vv."! I I • i I 1 a IN, I 1 i!I 1 = i a a' ;`e 1 • ' a N I 1 li I I I '1 1, : I .Y ir a'• I g 1 1 �1 IF ' I I i' I I i' jlj i I ` IP,..i"w II 6 1 1 i I i I .i I sa € f I Boll pg r i—„1�= I •i!i i 1 it !I' 1 = I—Al1 Ii 1114 ,gjrl'i i it ii P1 rl 'i = { 1 1 1 „1 1 J Oki i!I `Ilil I.i 1 E 1 !I 1 ; :t +1 11 Viii liiiel ' i PI{'I 1 j I I _ _�d 1/1111 •e I 1 i 16 `VII ii!N�I / I ',I Prf 1 I i'4' ,...y S ;C i I, i I 11(ill ililyl I I P.!:''11 I ! illi !i j `yg°� I i eel I i�1. ,1111 b1CioI j 1 TIM Is,Ijj 1 , ,x11111 i i1e51• LI i!I ii, 1 I' ti11161 Ylll' I Illjl Ile; I gilt!' I I 111 i 1,I.i !{ 1'.1.'Flip 1 ie diY i! i 1 AI t se P i I, i 51, i i ` 11 illl�If I.lilt ! li Inihoi!II WI EI ,i, X1,,3 its i Ii �i ; F i r I IS F FI II;1! NM I nil!i I i Yl r,I till'I Ill .I�_;1 I Sl i.s __Qi iilM:I- iP,itl'I ” Ie• / e it s i 1 1 :: .i ilr .1 ill.':i! :iia ill j 1 ii egie I-;Ii C C5 i; i I t 3- i4 Fr A.; • 7 'e I gag; . e ;/. e' .. .. I 1 �iiE 11 1 li u1 i11 o : 1 I? f I 141111 d Iu i Is 1— g 1 1 rill II ii. i , ii i' i is i�ll7i Iiili;i� Ill I �1 �? 1 ' E 1� 1 �Ill .11111II 1 •iI I ,11lII _ ! 1 I i it ;E i Ona�' EI'I iI 411;r I iai Ii1 t}; I I= g tl ll,, a9 g g S! ,3 y5 5 lil, , 11 gt II ilk ! _1= `,i 1E Qp 3e a 1i11f1i °II 3 ii 14; 1 i !If.! `! vii s 1.._I i ief 9t t tt tE E < 1 PI 1: 1! I! •1 J� I € f Ii 9 iii f 1 i t41 l lig c m mit i ! ilii fill `_I0 i� p " iii a F _ et , 6I =i1t:=3l= /it F.1 i! t. ,,I ttf Ir t f � ! ! §=�xd gill of II, p l ffl: gy 7 �n �€6 it tCei 11 --I 1 ` l 1 !lf1 E `ilii - r ,1 ' 1 t1 . Ali z Lu z / I{ __a 114 ,<t, IL 0 3 J Ill • W I II_ i a 6 a � ,PB �° � 16,�N1 � I jail if I Ill!. ;,fit "f Si � y. !,� t�fit flit- :s'j19! : fl I�< 'att"its 4 ll.,tftt 91111`°t 1i.1ft..,.1 ti �I.i 1t ' I.i< h`;t tq llti lilt It Ng it ii,H f- -I.1. Nl tit En 1 :tilJllit1l! IR jfl 11 ill I . le �ft !IIfQI ffa �!l °�3<fE i t1i`�•� 1 `Ns 1144 t t autt 0 0 4Ee gtf1+ t ill, fiF6. 7 t. 11,1 = ,. Vii! 1� iif f!Mai 1_ t ` jEl •-. Illi a :1'1!I f` ,ttsl ong s c'� 1 l i t h t t '1 li !r �t t5514:1:,01; Ifii,irl f5:la t j' I ': 1 e 1 fl i NI I ilk" i fitliaQ t ktl!1111 t'�w ii 1 `., !I I; q ._ auP : 3 i -'t,( )i ! t �et�zar MP,: ,h 1 mei.. fill ll I l - FRi ill Sin . n IF=711 ice- 1i c_e :: fZgi ill f ! I I I I 1 i 1 f `: 4 i f 7 ! f 1 I ii gi s a n ' ( 1( 1 f 1 1 1 r ii! a 0 i, °fie O W glgly A ijOP 3 W c ms`s.. W g ` � y !! i ;''' s s, !E 3y 33��` I IliiiN o„Yo ...... I , Q c g 1 °iW` fr¢ is ,hit I , , W a i i SEE ii ;W w' Zai g h a R U ill dl !ill ax 151_ CCEg =i g g �I -- n a g g;15 F. -----r- 6g-p! a _ : z Z - i lhigg lI 5.p iy . \ / Uai $ !g io ,H;; Z 5. O Z e W ,, z O \ � \ ., ;' i o g'r! E rU a xws wo o.-pI_ .. z a : s c "TiO a ” 3< �; m U H a 34 W_ €� ��� a € al i g 4 \\ \\' i .s'¢WSW ..I F4 6I ; T�s,q. O osq9 \ \ < ; \ %,--,'' k3 ilii )1 \ ,„Y 4_q y!, �y R1 -�1rm r i \ ! Tl \ -- a ¢w ,,3 iw 533gi ': 3 .r 1,„ f. ''...-hil 1 6 ! 4:5; W ;�4:h::: U z 2 r. Q4 a gr° 1 y 1 gn \ liEl; IE' .'4 z !i 5o-g FSg p = a 0 9 iiihi O g Sas;o .. O , ;, g �a " 11 1111; 1ggl1 g P 4 ggg!I� _ 11° ;;"Ili w \ 4V:-.,- ?,. $ Pi Y Sae€gg c4` - ,. -4— o - �\; \`` �$k-� s"ci=ague �d `a a i \CR\\ i tl4iriqii5/0 8' 1 , =c, .. \ fg U ximgEi . W !� H a - / g z - 51 a g rm o 1 \\#;A:,.-. • - -- •aj Z 3 pp ":`C O 6 _ El i W 4 il43E W li '� ' 1 \ e \\ a �'�i 0 IN F p IRlel_ ! gU i \ u t \ \ < \ U I < W s:z Ca �, wla�Lp { 1 L4 �Q ri E 's i $Z3 z \ i \ 0 ' Ig v' -E"� \ • \\ .. lay., `• ° s i 5 5 r,.. ......0 9..9.9. . 1SV3 „�� 1 f SLR/ (692)rel SLSOL6S'6EZ wy)p 1181HX3 3DVdS N3d0 Y 6011E 11e9,deN I00 9v^S 9•.a 11,ed1,11,M 0199 ' 8 ZS69 9t Z99L SS 909¢.1,101,/).M.9.0¢91,11. 1SV3 a II 9.�NIf1iiN19JN3 3a83A 3NId .».., p% g a I �� ` .y.1,, �i F E i i DNI Il e'nz i F I , UUUUUUUU I I ¢¢¢¢¢¢¢¢ 1,a 1 H+I H* H.+1+, OUODUU 1,n.-In nnlmn ,n nlvinv'-.Doo n ¢¢¢¢¢¢ L] ZO NOS,-oorn.- O +I+I+I+I+I H Q Q I I 1,r�lnNn aFa 1- No oo S V I , '',',_L-7 O O C Z "o—�0 0 L 1 Qgi >g = a wwt7a 0 O - o 2 I 1, D&OIawW, a raUZZ ,2, E_-',5'1Z- 2,^ Z V ,�oao,zfo wL0rl�ww ¢' > Z wacce O pW a , I °Zo1� 5 p „ce .5G AO=w 55g LiUUUZ F-w micerr0a w o _ dzwFo7, N ddaao an ,,, Lr > >� gooago IA v'v'v' zY uuuu z 0 Co , , rO�M LL'wu3 § ZZWWulluwe, ¢ gaga 0 a F. I , o�wZz� aaaa~ 00 O V V NN F O 1 oli����zw 8 OO000 Q- F- zZZZ,,,w ¢ a Z ?O?inwz O www.,„ F- F-o zl� 11111111 100050 ° �� � I , , , r. , sa wave I III A ,II i _ S Iii g nI ' 1 ' 1 JI a 5 I h W 1 8 � I - - - -- 3 + ° d , I r 1 , i - N ��� '"'s. .i s x ;v / 1 LY n I 1 8 1I -- , .. "x r' nx a - . _i_ii-_ i". i I L J � iii GAM 01411MS IN IN. . -- — 1 I 8 I I 8 3 3 m04 171 ,9 ‘.!b-,„,,;" '� br744/1011 "'gg��e a "Alt e W N O L_ '"PKP��� 25 8 OM r- gz1w 1 b o, 8 ig8W`" Fmsa $ w g .z a= aegq, zo Ld = yzm w G oX 984�"o'aa k' i HMI € 'eN m '1618 o:z44 a �oN g G 9 a€-9 - o� to LIMO.% 0] 4�zzFn 8 z Caw m .5....-T <.55Z6 aj g § z 3 84 a s=-o3w� n m oog.,a I o ffi a � s sne 3 ozw `�"$2' OM 0 w sa il w9 o tR '71a Q 8a P 1 o1^. i8s 4$n ,ep E 'g'342'44 4 EWA�� aozo�m a � g i � ; k w; g° &8= 8 ��Fa. p�o IliT: zr ,N tw 4"- m a r0r 9, o :$$ P iX I1$ w � ash 13WS woLt, � 6�as z `z a: .18 a S5 a 1 j h y ;a3 i =L 5 %p i ��-g-rg i W3 L z o8ig': 8 8 �° 's 8 ' 1s 8 g$ h 8 5585 aha ' -,�€1,, g,, _6�"�0.a F F- a p w I— a a w Ln CC w p3 qW ZZWO Za p• o wpm E" a 0 Z < a M ill. a li3? 680 0g „ 1 r z -0 — .• Z a = gyIM i ...8 „"8 a g , =m aw gY W cna O � w II ! ' � r A " o °w 0Li a Q 0 a Es: i n .`M t O y € '40'40 w -:� 'o o g _ .1 g p w " a6 Q m en Z • �� `—= ,. J o .. 8 'a= fib+ '$ J IL U a- O � 0S •�'afar:� � mom H o m o$ - oo", ' 06 f XE o_ O I a o Ndit, _ o =o S Q a =g a$N p J CCF (n ���� a 'O dos w a 000 o1 gra W ao0azw m .. �. � .- = 'in �; g 88-6 3gp3h J n ■ - 9It:—.--....,= ra l a ; a;n gn "e Piz 0 � � � � 0 '�_ � `� iia : �i o 4 LL2 = am„ ° a° 1— g_ < U ti ! iIi w = g a ohs: I eL z 0 o $o x1opffi o 'i s € o Ir O o= a d $?_� wa g g 615 w E, mow; ai m ..� gas P:, 5E T. q 1.18—.-t..2,,1 � 6 o NmL a < " _S ` ieo ,S'i' h - pgorl: V q w w e-1 Y osaw " ob Ba ge -w: sos$ o q� o ' R g i § w o =g; E "P" a 400 I 6E 61r476:0! 8 X N' n w S==ewao!; s ! 885 e1g., 5 " oe g �= w g"Foo g2g ,T�" o go-Mg s L: S5 4 5-,p . d RSOe4i .T—i'; 28 tz-w ..6§°6'=� �u'�A , . s M 5. o ' a 1 S _ :your, OE 3 gz`"�� €p, l eve g:'0-c� ' p iggri gg p o �gw p , " 95 �'z-o o- s ''' %1°68z � �" a2sak =8 6 = z m e a� =s="$"z `' 6 _ -EL', 0io,o 8F3 6., �,owECo,o, s o 0 8 ' .m W a a"=sl&w€8ixeg AR 5 e9. =..$ <�6� n -'n Ea 6 oLLY n n p H- r o..p ._ _ MO! as: _- a" r!u!g- s 3! o ig ss s: $< v o b w 8. .Ely g = € gA"8d ,h: k w�a o�7-= ��w d z 5 8-:Wad a €�2`& CW 3 �$=$mac ;�Wa'a = 07�sG " � R "� 6 " ` 8' 5„ ao j1 € w 6 q�aa�?o 1 sw o�` 8r p ow= W "- z� � " - $�� a Y't o o 83 i��W' 0 9tfow n ¢ � :!-OPo � q e° Ve Ei"' s TmPg � sae d = ! i �LL g s "`" W` F € � �;2� T"o � a ;"§ � P 'ac i O� 3 3 6 $z '3 a ".,."m^ . " o _ " o _ " o _ wil 5 9 W N N IN W= '''gE s Ou_ 9 - §W Llin� w a 0 p E8 wWEw og ''' k' y =� N Eck bmW 381,6 ;x .i 2 ppb*1 E%,§ s �s}tJo W Yogfioaaa4`Eggo B'AaA W I ho8E.99'oSaa8 �d8�.<• • C o6fs �R - Y e!8A8 O '.g o "" T �o nm m" n W w I " 2:1P>a ' (----- Is v SL 3 S,lZAOS v QQCf man¢ =aw _ ... ,O6'Z6i `• ' m«T 00«�� .00« "moo os.ao'os� ,ec LL Zao 60 `` ' Pl. N.LS,IZ00N J o II V ,C6'101 1 ,CS IOL /J/1 n�LS.IZ-0ON M,LS.Ix.IXMI M.[S,IL-0ON o T W11sai _. S ^ 8 V�1R R�o "i u I oVo 1 s ,w501 I ,a0'sol I .aosD1 .00501 I f8 r �j F.LS,LilON 1 x.03.00000 M.LS.tLLON A../530.009 8 o _.__....._.___. 8 8 ,DD5o1 ,301.30 8 ,ao saL 'aO,SLI...-1 oOmL 8 IW 8 ,a-a0,c—�-I- ; , 4¢ c I O A.LS,[LOON u_ bof 0 3.LS.IZD««.L� o 0.0000N W MLSo1ZA0N o S I 8 n r �jIW'1 121 o - o 'n 3O'd.O,+{ — 1.-30'0 0l + SI'�w 2 .00501 ,00301 ..“.03SOL F<� .00001 N,LS(LOON w A.LS.LxOON W A.LS ILLION J u A.LS,Lz00N �' 8 Sa 8 8 o f a 8 p o8 a o - om o o=i 1 p l o 16 o R I J_f. tIn R 1_ 1J l L x 1_ yL n _o __�_ 50r I ;+ } 0p'Sp t-- -00'SOr- I 8'T :00'SD ON. --1-'-slzan1 +-o Eo Rai7+"s z[•�1, arT f'.L3.I 1-', 18 +_�Txcsuamr 7 O � R S 8 ' 8 Lm gni 8 f `" o 4'"w. 3 $ x ,A . X 00 SOL i 8 I ,00501 h n .00 SOI•011 ---n, 4Io R^ AUS01 1 a 0 8 000..3 L 0000 1 0.LS,L9.009 00[3.10000 SI t = M,LS,IZAON -� I n o q v a ppm op 1-..,3Od.01 .__. 5,1- 8 s 8 I,',10 81 .00501 --r30.soo sol 8 �I .00 SOL rR } o ....MOON o d A.LS,LLAON 1 1 0.1 00000 r A.LS.I0O010 I m o , 08 8 <� i n I- V 8 Oo SOI 8 I a 2 .00501 ; 2 ,os• c,D" 18 ,sz .si R ,00'soi 0' -7 8 A.LS.LL000 0.LS.lZ.000 I I M.LS,ILLION I 0.00 IZ00 Q 11.1 .__ _._ 4" J� Iv ^00'39 .00-f0 —/ I _ 0000 Q I" t I 00 SOL «SB \ A.....0ON ,,,,L00N 8.OLSS A,[S.t900N L- 00'001 M...,LOON I o Z ) OD �a l-mI1MM1 ,O[f6C 3,LS,[LOM 0 OW 300 n o Q Q N r AL'fSl 133X15 pNINNIMt- 0 31'3V S r f rJ f3'9l el.. LU o "01'« .01 OS SIC fin 3,0310003 I o .03 SOL I VJ .— 0 coi 8 J 01'OS ',- 010S .o1re_i_*.010s__.0ool „I a N,LS MOON o c W Z O zQ <w - ' Q 0 Z 0000... ......._. `E 5 8 �.� 3O.Sl 1-' > ,--.17..04... „..., Q g •8 -8 08 -8 8 8 ^ryssl.wLS,MOON CSV R f.- RnN _ y n n s") . mo 0r Z cV -110 2 8 8- 0 8- "c,«L--g=i- 8 ^mom R� e m WY Q CS LL re'f9l 3.00,01.00S 8.01'« 01'«" 1.01'« ,01 OS n 01,3! OOSK 01'09 a." .00'031 ! 4 3 8 J .00'SS0 x.00,61.000 OD m . ('_ j 40 R � QZd] 2 V > _ W < O aj 5 3 J 6 _1 0o E ., - 8 _ ,00 ., ., _ - - - Nnm _ a ^ ma gQ Q - U � h n r n m o r h R .; m e R 3 n `q' Q C7 1 n ^ R % f ? „ ff, n 5, R , ^ A n f 5 5 5 2 Iii Q Q Z sRN m n ' aR « „ s : AazY4A : Iai : " : : g8 'f°- § 32 - 88 8 88 '3 Q W < < 8 8 r o 8 8 8 S 8 o N 8 8 ' 8 n ^ 8 R y „ z '" 0 f, 'is aae abb „ Yr mm Na « b Nm $ ° e 1 f m2 Cr) ur o V $ S2 $ $ 8 8 8 8 $ 8 $ $ 8 $ 8 $ $ S g? S SSRS ; •L 7 7 S 9 9 73 9 y2 R r 2 2 - N ^ _ H ., 2 ., - r v m 2 t5 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Z ., o o p 1, ., , ., o R 1411 F �" pp a g9�ij � jj j js f[3g2gi�{ hli W 0 80 $ �tE idE 3€fib o PI § ill'N iEELi 0 o o �i d z o X C Ea g nsi H gio�a 6 8 g g '-.n, RW3€zi w ocF $ a s € a=m g�z� W �a wzo o .goaa2�si�C I ygmFw� m &'„=gp gv 'a'iw e �z� '# € g a W �o�sg ons a Y oQagwo o � G $-4 : BC &..,, - gg22 g a„$a / . ,..8 ob1;1 d v; HMI 6, `� a �'8p N "s` w � i7�W cgs 80.'4)9 `> w w g B a& 1 8= 2 2e ` 2'g 22ag 22'A q! 16 ga 41-b'$ 0546 2 4¢o a z a ER -1 z 0 w- 1 nig guC . L=..a .A w F°”- 3€ rEwL2g .°P w Eg b o m ! < 4 G� v 0 : g08 % €2 oe a °agave:g k 3 'ir zr AI.g 8 § €2 g s 8 € is 8 ma an . s'o. ads =exp �_ a_o o� a :w ,.:r;L:2 g PA & ° U_ to -. ,/F- I- a� UJ ilri ..4.--i, iy= N ° gul E� a Q Z a Q. Erse � r Z g psW 'e Ea / oma W Z W 2 w 0 �_1■ �n O ,°po 1,2 8 gx U _ €W W23 g tl d v a N °- 8 :illeLLLk`�_•EI� -JE i 1 = gmip Ellis • ik a 8"- by �L U (A 0 �1-� \c. g w 'w° .Z � a z OD 1 moo �ar ,Low ° g�' <�. N Soo W mQa_ az W �, (4) 46- ��iir: �� 0. €m� Ji _, �g vEr. I 8E .° g o Qa d' C7 U a .wr 1I &'' N q a r52,ey§ J qt _ LL z 2 2 a _ " Lll W � ,i 5� °Y ° Q o X Ywm W W. -.2q,_pK �� a§. 6s Z ki, ,w W Y $ ? w :foo E. "gw ao:,W � sA�x wz 4a € W � 7",a o 2 a� ]ot r< o s d W 01P4 4 m <'� Wal R S " w w " 9 og� as g� ud"" a> A X El" 2 2 LES p g�$z € Sg 't o ;p°Fgo,: 2 F _3 4 ;fit w z S 3 ���€� so � �� OaE�g= 2 P r a = -a `s io 3 =atm c o82,w2°3g" ; -- €g 202 , 0 4 1 g go 2 . 6� " s 7 P=es= pup ' s� ggP "P' "U 1 o o . g e a ,g9 " w3aER aW 1 � o E<oe2V o"gQ i w m giT,6 62 i m o - a tE rg=n ps ° m "; y F� _ a ��w a m� 3 � wo '6 ' 24 ;,fig o 262,t' =_: ' €" 2s °E''4" o =2 w. W gW�p 5'23 o 5 .E°pz - Eo= N "o r a2w = IR-s, _< z - �� s ' ow r `g �" a r2 022 E _ e'F - „ a. 3'" o <b R €€o g �i e = w W w o 13 po - 4 e pg= g g o 4824 sE ° 4 egos4n2EsgE €a / / g , - 4,; 8a S< . diol L g= i g Xaa ;ZehA <w §oay<§24085s „ oF a � 8 9 @.' 8 -, u p w N18 '9`o 0 CL E z A N w u w 4 5kg g`-. i. w €REglfg/..,i1,2 V I In huu_,za S • a m 1g1g 111 = w Wnr o I s, m . 0 RM 8,,,N 'iiiiiiliggi W iq.•3 J �k a ooaaa Haag / =<LL68wo �aN nw¢ LO SSL 3.C1,1ZD5 3,il fL� Lei W n s a • .Os DEL 16i.,EAS .LS CIS 1-S010tlH1 ' .OG 3��LL cL _ -AI SO M.f 1..000 _ S ,01'0 .01'05 .010S ,Dl'K T I OL fS ,01'0 ,1055, LO R 5.a`9 3 8 I R' " i 30 A D €2 " X a _ o$a�Pn 7 7 9 - 8 - .00'50! 3 P‘§1i- e_ =a _ - . _ + c c o +S'L a- 00S W'St, 3,64.KO05 c- 0 0 2e� E 8 R .---- - ) 9 e Vin. ..._.._..----- `!-.mss. n\ w , .5'uc I-Zr6S---DTbs---.5+s---1-a--s--Drat J® m wI R o w \ ,i 8 (3A ow'3'0'd .0ff96E M,61,KAN ' n I 1 161,fSA05 . Fn ,0'501 �^ r,„,...4_2:12.0.."3.1'3.'M/S),09'f,[3.B1.K008 __ _ I "g oo.li 501 8 !Otl10tl111 335..... tlXNOIM q a w 4 '1 Ig'^ ll .00'011 M`fi I.KAN n .1 - .69., . L, . \G 1......_ D050 m'm----+-�. J .61.KA05 4 ».. _... .. /,per N.,Lf,fSOW ( to �u. r o h �R -y R 8 R .sz .Sz =.1 ` _.__._. n $ $I 3,61..005 1 3.64..005 - • 3.61,.00& 381.008 I , H 1 I ,0501 0501 I ; .OD SOI 3.,,„_..!1 I-II-» • a 0'501 d R is R b u o g 8 R w R n g g I 3....a. I 161,.005 3.61,5005 n 3.610501 m I .00'SOL 1 .00501 0501 r } m u"i , 501 I 30.51-.1 'o` 3'Od,DI�,Y..I -•,,..r.--.3.04111 e Ili �" En: 8 .:Z, I-; " 97 R - 7 R SS n m I . I 1a1,.m5S`T f 3.61..008 '" RRj 16,,.005 ,R '"" a 9 101,05005 Ii .00'501 I 1 .0501 =I0 ui I .0501 I 0 9 W o io .50'501 � � I�' q ^o n� � 'll R '. 1f��I 9 �"o 0 e n J" I ,0 i l l.3.61 s 1105 ( 16!,.1105 t 7" I� 4 161,.105 .• ..... ,1 o- �j.0050005..L 9_L .0 sol.- r+ 0501- ; .;;L:' -00501IT , 9Nw o J_-60'.'1__ �_a ,,r,' I -0.1 T 42 ' o R- T1 Ib Rdn R n - R ^I%= IR p - u _w . n 15" R w,"n1 7. n 1 0 „^ n IX R , 5. 05005 1 3,6,,05005 r 3.61,05005 I ..-3,,v, 9 " 161,.008 .00'501 _...i o,,,,.0501 .60'501 3'0.5 ; ,D0 SO, `.).L., a n -„o w g 3'0'd01 a-n.0 • a R g R g a i3 S R " IR § c 1 16',.005 ! 161..008 w I 161,.005 1 IL 181..0 S I <W .0'50l 30,51,_-1 .0050! _?.- I .50 001 w ,0'501 r .a of" So a"6 0l o 8 ' Ig, .5L 1,SL gl 3.61..006 1 161.05005 Ig (=t? �1 161,.005 .'391.SL QCl) 161.05005 I I -, .00'50! I ,00'501 1- `" , ,m.OL CL w - m ig 5. R w 8 1- °OOI O_ . S e " }, n - ni1$ In 1-m -I" ly Q .66'15 yt-' N /'KfO.amN �501.1.,a....., .50Lo Z0 SOMI It 1EAl F- / y' 11,-62 0610,'"'"12'`�Ly l L6.T 9fDL. 9.LLAN Lel. �fL 1 COW }, rn/ ,fiL 6LL N,LS.ILAN( t 81 Q 5,g 5555. 5555. 5555. Z Q0 i * E a W co � F_ c� ccs W o J ? w = � .._ Z W C7 _ g g R 8 - 8 8 N n _ 8 n R m ry R _ 8 z Q V JQap O H 18 « t taewwnS ; w ^ gym ; ; -I (n Q Ra ▪ a 5E 'E• . 5• xa " : A6 : - " h " " g8sa8888888 p_ YUCnOLLQ w § R , RS ARRRB :, « U 0 U U g < „ a '2 '88 ;, r 8 .- 3 14 8 8 81 ' ^ . tt t t f t t t: t f t 0J 0 r iCnEDI Lr g ' $ 's 'srv ° = m ° mnmSmream $ mg via00a08a " aa0 " W U U) J J u $ $ $ $ 888 « 8ggg $ 8888 $ 8 $ _ � � 9 � oQ > Q H O j R R « _ ± R r :, n ry n h „ _ " ., " _ n m Q < C7 1 5 u u u u u u u o „ u ' R = Q Q u � uuuuu a v O w w cn Q ,....e ,>. . w u�,�0� 1S3M SLSO-(65(6F2)xy SLSOL656F2»yW 1191HX33JYd5 N3d0 1,� Y ` 60131,wIdeN 1002>Lms">^uO yed..IIM OL99 @ E 8 2569 811991 93>one[uapmLp saLoyiu»epuoli 1S3M A I x _1--_■7_NI1.1i-iN■l0111133N10143i 30)13A 3NId U>0., skt3'g 3 ix I DNI' "NOlNOH'N'O ,i U V U U U U V O «««« 0 +I+I+I+I+I+I+I+I ouuu U mn.-'-mmmm up N�I�m.-FD00 r <<<<<< a Q f V C].—'-O O M.- Or +1+1+I+1+I ii Q Q N V r m�� jiQ O w NO��00 ce . l0 O = ZpNQT Yz a I- ~ Z'� wU'K ( Q r ';'Luz Q DKOEZz a w WW1 1.7 Q �a ZuoWz u 12-41:1:0E ZY Z j z wL9oanzg o wOa'I- o WLa„ 0 ozowa- 7 v) w w z�wm5� o W� m wOI-cc D Oi l9 za m a?Oa w zgzG�wv w aaaaZ a� � � �a `�> N ae,-,5,'-‘5,-E. S' , wwww 2- j 8.1- 000za0 Fn �U VUUV Z O O'O v29.�Z'z�?6wSz,4 wwwwwwYme, a aaaa OZ a � LL "o<,izza aaaawg80 1-6 Ln 0oi'2OFnit o0000013-1,C I— ZZZZY F„. 1111111cr e 11, J I 1 , I _r / r ____._____. ......- ansa owaaswiva L I pI 1 — ;': I 1 I i1 ' i 3 w Q L I c 0 x R 1 1 51 I I 8 A , 1 d I 1 g 1 I � I I it i I ii 1 $ 1 .- $ 1 � g . I 1 8 1 I v 1 8 1 a- I R F Z LykinsDave From: Scott Lepore <slepore@johnrwood.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 11:46 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Briarwood PUD Zoning Request Change Commissioner: I am writing to you today to express my objection to any changes regarding the Briarwood PUD, and specifically,the 15.97-acre parcel at Radio Road and Livingston Road that is zoned for a shopping center. I am vehemently opposed to any changes to that PUD,that would allow a non-conforming apartment complex with 320 units, and 21 units an acre of density. In reviewing the Briarwood PUD, I see nothing that would allow this to be built. Given the number of apartment complexes located within 3 miles of this area, that all have residences available to lease at this given time,this is a clear attempt by the potential developer to use the property for a use that is non-compliant and non-concurrent. If we continue to violate our Growth Management Plan, we will take a closer step to becoming Ft. Lauderdale. As an almost 30-year resident of Collier County I will be fighting this project head on. Radio Road is ill equipped to handle another major project of this density at this point, especially west of Santa Barbara. I am available to discuss further issues with you individually. Thank you for your time. Scott Lepore 634 Coldstream Court Naples, Florida 34104 239-250-2800 (Direct Line) scottlepore@comcast.net 1 ' _ < \ CO -tee:& / CD • gifs9 I- °=a& 2 3% ul TV 43103 $ \t-t-n.1\ CU 0 / § N MIe \ ° 2 ,— = 2 ' �m2 ; -_r- i t co , 2 � } n co ul Ill MI \ e \\i rg E1ti \ \ ' ( � a ] § � - tt 1 ® ` � .4 ( 0 tz' Er0 \ \ \ / - U .46 ] U \ o § { 3 \ \ \ 1-2 o \ { \ k \ — \ \ UI I e m ) { k \ ) ( E a tX \ E { 0 | § ; § | _ 0 ) \ k & A' / | } a \ ! / \ E \ to . § � . § ( / e a - 11 { { f k ( ° ) k gl _ E f | \ ' � ) 4 \ NI j § . { § i al . \ �11/0 e _( § \/ 2 \ 7 ] -o } ) � ` f ■ \ N �� U / r71 t Z ^ 0 < Eo a § ■ > a § t aii o § k ° t -5I & 11 . 2 E 73 G ; _ � a� /�.: J \ a:± ;22 2 _� T . , / ƒd - . .. . . \ 3 7 c R m a J . § : : . / LykinsDave From: Marlene Sherman <mwsherman@earthlink.net> Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 4:09 PM To: LykinsDave Subject: Need for Sidewalks and street lights on County Barn Road Original Message From: Marlene Sherman [mailto:mwsherman@earthlink.net] Sent:Thursday,June 01, 2017 11:39 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Sidewalks and street lights for County Barn Road Commissioner Fiala: I attended the June 1st meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission where the advertised hearing for PUD- PL2016001398 for 38 acre property on the east side of County Barn Road and south of the Seacrest school. The Neal Communities are seeking to create a new townhouse community similar to their Avalon Development on the corner of Davis Blvd and County Barn Road. Two persons from Glen Eagle Community spoke in regard for the need for infrastructure on County Barn Road (street lights and sidewalks) before more development is approved for property along Country Barn Road. However, I do not believe this matter will impede their PUD approval. I use County Barn Road regularly and I agree there needs to be street lighting. Is the need for street lights a matter that should first needs be brought to the attention of the County Commissioners before any action would be taken? Marlene Sherman Chairman, External Community Relations Committee Countryside Golf&County Club This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com \ Cr CD ,_ \\\ ,/ °2»a 11. 7 r cc) \ � » 0 • , = z 62trr R p ...../> VI ::: (,U2Lr \ / r.co I— �,r , — 11 1 , } -c,cn LID .—�, En• ��, . , f « 1 ( ) I \ a \ vi \# : ; F II \ ` \ 9 , ` \ / § ! ] 7 \ E ;Si. k / r.r "5 \ ) \ \ \ / \ \ 2 \ I0 \ iF,i � \ k 9 - ! $ ] U LE \ } \ E 8 13 \ o { G 2 n - ■ , \ $ W r2 co 41 } $ f E Ell \ � } \ � ( / ) } \ a k / i ! � o U \ t \ }_ 110. R, 0 4 � v ) \ k o15 \ MI W CO t - § | e . 3 f § )( al § / ) ) § \ H / ' a - k f J MI / \ \ 0. � � ` , > \ � j ; CU / ) / � ,k\ ; \ I \ I � � � r\ :\ , § t 2 > ® \ ,y °HU /\} ¢ ! °a :; 2 C P ^ . . . . 2� ) , , . • \ 2 ^ 2 6 CO 01 c G m z Z \ ! •-e2; \ NI 2 § ^=;m § In °e,a { 3 -=eG z Or \« `e—„ w tocn, . _ � , . } � � q $ `���w = v- CO \ k v, ,I IV C•1 / % \ 3 \ ) I ( ri $ I § . '0 E ' \ E - ) E ; E II 1 (j \ i . � \ 1 ik I '� /� \ ' I § i T _ § i \\ \ � \ E , c E ; ■ i - / g ( ! ƒ - 0 N a Illiii \ ) ! « t 7,1i - \ E § zr,- \,2 8 \ ) . i \ . 1 � \ ) / ( t E E . | o : » ; ° °. | _ if is \ j3 § ( 2 j I 0 « ° _ ; i \ I § [ g k r § ] I' § I CO o \ ) % \ 2 k ` % | ƒ - | 0 2 f i ! § ! !t co gi T" . \ k} Ira . 76 r a ucoo u, 0 , ) \ c H ,l'a rz ' o ■ ' E { = \ I | §fes _ § � } 21F - / ({ Ike § j\ c • � � oe / g I ` ` n t • I ! L} \k / I $ \ % oz � 2 ^ ~ > © » _ . . \ N- c a c R m @ 2 \ 2 Z a rn M 00 m tO m01- N VI ANN ,--1 o N N m N O r-1 L v�CO u1 .ZI- N n . orvx > 3 -Nm 2 O NO1tONO f VI O• -NN 0 • 1.--,1-.-coz CU •-QI,1NO1 ✓ N N LL r N m Fm-ON N 0 N W Vnr40F 0 a N Q 3 ,1,-03 N ---� �-- I- v c ✓• m.-.-N 0 E E N N0 1ONm 0 0 Cr to 0 to 7 m v E 0 a •e m 11 `aC -0 Of c 0 .-, d N 0 0 u O 4 m IL, 0 a` v u n v c m . C � N V2 E c E E Wc V O u o W ma. V m 0 wt 0 c . O J Yl Tel E n c u m 'm E v E c a E 0 o `w to co c W v° c ,. 7;,' ~ m G O a5 m a U a c c 43 E o m N v u / E m m by 0 E m v E w ° E 0 NE O O 8. v o E s 1 .0 0 `w Ol y l7 u v E i Cw .I = Z Y -moo E � i Y e, 0. 0 E E ' `m o e Tomv E_ m il c e u 2 o os1 V m m ° m • mm m E 7. N . ° u• 9 ta O L > m . " 12 S m t n u II" a d d x d w m z 111011 ›N z0 3 d o oY . m0. y y m ,m i 2 c� m '7;57,, .�. -. i O 4 CZ 2 .za. :. cuv.a ., N Cm I--- co 01 O x-- c- N c— N m In l4 CO V) LykinsDave From: Winner David <david.winner@volvo.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 2:47 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Wolf Creek Pud - Sobel Vanderbilt LLC Attachments: 201611231437.pdf Re: 7240 Acorn Way—Black Bear Ridge, Naples Mr. Saunders Please see the attached letter related to the above proposed changes to our community. I am getting extremely frustrated and angry that I purchased a lot, built a home and now a developer can change everything that was committed to me in writing. We will hold the county and everyone involved in making the decisions liable for damages caused if this action is allowed to go forward. Enough is enough. Regards, Dave David Winner Senior Vice President- Distribution Development Mack Trucks, Inc. Volvo Trucks NA Office: 336-393-2878 Mobile: 336-508-2279 Email: david.winnervolvo.com 1 • Daniel Smith DanielSmith@collierdov.net Mark Strain MarkStrain(a�colliergov.net Burt Saunders BurtSaunders(a?colliergov.net Summer Araque SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net I am a resident of Black Bear Ridge a community located with the Wolf Creek Pud. It was • brought to our attention at the Neighborhood Informational Meeting held on Nov. 10th that a proposal has been submitted to reduce the preserve areas in parcel 3B/9 of the PUD. The developer, Sobel Vanderbilt LLC was represented by an their engineering company and legal counsel There were many concerned residents from the impacted surrounding communities in attendance at that neighborhood meeting. After much reluctance the representatives finally presented plans for the potential development which would require a reduction of the preserve to accommodate the number of units included. After reviewing the PUD Master Plan it appears that much of the preserve area they propose to remove is listed on the Plan as Wet Land. One argument they claim in their favor of reduction is that the existing communities have met the majority of preserve acreage as required by the PUD. Our developments were sensitive to to ever decreasing preserve areas in Collier County and did not decrease the preserves to the maximum this should not allow Sobel LLC to transfer that unused deduction allocated to our parcels and use it to their benefit. By decreasing the preserve they have increased the number of proposed units to 214 which is far above the allowed density per acre according to the PUD. According to Collier County Environmental Review Guide Book and Collier County Engineering and Natural Resources the Country requires the preserves to be interconnected to allow for wildlife corridors of travel. We know our area has many protected spices, such as Florida Panther which was documented with Florida Wildlife, Bears, Turtles, Snakes and Birds including Woodpeckers. Reduction in preserves will impact Florida wildlife and natural vegetation. Our native animals rely on the preserves for their existence. Wildlife and natural areas are quickly diminishing in Collier County and the entire concept for Naples is slowly being chipped away by increased development and loss of preserve areas. Small developments being squeezed" in small parcels of land have negatively affected all of Naples. Development can be a benefit for all residents if it is controlled and long term impacts are taking into consideration. Personally I feel that this benefit for residents is being pushed aside for the benefit of developers. I plan to stay involved regarding this matter and ask for any assistance you may provide regarding the procedure and status of this proposed reduction to the preserve. Respectf ly yours, .ter 7// •-)\r{s4; L\_)ipeuvv� � 7240 Acorn Way, Naples FL 34119 David�-'E. Winner Melisa J. Winn LykinsDave From: faye.collettsutton@louisville.edu Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 7:53 PM To: LykinsDave Subject: FW: Application to Reduce Preserve on Property Located on Pristine Drive, Naples Fl. Attachments: Preserve Letter From Homeowners 12.doc; PETITION AGAINST PRESERVE.doc Dave: I don't know if Bev sent you a bcc but I know she meant to Faye DR. FAYE SUTTON Professor Emerita 7311 Acorn Way Naples, FL 34119 239-405-5199 AMERICAN PROUD From: Beverly Smith [mailto:bevsmith116@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 3:29 PM To: Burt Saunders<burtsaundersforcollier@gmail.com>; MarkStrain@colliergov.net; SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net Cc:Terrie Abrams<TERRIE.ABRAMS@GMAIL.COM>; Mike Fuchs<flguy55@gmail.com>; Rob Nossen <TheNossens@aol.com>; marc alien <mallencny@yahoo.com>; Faye Collett-Sutton <faye.collettsutton@Iouisville.edu> Subject:Application to Reduce Preserve on Property Located on Pristine Drive, Naples Fl. We respectfully object to any reduction in preserve by Developer, Sobel Vanderbilt LLC in proposed development to be known as Vanderbilt Preserve. This property falls in the zoning of Wolf Creek PUD. A petition of 155 signatures has been submitted on behalf of the residents of Black Bear Ridge, a 100 home community located in the Wolf Creek PUD. Along with this petition we have 151 letters submitted on behalf of the residents of Black Bear Ridge detailing our objection to the reduction of preserve. Attached please find a copy of the petition and the letter submitted. Originals have been delivered to the office of Daniel Smith on December 19, 2016 Should you require any additional information or would like to discuss this in more detail please do not hesitate to contact the following: Beverly Smith bevsmith116@gmail.com Terrie Abrams terrie.abrams@gmail.com Marc Allen 1 r `li mallenny@gmail.com 2 Daniel Smith DanielSmithCa�colliergov.net Mark Strain MarkStrain(c�colliergov.net Burt Saunders BurtSaundersa,colliergov.net Summer Araque SummerBrownAraque aa,colliergov.net I am a resident of Black Bear Ridge a community located with the Wolf Creek Pud. It was brought to our attention at the Neighborhood Informational Meeting held on Nov. 10th that a proposal has been submitted to reduce the preserve areas in parcel 3819 of the PUD. The developer, Sobel Vanderbilt LLC was represented by an their engineering company and legal counsel. There were many concerned residents from the impacted surrounding communities in attendance at that neighborhood meeting. After much reluctance the representatives finally presented plans for the potential development which would require a reduction of the preserve to accommodate the number of units included. After reviewing the PUD Master Plan it appears that much of the preserve area they propose to remove is listed on the Plan as Wet Land. One argument they claim in their favor of reduction is that the existing communities have met the majority of preserve acreage as required by the PUD. Our developments were sensitive to the ever decreasing preserve areas in Collier County and did not decrease the preserves to the maximum this should not allow Sobel LLC to transfer that unused deduction allocated to our parcels and use it to their benefit. By decreasing the preserve they have increased the number of proposed units to 214 which is far above the allowed density per acre according to the PUD. According to Collier County Environmental Review Guide Book and Collier County Engineering and Natural Resources the Country requires the preserves to be interconnected to allow for wildlife corridors of travel. We know our area has many protected species, such as Florida Panther which was documented with Florida Wildlife, Bears, Turtles, Snakes and Birds including Woodpeckers. Reduction in preserves will impact Florida wildlife and natural vegetation. Our native animals rely on the preserves for their existence. Wildlife and natural areas are quickly diminishing in Collier County and the entire concept for Naples is slowly being chipped away by increased development and loss of preserve areas. Small developments being `squeezed" in small parcels of land have negatively affected all of Naples. Development can be a benefit for all residents if it is controlled and long term impacts are taken into consideration. Personally I feel that this benefit for residents is being pushed aside for the benefit of developers. I plan to stay involved regarding this matter and ask for any assistance you may provide regarding the procedure and status of this proposed reduction to the preserve. Respectfully yours, Beverly R Smith Signature Beverly R Smith 7278 Address Acorn Way Print Name PETITION AGAINST REDUCTION OF PRESERVE VANDERBILT PRESERVE DEVELOPMENT THIS PETITION IS SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS "VANDERBILT PRESERVE" PARCEL 3B & 9 OF THE WOLF CREEK PUD OWNED BY DEVELOPER SOBEL VANDERBILT LLC. THE FOLLOWING RESIDENTS REJECT THE PROPOSAL TO REDUCE THE PRESERVE AREA BASED ON THE DISRUPTION TO PROTECTED WILDLIFE AND NATIVE VEGETATION. WILDLIFE AND NATURAL AREAS ARE QUICKLY DIMINISHING IN COLLIER COUNTY AND THE ENTIRE CONCEPT FOR NAPLES IS SLOWLY BEING CHIPPED AWAY BY INCREASED DEVELOPMENT AND LOSS OF PRESERVE AREAS. SMALL DEVELOPMENTS BEING "SQUEEZED" IN SMALL PARCELS OF LAND HAVE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED ALL OF NAPLES. DEVELOPMENT CAN BE A BENEFIT FOR ALL RESIDENTS IF IT IS CONTROLLED AND LONG TERM IMPACTS ARE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION. PERSONALLY I FEEL THAT THIS BENEFIT FOR RESIDENTS IS BEING PUSHED ASIDE FOR THE BENEFIT OF DEVELOPERS. ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY LykinsDave From: StrainMark Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 4:10 PM To: SaundersBurt Subject: Background for Wolf Creek PUD Hi Burt. Welcome back! I noticed you have received some correspondence regarding the Wolf Creek PUD from members of the public objecting to the change proposed. The change is considered an "insubstantial change" and was originally scheduled to go to my office, but because of my office's ordinance requirement to elevate those actions that have a "heightened public concern", I had to move this to the CCPC. To give you some background,the change in this PDI (Planned Unit Development Insubstantial change) is to reduce the preserve areas in the PUD in one area, because other areas of the PUD have exceeded preserve requirements. The result is that the PUD is required to have a minimum amount of preserve and with the other areas exceeding the minimum planned preservation acreage,the developer of the remaining parcel wishes to reduce the preserve within that area so the minimum is maintained and not exceeded overall. No density is being added to the PUD,the change is to amend the master plan to show the relocation of preserve areas. I have attached the original master plan with the area in question in a red circle. Submittal 1 - Exhibit A Master... I have attached the new requested plan with the same area in red circled. a Submittal 3-Wolf Creek RPUD... Here is the narrative prepared by the applicant (Bruce Anderson) explaining the changes: ria Submittal 2-Wolf Creek PUD P... Earlier today an email objecting to this project was sent to your office and with it were attachments, one was labeled as a petition. I thought the information I attached might help to explain what is going on in case you are called. The PDI goes now to the CCPC (date not set yet) and unless appealed to the BCC, is a final decision at the CCPC. Thanks, 1 Ma rk., 239.252.4446 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 Wolf Creek RPUD Insubstantial Change to a PUD Project Narrative July 18,2016 The Wolf Creek Residential Planned Unit Development RPUD was approved May 14,2013,as Ordinance 13- 37(most recent PUDA). The RPUD Ord. 13-37 was an amendment to the previously amended Ord.09-34 and Ord. 07-46 Wolf Creek RPUD. The RPUD Ord. 07-46 as approved May 22, 2007, included 168 acres of residential parcels for maximum 671 dwelling units. The RPUD Ord. 13-37 amendment increased the RPUD area to 189 acres by adding approximately 21 acres of adjacent lands and increasing the maximum dwelling units to 754 units. The minimum natural habitat preserve area increased from 32.32 acres to 34.26 acres. This RPUD is consistent with the Future Land Use Element(FLUE),particularly Policy 5.4 and Policies 7.1 through 7.4. This development is a single-family residential use compatible with the surrounding uses in this RPUD and adjacent residentially zoned properties. The residential communities within this RPUD are interconnected by the recently constructed Pristine Drive and Wolfe Road,providing an internal access and loop road from the residential entrances to the adjacent collector roads Collier Boulevard and Vanderbilt Beach Road. A separate access road has been permitted and is currently being constructed to connect the Island Walk PUD to Pristine Drive. This access road is partially on this property within a dedicated access and drainage easement. Sidewalks are being provided on both sides of the internal streets of this development with connection to Pristine Drive sidewalks. The purpose of this RPUD Insubstantial Change application is to amend the RPUD Master Plan to provide a new RPUD Preserve Master Plan exhibit showing the proposed location and acreage of preserve within Parcels 3B and 9, and the total documented acreage for all preserves within the RPUD boundary. The most recent PUDA, Ord. 13-37 includes two Master Plans, Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1" that graphically show the preserve areas but do not clearly identify their acreages. Exhibit"A"shows the original Wolf Creek RPUD Ord.07-46 parcels(Parcels 1 through 9)including the preserve locations,with no individual acreages listed. Exhibit"A-1"as provided in Ord. 13-37 shows only parcels 1A, 1B,2A,2B and 3A;all other parcels were left unchanged. Preserve locations are shown on Parcels 1A,2A and 3A and approximate areas are listed at the bottom of the exhibit. The total approximate area as listed is+/- 16.79 acres. The actual area provided per Plat Book recordings is 16.41 acres. The revised RPUD Preserve Master Plan, Exhibit "P" identifies the total 34.26 acres minimum required preserve area and the individual preserve acreages. The plan also shows a reduction to the preserve area on Parcels 3B and 9(this preserve area was shown graphically on Exhibit"A",but no acreage listed). There are no changes proposed to preserve areas and locations as previously approved on Parcels 1A,2A,3A,4,6,7 and 8, as identified on Exhibit"A"and"A-1". Exhibit "P" identifies the total documented 34.26 acres minimum required preserve area. Each preserve acreage was taken from the recorded Plats of the Black Bear Ridge and Raffia Preserve developments. The Falls of Portofino preserve is identified on the SDP-2005-AR-7064 and the Conservation Easement as recorded in Official Records Book 3973, Pages 2911-2927 of the public records of Collier County. The remaining minimum native vegetation preserve area is identified as 3.06 acres and proposed on Parcel 9 of the RPUD. The total preserve areas are tabulated on the Preserve Master Plan identifying the total 34.26 acres provided. The proposed lakes on Parcel 3B and Parcel 9 are rotated to be consistent with the proposed development order application being processed simultaneously with this PDI application. There are no changes proposed to the PUD document text and there are no changes proposed to lands owned by others. All other parcels are shaded gray and noted"to remain as approved by Ordinance 13-37, 07-46 and 09-34". K:\201 S\15-0106-The Falls of Portofino\Correspondences\Documents\PDI(Wolf Creek PUD)-Submittal 2\Wolf Creek PUD Project Narrative-Revised.doc 1 lL6l—•3380 dloM. g S yyI b ' 8 Q Z � • Q o E, mJag 4 — — fr0. (l56-80 0NVA31006 -n,. t_ , , Ficj i 3" d 4 I W Q 3N u W ow YE Imo° -3 4 1r w I x ¢Q JQ� a �F: s �I LL a 8 - S 14%1 I8 PG H 8 £E€ E-1 I 2 k N 0i 1 I o w 8 .1 j: j 11 a o' 110thfl PAos aN�w=g w w -wok §=di =wg-i, '1 F 'i �n°ausnc3�, 3 m ° 's,11;4 ;slwiSx�>1�d-=-=2 C w I ! W11100.13 SIM, ssaa B & I I andw00....,..,, "7=7=-- erg 1I �\�\.\ I f! u \`.� s�` e I 7/ lolil a \�!\ $. < 3 \`6\� ill i IT- - - \�\ m \,.\` ——— 511i10 3NLLSRId 03S0dONd i i i Eg� \�\\\ c ® I �, ��\r n AA's \\\ $' I & ^ s I g 266; E \\�\ I w € 5 € ME lir fIlgz fi \\ E "'s i s g8 s J h. ^+ \ 2! of i. ,..,'.. ‘ NI -\\,--;\\\:\\ - \\ i I J--- F I IV\ ‘-- El w.1 \\\ Inuunw` ULanwwoo mu+avis3aauv°) W %' andna°xnm almsi p '' anannvm - 2 3'5 W 3 U2 O 'I $w im ',It, 0 g g it E 8 l' `----' i EU TTT N 8 `a l£KE 1J'NOIVi1 VO08 1181HX31Vld AS +� oil',311f1S NOI1VOOl1V 3AN3S3Hd 9 0 ■ �1! ! "210 2131N30 3A11f103X3'MN 48EZ ........ a c . w o 1111'f�� 011'1�182j3ONVn'1380S ;3 " 1 N 'a = o - ill anda)133210 dIOM € gg1 1 OPRBEq 4 �g 1 E W Q on ,'a 8 a ; �� 22 am 8 m � � �d n N?eV GG mG n .II.II.Y. do da 3rvolsw�ne F— w • II.II.R.II.N.N.il.11.11•ll.l II.X 11.1�1.11.11.¢rl� _ — 1 c.,,,..:, 77 , I ,,s I I I \ o w l ---' n a g3 n �v` v 5' a n..l.nilnln.�mml.nri■o \ w \\ ` g A Y as < ma I I.luu.o.¢.u....n ¢ 1 `\\\ � ga s3notl aos — \�\ .�\... .a3rv1d Ir ■ 1 i \ sF 1iTiiii\b LL W \ \ \\ \ -o \ \. a R LL 4 Q > \� �� \ d rco ■ g \\\..• m K `j¢ 5" 3 ' 1p35__ \\\'.\\ \\`.. N 3 I ¢m \\\\\\ \ � \ .II.II�II.II. .XT `\ / /\ISI AI w0OrlM 11 0.1511tl9 8 ♦1 and NitlM arvtlKi ltlo 1 w 88 CAn E S w E M'' .808 g„ �� € qua °1i� a i I s _ € a II.II.II.N .II.II.¢.II.II.II.II I. . II.I.I,.II.I.II.\.�.�+ "N andry tlMarvtl,=1 '" CO a 9 - L. 1g a d,, CC CC 0 ✓i8`� s,x„y 0 a A 0 0 Y ✓ gg m ¢m€" �m€d€ of .n.11m� W walla e� [ aag Al 11 0 raG rar rdr r8r d u l'or a asr 2 r1r r5.r a `‘,8.4,h o °o a and H�vmarvtlisi J gli NH and ¢fl NNH LLp Qd$ O Q K�¢n NH >�g 3 LykinsDave From: Mr. Kilroy <kilroyshere@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 9:25 AM To: SaundersBurt; StrainMark; donnafiala@colliergov.net; SchmidtCorby; McDanielBill; BosiMichael; andysolis@colliergove.net; TaylorPenny Subject: RE: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application, Vanderbilt Beach Rd RE: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application, Vanderbilt Beach Rd Road/Collier Blvd Commercial Sub district. Folios: 25525600520, 25525600546, 25525600562, 25525600588, 25525600041, 25525600067, 25525600083, 25525600096 Public Hearing: April 11, 2017, Property: Carolina Villages aka Vanderbilt Commons To County Commissioners, Zoning & "Planning:" I live in Black Bear Ridge year-round. It's my Homestead. My wife works for NCH. I own and operate a local business. We pay taxes. We vote here. Vanderbilt Commons, adjacent to Black Bear Ridge, if granted this application, may profoundly affect traffic congestion, quality of life, home values and safety at our front door. WE PURCHASED OUR BLACK BEAR RIDGE HOMES BASED on living adjacent to (former) Carolina Commons, an approved 150,000 sf PUD of low density housing and retail. ACCESS/EGRESS DEDICATED RIGHT TURN LANE: Adjacent to us is 85,000 sf Mission Hills Center. They have 2 dedicated right turn in/out access/egress lanes into their parking lots to accommodate the traffic they generate. Vanderbilt Commons if granted this application will be at least 235% larger than Mission Hills Center. So ought Vanderbilt Commons have such a dedicated lane off Vanderbilt and into their own parking lot to handle the traffic they generate. ALL OTHER NEARBY SHOPPING CENTERS: Immokalee & Collier and 3 Centers at Airport & Vanderbilt, have dedicated right turn in/out access/egress lanes into their own parking lots. VANDERBILT COMMONS DEVELOPERS, PRIOR TO GETTING APPROVAL TO INCREASE BUILDABLE FOOTAGE chose to build a 95,500 sf mini storage facility under the original "Planned" PUD permitting 150,000 sf total built on 14.492 acres. They took a real estate risk and now are looking to profit further with this risky application to create another high traffic strip mall for more drive-thrus and fast food burger joints. IF THIS DEVELOPER IS UNWILLING TO DEVELOP THE REMANING 55,500 SF under the approved "Plan" they purchased the parcel under, other developers will be ready willing and able to procure suitable to County and neighbor friendly users. WE OUGHT NOT BE FORCED TO BEAR ONEROUS COSTS: We're under cost sharing agreements based on original "Plans" that could if application is granted, force Black Bear home owners to disproportionately pay expensive road/traffic modifications caused by this approval. WE DO NOT WANT THE RISK that Vanderbilt Beach Rd may become, a congested and dangerous Collier County traffic jam putting our home value and safety at risk. WE FEAR OUR QUALITY OF LIFE "Planned" for will be made poorer if this application is granted. Respectfully, Steve Rosenberg 7210 Acorn Way Naples, FL 34119 kilroyshere@hotmail.com 2 LykinsDave From: Wendy J <wendyroseryt@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2017 9:29 AM To: SaundersBurt; StrainMark; donnafiala@colliergov.net; SchmidtCorby; McDanielBill; BosiMichael; andysolis@colliergove.net; TaylorPenny Subject: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application, Vanderbilt Commons RE: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application, Vanderbilt Commons Road/Collier Blvd Commercial Sub district. Folios: 25525600520, 25525600546, 25525600562, 25525600588, 25525600041, 25525600067, 25525600083, 25525600096 Public Hearing: April 11, 2017 Property: Carolina Villages aka Vanderbilt Commons To County Commissioners, Zoning & Planning: I am a year round Black Bear Ridge resident, home owner and I work for NCH. I'm very concerned the Vanderbilt Commons application for expansion will create major traffic congestion and safety risks on the public Buckstone and Pristine Drives which are the only entry to our front door. I believe Vanderbilt Commons ought be required to build a dedicated right turn in/right turn out access/egress at the East/West midpoint of their property into their own parking lots off Vanderbilt Rd. Vanderbilt Commons will generate tremendous traffic. As such they ought bear the majority of space, road traffic and cost burdens to accommodate it...not their neighbors in Black Bear Ridge. NOTE: Mission Hills Shopping Center is an 85,000 sf mall adjacent to Black Bear Ridge on the corner of Vanderbilt and Collier. There are 2 such dedicated right turn in/right turn out access/egress lanes (1 on Collier and 1 on Vanderbilt) into the Center's own parking lots, mitigating traffic on abutting Mission Hills and Buckstone Dr. Vanderbilt Commons application for 50,000 more sf, if granted would make it more than 235%% larger in terms of leasable sf and associated traffic than adjacent Mission Hills Center. Additionally, Vanderbilt Commons application seems to not include 25% of their buildable space on their NE quadrant not included in this application. If a later application is made to develop that NE quadrant, Mission Hills would far exceed 200,000+ sf. NOTE: All other nearby shopping centers have these same dedicated right turn in/outs like Mission Hills Center does. Please see: Pebblebrooke Center at Immokalee & Collier and, all 3 shopping centers at Vanderbilt & Airport (Shoppes at Vanderbilt, Venetian Plaza and the Publix Naples Walk Center). Respectfully, Wendy Rosenberg 7210 Acorn Way Naples, FL 34119 wendyroseryt@hotmail.com 2 LykinsDave From: Terrie Abrams <terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 7:21 AM To: SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SolisAndrew; TaylorPenny; StrainMark; SchmidtCorby; BosiMichael; SmithDaniel Subject: Black Bear Ridge Response to Growth Management Plan Amendment Application Attachments: Scan.pdf 1.pdf; ATT00001.txt; Scan.pdf 2.pdf; ATT00002.txt; Scan.pdf 3.pdf; ATT00003.txt; Scan.pdf 4.pdf RE: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Blvd Commercial Sub-district Folio Numbers: 25525600520,25525600546,25525600562,25525600588, 25525600041,25525600067, 25525600083, 25525600096 Please find attached the signatures representing 70%of property owned in Black Black Ridge supporting the 3 attached letters of concern regarding the Vanderbilt Commons Growth Management Plan Amendment to be heard on April 11.2017. We urge you to read and fully understand the situation surrounding the communities located near Collier Blvd and Vanderbilt Beach Road. Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 1 To: Collier County Commissioners March 22, 2017 Re: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application PL20150002167 Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Blvd Commercial sson H Ils'c t CarolinaNanderbilt Commons expansion Public Hearing:April 11, 2017 Commissioners, As residents of Black Bear Ridge, who are immediatelyaffect Med p the current proposal and the "to follow" CarolinaNanderb Commons Commissioners, to please step back the County Com amendment , we would ask you, plan for the area, if and consider the "whole" picture. We to be maintained, and we need resolution quality of life and property values are to not be in of the outdated inequitable cost sharing agreement that appears conformitywith Florida State statute and Collier County municipal trpfflcode regarding payments upon proportion basing proportionate fair share Planned development with an eye toward augmenting local neighborhood rvices and enhancing quality of life in a manner consistent withtheplanningwith a continued needs and surroundings is desirable. Long range and other considerations is consideration of ever changing necessary. With regards to the Mission Hills CPUD and expansion was for moderately the adjacent Wolf Creek RPUD, the original plan at inception ision Hills commercial upscale residential communities to be served by district. This was augmented with the addition of the d thee current Hills expansion tpbea Vanderbilt district which was the original Carolina Commons a Commons. The plan according to the original ordinance was: "Carolina Village Mixed Use PUD is intendedtoto tocre worteea pedestrian- friendly ed pPt haft and friendly atmosphere that encourages area residents on-site workers to walk to other services, such as having lunch within the project." The Carolina Village expansion district was approved as a mixed use PUD and was to act as a buffer between the adjacent residential district and the Mission Hills commercial district. abuts the As residents of Black Bear Ridge, which immediately development in Vanderbilt Commons development, we welcome and favor keeping with this original plan. It seems, however, in recent years, that there has for dda eviation elopment has the original planned approach and that"de rigueur du jour" n which has resulted become a patchwork, cut and paste piecemeal methodology in a degradation of quality of life in the area due inparticular buden potentially to a marked increase in traffic congestion and also an undue financial being placed upon Black Bear Ridge landowners.This evidenced by the following: A) Pristine Drive Cost Sharing Agreement 2004 based upon acreage not traffic: BBR proportion 30% Carolina Commons 9.5% B) Mission Hills/BuckstoneC ercentage threet Sharing eparties t based upon assignedp BBR 25% C) Pristine Drive Cost Sharing Agreement was for the ere struction ly upscafof a two lane road to serve specifically thre n residential communities to constructing a no mention of this agreement to apply road to serve additional traffic from: 1) CarolinaNanderbilt Commons MPUD 2) Mederos property added in 2007 with pending development as Vanderbilt Reserve with proposed 200+dwelling units 3) Addition of Scenic Woods parcel 4)Addition of portion of Palermo Cove PUD to Wolf Creek PUD 5) The "tacking on" of traffic from Palermo Cove PUD to Pristine Drive and Wolf Road 6) Increased traffic due to shunting via"private" connector roads in Vanderbilt Commons and Sonoma Oaks 7) Failure of the Immokalee Road corridor with traffic shunted to Collier and Vanderbilt Beach Blvds and through Wolf Creek PUD via the Wolf Rd/Pristine Drive and Mission Hills/Buckstone loop roads and internal "required" connectors. ro osing to require is `fair share" N g. - It appears that the county proposing payments for necessary road improvements to be based upon oesappear to conform to current the 2004 CSA, which h ch is bad upon traffic generated, Florida State policy, thus resulting in an inordinate burden to BBR landowners County "Traffic" anticipates signalization at Pristine and Vanderbilt will be triggered with a projected cost of$1.1M resulting in an obligation to BBR homeowners ofionate 0,000 00 under the CSA, if enforced. This is not a p P share". D) County administrative approval of—95K square foot indoor "similar" storage facility at Carolina Commons, being deemed E) Resultant"need"for Vanderbilt Commons devellopbuild out his eer tortya requests additional square footage two thirds of the allowable square footage for VC MPUD was utilized in the storage facility F) Current VC proposal to add 50K square feet leaable slocatiopace n of without consideration of types of businesses businesses and effect upon adjacent property owners and neighborhood G) Pending Vanderbilt Reserve proposalunitsf dedicated preserve to be utilized for additional dwelling H) "Failure" of the Falls at Portofino development I) Current traffic congestion such that: Exiting BBR onto Vanderbilt Beach Rd frequently requires an extended wait during peak periods Morning traffic on Vanderbilt Beach Rd is frequently backed up such that several light changes are required to pass through the traffic lights at the Vineyards and Oaks intersections During afternoon peak times it is not unusual for eastward going traffic on Vanderbilt turning northward on Collier is backed up westward of the stacking lane for left turn onto Buckstone Dr. It is not unusual to have 8 cars of more stacked times, while e there e left turn lane onto Buckstone during peak may be one or two cars sitting in the from Buckstn one n from an eastward turn onto Vanderbilt There are frequent near accidents at the exit of Mission d when Hills onto Buckstone which may be e Vanderbilt Way is open and there is increased traffic County traffic planners have required developers e sto at Cat ucta/ Vanderbilt Commons and SonomaOo loop roads of ns private "connector" roads fission Hills/tween the Buckstone one Dr. The Wolf Rd/Pristine Dr and idea was for these to: bypassing traffic through the neighborhood byp g the CollierNanderbilt Beach intersection This design results in: increased traffic and congestion degrading neighborhood quality of life and creating a potentially dangerous intersection where Mission Hills western exit shunts to Vanderbilt Way With Vanderbilt Way running through the middle of Carolina/Vanderbilt Commons, the end result is a racetrack separating two strip malls, not a pedestrian friendly environment Outside county road traffic shunted into the neighborhood with the neighborhood developments being "stuck"with the costs of road improvements due to the CSA We respectfully request that you: Consider the whole and stick to the original plan - review the development plans for the area as a whole Address the current traffic issues that exist before approving things that may exacerbate them "Fix"the current cost sharing agreement-this was discussed at the County Planning Commission hearing of February 16, 2017 and was referred to by the County Attorney Mr. Kaltzkow as alease refer to the can of worms that needed to be fixed - p minutes of that meeting. Thank you, To: COLLIER COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Mr. Burt Saunders, CC District 3 cc: Mark Strain, Hearing Examiner& • •llCo '-r•o -t Planning Commissioner, Chair b rt . .n•- rby Schmidt, Principal Planner Ms DonnaFiala, CC District 1 Planning/Zoning Division donnafiiala@cotliergov,net Michael Rosi, Director, Zoning Mr. William McDaniel, Jr. CC District 5 Division billmcdaniel@colliergov,net Mr.Andrew Solis, CC District 2 andysolisC�corgove.net Ms. Penny Taylor, CC District 4 •enn •r@c•Ili-r•ov.net RE: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Folio Numbers: 2552 0067 25525600083 255256000962'25525600588, 25525600041,2552560 , Public Hearing: April 11, 2017 Property: Carolina Villages aka Vanderbilt Commons My name is Terrie Abrams and I live in Naples as a full time resident. I have been coming to Naples for 40 years so didn't have to think to hard where to retire. I knew Naples was well planned out to include nature and services for residents and purposeful development located and directed to enhance lifestyle. I am here today to articulate what is happening to our little piece of paradise that may not be obvious to decision makers. I purchased my home for the location and price point happy the intent of the undeveloped area was going to provide services to the surrounding areas that would complement my quality of life. I am looking forward to success of the development but not at the expense of my community. Here is what is going on and it can't be looked at in piecemeal or the wrong decisions for the residents of Naples will be made. Today is the cusp of a serious situation that must be addressed in totality. Vanderbilt Commons/Vanderbilt Preserve/ Sonoma Hills all impact immediate surrounding residential communities. Here are the pieces to the puzzle that must fit together or this will be a shining example of how Naples is losing its balance between residential quality of life (safety/property values/nature and happiness). - There is a CSA agreement between of the properties of Wolf Creek PUD-Carolina Commons/Vanderbilt Commons Parcel that although is a private contract it must be considered as it clearly defines how the land was to be developed and the relationship between the parcels. And, most important the county has already taken ownership of the agreement by accommodation of traffic not part of the agreement and therefore changing the intentions of the CSA. The CSA was a requirement of Collier County years ago and as stated by Mr. Klatzkow it has played out differently than intended to the detriment of citizens. Black Bear owners were aware of the CSA intent and felt comfortable it was there to support proper development of the immediate area. Here are the different facets of the CSA o Protection of preserves o Types of businesses that would support the community o Define the density of the area which in turn protects the preserves and supports the lifestyle of the surrounding communities defined as 3 moderately upscale communities. o Defines if those 3 moderately upscale communities generate excessive traffic how traffic flow improvements would be paid. - Mission Hills which includes restaurants/fast food drive thru/grocery store! medical/ misc. Retail has sufficient parking and is well buffered with preserves and streets from immediate residential property and channels traffic away from residents. - Vanderbilt Commons under discussion today directly borders residential property on two sides with no or little buffer making it critical the right retail usages are allowed by location within the development. If not there will be unsolvable traffic and safety issues and degradation to quality of life that can only be viewed as preference for development over residents. Once again is the county looking at this parcel's requests and impact on traffic in piecemeal and will require traffic studies only when it is too late? The intent of the property was to support 3 moderate upscale communities with services that were pedestrian friendly. Not fast foods drive thru and businesses not compatible to residential communities directly bordering the property. The developer chose to use square footage for a Storage Unit which by no means enhances the lifestyle of residents. Just because technically the county can grant plan changes ... should they an inch at a time until the genie can't be put back in the bottle. - The traffic issues imploding around us is not driven by the residents of our immediate area but by traffic from desperate drivers on lmmokalee and Collier that are using our residential area to bypass traffic . Moving the issues into a residential area at the safety of residents and destroying quality of life is not the correct solution. And then expecting t residents to pay for something that was not intended is unconscionable. Traffic studies indicate the immediate residential communities are not creating the traffic. This is problem for Collier County Planning to OWN. You are asked to look at this area through the eyes of the residents and in totality. Developers should not be granted special privilege at the expense of residents of Naples. Nor should the county ask residents to bear the burden of unsolved planning problems. On the other hand residents should not stand in the way of well thought out and refined planned progress. Residents drive the need for development and astute planning. Thank you. a ri March 21, 2017 To: COLLIER COUNTY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Mr. Burt Saunders, CC District 3 cc: Mark Strain, Hearing Examiner& burtsaunders@colliergov.net Planning Commissioner, Chair Ms Donna Fiala, CC District 1 markstrain@coiliergov.net donnafiala@colliergov.net Corby Schmidt, Principal Planner Mr. William McDaniel, Jr. CC District 5 corbyschmidt@coiliergov.net billmcdaniel@colliergov.net Michael Bosi, Director Zoning Div. Mr. Andrew Solis, CC District 2 michaelbosi@colliergov.net andysolis@colliergove.net Ms. Penny Taylor, CC District 4 pen nytaylor @ coil iergov.net RE: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Folio Numbers: 25525600520,25525600546,25525600562,25525600588, 25525600041,25525600067,25525600083, 25525600096 Public Hearing: April 11, 2017 Property: Carolina Villages aka Vanderbilt Commons As a full time resident of the community of Black Bear Ridge located in the Wolf Creek RPUD this letter is submitted to the County Commissioners for the purpose of stating concerns regarding the above referenced Application. These concerns are directed toward the changes that will result from within the property as outlined in the application. This change will have an affect on life style within all the adjoining residential communities and we ask that the County Commissioners consider the negative implications that will occur. 1. Traffic Impact The addition of 50,000 sq. ft. of office/retail usage will have a direct impact on traffic within the connecting loop roads that encompass Black Bear Ridge both east and west. Entrance availability to our community is directly from these connecting loop roads. Mission Hills/Buckstone Drive on east side and Wolf Rd/Pristine Drive on west side are both considered a traffic reconfiguration by the County in order to avoid the signalization at 951 and Vanderbilt Beach Road. Traffic for the Vanderbilt Commons Mall will only increase the usage of these loop roads. What must be considered in the analysis of total impact is the additional vehicle usage on these loop roads as the two undeveloped residential communities on Wolf Rd and Pristine build out. Vehicular traffic exiting the new Vanderbilt Commons and existing Mission Hills Complex will intersect on Buckstone Drive directly opposite each other. With traffic from Vanderbilt Beach Road entering Buckstone to access both centers this will create a hazardous intersection. Traffic on these roads has dramatically increased in the past several years due to addition of new residential communities and retail operations in the surrounding areas including Immokalee Road, Collier Blvd (951) and Vanderbilt Beach Road. 2. Cost Share Agreement In 2004 a Cost Share Agreement required by the County of the original developers for the three proposed residential communities, currently known as Black Bear Ridge, Falls of Portofino and Raffia Preserve, and MPUD -Carolina Villages was entered into for roads, future signalization, etc. However cost percentage to each area was determined by acreage not actual units or amount of traffic to be generated by each particular development. An agricultural parcel within the RPUD at the time of the agreement was not included but is now being considered for residential with 215 units. These units add to the vehicular traffic on Pristine and Wolf Drive. This County required CSA will have a negative financial effect on homeowners in the Wolf Creek PUD. Increases in traffic flow that would require signalization at Pristine and changes in access to Buckstone Drive are not generated by the residential communities but rather by area commercial enterprises and County growth over the years. The individual homeowner should not be penalized financially to subsidize the County for any signalization for roads that are accessed by all. As homeowners we pay our property taxes to fund the County for such purposes. The developers have met the obligation with regards to the completion of the Pristine Drive and Buckstone up to connection to Vanderbilt Beach Road. This CSA is an undue burden on homeowners and should never have been a requirement by the County to develop the original properties. 3. Usage We understand the reasoning behind the increase as the Storage Unit utilized the majority of allowable space and now the developer needs additional to make the strip mall profitable. However a greater concern regarding is how this additional space be used. The developer has advised the intent to include a fast food drive thru restaurant to be located on the east side of phase II which is adjacent to Buckstone Drive. This particular establishment is being claimed not be a drive through, however it is the same business model as a Starbucks or Dunkin Donuts (See exhibit A). Traffic generated from these types of businesses have a major impact on surrounding roads and residencies. Especially during peak drive times. morning. noon, early evenings. We oppose any type of drive up, drive through, drive in, etc. fast food establishment. The developer has also advised that they are considering a Funeral Home, Boat/Car sales/leasing establishment, dollar store etc. All of which would generate extremes amounts of traffic and as presented the actual strip mall would not accommodate such type of facilities with regards to storage or parking. As a community we want to see this property to include businesses that will not distract from the atmosphere, life style and value of our homes. 4. Amount of Allowable Footage The original vision by the County was that Carolina Villages was to be a pedestrian friendly development where there would be a mixture of office, retail and sit down restaurants and some residential units. This development has now become nothing less than your average Strip Mall with a large storage warehouse. An "unknown" on the north east parcel is being labeled "future development". This future development is a major concern. Will the balance of approximately 24,000 sq. ft. that will be left from the phase I and phase I1 build out with the approval of 50,000 sq. ft. be adequate for this parcel? Will we be here in front of the Commission in a year or two with a request for additional square footage to enable that parcel to be viable for development? Welsh LLC originally asked for an additional 100,000 sq. ft when they applied to rezone to a full CPUD, subsequently Welsh withdrew that application. With current amendment approval and completion of phase I and II will they attempt to get that additional footage with another amendment? Will there be an avenue for Welsh to obtain the full 100,000 by going around the system and reapply again for the "future" development parcel. If this 50,000 is permitted then we respectfully request that a contingency be included that no further amendment/application for additional square footage can be made by this owner, developer or any future owner,developer for the purpose of development or redevelopment of this project. This addition will bring the total to 200,000 and that must be the final allowable space permitted. 5. Lighting and Noise Reduction To install additional landscaping or other means of filtering to eliminate light and noise that directly impacts the Black Bear Ridge homeowners adjacent to Vanderbilt Commons on the north side of VC property. I respectfully ask that the Commission take into consideration requests and concerns regarding the development of property known as Vanderbilt Commons. Respectfully submitted, Beverly R. Sthith bevsmith116@gmail.com 7278 Acorn Way Naples, Fl 34119 • o • x 4 _ itik. ,,i . fir c-,....5....i1 Tii . a �`'�. art #####wimoso,, 4 1 4 ililitillit ;e: ft 0 ACT%IN • 7:t7 AM --7- a ve0.00,11 i f -,„ . .,... .„..,...„ - . --.... .t. ... ,.•...., Il \ \ N, . ,. . ,L . . _ . .. . . ., .... ,....„.......... _ .„.. ,......, .. .. . .. -.....„ II T ,.. '14 if ,,. , ri,...1 . . .-7- ........ . .--, .-..., . ........ * A. 1 ki .... Si a-1 11114.iii_ "0 ISSIlail 77"",` 11/1111 . : . III i 7f • ,‘41' I ' ti - . i . III HiLigI .., 1, . : ' ' - 1111i1111111111 „ gi 14 's ifi:----. -'i-:'-....-----.......T.10... -0,. ........-...„- ' '1 _,. . .. ..... .„.... ;: c.. ,..,. _;4; J et1. t, ,..- 4' . fr", .: --, ' iS 4. MI , - s4--,.. ' , �f %,4:A4... 1, (f., ., limi CD .i ipt. , '� r s 0 3 rn C 4, o T _ m g w o d v ;V i -.t E cp .. v Vii, _ o C '�: "' O O - C v UL. (� s n 0 O o r C C o ,' O R , - @ V T—" ,• T. o , 0 u.L 44 2 O ''f _ q W R 0 u p T� m .. O m v -5 1. vc. F 41 0E E V 0 1 .0 �,P m Ca, w a0+ o v 0 O = Kj ,r R m o 3t. - m W 3 .. O O a Z c o ta ov m 0.3 w o = a U ` W to O = = s vtV p xo � ra C� .) o w�Q = > > 3 u mOu n 2 O m a t 0 0 a r F t o z N m G C C ~ _ 1...^ 177. oO um ` 0 o CO F= .i ° p A E ` a u3T e' vt s ,n `+a A 4c ^ c o a o so m 5 Noca pE V _ ; mda S 0 A . moP a d d N H E CCZ N N 0 .0 .0 m a g F EY "E I. 0, i6 10 E E �:= V O: NY 0, m m +' s A IIf m 4 C N c c c o 1 s 0 V a 0 = V$ 0 03 .V sg o `e a E E _ ~ V ° -a > O m w Of.II m .$ T u u V °� u °� o T m o :. N 7 t C C ` o m '` ` ; C O 7 'p Y Q 0 0 E O1 m. 5. 3 O c m` m !S E # dd m < 0 U U U U W LL (7 Q 0 C. o. c, O: C7 c, co x S , r ,O ry •,), Z LLI (i) I' la , mai >,.. 5.3.L ILI < 0 4 W Y 1-- 4lii ‘ . - elm 1 _ • . _.. til • - 0 = • - _ W _ 06,0 — —. cr) — —_- , - Z '------ - ' _f . _ _ _ , ,....., _i_ _ . _ ,- _L W I.:::: - _-_•. '- _ - ,,-, _ ,:', - C(‘..i - - - 0 .5. '--i•LI-- -; ‹. C--= - _ U c _, ,-, 3 410 -- a w '. _ u 7 .... „.... ...,, ce. _ , u- - I,- i _ _ I _i_. cl ILI w 1 _ -- _ , , 2: - -L- - ›... ....., . • u.. 3 0 (., ...... cr 2 ..-= C — — tpI , w k,-/ . _ M .ad 1- - - _ .-1 C - ___ iam M — ' .±. ` ''› . _. - - — - - - - — 0 - L, --, — '-' r , ,-- Z - _ N i_ - (4 LL< , \._, . Lu - — : — _ - _ 2-: _ _ tfl, I _ a, --.- "1- - 0 Z ti ----' - ' --- - - .._, _ ,, -, - ( . - ,--, - - • - . _ - = ..,. _. __ . _ - - ..1 1.--- . -I- '' Li- a _ ...i ..... 0 __,, _ <l- --- _ , = - (..0) -- - - 1,-r r 7 -I- tO1 -- - ‘,../ 7 7 - ---> . - ''''. .2_ _ , - (_-. - $ -- ------ _ _ _ • Y ,9 ., . x -..*-at...,.."as t..Cda v ' y m ,. 1 ,,,, #4WrFm dV -0 d > l' .U�s iC uLL @']N ° V0_i Z S N -11- 41'44' O ` � :�_ D0CS �m W — ty. NO— VQm ° 'E-Z m < c * t . � YO v m o3 °v ;; m 3 0_ Z ' o iii O e3 k s.. ,p k ay .o Q: Wuo ss p ° NE smXrn10 Z40_ Ia° m5 COou n. e U H 4, W 0a VL 6j m Z .r@ .6-3-..S I at LL. U VW tiI R> V ?tOCh mme v2_-_t, Xm — Vvu a 2 m p < c IJ 01-1 dmo c m ,° iW , < vs C Z—4 ObcmJy` w = o: Vc 4 '.460' F.7 Voim U "gm trimQO Gq raW otn s'5 ~ U a Zr 2r Zuti lair' s) 7.11-0 Zv8 NOa. m > VZ $ c0 d� oin K2'co <= Q- n N .1] k Li. U0 2 Wx0O �t7am" 11-170_ as mi ' r.r f 4 m y 41 ,,amt,Ury lEc fp ti. xu;Y -0 ° it � m ° rteso u� m n - O V 'z' Eddw 5 TY 0 IL Sc1 alix C Q 3 R O ; SG ` g -6 f:,,3 ..U " i- . a t;- v �N CL au N ,.t a N O of S a: 6^GN ` .!°!‘.;) amC321': o. 78",,,- 2y -F°..67."''' D teaC o X V= 3 m Q 0 y u_ m O0 O > o r>V o J0Qmm md o: .yy_ ,t. 50-E2 G °E p R� 'n..0w c Li',:. �;m ` >'om oS_ E yo3 °I2v °C ., a ,, m < ° £ . !rtQt2, .0_2 <v Yuo � ° h0 1'.cg. Oum � < vm ye a m m a j= u � � Uti7'E W`n LQ , Ud ' S g- mLLLyJYm n ° VVm ` oW A p �m < mrr � 2 �� ui = 3E�X-2 at > � 9'nEtat O¢m ' r - pyF' "v _,,I,..2 1, o, O4a yio"Ixc 1 �v Wt?. 1 ; amhry Lao V �. to-0 . • '8 <31 ° I EYvio guvmmo < 30 a°2 ,y' > o A ° E°--c. ad0 %. J7� < oamO > c < o•E Do § o ma o- <L- ° 47:c .' = E 3cA ZZohx0hot-a S=rci haUa S1.9tto a. Ill co r. C > m n E F y tri 1 o Cs ci 0 oiS rtzxm o '&R i m Oti 0_ o L�m n.m :m v W, OVw m d t a"ti g! a 0 t•33wQ9 vo` v� v " coo -p ryooL .a L vo t C ° ..amrn cUm m - 0 `0 as Ea " 'OL ., o t' E v m d . = .2.aLo s -p n mVt 't ..`L m x L'a m I 0_,m Is' v V •® dm dO 1«. hdvo ctq„, c 0V I c.c ce m c ry Q om0_ q � �t . °N "' ° c cc v � u = ,nmrn ;m cd0_ Ou 0 <m tpF.n - H �� I.H> 0 Z_, O : aD'6 " ? 41 L.5 mS f . Qt O gtno3t- hgN !`1'�t° : a s to ov n� 0 °� -0_ W n3 - „Woo oU <L.; tLn Shmti 'wm 9E1,311.2S�mc cis,, lo tsi3 fl-o Vm.� ,E>.-_,_- x.- E.7.« A df . Zas < VQ <,1 u FH 0_Z: m O pc W „ Z (Co m, 6 u z a oton rn-0r ymu5 „'2 m r < rno < rns rnd o < o} w;a cmts mw!- mwU mwm mw¢ WwtS t < !- = U 22 •44 ...`; , >- u.I J) .. . _ _ , I _ 1 1 a. -.: .. ._.. , . D ' . -- LIJ . . ... u E. 4:.... . ... .!-,1-1_•••'!, ' .. 1,... -:-:. : a: -* -: ,. • th !J..: i-..,'-; - . _ a • . ._ _. . . L.., . . . . ..... . . . . _ . . . ' Ift - ... _ .. .. • - • ,,. . . .. , .... - . . . . -- __ . . -... _ . . C : _ -- , . . .. , • .„ . - - . .. - . . . . . ._ - - _ — --- - -- --- 7 : - - -2- --- .-- - - ._ Z . - -- - ,...,... -.'-. --: -_-. t„--:: ._ _ .-_-.- „ ,.._, ...I ' __ ... . 11 16. 2 Fe'"--- ,, y_j• r r, '.... . - *. ....,..li : (.1... ,.../ . r.. - ,...._ 7 ,,, Z ..E. ':. '...D ;. ':.7 :. 7-.: kJ< '..... • , <- r r= 1-. ,. ...li I t:z ,---. •. - - ' . -7. . =0 i. '...r. L1.2. + ..._Li± ( - ,-3: ff--, -:.-.- .-: -:. a: ':i'.- '' ;7,-, _ _,. ,.; . -- -,.... U r...--) 1) <1".. c; -,-,- - ---: .- -+ ,-.1^.. + //=.! - -- - - -- --, .n. ... L„ Se •.,' t r-• fr• _. ,-- _ - ,,...... __ — _ -- .-.. — -1-. .....4,-. . • `,...= , -. '22! cf.' 2 -W.-, 1J' r.2:' '-':--- : :-- - .--. (7.-2' - -- - .1--. ,....J 1..__ < I_ _.-.. 7 f •' CI a .., 2J Cr. '.----; ::: L----, <I: -7 4 -+, (;) „_.-3 I:. 7.r- i ' l': ::.: 7 '---.'„ :, ‘51` fl- -' J. '--,. .---' :;', 5... __ .._, — u c :jer, Ca c. .„ i„..:u m u ,,f-,, :fr.> c-r, 2._ :: ...- :- — .-L , •,2,:. :-., __._. ... PETITION RE: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Blvd Commercial Subdistrict Folio Numbers: 25525600520,25525600546,25525600562,25525600588, 25525600041,25525600067,25525600083, 25525600096 THE FOLLOWING PETITION IS BEING SUBMI I I ED ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS OF BLACK BEAR RIDGE, LOCATED IN THE WOLF CREEK PUD OF COLLIER COUNTY, NAPLES, FL. THE FOLLOWING RESIDENTS HEREBY STATE THIER CONCERNS TO THE GMP AMENDMENT APPLICATION AND REQUEST ACTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS BE CONSIDERED AS FOLLOWS: Density if allowed to increase by requested 50,000 sq. ft of office/retail space it shall be contingent on no additional square footage permitted either by current owner/developer, future owner/developer, and development of present project, future project or redevelopment of project. Total amount of office/retail space will be capped at 200,000 sq. ft. Restrict unplanned portion noted as "future development" which includes 2 parcels located in the north east corner to office/retail only. No food establishment(s) to be permitted. Business types be prohibited as described as stated in Exhibit A Buffering against north property line to be revised by increasing the amount of landscaping to diffuse lights and noise from buildings and parking areas. Eliminate homeowners responsibility for the Cost Share Agreement that pertains to the signalization and future road improvements to Wolf Creek Road, Pristine Drive, Mission Hills Road,Buckstone Drive, Vanderbilt Beach Road or Collier Boulevard. Address the impact of traffic and its effect on the entire Wolf Consider the effects of density change, type of business Creek RPUD. allowed in Vanderbilt Commons and thea establishments the RPUD. Traffic impact must be evaluated innrits eentirety nre ot development iof n piece meal manner just to accommodate Vanderbilt Commons addressed in To maintain the original intent of Collier County for a office/retail environment. pedestrian friendly In addition we support the content of the letters attached to this petition as Exhibit B,C,D. ' mr,- Ladtrec_ nfG�2L-., t ACORN WAY M7/1t riJ2t// (2?.67 Z69,,, :e6z-"-f-/ -/.5 -?E9 ACORN WAY _ ACORN WAY c-e2.0 ZA( C) 7jg?- i '7-. 6 3 ACORN WAY _40%)-6-4( /7-t-i-,7. ACORN WAY r JaLeLltz_ (4.--e-i4 /7 ° 3 ACORN WAY FWYten A�-2 -.A) 7.33 ACORN WAY TiOcc, 'Z/Vii 't`t-41.---- --- ACORN WAY ,..,,, \ AR\\____ , _,,,, -__L7...z____ 0 ..c. ACORN WAY or W 70 1.D " ACORN WAY 9e-3 &th-CA/ KuLTh 7 -c5/D ACORN WAY Ma1/4), C7{��� eh' k 7J9 , i , ,\ 73t7\! i Lik.k ,i- 1 (_, ACORN WAY /27-------7Z-7._ /3(-)/ , 7 _.). ,,,) ,_). f4-T•'-.7.--- 1Z:i „, ACORN WAY ! � ACORN WAY 4 c--5-- ( A /1 01 ' 13 '5 D ACORN WAY � (' ; - 78 7) -7.5? ACORN WAY • �nJ� ACORN WAY AO f) FYN/ -i 3Q__ \A ACORN WAY I /N) (N- 67'Y-1-) )0 n I T-)-1 (-41" )-1 AU)1C2Ak 7 in ACORN WAY 1 ACORN WAY C /32 Z? ACORN WAY ACORN WAY W ', ' Leiitt, 73 J---3 •,,,, } , ACORN WAY / / i 7 e \ /14 f- fr ( - e ACORN WAY .)ddVi\.(0\At .." ) ACORN WAY IC_S\'' .A.t•-.— 7\s.AC_____ --+-') 1 \ ACORN WAY 7.,---.-7-7--,, , _---e .., ,...... ;„ _ ,,.. ..,,, ---7 ACORN WAY ACORN WAY i'--k C) ----- ACORN WAY ACORN WAY kV) 0,_, Liclytt6 Ls. 7).OA ACORN WAY i A --.7c.,,I4 ACORN WAY _ `i'-L ACORN WAY /4 ,e2/44- C)L444'tf-A, Z9V / - , ACORN WAY '&)ck Z6tA, -1'(-r- /-c;:2D 9 ! 1- ACORN WAY - ) LA ck---L----)Cle-CAma-.& 7 a 61 6 ,_ __ ` ACORN WAY , / 1.07., . t7& AV11410 9 4/ .,..._ .ii" , .....,..L.„," 7''T / J ACORN WAY 4 ,67 *-20 )4a 73 W/Ci'M/ACORN WAY // 73Z! ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ' - ` I tf3 7 ACORN WAY 74/3 ` 2 /fACORN WAY 7 /z 6 ACORN WAY t‘2:114 ‘ • / . /1`,-_--V 772 J ACORN WAY g4/ ACORN WAY o-if,;X ACORN WAY ACORN WAY (fluky Zjau) ACORN WAY =im 735-4 ��- ACORN WAY ACORN WAY /64 .� y- 7 3 ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY QKL4. ACORN WAY 3 '7 g /1./w.ou Cok.qfil_ ACORN WAY tRif 7 2 ACORN WAY 41.4121 1/4 WACC-2- -2 2 6 3 ACORN WAY 3 a ACORN WAY ACORN WAY /-2- _FG=eco- -`'2 36 ACORN WAY 4/40;( 49 ,X ACORN WAY 7.-56 ACORN WAY ACORN WAY /7----Thi ,V /-- ACORN WAY--i--"; S' .0 7- \-C1 51-(i)— ACORN WAY /' ACORN WAY i r - , ACORN WAY ACORN WAY , >42:1-4•2-€4,/ 72,2 Le '-"----------- ACORN WAY / . 7/-"L\------------/"- / 73 ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ,----) ACORN WAY zy" ACORN WAY 75L/ ACORN WAY 1 ‘1 7 ACORN WAY 2/4/ tel _•-6( 7_53 7 )47- • 05a, 7 ? 3 t ACORN WAY ACORN WAY -7331 ACORN WAY i r . L-311A i-jettx) 11 -1' -' -7 ACORN WAY y 41 1CC-4.1.k.---r• l' (6 tA/31-Ze/'1/4--- 7 3S-- z ACORN WAY 2)1 A-----1---------%."------ 7 LI ? S )7 ACORN WAY rl/ )L ACORN WAY -----, --72_ ACORN WAY ( _ ' ACORN WAY t .-------) R-7--. -.S . ACORN WAY -j_,QL T tic_ -r '& /14, ACORN WAY t\i \ 4, 1 rolano AtalisalTk, uii -7-4- ,- ACORN WAY bidCLA112 o y0T int 1 -o2- ACORN WAY tuati, f- .H,,i,,a,er ok te s 7 t-1- ;, , A ACORN WAY \id-1 W-",.. .7f.„(--4.--- 7 3 q„‘ 4ti ACORN WAY . 1 44ht 1/04-4-64d 13 3,5'' &---(A--U32- . -+-- IL, la 7, ()/ , ACORN WAY ACORN WAY --4: C1- ›,)• /a 7/ ACORN WAY (--1- 741it1 ACORN WAY -154:,119/ fl i 7*,,'/ ACORN WAY .--'et (f) ACORN WAY ��� ,- U ,( _ 2 3 -I 3 4a rG � L0,7' ACORN WAY 73 g r/ cerI`� ACORN WAY Ott* kt-tiSL 0,-(...------ ACORN WAY .10 -7.3 fr a,, ACORN WAY -./ �i. ‘, lb 73 a- 7 4 .4-4/ ACORN NAKY 4 )>f1-6 elk? 0e01-Xl,e-4-, . .--7 3 -7,4e-c5x-). 4/ 6A--/ _ ��--�"" ACORN W Y v- � F2/‘ A ,Cr"i W 10 - ACORN WAY 4 /, 02,17 7Z ' CJ 4 , cifn W . ACORN AY ,..gyt,t(itjtyte 1-iitit-re<3 2 3 7 r ,7-2(.4-,,,i AM ACORN WAY ✓( 1---,r,®- 7 3Y ACORN WAY \, •v,.4\L-JP . -._ Ltr,c,--41 - -1 ---1 \ C\c_r,.. r cl 1,3- (N-) ACORN WAY 4 ACORN WAY c 'i / 1 -7 2-117 f ACORN WAY -)----" t.--, ' r ---72z(„. ACORN WAY 91114A/ )441'3W °X... ,..2 40 ACORN WAY �/ / j P %%'`��'i 41.1) - 70157 7,2_3 7 ACORN WAY r q ACORN WAY --7 /LI--- x , ((\j\km),:,,_/ ACORN WAY _ (-7----Yd ACORN WAY y1/1//caz7,("ei 173C7 ACORN WAY - --' Ale 4 , ( ii:,,Z&Z,, .'7 3 9. y . 1 ACORN WAY 0 7L , /� ACORN WAY -� 05 1 -C44'11/11S(-r U`l L ACORN WAY tet, f j ACORN WAY LU 1 if ,7 c(, ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY - 77 ACORN WAY -7 ..- 2- sq / ,---., 'ft" ACORN WAY l?5)/ () Lil-L -1j Tar& Qf ( 3 (li (...,_ •7 q (3 ACORN WAY ' ACORN WAY t - 1 1. ACORN WAY 1 (2, . 0 ACORN WAY i , I ric\as A 1) ''''l .:41 - / ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY ACORN WAY LykinsDave From: Thenossens@aol.com Sent: Monday, April 3, 2017 2:10 PM To: SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SolisAndrew; TaylorPenny; s.carter@cmgflorida.co Cc: StrainMark; SchmidtCorby; BosiMichael Subject: Public Hearing: April 11, 2017 Attachments: Vanderbilt Common PUD Amendments.pdf; CCPCminutesFeb16,2017HearingVC.pdf Re: Growth Management Plan Amendment Application PL20150002167 Vanderbilt Beach Road/Collier Blvd Commercial SubdistrictCarolinaNanderbilt Commons expansion to Mission Hills Dear Commissioners, My name is Robert Nossen. My wife and I are homeowners in Black Bear Ridge (BBR). Our house is directly behind the Preserve which abuts the Vanderbilt Commons parcel. I understand that you already received the petition from BBR homeowners in which we participated. Unfortunately, next Tuesday being the first day of Passover and with family obligations, we will be unable to attend the Commission meeting. Accordingly, my intent with this email is to provide some background information in support of our concerns, namely usage/further square footages and cost sharing based on traffic requirements. Usage/Square Footage The original PUD for the parcel now called Vanderbilt Commons provided for 150,000 square feet of mixed use including residential and specialty shops. It was meant to support the planned communities within walking distance of Vanderbilt Commons. Last year, we found out that a large (95,500 sq. ft.) 3 story storage facility was going to be built on the NW corner of the property. We really didn't mind that since it wouldn't generate significant traffic on either Buckstone Dr. or Pristine Dr. However, in September 2016 we were advised that the developer, Welsh, planned to amend the PUD to change it from a MPUD as outlined in the attached amendment summary. This would have allowed gas stations, drive thru etc. and eliminated all residential units. He also planned to increase the square footage to 250,000, attributing the increase to 50,000 to allow for the storage unit and 50,000 to a "scriveners" error in the original PUD. We voiced strong objections to the changes at a 9/7/2016 neighborhood Information meeting as well as in subsequent correspondence. Then, in November 2016, we were presented with the current amendment for 200,000 square feet and only minor changes to the MPUD. However, Welsh's president remained vague as to whether there would still be a fast food drive thru such as Caribou/Einstein with all of its traffic issues. Is there really a need for another drive thru when we already have a Dunkin Donuts drive thru, a Subway and a breakfast/lunch place (Cafe Blu) in Mission Hills? Also, there are the 2 lots for future development originally slated for residential use. Accordingly, we are very concerned that the developer will eventually return with another amendment for different usage and additional square footage. This must not happen. Cost Sharing In 2004, the 5 owners in Wolf Creek PUD and what is now described as Vanderbilt Commons signed a cost sharing agreement for development of Pristine Drive. It's my understanding that the County was responsible for its creation. The agreement allocated percentages of responsibility based on acreage and also allocated corresponding units to the PUD portion of the agreement. Accordingly, BBR ended up with 30% of the potential cost while Vanderbilt Commons has 9.5%. This agreement is still in effect since it follows the land and has been used during the build out of Pristine Dr. I believe that all work on Pristine Dr. has now been completed and the road is in the process of being turned over to the County. That brings us to the ongoing issue for any future improvements to Vanderbilt Beach Rd. at the intersection of Pristine Dr. If that cost is passed on to the communities, that means that BBR would still bear 30% of the cost. Accordingly, this 1 agreement no longer would (if it ever did) make sense considering that the need for any additional road work such as a traffic light is based on traffic studies. Also, since 2004, the Wolf Creek PUD has been replaced or amended at least 3 times, it now allows for 754 units compared to 591 in 2004 and doesn't reflect actual build out. For example, BBR wasn't incorporated until a year after the agreement and designed with a full build out of 100 homes, not the 203 allocated as part of the cost sharing agreement. BBR now represents just 13.3% of the total number of units in the current Wolf Creek PUD. Further, this doesn't even take into account the effects of Vanderbilt Common, Mission Hills and the cut through traffic with drivers using Wolf Rd. and Pristine Dr. to avoid the CollierNanderbilt Beach light. One final thought for consideration. BBR has two entrances. The primary entrance is on Buckstone while the Pristine entrance is solely for residents and emergency vehicles with access/egress limited through the use of gate clickers. Also, due to the configuration of our roads within BBR, some of our homeowners may presently find it more convenient to use the Buckstone egress even when heading west on Vanderbilt Beach. This further reduces the use of Pristine by BBR. In conclusion, the Planning Commission and County Attorney recognized the cost sharing issue at its February 16th meeting as reflected in part of the transcripts of that meeting (see attached pages 16-17). However, ultimately we will probably need your help as Commissioners to resolve this issue. Thank you, Robert Nossen 239-591-3956 2 Vanderbilt Commons PUDA/ GMPA— Summary of Proposed Amendments Note:The following documents will be submitted to Collier County. The strike-through language will be omitted from the updated documents. The underlined items will be added to the documents. The items below summarize the proposed changes from the first NIM to today. NIM—September 7th,2016 1. Proposed the addition of 100,000 sq ft to the existing 150,000 sq ft for a total of 250,000 sq ft 2. 95,500 sq ft would be allocated to the self-storage facility 3. Proposed fast food with drive-thru (PUD) 4. Proposed gas, c-store,fast food and tire stores(GMP) 5. Removed 64 residential units(made Carolina Commons/Vanderbilt Commons a CPUD) 6. PUD acreage was reduced from 15.88 acres to 14.492 acres due to County ROW taking (acceptance of Pristine/Buckstone Drives) 7. Deviate to remove wall requirements along Vanderbilt Beach Road 8. Reduce perimeter landscape buffers from 20-feet to 15-feet since PUD is now less than 15 acres per!DC requirements 4.06.02 9. County requested title sheet of PUD to be updated with new name,owners, etc. 10. All other components of the existing GMP and PUD remain the same NIM—November 9th,2016 1. Proposed the addition of 50,000 sq ft to the existing 150,000 sq ft for a total of 200,000 sq ft 2. 95,500 sq ft would be allocated to the self-storage facility 3. Removed 6 residential units for a total of 58 existing residential units(remains as MPUD) 4. PUD acreage was reduced from 15.88 acres to 14.492 acres due to County ROW taking (acceptance of Pristine/Buckstone Drives) 5. Deviate to remove wall requirements along Vanderbilt Beach Road 6. Reduce perimeter landscape buffers from 20-feet to 15-feet since PUD is now less than 15 acres per LDC requirements 4.06.02 7. County requested title sheet of PUD to be updated with new name, owners, etc. 8. All other components of the existing GMP and PUD remain the February 16,2017 MR.BRACCI: That is correct as well. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think that's the crux of the error,and we didn't participate in that.Had a document like that come forward,most of the county planners and us, if we had gotten to review it before it was finalized,I can't imagine we wouldn't have looked at intensity or density as a basis for cost sharing far above acreage,because the zoning for Black Bear Ridge has more units available to it. If they don't build out to that,it seems questionable on how you apply a cost share based on a lower density when it's configured on a per-acre basis. And the same goes for a commercial parcel that does increase its intensity,like could happen here. And,actually,your argument for increasing intensity on this by 50,000 square feet is--might be a little difficult to address because they're actually reducing the intensity by the square footage that they used. But regardless,your cost-sharing agreement,not having a part of the county,not having the county participating in it,I think,has inherent problems with it,and I'm not sure the best resolution of that. I certainly will look to Mr.Klatzkow if you could opine on what bearing that agreement should be on the zoning efforts coming through for this board either at the GMP or LDC level. MR.KLATZKOW: Yeah,I walked over earlier in this meeting to Trinity and said,you need to wrap this up before this concludes. I know where this is heading,and it's going to be a train wreck. We need to get this entire issue as far as who's going to pay for the light resolved as part of this process,in my opinion. I don't think ifs fair that ultimately the homeowners have to kick in on this. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, in the PUD--we have a detailed transportation section of the PUD, and the applicant is coming forward proposing to strike quite a bit of that and rewrite it. And I would turn to Mike or—because Mike is the overall zoning. I know Corby's strictly Comprehensive Planning. But,Mike,the arrangements for how these roads are to be taken--handled in regards to payment and responsibility,is that something that can be addressed in that transportation section of the PUD,assuming that either the applicant and the opposition parties get together and work it out on their own,or can that be something that can be dictated to be included in the PUD? MR.BOSI: Well,the legality of that,I may turn to a little advice from the County Attorney's Office. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm trying to figure out how to find a solution,Jeff,outside of a document we don't have any power—authority over. MS.ASHTON-CICKO: The current PUD does make reference to a shared agreement,but when this comes through as the PUD amendment,we can strike that language and it can be addressed through a prop share arrangement like we typically do. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So in order for this to come through at the PUD level when the applicant wants to actually come in and get the uses squared away and the additional square footage added, we will have an opportunity to address the issue and hopefully clean up the sharing agreement you currently have that's not part of our basis? MR.BRACCI: One complication there is that the--Black Bear is in the Wolf Creek PUD. This is in a separate PUD,I believe. So somehow we'd have to link these PUDs in some kind of process before the County Commission in order to accomplish that. I think that there may be--you know,if everyone's willing,we could accomplish that,but I don't think it's as easy here as just addressing it in this one,because it—the cost-sharing agreement spreads over multiple PUDs. MR.KLATZKOW: When this first started years ago--my memory is a little dim,because this is years ago that we started developing this area;Mission Hills,Black Bear. The representations the developers were making as to who was going to do what and what was going to develop isn't quite the way it's developing. I'm not saying--there weren't any misrepresentations made. It's just that,you know,as time goes on needs change,market changes,whatever,so that I think it's appropriate that we take a look at what we did and why and now how we're going to fix it,all right,because what's going on here is not the way it was supposed to develop entirely. It's changed a bit. That's fine. The county's changed a lot,too. But as long as we're changing it,okay,then there's no reason why we can't go back to the beginning and say okay,this was predicated on that,that's not happening,we're going to change this. And it may be for Page 16 of 29 February 16,2017 several items that we look into this and say,you know what? We need to fix this now before this is completed,this thing. Because there was a reason we had this loop here with Wolfe Road going straight down to VBR,all right. We put that in as a bypass years ago,all right,because we new Immokalee Road was going to get heavily trafficked,and at the end of the day,we knew people were going to take a left on Immokalee down here, get down to VBR,and then get into town. This is not by accident,this entire loop. We also knew that VBR eventually was going to get expanded to the east,and the shopping center here is going to get more and more dense. But this little shopping center in front of Black Bear,this was supposed to be just,like,personal uses for the residential use,some restaurants,hair cutting place,that sort of thing. That's what was explained to us with the way this was going to develop. It was going to be a neighborhood little place. It's not quite developing like that,because the county's not quite developing like that. All right. So it's appropriate that staff goes back to the beginning as to why we're doing it this way, what representations were made,okay,and then,perhaps, in this process try to clean up what we can so that the area can develop hopefully in a better way rather than a piecemeal process. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think--go ahead,Diane. COMMISSIONER EBERT: Jeff,may I ask you a question. Originally,how many developers—or, I mean,how many people are supposed to be in on this cost-sharing agreement? MR.KLATZKOW: It was an odd arrangement at the time because it was multiple developers who came in on this. Usually you just get the one developer with the cost share. Here there are multiple developers. MR.BRACCI: I do have some-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,I think I want a--I think I know a path to get this resolved. Corby or Mike,a transmittal goes to the state after the Board gets an ORC report and comes back; we do adoption. Even if there's no objections from the state,even if the Board on a three--I think it's a simple majority vote--approve it for a transmittal,we have the absolute right to deny it at adoption; is that correct? MR. BOSI: Correct. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The whole process that you're here for today and the idea for getting this PUD changed,or a PUDA,affords the community an opportunity they would not have had if the developer didn't come forward and do this. So by letting this transmittal move forward we can get three or four more months of item in which you and the developer can hopefully get together,the transportation staff could come up with a better solution to the road system out there,and that the next time when it comes back for adoption,we can make sure these things are resolved as they should have been probably from the time it started. Now,this is an opportunity that arose because of this request. Had the request not come up,it would have been a civil matter probably for you guys to have to handle on your own. So I think,regardless of any issues of compatibility,to get this past transmittal to get to the next phase would give us the opportunity to really get into this and maybe find a resolution, Steve,and I ask for your conversation of that as far as-- MR. BRACCI: Obviously,I have to defer to my clients,who I haven't spoken to. But just in terms of the concept, I mean,the transmittal itself, I don't think there would be an issue other than,as we all know, typically the transmittal is the precursor to what happens at zoning,you know. And,again,the 50,000 square feet in and of itself isn't as much as the issue as how it's going to operate,you know. And it gets back to Mr. Klatzkow's point a moment ago about how--what the original intent of this was was sort of a blend. It was going to be residential over retail.You know,it was going to be a little bit of a streetscape type of thing. And as Mr.Klatzkow mentioned,the character of this particular project's changed;the character of the county has changed. And if we're going to revisit these--you know,a lot of the--you know, if we're going to acknowledge the transmittal going forward,it's with the understanding that these things should be revisited like we're talking about,maybe with more particularity than what might otherwise be at a PUD hearing that follows the transmittal on the GMP to the state. Page 17 of 29 LykinsDave From: faye.collettsutton@louisville.edu Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 1:09 PM To: SaundersBurt Cc: LykinsDave Subject: Thank you! Burt: thank you for meeting with the Black Bear Ridge Board this morning and allowing us to summarize the issues we are facing with the commercial development surrounding us as well as the problems with the cost sharing agreement. We appreciate your time. Faye DR. FAYE SUTTON Professor Emerita 7311 Acorn Way Naples, FL 34119 239-405-5199 AMERICAN PROUD 1 LykinsDave From: faye.collettsutton@louisville.edu Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 8:22 PM To: Terrie Abrams Cc: LykinsDave Subject: RE: Vanderbilt Preserve -Wolf Creek PUD OK but cc Dave Lykins at davelykins@colliergov.net. DR. FAYE SUTTON Professor Emerita 7311 Acorn Way Naples, FL 34119 239-405-5199 AMERICAN PROUD From:Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, April 20, 2017 7:11 PM To:faye.collettsutton@louisville.edu Subject: Fwd: Vanderbilt Preserve -Wolf Creek PUD I am going to send this on to Burt Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 Begin forwarded message: From: Steve Bracci<steve@braccilaw.com> Date:April 20, 2017 at 6:56:36 PM EDT To:Terrie<terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Cc: alien marc<mallencny@yahoo.com> Subject: Re:Vanderbilt Preserve-Wolf Creek PUD I do not see why not. Steve Steven J.Bracci, PA Ph:[239)596-2635 Original message From:Terrie Date:Thu,Apr 20, 2017 6:36 PM To:Steve Bracci; Cc: allen marc; Subject:Re:Vanderbilt Preserve-Wolf Creek PUD 1 Is there any reason we shouldn't send this note on to Burt Saunders? From my I phone Terrie 630.244.4800 On Apr 20, 2017, at 4:59 PM, Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com>wrote: From: Steve Bracci Sent:Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:58 PM To: 'AshtonHeidi' <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Cc: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay<RayBellows@colliergov.net>; StoneScott <ScottStone@colliergov.net> Subject: RE:Vanderbilt Preserve -Wolf Creek PUD Heidi—In 2013 when the County amended the Wolf Creek PUD, it did a workaround to avoid the Cost Sharing Agreement and the allocation of units under that agreement. In an effort to avoid application of that agreement, the County went out of its way to assign units specifically to Parcels 1A through 3A. As a corollary to this workaround, Black Bear Ridge now would like the same type of protection in reverse. Specifically, as part of the Vanderbilt Preserve amendment insubstantial change process whereby they are attempting to shrink their onsite preserve, Black Bear Ridge wants to be sure that the developer/land owner is not attempting to take the extra 100 units of density that Black Bear Ridge is entitled to under the Coast Sharing Agreement (ie,the "Allocation Agreement). (See numbered pages 53 and 54 of the attached CCPC minutes). Black Bear Ridge would like a clarification that there is a specific allocation of remaining Wolf Creek PUD units to Parcels 6, 7, and 8 (Black Bear Ridge). Also, my client will be meeting with Mike Bosi tomorrow, to present a compelling case for why the County is entertaining what would appear to be a double-dipping by the owner of Vanderbilt Preserve,whereby they are applying the "25% preserve rule" twice, in an effort to improperly shrink the preserve. I hope that staff(Mike and Summer) will listen closely to this presentation, including the written analysis that my clients will be bringing to the meeting. Finally, my clients feel (and I concur)that the County is mixing up its terminology for "native vegetation" and "preserve area." The result is potentially that any concession given to Vanderbilt Preserve would prevent any future use of Black Bear Ridge's preserve area for passive recreation that might reduce some of its "native vegetation." Black Bear Ridge strongly opposes such an infringement upon its rights. Further, we believe that it is bad public policy for the county to adopt processes that would lead to a "race to eliminate native vegetation." I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further, in follow-up to my clients' meeting with Mike and Summer tomorrow morning (Friday). 2 Sincerely, Steve <image002.png> Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. From: AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net] Sent:Tuesday, April 11, 2017 4:32 PM To:Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com> Cc: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay<RayBellows@colliergov.net>; StoneScott <ScottStone@col liergov.net> Subject: RE: Vanderbilt Preserve -Wolf Creek PUD Steve-He is relying on Section 4.1 and Section 5.3A of Ord. No. 07-46. /la'flekoit-Cicio Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800 Naples, FL 34112 (239) 252-8400 From: Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 5:06 PM To:AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Cc: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay<RavBellows@colliergov.net>; StoneScott <ScottStone@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Vanderbilt Preserve-Wolf Creek PUD Heidi-how does Bruce Anderson justify his statement that "clearly the focus is on the entire PUD's preserve areas and does not require 25% retention on each individual parcel?" 3 See the attached highlighted excerpt from the recorded Cost Sharing Agreement which includes Wolf Creek. The County is fully aware of this Cost Sharing Agreement, having acknowledged it on numerous occasions. Is the County enabling a process whereby Black Bear Ridge's rights to reduce its preserve in the future are now being ceded to Vanderbilt Preserve? It seems to me that Vanderbilt Preserve must stand on its own for its preserve area requirements. Steve <image004.png> Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court,Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. From:AshtonHeidi [mailto:HeidiAshton@colliergov.net] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 4:23 PM To:Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com> Cc: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay<RavBellows@colliergov.net>; StoneScott <ScottStone@col liergov.net> Subject: RE:Vanderbilt Preserve -Wolf Creek PUD Steve, Attached are the emails relevant to your request. Please see the first email,which provides that PDI's also go to the BCC. ad/fid torr-Ceio Heidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800 Naples, FL 34112 (239) 252-8400 4 From: Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@ibraccilaw.com] Sent: Monday, April 10, 2017 3:59 PM To: AshtonHeidi Subject: Vanderbilt Preserve - Wolf Creek PUD Hello Heidi—I understand that after a conversation you had with Bruce Anderson, the Vanderbilt Preserve PUD amendment request went from a full PUD amendment to an insubstantial change. Is that correct, and if so can you explain the reason for the change in process? Dan Smith had previously informed my Black Bear Ridge client that this would be a full PUD amendment hearing. Thank you, Steve <image005.png> Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court,Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. 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. <CCPC Minutes 03212013 R palermo_wolf pdf#94DF.pdf 5 LykinsDave From: faye.collettsutton@louisville.edu Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 6:52 PM To: LykinsDave Subject: FW: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge Dave: the Board wants to keep you in the loop regarding the second development being planned near us. The East Coast developer wants to reduce the small preserve space in half to put in more townhomes. The Board is going to meet with Mike Bosi and Planning in the morning. You are invited to attend tomorrow and any of the meetings we have with the County staff. I apologize for this short notice. This parcel backs up to Island Walk on Pristine Drive and is different than the Vanderbilt Commons which the Commissioners voted to send to the state. Anytime you have any questions let me know and I will get you answers or to the right person within the Community. Thanks. Faye DR. FAYE SUTTON Professor Emerita 7311 Acorn Way Naples, FL 34119 239-405-5199 AMERICAN PROUD From:Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, April 20, 2017 6:17 PM To: faye.collettsutton@louisville.edu Subject: Fwd: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 Begin forwarded message: From: BosiMichael <MichaelBosiPcolliergov.net> Date:April 20, 2017 at 3:51:26 PM EDT To:Terrie<terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Subject: RE: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction -Black Bear Ridge Terri, Unlike Mark,the CCPC members are volunteers and not within the building on staff. We, as staff, most certainly can hear your perspective, but as far as lobbying a CCPC member,those arrangements are made outside of staff, directly between the CCPC member and agent or party. Here's the link to the CCPC members. http://www.colliergov.net/Your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning- division/zoning-services-section/collier-county-planning-commission-ccpc See you tomorrow, mike 1 Original Message From:Terrie [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 3:34 PM To: BosiMichael <MichaelBosi(a@colliergov.net> Subject: Re: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge Hi ... any chance you could get another planning commission person to meet with us tomorrow since Mark can't make it ! From my I phone Terrie 630.244.4800 >On Apr 18, 2017, at 4:43 PM, BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>wrote: >Thank you Terri! See you Friday. > Original Message > From: Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] >Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 4:42 PM >To: BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net> >Subject: Re: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge > I like your style .... quick on emails ! >Sent from my iPad >Terrie >630.244.4800 >> On Apr 18, 2017, at 4:41 PM, BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>wrote: >>Yes Summer has accepted the invite. » mike » Original Message >> From: Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] >>Sent:Tuesday,April 18, 2017 4:36 PM >>To: BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net> >>Subject: Re: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge >>Yes ... we are still on . Will Summer be there ? »Sent from my iPad >>Terrie >> 630.244.4800 »>On Apr 18, 2017, at 2:57 PM, BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>wrote: »> >>>Terrie, 2 >>> I just spoke with Mark and he will not be at the meeting.The petition was originally going to be heard by Mark sitting as the Hearing Examiner, but once it was elevated to the CCPC due to the heightened public concern, he no longer can take part in the discussion as a CCPC member. When the PDI is heard by the CCPC, he will leave the room and not take part in the process. Dan and I can still meet with you and Marc to hear your position this Friday, its just Mark won't be involved. »> Please let me know if we are still on for Friday. »>Thanks, »> mike >>> »> Original Message »> From:Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] >>>Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 2:01 PM »>To: BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net> >>>Subject: Re: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge »> >>> But Mark Strain will be there ? »> >>>Sent from my iPad >>>Terrie »>630.244.4800 »> »> >>>>On Apr 17, 2017, at 1:51 PM, BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>wrote: >>» »»Terri, As I mentioned, not sure of Dan's schedule, so his attendance is tentative. >>» >>» Original Message »» From:Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] >>>>Sent: Monday,April 17, 2017 1:49 PM >>>>To: BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net> >>>>Cc: StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net>; BrownAraqueSummer<SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net>; alien marc<mallencny@yahoo.com> >>>>Subject: Re: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge >>» >>>>Great ... April 21 at 9 am . Will everyone be available? >>» >>>>Sent from my iPad »»Terrie »»630.244.4800 >>» >>» »»>On Apr 17, 2017, at 1:42 PM, BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>wrote: »»> »»>Terri, >>>>> Dan is out today, but he is in tomorrow. I will talk with him to check his schedule, but how would a 9am tentative meeting work for you and Mr. Allen? »»>Sincerely, »»> mike »»> »»> Original Message »»> From: Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] »»>Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 1:26 PM 3 »»>To: StrainMark<MarkStrain@colliergov.net>; SmithDaniel <DanielSmith@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; BrownAraqueSummer <SummerBrownAraque@colliergov.net> »»>Cc: alien marc<mallencny@yahoo.com> >>>>>Subject: PI 20160000404 Preserve Reduction - Black Bear Ridge »»> »»> Hello, »»> >>>>> Marc Allen and I would like to meet with you to understand how the County is looking at this preserve reduction request as our research indicates a conflict with existing ordinances. »»> >>>>>We would prefer Friday APRIL 21 ...anytime. Or we could meet on April 24 or 25. »»> »»> Regards, »»> >>>>>Sent from my iPad >>>>>Terrie »»>630.244.4800 »»> »»> »»> >>>>> 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. 4 LykinsDave From: Terrie Abrams <terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 4:45 PM To: SaundersBurt Cc: LykinsDave Subject: Black Bear Ridge Hello Burt, Black Bear Ridge would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the latest developments surrounding our community and how we move forward with the county on dealing with road improvements.We greatly appreciate the time and support you have shown us. How do we get on your calendar? I tried scheduling a meeting with Nick Casalanguida but received no response. Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 1 LykinsDave From: Terrie <terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 11:37 AM To: CasalanguidaNick Cc: MarcellaJeanne; ScottTrinity;Anderson, Bruce (BAnderson@ralaw.com); LykinsDave; Steve Bracci Subject: Re: BBR phone call - May 5 , 2017 Thanks . We are keeping our District Commissioner involved with regularly scheduled meetings. One is coming up. From my I phone Terrie 630.244.4800 On May 5, 2017, at 11:28 AM, CasalanguidaNick <NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> wrote: Good Morning Terrie, Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this morning.Your recollection and summary of our conversation is not quite accurate. We work transparently and fairly for both you in public trust as a citizen and public service for the developer and our Board. I will schedule the meeting and I will certainly keep an open mind. I have the copied Mr. Anderson and Mr. Lykins so that both parties area aware and the Commissioner of the district is also informed. Jeanne, Please work with Trinity to set this meeting up. Please make sure Trinity invites all interested parties. Please see my comments below underlined.... - the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. The county reviewed and approved all documents that were part of the public process and enforceable by the County. We did not create, review, or approved the private agreement. That was done outside of the County's review. It was completed and signed prior to any county staff seeing it. We set the requirements for a joint infrastructure project that collectively handled all of your combined traffic impacts. How the individual parties chose to fund those improvements, the timing, and stipulations were privately agreed upon. - we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 Thank you, I will ask Jeanne to make sure all sides can attend the meeting in a an open and transparent environment. - your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson 1 I do not appreciate the mischaracterization. Bruce is a professional colleague and I respect him immensely. You will find that Bruce and I have had many professional disagreements. I will treat both parties without bias and make my recommendation to the Board based on past practice. - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. I have asked Trinity to evaluate a left turn lane in lieu of a signal. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. The burden you currently have or do not have will be based on approved ordinances, transfers of obligations through contracts, and private agreements. I cannot make a determination based on the limited discussion we have had. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 <image001.png> From:Terrie [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 11:03 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> Subject: BBR phone call- May 5 , 2017 Hi Nick, Thanks for the call this morning. Just a quick recap. - the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. - we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 - your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. 2 We look forward to meeting with you and finalizing an appropriate quick action to resolve this mess. Kind Regards, Terrie 630.244.4800 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 3 LykinsDave From: CasalanguidaNick Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 1:29 PM To: LykinsDave Subject: Re: BBR phone call - May 5 , 2017 I'm happy to attend if the Commissioner would like me there. Sent from my iPhone On May 5, 2017, at 11:31 AM, LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> wrote: Nick...FYI...The Commissioner is meeting with Terrie Abrams and Black Bear Ridge residents at 11 am on Monday May 22nd ...please advise if the date/time is good for you. We can move the meeting to the Commissioner's Board Room and block off an hour. Regards... Dave Lykins Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders davelykins a(�colliergov.net 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (239)252-8603 <image002.gif> Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: CasalanguidaNick Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 11:29 AM To:Terrie<terrie.abrams@gmail.com>; MarcellaJeanne <JeanneMarcella@colliergov.net> Cc: ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; 'Anderson, Bruce (BAnderson@ralaw.com)' <BAnderson@ralaw.com>; LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: BBR phone call - May 5 , 2017 Good Morning Terrie, Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this morning. Your recollection and summary of our conversation is not quite accurate. We work transparently and fairly for both you in public trust as a citizen and public service for the developer and our Board. I will schedule the meeting and I will certainly keep an open mind. I have the copied Mr. Anderson and Mr. Lykins so that both parties area aware and the Commissioner of the district is also informed. Jeanne, Please work with Trinity to set this meeting up. Please make sure Trinity invites all interested parties. Please see my comments below underlined.... 1 - the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. The county reviewed and approved all documents that were part of the public process and enforceable by the County. We did not create, review, or approved the private agreement. That was done outside of the County's review. It was completed and signed prior to any county staff seeing it. We set the requirements for a joint infrastructure project that collectively handled all of your combined traffic impacts. How the individual parties chose to fund those improvements, the timing, and stipulations were privately agreed upon. - we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 Thank you, I will ask Jeanne to make sure all sides can attend the meeting in a an open and transparent environment. - your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson I do not appreciate the mischaracterization. Bruce is a professional colleague and I respect him immensely. You will find that Bruce and I have had many professional disagreements. I will treat both parties without bias and make my recommendation to the Board based on past practice. - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. I have asked Trinity to evaluate a left turn lane in lieu of a signal. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. The burden you currently have or do not have will be based on approved ordinances, transfers of obligations through contracts, and private agreements. I cannot make a determination based on the limited discussion we have had. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 <i mage003.png> From:Terrie [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 11:03 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> Subject: BBR phone call - May 5, 2017 2 Hi Nick, Thanks for the call this morning. Just a quick recap. -the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. -we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 -your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. We look forward to meeting with you and finalizing an appropriate quick action to resolve this mess. Kind Regards, Terrie 630.244.4800 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 3 LykinsDave From: George Vuko <George@welshfl.com> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:03 PM To: LykinsDave Subject: RE: Meeting with Commissioner Saunders Thank you sir!. Regards, GV From: LykinsDave [mailto:DaveLykins@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 2:00 PM To: George Vuko<George@welshfl.com> Subject: RE: Meeting with Commissioner Saunders See you Monday at 11 am. Have a good weekend. Regards... Dave Lykins Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders davelykins(a colliergov.net 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (239 252-8603 rer County Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: George Vuko [mailto:George@welshfl.com] Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 1:59 PM To: LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Meeting with Commissioner Saunders Yes,thank you Dave. Regards, GV From: LykinsDave [mailto:DaveLykins@colliergov.net] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 1:54 PM To: George Vuko <George@welshfl.com> Subject: Meeting with Commissioner Saunders George, I realize it's late notice, but are you available to meet with Commissioner Saunders 11 am Monday May 8th? He had an opening that just occurred...Please advise. Regards... Dave Lykins Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders davelykinscolliergov.net 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (219252-8603 Co rer County Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 LykinsDave From: CasalanguidaNick Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 5:03 PM To: Terrie Abrams Cc: MarcellaJeanne; ScottTrinity; LykinsDave; Bracci Steve; KlatzkowJeff; George Vuko; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; CasalanguidaNick Subject: RE: BBR phone call - May 5 , 2017 Hi Terrie, I believe all PUD Ordinances state the Developer or successors and assigns. Developer commitments are handled very differently during bulk transfers or individual sales. Buyers negotiate their terms with the developer based on where the obligations will ultimately reside. Development bonds are currently collected as part of all onsite platted construction projects approved by the County. Offsite construction obligations sometimes come with surety such as bonds or letters of credit depending on the project. In the case of traffic signals,they are subject to warrants, which may or may not ever happen, and can take upwards of 5 to 10 and even 15 years to meet warrants. If the offsite improvement is specific and tied to a capital project that requires agreements with the County, then we make sure that a form of surety is included. I have worked on dozens of agreements with developers that have produced very clear and positive outcomes.Your own development is thoughtfully connected with private and public roads that came out of many meetings with developers.This offsite obligation is complicated because each contributing party is in a different phase of development and includes residential and commercial owners. In this case, a private agreement was probably a very good vehicle to meet the obligations.The problem arises when the new owner has not been made aware of the encumbrance or it is not clearly spelled out in the transaction. Practically all developers have some sort of private agreement between partners and lending institutions that define their obligations.Since these agreements are below the governing PUD Ordinance and have no obligations or commitments that the County subscribes to, we have no reason to review them. Even if we did, we have no authority to modify them.They are all disclosed to buyers in future transactions such as the title commitment of your purchase identifying the cost sharing agreement on line 24. It is important that each buyer takes the time to review the encumbrances on the property they intend to purchase during the due diligence period. My recollection is that the County has rarely ever required surety for traffic signals due to the amount of time that elapses from the original approval up to and through the warrant period.Almost every PUD I have seen in Collier County includes language that the traffic signal will be the responsibility of the developer or his successors and assigns, if warranted. That all said, I believe that the current developer seeking a zoning change intends to review the County's recommendation for the developer to construct a left turn lane with the County installing a directional median to the east.This will eliminate the signal issue as it will not likely meet warrants anyway. I encourage you to explore that with them as the cost is significantly less.As to their willingness to reconsider the cost sharing, I cannot speak to that. I suggest that we leave the remainder of this discussion to the upcoming meeting. You will find myself and our staff to be very willing to discuss solutions with all of you. Enjoy your weekend.... Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida 1 Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 C�osoity From:Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 2:50 PM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> Cc: MarcellaJeanne <JeanneMarcella@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; Bracci Steve<steve@braccilaw.com> Subject: Re: BBR phone call - May 5, 2017 Nick, It is far more professional to engage during our face to face meeting so I apologize for not being able to help myself here and comment again. My last email ... I promise. Can we all agree that the PUD ordinance says the "developer" will be responsible for intersection improvements? Isn't that what developer bonds are for? And, shouldn't the county have required agreement from the developers so that proper security bonds could have been obtained by the county? You had mentioned the multiple developers involved couldn't sort things out. Isn't that where the counties expertise lies in establishing funding for infrastructure in a clear and concise fashion. Versus something that has been hanging out there for years that the " best of the best "thinks is a can of worms ? This goes back to your statement this morning that the county required the developer agreement but never read it (supposedly). 2 We Black Bear Ridge citizens do place public trust in the County — to enforce the developer obligations transparently and fairly, as part of the County's public service. Not to let it slip and then later attempt to place the financial burden on taxpayer-owners. I am very sorry if you were offended by my Bruce comment but could not figure out the relevancy to our conversation when you mentioned "Bruce was a dear friend". My background is the private sector so keeping business and friendship was a clear distinction. I look forward to our meeting. Thank you very much for your time. Kind Regards, Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 On May 5, 2017, at 11:28 AM, CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> wrote: Good Morning Terrie, Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this morning. Your recollection and summary of our conversation is not quite accurate. We work transparently and fairly for both you in public trust as a citizen and public service for the developer and our Board. I will schedule the meeting and I will certainly keep an open mind. I have the copied Mr.Anderson and Mr. Lykins so that both parties area aware and the Commissioner of the district is also informed. Jeanne, Please work with Trinity to set this meeting up. Please make sure Trinity invites all interested parties. Please see my comments below underlined.... - the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. 3 The county reviewed and approved all documents that were part of the public process and enforceable by the County. We did not create, review, or approved the private agreement. That was done outside of the County's review. It was completed and signed prior to any county staff seeing it. We set the requirements for a joint infrastructure project that collectively handled all of your combined traffic impacts. How the individual parties chose to fund those improvements, the timing, and stipulations were privately agreed upon. - we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 Thank you, I will ask Jeanne to make sure all sides can attend the meeting in a an open and transparent environment. - your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson I do not appreciate the mischaracterization. Bruce is a professional colleague and I respect him immensely. You will find that Bruce and I have had many professional disagreements. I will treat both parties without bias and make my recommendation to the Board based on past practice. - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. I have asked Trinity to evaluate a left turn lane in lieu of a signal. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. The burden you currently have or do not have will be based on approved ordinances, transfers of obligations through contracts, and private agreements. I cannot make a determination based on the limited discussion we have had. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 <image001.png> From:Terrie [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 11:03 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> Subject: BBR phone call- May 5 , 2017 Hi Nick, Thanks for the call this morning. Just a quick recap. 4 , -the county required the developers to address road infrastructure yet you and others didn't read it to make sure it satisfied the needs of the county or residents. -we will provide you with a pre read prior to the meeting on May 10 or 11 -your " dear friend" is Bruce Anderson - Trinity has a plan to ask the developer of Vanderbilt Commons to pay for the turn into the plaza which is already his requirement. But the plan is to take it one step further to to eliminate the need forever for more improvements such as a traffic signal even if it is warranted and becomes a safety issue. - it is our belief the residents do not have any cost burden for signalization or road improvements as they lie with the county and or developers. We look forward to meeting with you and finalizing an appropriate quick action to resolve this mess. Kind Regards, Terrie 630.244.4800 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. 5 LykinsDave From: CasalanguidaNick Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 1:18 PM To: Steve Bracci Cc: FrenchJames; BosiMichael; PattersonAmy; ScottTrinity; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko; Keith Gelder (kgelder@stockdevelopment.com); KlatzkowJeff; AshtonHeidi; LykinsDave Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Attachments: 2017.05.12 Letter to Nick Casalanguida (Black Bear Ridge).pdf Steve: I apologize for not getting back to you sooner. I asked our staff to review the questions and confirm some of the information prior to responding. In your letter you requested a response to five specific questions. Please review the responses below. 1. Yes,the County still holds securities related to the Construction, Maintenance and Escrow Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, specifically line items identified in the Engineer's Opinion of Probable Costs for Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements. The amount would not be released until verification that the improvement has been completed. At that time, the security would be able to be reduced by the corresponding line item. 2. Securities have not been released per answer# 1. 3. The improvements were not included in the County's contract plans. The developers were to contract with the design engineer on their own, once they had plans they were to contract directly with the construction contractor. The County project was awarded in July 2004. In February 2007,the developers contracted with the design engineer to prepare the intersection improvement plans. The plans were completed in April 2007 and provided to the developers to negotiate with construction contractor. It is our understanding that the developers could not come to an agreement with the contractor and the improvements did not proceed forward. Please keep in mind as we had discussed,once the County issues a notice to proceed for a construction project, we do not permit additional contractors to do work within the same area without the consent of the prime contractor. The developers did not have the benefit of soliciting bids if they were to construct concurrent with the County's project. The County did not have any funds to complete the developer required intersection improvements. Therefore, no funds were available to the County to complete the project. 4. The County has not typically demanded escrow deposits to complete development required improvements. During this timeframe,the Country was hit hard with the Great Recession, in which our community was not spared from these financial impacts. At that time the County was focused on maintaining our economy that revolved around tourism and construction. Furthermore, it was not the County's obligation to complete the intersection improvements. If the County were to demand the escrow and take the responsibility of completing this project,the County would have also taken on any cost overruns or change orders with no mechanism to be able to recover the funds from the developer.The County could have held certificates of occupancy for the development until the improvements were completed. However,that has not been a preferred method as it would hinder new homeowners who may already have loans in place from being able to get into their new constructed home. 5. We cannot speak for Stock. County staff has proposed a significantly lower cost solution in lieu of signalization for the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Pristine. As previously suggested, it may be beneficial for the Black Bear Ridge Homeowner's Association to discuss this item with the developer, Stock Development and the other owners of the PUD. Keep in mind, as stated above,the County will not release the securities related to the escrow agreement until the improvements are 1 completed. It is important to remind everyone that we have no authority to modify the private agreement nor can we or should we use our administrative authority to force such modification. It was also helpful to get confirmation that the owners knew in advance as part of the title commitment that the obligation was disclosed in their purchase documents. Perhaps the recent meeting has opened up communication lines for all parties to come to the table to be able to complete the intersection improvement and put the concern to rest. We were happy to bring all the parties together to facilitate a transparent discussion. I encourage you to continue dialogue with Stock Development and your neighbors to achieve a solution. Please submit any additional inquires to Trinity Scott in order to facilitate a quicker response. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 �,ewCawMty Cc: Jamie French, GMD Deputy Department Head Michael Bosi, Planning&Zoning Director Amy Patterson, Capital Project Planning Trinity Scott,Transportation Planning Manager Bruce Anderson Barry Ernst George Vukobratovich Jorge Cepero Keith Gelder From: Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent:Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:07 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; KlatzkowJeff <JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Subject: FW: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Nick—it has been almost a week without a response from you on the questions in the attached letter. Kindly either respond, or let us know when we can expect a response. The answers to these questions are materially important to Black Bear Ridge's consideration of other pending matters that affect their community. Sincerely, Steve Bracci From:Steve Bracci Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 10:12 AM To: nickcasalanguida@colliergov.net; trinityscott@colliergov.net; KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Subject: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Dear Nick (with copy to others)— 2 Please see attached letter on behalf of Black Bear Ridge. Sincerely, Steve ,k Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 3 STEVEN J. BRACCI, PA A Professional Association Attorney at Law 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102 Naples,Florida 34109 Ph: (239)596-2635 Fax: (239)431-6045 steve@braccilaw.com www.braccilaw.com May 12, 2017 VIA E-MAIL ONLY nickcasalanguidacolliergov.net Nick Casalanguida, Deputy County Manager Collier County Government 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202 Naples, Florida 34112-5746 Re: Intersection of Pristine Drive and Vanderbilt Beach Road Black Bear Ridge Property Owner's Association, Inc. Wolf Creek PUD Vanderbilt Commons PUD Dear Mr. Casalanguida: Please accept this letter on behalf of Black Bear Ridge in follow-up to the meeting held on May 11, 2017,to discuss the intersection of Pristine Drive and Vanderbilt Beach Road. The proposal at the meeting was that county staff will support the construction of a westbound right-in turn lane, and an eastbound left-in turn lane, with requisite median modifications, and no traffic signal. The belief is that a traffic light will not be warranted now or in the future,and that this could be determined with finality by county board action at this time. Any future traffic signal would be a general county expense based on safety issues, under its police powers. At the meeting, you recounted a narrative about how during the Great Recession, the Vanderbilt Beach Road contractor who was working on the widening of VBR passed by the Pristine Drive intersection without making any turn lane improvements or median modifications because the Wolf Creek PUD developer had not yet paid for any intersection improvements. Thus, the developer (nebulously defined) should now pay for those improvements. Estimates at the meeting were that the Pristine/VBR intersection improvements could cost $200,000 on the low end, and $600,000 at the high end. The county, in turn, would pay additional Buckstone Road intersection improvements or modifications. You have previously asserted in writing, and at yesterday's meeting, that the county does not typically require developer sureties for future intersection improvements that may or may not be warranted in the future. Thus the reason why no surety was required by any Wolf Creek PUD developers in this instance. Nick Casalanguida,Deputy County Manager Page 2 These narratives seemingly contradict the enclosed Construction,Maintenance and Escrow Agreement for Subdivision Improvements (Infrastructure), dated August 30, 2005,by and between Buckstone Estates, LLC, and the Board of County Commissioners. You may know that Buckstone Estates was the original Black Bear Ridge developer. That escrow agreement, and its attached exhibit, specifically provide that $3,057,906.50 was placed in escrow by the Black Bear Ridge developer for certain "Required Improvements." This includes $270,000 line itemed for Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements including turn lanes, signalization, drainage and lighting. The escrow agreement further provided that the developer had 12 months to complete the improvements, failing which, the county could make immediate demand for the escrow funds and complete the work itself. This revelation prompts the following questions: 1. Is the $270,000,plus 10%retainage and any interest, still sitting in escrow? 2. If not,who released it and where did it go? 3. Why is the county stating that no funds were available when the VBR road contractor was working on the widening of VBR at the intersection of Pristine Drive? 4. Why did the county not make demand on the escrow deposit and instruct the contractor to install the intersection improvements at that time? 5. Why is Stock—who was at that meeting—not acknowledging the existence of these escrowed funds? It would appear that the escrowed funds more than adequately cover Black Bear Ridge's (theoretical) portion of any intersection improvements at Pristine Drive and Vanderbilt Beach Road. Its residents should not have to pay twice. Your prompt response to this letter is much appreciated. Sincerely, S EVEN J. BRACCI, PA Steven J. Bracci, Esq. cc: client Encl. LykinsDave From: Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 11:18 AM To: CasalanguidaNick; ScottTrinity Cc: FrenchJames; BosiMichael; PattersonAmy; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko; Keith Gelder (kgelder@stockdevelopment.com); KlatzkowJeff;AshtonHeidi; LykinsDave Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Nick, please be sure that the information Trinity circulates includes a breakdown of what elements the county proposes to pay for. This is part of what was requested below. Steve From: CasalanguidaNick [NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 10:53 AM To: Steve Bracci; ScottTrinity Cc: FrenchJames; BosiMichael; PattersonAmy; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko; Keith Gelder (kgelder©stockdevelopment.com); KlatzkowJeff; AshtonHeidi; LykinsDave Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/ Wolf Creek PUD / Pristine Drive Trinity, Please respond to Steven's questions 1 and 2. Please send the group a copy of the proposed improvements subject to a traffic safety and circulation study. Steven, My intention was to be fair to all parties and make sure there is complete transparency. I will not meet with any side individually to discuss this issue as you have requested. My staff may meet with them to go over specific project questions or traffic concerns. I will ask them to make sure that any information is shared accordingly. I smiled at Ms.Abrams when I made that comment as it was not meant to insult her. She has misinterpreted my comments several times in our communications. She is due my full respect as a taxpayer. I'm not going to comment on the remaining points in your email as they are subjective and not material. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 From:Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 9:51 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net> Cc: FrenchJames<jamesfrench@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; PattersonAmy <AmyPatterson@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko <George@welshfl.com>; Keith Gelder(kgelder@stockdevelopment.com) <kgelder@stockdevelopment.com>; KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave 1 <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Nick—your below response prompts a few more questions/comments so that Black Bear Ridge can understand this situation: 1. Has the county been working with the developer on these escrow items? If so: a. Who has it been working with? b. What communications has the county recently had with the developer on the release of any escrow line items? c. When was the last partial release from the escrow account, and for which line items? 2. Were the escrow funds that were line itemed for the Pristine Drive intersection based on the entire amount of the Pristine Road intersection improvements, or just Black Bear Ridge's pro rata portion? a. If the latter, did any other area developers establish surety escrows for Pristine Drive intersection improvements? b. If so, please provide copies. c. Please provide copies of any estimates of probable cost in the county's possession for the Pristine Drive line items as referenced in the Buckstone Estates escrow agreement. 3. The county's narrative has changed in your e-mail below. At the May 11 meeting, you stated that during the Great Recession,the road contractor was working on Vanderbilt Beach Road. When they got to the area of Pristine Drive, no developer funds were available, so the contractor just passed it by without making improvements. This is also what Terrie Abrams heard you say,thus her follow-up public records request to Trinity Scott asking for the roadway construction plans. 4. Black Bear Ridge notes your repeated theme of"buyer beware" with respect to the responsibility of the public to review and rely upon documents in the public records. This argument works in two directions 5. For the sake of everyone's clarity, please articulate in writing what the county proposes as a solution to the issue of Pristine Drive intersection improvements. Finally, three other comments that my client would like to convey with respect to the May 11 meeting are: (i) while you will likely couch it as the county trying to get everyone in the room together, the May 11 meeting was requested by Black Bear Ridge with you, Nick, and yet you felt compelled to instead invite a posse. Black Bear Ridge expects the same in return—specifically, that the county will reach out and invite Black Bear Ridge and its counsel to any meeting with a developer or property owner that has a direct or indirect impact on Black Bear Ridge. This includes meetings with Stock, George Vuko/Vanderbilt Commons, and Vanderbilt Preserve. (ii) During the meeting, you called my client, Ms.Terrie Abrams, a "worthy adversary." Ms. Abrams is none- too-pleased. Such a statement belies your role as a Deputy County Manager. When did a tax paying resident of Collier County trying to protect one's property rights and correct an apparent inequity become an "adversary" of the county? 2 (iii) At the May 11 meeting, my client also noted staffs institutional bullying whereby there was an implicit threat—and explicit suggestion --that the board of county commissioners might get angry with my client for protecting its property rights, and thus take board action contrary to the public interest simply to spite my client. If you wish me to elaborate further on this point, please let me know. Sincerely, Steve Bracci Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. From: CasalanguidaNick [mailto:NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net] Sent:Thursday, May 18, 2017 1:18 PM To:Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com> Cc: FrenchJames<iamesfrench@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; PattersonAmy <AmyPatterson@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinitvScott@colliergov.net>; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko <George@welshfl.com>; Keith Gelder(kgelder@stockdevelopment.com) <kgelder@stockdevelopment.com>; KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Steve: I apologize for not getting back to you sooner. I asked our staff to review the questions and confirm some of the information prior to responding. In your letter you requested a response to five specific questions. Please review the responses below. 1. Yes,the County still holds securities related to the Construction, Maintenance and Escrow Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, specifically line items identified in the Engineer's Opinion of Probable Costs for Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements. The amount would not be released until verification that the improvement has been completed. At that time, the security would be able to be reduced by the corresponding line item. 2. Securities have not been released per answer# 1. 3. The improvements were not included in the County's contract plans. The developers were to contract with the design engineer on their own, once they had plans they were to contract directly with the construction contractor. The County project was awarded in July 2004. In February 2007,the developers contracted with the 3 design engineer to prepare the intersection improvement plans. The plans were completed in April 2007 and provided to the developers to negotiate with construction contractor. It is our understanding that the developers could not come to an agreement with the contractor and the improvements did not proceed forward. Please keep in mind as we had discussed, once the County issues a notice to proceed for a construction project,we do not permit additional contractors to do work within the same area without the consent of the prime contractor. The developers did not have the benefit of soliciting bids if they were to construct concurrent with the County's project. The County did not have any funds to complete the developer required intersection improvements. Therefore, no funds were available to the County to complete the project. 4. The County has not typically demanded escrow deposits to complete development required improvements. During this timeframe,the Country was hit hard with the Great Recession, in which our community was not spared from these financial impacts. At that time the County was focused on maintaining our economy that revolved around tourism and construction. Furthermore, it was not the County's obligation to complete the intersection improvements. If the County were to demand the escrow and take the responsibility of completing this project,the County would have also taken on any cost overruns or change orders with no mechanism to be able to recover the funds from the developer.The County could have held certificates of occupancy for the development until the improvements were completed. However,that has not been a preferred method as it would hinder new homeowners who may already have loans in place from being able to get into their new constructed home. 5. We cannot speak for Stock. County staff has proposed a significantly lower cost solution in lieu of signalization for the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Pristine. As previously suggested, it may be beneficial for the Black Bear Ridge Homeowner's Association to discuss this item with the developer, Stock Development and the other owners of the PUD. Keep in mind, as stated above, the County will not release the securities related to the escrow agreement until the improvements are completed. It is important to remind everyone that we have no authority to modify the private agreement nor can we or should we use our administrative authority to force such modification. It was also helpful to get confirmation that the owners knew in advance as part of the title commitment that the obligation was disclosed in their purchase documents. Perhaps the recent meeting has opened up communication lines for all parties to come to the table to be able to complete the intersection improvement and put the concern to rest. We were happy to bring all the parties together to facilitate a transparent discussion. I encourage you to continue dialogue with Stock Development and your neighbors to achieve a solution. Please submit any additional inquires to Trinity Scott in order to facilitate a quicker response. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 Cc: Jamie French, GMD Deputy Department Head Michael Bosi, Planning&Zoning Director Amy Patterson, Capital Project Planning Trinity Scott,Transportation Planning Manager Bruce Anderson Barry Ernst George Vukobratovich Jorge Cepero 4 Keith Gelder From: Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent:Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:07 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguidac colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; KlatzkowJeff <JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Subject: FW: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Nick--it has been almost a week without a response from you on the questions in the attached letter. Kindly either respond, or let us know when we can expect a response. The answers to these questions are materially important to Black Bear Ridge's consideration of other pending matters that affect their community. Sincerely, Steve Bracci From:Steve Bracci Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 10:12 AM To: nickcasalanguida@colliergov.net; trinityscott@colliergov.net; KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Subject: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Dear Nick (with copy to others)— Please see attached letter on behalf of Black Bear Ridge. Sincerely, Steve ,., • Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. 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. 5 LykinsDave From: faye.collettsutton@louisville.edu Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 9:48 PM To: LykinsDave; SaundersBurt Subject: Excellent Town Hall Meeting Tonight Commissioner Saunders and Dave: I attended your Town Hall Meeting tonight and thought it was an excellent summary of planned development and transportation issues that our area is and will be experiencing as we grow. I learned a lot and felt it was well worth my time just for that reason. It was evident that you and all the staff in attendance had spent substantial time in preparation as your all's presentations and handouts were informative and very much appreciated. I thought that the openness and receptiveness on the part of the staff to listen intently and engage openly with the residents in attendance promoted constructive dialogue (one of your specialties Commissioner). I know that the staff are used to opinionated and annoyed citizenry voicing their concerns but I was particularly appreciative with how they/you encouraged residents to speak and share their concerns/issues and become engaged in the political process. You/staff documented tonight that you are there to find balanced solutions for the problems that come with growth and governing. Living in the area, Black Bear Ridge, I, too, am concerned that the County continue to focus on solving transportation issues that are already impacting our mobility, safety and pocketbooks especially as it relates to loop or connector roads that move traffic off of and between Immokalee and Vanderbilt Beach Roads. Again,thank you for hosting the Town Hall tonight, and I hope that you will host additional forums in the future. I would appreciate it if you would forward this to the staff in attendance tonight as I appreciate them giving up their evening to share and engage with us. Faye DR. FAYE SUTTON Professor Emerita 7311 Acorn Way Naples, FL 34119 239-405-5199 AMERICAN PROUD 1 LykinsDave From: ScottTrinity Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 3:33 PM To: CasalanguidaNick; Steve Bracci Cc: FrenchJames; BosiMichael; PattersonAmy; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko; Keith Gelder (kgelder@stockdevelopment.com); KlatzkowJeff; AshtonHeidi; LykinsDave Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Attachments: Exhibit_B_5-9-17.pdf; Exhibit_A_5-9-17.pdf; Black Bear Ridge 1 CME OPC.PDF All, I have coordinated with our Growth Management Department team for the responses to questions 1 and 2. In addition, attached please find the concepts that were discussed at the prior meeting. 1. Has the county been working with the developer on these escrow items? If so:The Growth Management Department Development Review Division (DRD) has been going through the final acceptance process for Black Bear Ridge and this issue has come up as needing to be resolved prior to final acceptance. Other improvements associated with the subdivision have been found to be in substantial compliance. This issue is the only remaining item to complete the final acceptance of the Black Bear Ridge subdivision. DRD inspections staff has had several conversations with Stock and their Engineer(JREvans) regarding the requirement for off-site improvements. a. Who has it been working with? DRD staff have made Stock and their Engineer aware of this issue. b. What communications has the county recently had with the developer on the release of any escrow line items?There has not been a request for release of any escrowed funds since the original reduction in 2006. c. When was the last partial release from the escrow account, and for which line items?Sept. 18, 2006 was the last reduction. Line items reduced at that time included some off site improvements as well as the standard, paving, drainage and utilities completed. This has been the only reduction in the original security of$3,057,906.50. Remaining funds in escrow= $816,420.81 2. Were the escrow funds that were line itemed for the Pristine Drive intersection based on the entire amount of the Pristine Road intersection improvements, or just Black Bear Ridge's pro rata portion?The engineer's probable opinion of costs identifies turn lanes (WB, RT, EB, LT), signalization, side drain drainage and lighting for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersections Improvements which appear to be for all the required off site improvements. a. If the latter, did any other area developers establish surety escrows for Pristine Drive intersection improvements? DRD staff is unaware of other developer's established securities for these improvements. b. If so, please provide copies. c. Please provide copies of any estimates of probable cost in the county's possession for the Pristine Drive line items as referenced in the Buckstone Estates escrow agreement.The engineer's probable opinion of costs(attached as part of the CME) identifies turn lanes(WB, RT, EB, LT), signalization, side drain 1 drainage and lighting for the Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersections Improvements associated with Black Bear Ridge Phase One totaling$270,000.00. Best Regards, Trinity Scott, Transportation Planning Manager Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees & Program Management Division Telephone: 239.252.5832; Fax: 239.252.6610 trinityscott@colliergov.net From: CasalanguidaNick Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 10:53 AM To: Steve Bracci; ScottTrinity Cc: FrenchJames; BosiMichael; PattersonAmy; rbanderson@inapleslaw.com; George Vuko; Keith Gelder (kgelder(astockdevelopment.com); KlatzkowJeff; AshtonHeidi; LykinsDave Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/ Wolf Creek PUD / Pristine Drive Trinity, Please respond to Steven's questions 1 and 2. Please send the group a copy of the proposed improvements subject to a traffic safety and circulation study. Steven, My intention was to be fair to all parties and make sure there is complete transparency. I will not meet with any side individually to discuss this issue as you have requested. My staff may meet with them to go over specific project questions or traffic concerns. I will ask them to make sure that any information is shared accordingly. I smiled at Ms. Abrams when I made that comment as it was not meant to insult her. She has misinterpreted my comments several times in our communications. She is due my full respect as a taxpayer. I'm not going to comment on the remaining points in your email as they are subjective and not material. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 er Ca►�nt�y From: Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 9:51 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida(a@colliergov.net> Cc: FrenchJames<iamesfrench@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; PattersonAmy <AmyPatterson@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko <George@welshfl.com>; Keith Gelder(kgelder@stockdevelopment.com) <kgelder@stockdevelopment.com>; KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive 2 Nick—your below response prompts a few more questions/comments so that Black Bear Ridge can understand this situation: 1. Has the county been working with the developer on these escrow items? If so: a. Who has it been working with? b. What communications has the county recently had with the developer on the release of any escrow line items? c. When was the last partial release from the escrow account, and for which line items? 2. Were the escrow funds that were line itemed for the Pristine Drive intersection based on the entire amount of the Pristine Road intersection improvements, or just Black Bear Ridge's pro rata portion? a. If the latter, did any other area developers establish surety escrows for Pristine Drive intersection improvements? b. If so, please provide copies. c. Please provide copies of any estimates of probable cost in the county's possession for the Pristine Drive line items as referenced in the Buckstone Estates escrow agreement. 3. The county's narrative has changed in your e-mail below. At the May 11 meeting, you stated that during the Great Recession,the road contractor was working on Vanderbilt Beach Road. When they got to the area of Pristine Drive, no developer funds were available, so the contractor just passed it by without making improvements. This is also what Terrie Abrams heard you say,thus her follow-up public records request to Trinity Scott asking for the roadway construction plans. 4. Black Bear Ridge notes your repeated theme of"buyer beware" with respect to the responsibility of the public to review and rely upon documents in the public records. This argument works in two directions 5. For the sake of everyone's clarity, please articulate in writing what the county proposes as a solution to the issue of Pristine Drive intersection improvements. Finally,three other comments that my client would like to convey with respect to the May 11 meeting are: (i) while you will likely couch it as the county trying to get everyone in the room together,the May 11 meeting was requested by Black Bear Ridge with you, Nick, and yet you felt compelled to instead invite a posse. Black Bear Ridge expects the same in return—specifically,that the county will reach out and invite Black Bear Ridge and its counsel to any meeting with a developer or property owner that has a direct or indirect impact on Black Bear Ridge. This includes meetings with Stock, George Vuko/Vanderbilt Commons, and Vanderbilt Preserve. (ii) During the meeting, you called my client, Ms.Terrie Abrams, a "worthy adversary." Ms. Abrams is none- too-pleased. Such a statement belies your role as a Deputy County Manager. When did a tax paying resident of Collier County trying to protect one's property rights and correct an apparent inequity become an "adversary" of the county? (iii) At the May 11 meeting, my client also noted staff's institutional bullying whereby there was an implicit threat—and explicit suggestion --that the board of county commissioners might get angry with my client for 3 protecting its property rights, and thus take board action contrary to the public interest simply to spite my client. If you wish me to elaborate further on this point, please let me know. Sincerely, Steve Bracci \* Ps. fir Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court,Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. From: CasalanguidaNick [mailto:NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net] Sent:Thursday, May 18, 2017 1:18 PM To: Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com> Cc: FrenchJames<jamesfrench@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael<MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; PattersonAmy <AmvPatterson@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; George Vuko <George@welshfl.com>; Keith Gelder(kgelder@stockdevelopment.com) <kgelder@stockdevelopment.com>; KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLvkins@colliergov.net> Subject: RE: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Steve: I apologize for not getting back to you sooner. I asked our staff to review the questions and confirm some of the information prior to responding. In your letter you requested a response to five specific questions. Please review the responses below. 1. Yes,the County still holds securities related to the Construction, Maintenance and Escrow Agreement for Subdivision Improvements, specifically line items identified in the Engineer's Opinion of Probable Costs for Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements. The amount would not be released until verification that the improvement has been completed. At that time, the security would be able to be reduced by the corresponding line item. 2. Securities have not been released per answer#1. 4 3. The improvements were not included in the County's contract plans. The developers were to contract with the design engineer on their own, once they had plans they were to contract directly with the construction contractor. The County project was awarded in July 2004. In February 2007,the developers contracted with the design engineer to prepare the intersection improvement plans. The plans were completed in April 2007 and provided to the developers to negotiate with construction contractor. It is our understanding that the developers could not come to an agreement with the contractor and the improvements did not proceed forward. Please keep in mind as we had discussed, once the County issues a notice to proceed for a construction project,we do not permit additional contractors to do work within the same area without the consent of the prime contractor. The developers did not have the benefit of soliciting bids if they were to construct concurrent with the County's project. The County did not have any funds to complete the developer required intersection improvements. Therefore, no funds were available to the County to complete the project. 4. The County has not typically demanded escrow deposits to complete development required improvements. During this timeframe,the Country was hit hard with the Great Recession, in which our community was not spared from these financial impacts. At that time the County was focused on maintaining our economy that revolved around tourism and construction. Furthermore, it was not the County's obligation to complete the intersection improvements. If the County were to demand the escrow and take the responsibility of completing this project,the County would have also taken on any cost overruns or change orders with no mechanism to be able to recover the funds from the developer.The County could have held certificates of occupancy for the development until the improvements were completed. However, that has not been a preferred method as it would hinder new homeowners who may already have loans in place from being able to get into their new constructed home. 5. We cannot speak for Stock. County staff has proposed a significantly lower cost solution in lieu of signalization for the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Pristine. As previously suggested, it may be beneficial for the Black Bear Ridge Homeowner's Association to discuss this item with the developer, Stock Development and the other owners of the PUD. Keep in mind, as stated above,the County will not release the securities related to the escrow agreement until the improvements are completed. It is important to remind everyone that we have no authority to modify the private agreement nor can we or should we use our administrative authority to force such modification. It was also helpful to get confirmation that the owners knew in advance as part of the title commitment that the obligation was disclosed in their purchase documents. Perhaps the recent meeting has opened up communication lines for all parties to come to the table to be able to complete the intersection improvement and put the concern to rest. We were happy to bring all the parties together to facilitate a transparent discussion. I encourage you to continue dialogue with Stock Development and your neighbors to achieve a solution. Please submit any additional inquires to Trinity Scott in order to facilitate a quicker response. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 f ew Lcrw�ty Cc: Jamie French, GMD Deputy Department Head Michael Bosi, Planning&Zoning Director Amy Patterson, Capital Project Planning Trinity Scott,Transportation Planning Manager Bruce Anderson 5 Barry Ernst George Vukobratovich Jorge Cepero Keith Gelder From:Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent:Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:07 AM To: CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; KlatzkowJeff <JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>;AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Subject: FW: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Nick—it has been almost a week without a response from you on the questions in the attached letter. Kindly either respond, or let us know when we can expect a response. The answers to these questions are materially important to Black Bear Ridge's consideration of other pending matters that affect their community. Sincerely, Steve Bracci From: Steve Bracci Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 10:12 AM To: nickcasalanguida@colliergov.net;trinityscott@colliergov.net; KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Subject: Black Bear Ridge/Wolf Creek PUD/ Pristine Drive Dear Nick (with copy to others)— Please see attached letter on behalf of Black Bear Ridge. Sincerely, Steve 4 f _ 4} r Y+ t` +t Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. 6 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. 7 �1 1 I 1 I 111 a tixf 1 .I II r I 1 ,I IIi I I f u 1�i I e h p , / w 1 4 14. 1. 1 1 -10 1 O s , m 4„, ,, a t�+, I i e PRISTINE DRIVE ____..... ..,...___,,r..: - i Ivr Z k l I 4,,,, ._ S y ( i —0. - H ,1 m n in z o t - ri >;I 1 o 11 r D .7., I I yy Z O rI,I "- III c ff S 1'IIF I ` =� O > C 1 ". Z C) 1;- > z COTi H r °j s 1 3 II; 0 p;`t CO fZ0 i i t'.. ilft m m p #Iii; ,— 11 I I,_ = C m 111; 1: a mI 1 0 C iii C 1' . Z III r 0 r 111 1 , T D N Z iii ; I;' e Z m �. viii iI ' r D1111 ''I ,1 I1 Z I I I I 11 I m gJ!i /' 1I ill 7 li;i i i i q 1111 I11 fl M ti !y 11 LI4: ' 11 73 0I iii ''' 0 t1 iii l i I, m1 i CJ I!11 I1� II I i 1 1 1 Y LI It'II i y i i i! Y ,'Ill if 1 e F, UCKSTONE . ,4. CP D 11/11 R M � I11 11 1 ,-- I` 1i wI1 I I it yti` \ I I'fi I Ill'llyI'Iill i 1 0 1111 A "' ;IIII1 o I i i 1 9/Ii i i qi I11 u i1 1 O II 1111 z ilii 'II I I' I II:1 1ri I II 1 .. /� 81, I I I 1 II I q�' � .' 11 I I I 1 111 ,y r, 1 p 1 n 91.1 I,ii i II 1. a' .', I I I I D i� AI I 1 i/ II I I I/.. _ . R .a' air (7)r a Z ': ; m m Z Z , m e I Z W ,,.� O ,wD Z �' mm C) IA I IW I yl lig K� 11 IIS PRISTINE DRIV Z ° .1 _ 44 ViiFt(IL * A� m II �'1 I Y,' - — — L.--.7.--, `, I'"--I./ A lr n: , 1 T 1 I .., RI r A. I __ ( $1 4 mco g IT :I 1 . In .11 ti j 7:11,I � 1 I III> NW } V, 1 • ' g-• • ....dell AM ' -0 11111 Aa '"'S�"- ' O III 1 NI 8 �— _ ----,,,i -1 III ' 4 1 ii 4' s �c k 1 , ii r 0 n __ D Ili lilt! -ti BUCKSTONE DRIVE g a IIL! d ........i: , l'..11 ll ;I ,I in, nr/. z B I Ili I 1 I 1: „ :- 1- -- 1'. ,Evi 4'" + ...;- '-, 1 COLLIER BLVD (CR 951) 1 m , .. - �4"" .I CONSTRUCTION,MAINTENANCE AND ESCROW AGREEMENT FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS-(INFRASTRUCTURE) • THIS AGREEMENT entered into this 30' day of August, 2005 by Buckstone Estates, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (hereinafter "Developer"), THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (hereinafter the "Board"), and Orion Bank, a Florida banking corporation(hereinafter"Lender"). RECITALS ORIGINAL A. Developer has, simultaneously with the delivery of this Agreement, applied for the approval by the Board of a certain plat of a subdivision to be known as: Black Bear Ridge. B. The subdivision will include certain improvements which are required by Collier County ordinances, as set forth in a site construction cost estimate ("Estimate") prepared by Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit 1. For purposes of this Agreement, the "Required Improvements" are limited to those described in the Estimate. C. Sections 10.02.05 and 10.02.04 of the Collier County Subdivision Code Division of the Unified Land Development Code require the Developer to provide appropriate guarantees for the construction and maintenance of the Required Improvements. D. Lender has entered into a construction loan agreement with Developer dated June 2, 2005 (the"Construction Loan") to fund the cost of the Required Improvements. E. Developer and the Board have acknowledged that the amount Developer is required to guarantee pursuant to this Agreement is THREE MILLION FIFTY-SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIX AND 50/100 DOLLARS ($3,057,906.50), and this amount represents 110% of the Developer's engineer's estimate of the construction costs for the Required Improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing premises and mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, Developer, the Board and the Lender do hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. Developer will cause the water, sewer, roads, drainage, and like facilities, the Required Improvements, to be constructed pursuant to specifications that have been approved by the Development Services Director within 12 months from the date of approval of said subdivision plat. 2. Developer hereby authorizes Lender to hold THREE MILLION FIFTY-SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIX AND 50/100 DOLLARS ($3,057,906.50) from the Construction Loan, in escrow, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The urreut Orion Bank account number for this account is 8500006690. 3. Lender agrees to hold in escrow THREE MILLION FIFTY-SEVEN SVP ss� mos-- THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIX AND 50/100 DOLLARS ($3,057,906.50) from the Construction Loan, to be disbursed only pursuant to this Agreement. Lender acknowledges that this Agreement shall not constitute a draw against the Construction Loan fund, but that only such funds as are actually disbursed, whether pursuant to this Agreement or a provision of the Construction Loan, shall accrue interest. 4. The escrowed funds shall be released to the Developer only upon written approval of the Development Services Director who shall approve the release of the funds on deposit not more than once a month to the Developer, in amounts due for work done to date based on the percentage completion of the work multiplied by the respective work costs less ten percent (10%); and further, that upon completion of the work, the Development Services Director shall approve the release of any remainder of escrowed funds except to the extent of $305,790.65 which shall remain in escrow as a Developer guaranty of maintenance of the Required Improvements for a minimum period of one (1) year pursuant to Paragraph 10 of the Agreement. However, in the event that Developer shall fail to comply with the requirements of this Agreement, then the Lender agrees to pay to the County immediately upon demand the balance of the funds held in escrow by the Lender, as of the date of the demand, provided that upon payment of such balance to the County, the County will have executed and delivered to the Lender in exchange for such funds a statement to be signed by the Development Services Director to the effect that: (a) Developer for more than sixty (60) days after written notification of such failure has failed to comply with the requirements of this agreement; (b) The County, or its authorized agent, will complete the work called for under the terms of the above-mentioned contract or will complete such portion of such work as the County, in its sole discretion shall deem necessary in the public interest to the extent of the funds then held in escrow; (c) The escrow funds drawn down by the County shall be used for construction of the Required Improvements engineering, legal and contingent costs and expenses, and to offset any damages, either direct or consequential, which the County may sustain on account of the failure of the Developer to carry out and execute the above-mentioned development work; and, (d) The County will promptly repay to the Lender any portion of the funds drawn down and not expended in completion of the said development work. 5. Written notice to the Lender by the County specifying what amounts are to be paid to the Developer shall constitute authorization by the County to the Lender for release of the specified funds to the Developer. Payment by the Lender to the Developer of the amounts specified in a letter of authorization by the County to the Lender shall constitute a release by the County and Developer of the Lender for the funds disbursed in accordance with the letter of authorization from the County. 6. The Required Improvements shall not be considered complete until a statement of substantial completion by Developer's engineer along with the final project records have been furnished to be reviewed and approved by the Development Services Director for compliance with the Collier County Subdivision Regulations. 7. The County Manager or his designee shall, within sixty(60) days of receipt of the statement of substantial completion, either: a) notify the Developer in writing of his preliminary approval of the improvements; or b) notify the Developer in writing of his refusal to approve the improvements, therewith specifying those conditions which the Developer must fulfill in order to obtain the Director of the Required Improvements. However, in no event shall the Development Services Director refuse preliminary approval of the improvements if they are in fact constructed and submitted for approval in accordance with the requirements of this Agreement. 8. Should the funds held in escrow be insufficient to complete the Required Improvements, the Board, after duly considering the public interest, may at its option complete the Required Improvements and resort to any and all legal remedies against the Developer. 9. Nothing in this Agreement shall make the Lender liable for any funds other than those placed in deposit by the Developer in accordance with the foregoing provision; provided, that the Lender does not release any monies to the Developer or to any other person except as stated in this Escrow Agreement to include closing the account or disbursing any funds from the account without first requesting and received written approval from the County. 10. The Developer shall maintain all Required Improvement for one year after preliminary approval by the County Manager or his designee. After the one year maintenance period by the Developer and upon submission of a written request for inspection, the Development Services Director shall inspect the Required Improvements and, if found to be still in compliance with the Code as reflected by final approval by the Board, the Lender's responsibility to the Board under this Agreement is terminated. The Developer's responsibility for maintenance of the Required Improvements shall continue unless or until the Board accepts maintenance responsibility for and by the County. 11. All of the terms, covenants and conditions herein contained are and shall be binding upon the respective successors and assigns of the Developer and the Lender. (Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank-Signatures Begin on Next Page) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board and the Develoer have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized-representatives this so"( day o July, 2005. DEVELOPER: BUCKSTONE ESTATES,LLC, a Florida limited liability company ice+— P By: Catalina Land Group, (P IRMS1r T6?. Y .17 ' a Florida corporation, its Manager (Print Name: ft'D-XL, et. _t ) By: `,42s� W L. Hoover,President LENDER: Orion Bank, J� a Florida banking corporation • L/A4 . I r' ' 6.-- ` By:CZ ' Mil Rat", Name: let rg r e X !1C "-L.L[..e•L (Print Name:. Brandy A. Rosc}1Ke Title: S MG,c Pre ei'tts,bar- . ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA Q. 1.411; .JAOCK,Clerk -"‘` ..' '',..el,%, • %.---il_t_a_, LA), CjiritSk. qt 'C1eci ` Chairman 1 et .-s i ga �-u ar, �✓ .1j - "FE--1) Li . CyL proved 4s40(form and legal sufficiency: � A• r Assistant County A :lvey JIvn, 1 x,12. A. ..nc eD i . S Ctrg Clien FWdaNkwer8I. Nor RAF Sub:Im WINM:Co MwKttme.td Etrrott Apttirtent for SuFdititian Improtetzms dor Black Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget Off-site Improvements (PRISTINE DRIVE) %PROGRESS BUDGET Site Work Quantity Unit Price Total AS OF 945-06 CONSUMED 1 Clearing and Grubbing 2 AC $3,500.00 $7,000.00 100% $7,000.00 2 Silt Fence 2,800 IF $1.50 $4,200.00 100% $4,200.00 3 Fill 8,500 CY $9.00 $76,500.00 100% $76,500.00 4 Final Grade 1 LS $6,500.00 $6,500.00 100% $6,500.00 5 Valley Gutter 2,700 IF $5.50 $14,850.00 100% $14,850.00 6 8"Litnerock Base(compacted and primed) 4,800 SY $7.50 $36,000.00 100% $36,000.00 7 12"Stabilized Subgrade 5,750 SY $2.25 512,937.50 100% $12,937.50 8 3"Asphalt 4,800 SY $8.50 540,800.00 60% $24,480.00 9 Signing&pavement markings 1 LS $6,500.00 $6,500.00 0% $0.00 10 Sodding 5,800 SY $1.50 $8,700.00 0% $0.00 11 5'Wide Concrete Sidewalk 1,500 SY $16.50 $24,750.00 0% $0.00 12 4"Limerock(under sidewalk) 1,500 SY $4.50 $6,750.00 0% $0.00 13 Maintenance of Traffic 1 IS $2,500.00 $2,500.00 100% $2,500.00 Sub-total 5247,987.50 Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements Quanti Unit Price Total I Turn Lanes Complete(WB Rt,EB Li) 2 IS $40,000.00 $80,000.00 0% $0.00 2 Signalization I IS $130,000.00 $130,000.00 0% $0.00 3 Side Drain Drainage(4 DBI,DBL run 36") 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 100% $35,000.00 4 Lighting 1 IS $25,000.00 $25,000.00 0% $0.00 Sub-total • $270,000.00 Sanitary Sewer 1 uanti Unit Price Total 1 8"PVC Force Main(C-900 Class 200) 1,400 LF $20.00 $28,000.00 100% $28,000.00 2 8"Plug Valve w/Box 2 EA $1,380.00 $2,760.00 100% $2,760.00 3 Hot Tap Future 16"Force Main on VBR 1 LS $5,500.00 $5,500.00 100% $5,500.00 Sub-total $36,260.00 Water Main I uanti Unit Price Total Hot Tap Existing 30"Reinf Cone Water Main 1 _ (or ah=j/b and tap new prop 24"wm) 1 LS $35,000.00 $35,000.00 100% $35,000.00 2 12"PVC Water Main(CL 200) 1,400 IF $25.50 $35,700.00 100% $35,700.00 3 12"Gate Valve w/Box 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000.00 100% $3,000.00 4 Fire Hydrant(Complete Assembly) 2 FA $2,400.00 54,800.00 100% $4,800.00 5 Permanent Bacterial Sample Point 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00 100% $1,000.00 6 Temporary Bacterial Sample Point 1 EA $900.00 $900.00 100% $900.00 7 Air Release Valve 2 EA $1,550.00 $3,100.00 100% $3,100.00 Sub-Total $83,500.00 Drainage Quanti Unit Price Total 1 Control Structure 1 EA $4,000.00 $4,000.00 100% $4,000.00 2 15"RCP 100 LF $23.00 S2,300.00 100% $2,300.00 3 18"RCP 350 IF $25.00 $8,750.00 100% $8,750.00 4 24"RCP 1,200 IF $34.00 $40,800.00 100% $40,800.00 5 Valley Gutter Throat Inlet 6 EA $2,000.00 $12,000.00 100% $12,000.00 6 Grate Inlet 4 EA $1,700.00 $6,800.00 100% $6,800.00 7 Junction Box 8 EA $1,850.00 $14,800.00 100% $14,800.00 8 15"Flared End Section 1 EA $900.00 S900.00 100% $900.00 Sub-Total $90,350.00 Off-SiteTotals $728,097.50 59% $430,077.50 9/15/2006 Black Bear Rid2e-Phase I Budget Paving , %PROGRESS BUDGET Item-Pavin_ Quanti Unit Price Total AS OF 9-15-06 CONSUMED 1 Valley Gutter 8,546 LF $5.50 $47,003.00 100% $47,003.00 2 Valley Crossing 300 LF $15.00 $4,500.00 100% $4,500.00 3 Type"A"Curb 210 LF $7.25 $1,522.50 100% $1,522.50 4 Type"D"Curb 0 IF $8.70 $0.00 100% $0.00 5 1 1/2"Asphaltic Concrete(Type S-III)(2 lifts) 9,159 SY $5.20 $47,626.80 50% $23,813.40 6 6"Iimerock Base(compacted and primed) 9,159 SY $6.75 $61,823.25 100% $61,823.25 7 12"Stabilized Subgrade 12,272 SY $2.25 $27,612.00 100% $27,612.00 8 5'Concrete Sidewalk 4,745 SY $16.50 $78,292.50 0% $0.00 9 4"Limerock(under sidewalk) 4,745 SY $4.50 $21,352.50 0% $0.00 10 Signing&Pavement Markings 1 LS $7,000.00 57,000.00 0% $0.00 11 Sodding(sod strip behind curb) 950 SY $1.50 $1,425.00 0% $0.00 Total $298,157.55 $166,274.15 9/15/2006 Black Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget Wastewater Collection System %PROGRESS BUDGET Item-Sanitary Sewer Quantity Unit Price Total AS OF 9-15.06 CONSUMED i1 Pump Station(complete) 1 EA $85,000.00 $85,000.00 80% $68,000.00 2 6"C900 DR 14 PVC Force Main 100 LF $12.50 $1,250.00 100% $1,250.00 3 Force Main Connection to Offsite(includes valve) 1 LS $3,000.00 33,000.00 100% $3,000.00 4 8"PVC Sanitary Sewer(0-6'Cut) 820 LF $18.00 S14,760.00 100% $14,760.00 5 8"PVC Sanitary Sewer(6-8'Cut) 800 LF $20.00 $16,000.00 50% $8,000.00 6 8"PVC Sanitary Sewer(8-10'Cut) 520 LF $22.00 $11,440.00 100% $11,440.00 7 8"PVC Sanitary Sewer(10-12'Cut) 480 LF $25.00 $12,000.00 100% $12,000.00 8 8"PVC Sanitary Sewer(12-14'Cut) 510 1F $30.00 315,300.00 100% $15,300.00 9 8"PVC Sanitary Sewer(14-16'Cut) 515 LF $35.00 $18,025.00 100% $18,025.00 10 TrcnchingforRock 3,645 LF $22.00 $80,190.00 100% $80,190.00 11 Manhole 4'Diameter(0-6') 3 EA $2,160.00 $6,480.00 100% $6,480.00 12 Manhole 4'Diameter(6-8') 3 EA $3,100.00 $9,300.00 100% $9,300.00 13 Manhole 4'Diameter(8-10) 1 EA $3,500.00 $3,500.00 100% $3,500.00 14 Manhole 4'Diameter(10-12') 3 EA $5,400.00 $16,200.00 100% $16,200.00 15 Manhole 4'Diameter(12-14`) 2 EA $6,300.00 $12,600.00 100% $12,600.00 16 Manhole 4'Diameter(14-16') 2 EA $7,500.00 $15,000.00 100% $15,000.00 17 Single Sewer Service 67 EA $500.00 $33,500.00 100% $33,500.00 18 Television Inspection(Preliminary&Final) 3,645 LF $3.00 $10,935.00 100% $10,935.00 19 20 Total $364,480.00 $339,480.00 9/15/2006 Black Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget D rainage System %PROGRESS BUDGET Item-Drains:e Quanti Unit Price Total AS OF 9.15-06 CONSUMED --.-...... I Control Structure 2 EA $4,000.00 $8,000.00 100% 58,000.00 2 15"RCP 964 LF $23.00 $22,172.00 100% $22,172.00 3 18"RCP 822 LF $25.00 $20,550.00 100% $20,550.00 4 24"RCP 235 LF $34.00 $7,990.00 100% $7,990.00 5 30"RCP 1,220 LF $52.50 $64,050.00 100% $64,050.00 6 36"RCP 1,100 LF $70.00 $77,000.00 100% $77,000.00 7 42"RCP 210 LF $83.00 $17,430.00 100% $17,430.00 8 12"HDPE 2,914 LF $18.00 352,452.00 100% $52,452.00 9 24"Flared End Section 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00 100% $1,000.00 10 30"Flared End Section 1 EA $1,200.00 $1,200.00 100% $1,200.00 11 36"Flared End Section 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000.00 100% $3,000.00 12 42"Flared End Section 1 EA $1,900.00 $1,900.00 100% $1,900.00 13 Valley Gutter Throat Inlet 21 EA $2,000.00 $42,000.00 100% $42,000.00 14 Grate Inlet 15 EA $1,700.00 $25,500.00 100% $25,500.00 15 Junction Box 5 EA $1,850.00 $9,250.00 100% $9,250.00 16 Yard Drain 13 EA 5400.00 $5,200.00 0% $0.00 17 Type X Inlet 14 EA $485.00 $6,790.00 0% $0.00 100% $0.00 Total 065,484.00 $353,494.00 9/15/2006 $lack Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget Potable Water Distribution System %PROGRESS BUDGET - Item-Water it uanti Unit Price Total AS OF 8-15.06 CONSUMED I Single Water Service 4 EA $400.00 $1,600.00 100% $1,600.00 2 Double Water Service 48 EA $700.00 $33,600.00 100% $33,600.00 3 Water Service Casings 834 LF $4.00 $3,336.00 100% $3,338.00 3 Hot Tap Existing Water Main on Inner Loop Rd(contingent loop) I EA $4,500.00 54,500.00 100% $4,500.00 4 Water main connection to North-South Rd 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 100% $3,000.00 5 8"PVC Water Main(CL 150) 4,860 LF $16.00 $77,760.00 100% $77,760.00 6 8"Gate Valve w/Box 5 EA $1,280.00 56,400.00 100% $6,400.00 7 Fire Hydrant(Complete Assembly) 11 EA $2,400.00 526,400.00 100% $26,400.00 8 Permanent Bacterial Sample Point 4 EA $1,000.00 $4,000.00 100% $4,000.00 9 Temporary Bacterial Sample Point 4 EA $900.00 $3,600.00 100% $3,600.00 10 8"Temporary Blow Off 2 EA $1,500.00 $3,000.00 100% $3,000.00 11 Air Release Valve 4 EA $1,550.00 $6,200.00 100% $6,200.00 Total $173,396.00 $173,396.00 Page 1 of l 9/15/2006 Black Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget Earthwork&Cleating %PROGRESS BUDGET Item-Earthwork&Clearin: 1 uanti Unit Price Total AS OF 9-15-06 CONSUMED 1 Clearing and Grubbing 32.3 AC $3,500.00 $113,120.00 100% $113,120.00 2 Clearing and Grubbing(Exotics Removal) 7.19 AC $5,000.00 $35,950.00 100% $35,950.00 Lake Excavation(includes blasting and rock 3 crushing) 74,600 CY $4.00 $298,400.00 100% $298,400.00 4 Fill Placement and Grading 74,600 CY $2.00 $149,200.00 100% $149,200.00 5 imported Fill Placed and Graded 25,400 CY n/a $0.00 100% $0.00 6 Sod(lake banks) 6,700 SY $1.90 $12,730.00 50% $6,365.00 Erosion Control-Silt Fence 8,200 LF $1.50 $12,300.00 100% $12,300.00 Total $621,700.00 $615,335.00 Page 1 of 1 9/15/2006 LykinsDave From: Keith Gelder <kgelder@stockdevelopment.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 4:46 PM To: CasalanguidaNick; rbanderson@napleslaw.com; ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com; George Vuko; Steve Bracci; Terrie Abrams Cc: KlatzkowJeff; ScottTrinity; FrenchJames; LykinsDave Subject: RE: Zoning applications at Vanderbilt and Collier Nick, We are agreeable to covering the Black Bear portion under the cost sharing agreement, assuming that George Vuko is willing to construct the VBR westbound right turn lane. I believe that is the case based on our prior discussions.Thanks. Keith Gelder Vice President of Land Stock Development, LLC 2639 Professional Circle,Suite 101 Naples, FL 34119 (239)449-5227 Office (239)280-6504 Cell Email: kgelder@stockdevelopment.com From: CasalanguidaNick [mailto:NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net] Sent: Wednesday,June 14, 2017 10:55 AM To: rbanderson@napleslaw.com; ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com; Keith Gelder<kgelder@stockdevelopment.com>; George Vuko <George@welshfl.com>; Steve Bracci<steve@braccilaw.com>; Terrie Abrams<terrie.abrams@gmail.com> Cc: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net>; ScottTrinity<TrinityScott@colliergov.net>; FrenchJames <jamesfrench@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: Zoning applications at Vanderbilt and Collier All: It is my understanding that Stock has agreed to cover Black Bear Ridge's commitments to cost sharing. Let me know if I am incorrect. With that out of the way, I understand that George's project will continue to go through the public process and there may be another owner that is moving forward also. My outstanding item is the final configuration, construction timing, and identification of obligated parties for the access improvements without a signal. Please continue to work with Trinity to resolve this item. Thank you, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 ar C:rnsnty 1 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 LykinsDave From: marc alien <mallencny@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 8:07 AM To: SaundersBurt Subject: PDI PL20160000404 Wolf Creek RPUD preserve reduction Re: PDI - PL20160000404: Wolf Creek RPUD by the developer of parcels 3b and 9 to reduce preserves Dear Commissioner Saunders, First, let me be clear, I am not against development, nor against this developer's right to develop his property. The property is, however, within a residential planned urban development, Wolf Creek, and development should be in keeping with the agreements and ordinances associated with the RPUD, and should be compatible with other developments in the RPUD. There are two facets to this proposal; preserve reduction and residential density, although only one is being considered with this PDI. To be properly assessed the project should be looked at in its entirety, not piecemeal. Please consider the following: With respect to the preserves: There were no excess preserves or excess native vegetation prior to 2013 when a portion of Palermo Cove was brought into the Wolf Creek PUD. As noted in the CCPC minutes of 3/21/2013, it was intended that there be no net effect upon preserves and no increase in density in the Wolf Creek RPUD and Palermo Cove PUD, with the 2013 WCPUD and Palermo Cove amendments. Thus, the apparent "excess" should not have existed. The excess appeared when the required preserves for SFWMD, which were more than the county's native vegetation requirement, were added to the WCPUD map exhibit as preserve, but not taken into account as required native vegetation because only a portion was required. The excess was an unintended consequence and a reduction should therefore not be approved. With respect to the density: While other county PUDs may have dwelling unit "pools", Wolf Creek 1 dwelling units have been allocated to the different parcels in the PUD, initially by a Cost Sharing Agreement* and subsequently by county ordinances** as parcels were added to the PUD. This was done with intent as documented in county minutes*** CCPC minutes from 3/21/13 document specific allocation of dwelling units to prevent them from being "used" by other parcels, which would change density Parcel 9 was allocated 80 dwelling units for a density of 3.99 dwelling units per acre when it was brought into the Wolf Creek RPUD in 2007 - that was the request and that was what was approved Parcel 3b, representing N 60% of the original parcel 3, would be allocated N 24 dwelling units based upon acreage and the original 2004 CSA post transfer of units to Falls at Portofino Thus, parcels 3b and 9 have N 104 dwelling units allocated to them under current ordinances and agreements - this yields an allocated density of N 3.3 du's/acre Comparable densities are: Black Bear Ridge - density 1.97 built out (N 4 allocated) Raffia(WCPUD portion) - — 2.3 Adjacent Island Walk - 3.04 Falls at Portofino - ' 6.85 - these were initially high end town homes selling in the N $500K range - the allocation plan was for one higher density • multifamily project on the periphery of WCPUD with lesser density elsewhere There is a companion application PL20160000157 which proposes a 215 dwelling unit project with N 88% of the buildings being 7-9 flex units - this is a high density row house type development of N 6.82 du's/acre - more than twice the approved/allocated density. parcels 3b and 9 do not have 215 dwelling units allocated to them and there is no request to increase the approved density the developer is claiming density he does not appear to have At every juncture, the county has historically upheld the allocation of dwelling units within the Wolf Creek PUD, documented in meeting minutes and ordinances. The county should be consistent and continue to recognize the historical allocation and not allow a claim for unused but allocated dwelling units within the PUD. 2 In conclusion please consider: The PDI for a requested reconfiguration of the preserve map and decrease in preserves should not be approved as there should be no "excess" preserves. The companion PL 20160000157 should not be approved as the requested number of dwelling units is more than twice that allocated. The high density row house type development is not compatible with the original plan and not in keeping with the majority of the adjacent developments. Note that there is no opposition to development according to parameters of the original plan; a development of —104 dwelling units, which may be multifamily, possibly with a mild or moderate increase in density, but this proposal is not that. We have met with the developer in an attempt to work out something mutually agreeable. They have been unwilling to consider any compromise in their proposed density, to which they are not entitled according to allocation. Thank you for your time, Respectfully, Marc Allen, 7347 Acorn Way, Naples FL *OR 3635 PGS 1672-1699, recognized as valid and enforceable as documented in various county meeting minutes **Ordinances 2007-46 and 2013-37 ***BCC minutes 5/22-23/2007, CCPC minutes 3/21/13 3 l LykinsDave From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 1:29 PM To: SaundersBurt Cc: LykinsDave Subject: Further Sereno Grove Update Commissioner Saunders, As a follow-up to my June 12, 2017 email to you, yesterday afternoon WCI/Lennar's requested changes to the Sereno Grove plat and construction plans ("PPL") were approved through the "insubstantial change" process (application #20170001891), despite the significance of the changes. Under Sec. 250-58 of the Code of Laws we should have 30 days from the June 20, 2017 decision to file an appeal. We advised county staff that we intend to do so. Despite this, county staff (Matt McLean) advised us that the PPL will be on the agenda to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners next Tuesday, June 27, 2017, essentially shortening our 30-day appeal period on the ICP to less than one week. We have advised Mr. McLean that we feel that scheduling the PPL for next Tuesday is premature and potentially prejudices our due process rights. However, we have received no indication that he intends to change it. Can you ask the staff why they would not continue the PPL until after the BCC, as the Board of Zoning Appeals, considers the ICP appeal? If the decision to approve the ICP is overturned, the PPL is not ready for consideration by the BCC. In the past week, I also learned additional information about the redesign of the wastewater and water distribution systems that was proposed and permitted to be accomplished as an "insubstantial change." WCI/Lennar now plans to run the water and sewer connections all the way from Livingston Road which is approximately 1/4 mile west of their western property line (not counting the access road), rather than use the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs that are approximately 12.5 feet to the east, as originally planned. The changes also include: (1) using an unlooped water system which can result in poor water quality, (2) a very long distance between the water connection and the further points in Sereno Grove which will likely result in poor water pressure, (3) a privately-managed sanitary sewer system that includes an extremely long force main and low flow, and (4) the removal of the requirement for a standby generator for the wastewater pumping station, which removes any protection against failure. According to the updated opinion of WCI/Lennar's own engineer, as filed with the county, the probable additional construction cost for the proposed changes have been increased and will be approximately $290,000, which does not seem to include engineering, permitting or filing fees or the additional costs of ongoing maintenance of the wastewater facilities. All of this was approved as an "insubstantial change." If you have any questions or would like to schedule a call or a meeting to further discuss these developments, please let me know. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts roberts.sheri(a�att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 1 LykinsDave From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 8:02 AM To: SaundersBurt Cc: LykinsDave Subject: Sereno Grove Update Commissioner Saunders, Once again, I would like to thank you for taking the time to meet with me, my attorney Patrick White and my neighbors on February 27, 2017. Unfortunately, since that date things have not improved with respect to the development known as Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh. As you had instructed, we advised WCI/Lennar that we had spoken to a county commissioner who was not willing to approve their plat and construction plans for Sereno Grove ("PPL") in their current configuration, and that the alternative plan developed by our engineer was considered to be reasonable. Despite that, WCI/Lennar continues to refuse to speak to us and now they are seeking approval of changes to the PPL through a process termed an insubstantial change ("ICP"), in order to avoid ever needing to do so (application #20170001891). However, the changes they propose are not "insubstantial;" they involve a complete re-work of the wastewater and water distribution facilities for the PPL. In mid-April, we were advised that management of WCI/Lennar would meet with us to discuss our concerns, and we were asked to contact Rhonda Brewer, their VP of Community Development to set up a meeting. I called and spoke to Ms. Brewer on April 19, 2017, and provided her with my availability: three full days and one half-day from April 25 through May 2. She thanked me for being so flexible, but then never contacted me to arrange a meeting. Instead, WCI/Lennar was working behind the scenes to reconfigure their PPL, a revised version of which was filed with the county on May 24 along with their request for an ICP. As a reminder and by way of background with respect to the ICP, in February WCI/Lennar's agent contacted the President of our Wilshire Lakes Homeowners Association ("HOA") to discuss WCI/Lennar's need for easements to tie into the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs for water and sewer, since no such easements exist. Use of the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs was assumed in WCI/Lennar's initial plans as it would be the most cost-effective location and alignment to provide the necessary water and sewer connections for Sereno Grove. Our HOA President advised the representative that she wanted to include me and my neighbors in the discussion so that we could resolve all issues at the same time. Initially, they agreed and a meeting was set for February 13. However, on or about February 3 when WCI/Lennar's counsel advised ours that WCI "did not see any benefit to discussing" our request to address the location of the roadway in their plan, WCI/Lennar's agent canceled that February 13 meeting. In connection with their current application for an ICP, WCI/Lennar has significantly reconfigured their plan, spending time and money to do so, to avoid speaking to our HOA about those stub-outs and, therefore, avoiding the need to address the positioning of their roadway so close to my home and the homes of my neighbors. In their revised PPL, they intend to move the utility connection locations to Livingston Road, which would result in a connection that is approximately % mile west of their westernmost property line, rather than use the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs which are located approximately 10 feet east of their easternmost property line. They then argue that, because of the time required to obtain the necessary permits to do this, it would create a "considerable economic hardship to the developer" and they propose that the wastewater facilities will now be privately owned and maintained. They claim that this self-imposed hardship entitles them to obtain approval for these changes through the ICP process. It is obvious that their unwillingness to address the positioning of their roadway so close to our homes has nothing to do with either the cost of doing so or the time necessary to re-work their plans. The alternative plan created by our engineer (who we hired and paid) was provided to WCI/Lennar in January; the changes 1 included in that plan would be relatively cost neutral to WCI/Lennar and would also retain the same number of lots of equivalent size. Rather than consider that configuration, WCI/Lennar has wasted time developing a new plan moving the water and sewer tie-ins for which, according to their own engineer's opinion, the probable additional construction cost will be over $210,000 (which does not seem to include permitting, filing or engineering fees, or ongoing costs of maintaining the wastewater facilities). For less cost, they could have used our engineer's plan and been in a position to obtain approval of their PPL at the May 9 Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC") meeting, as originally scheduled. They chose not to do so, but are now requesting an abeyance from legal requirements in order to obtain approval for their significantly revised plan. WCI/Lennar has made it clear that they are more interested in spending their time and money pushing for approval for a PPL that is inconsistent and incompatible with the surrounding land uses, than make any attempt to recognize the rights of existing homeowners. Under their proposed PPL, myself and my neighbors will be forced to bear disproportionate negative impacts from the WCI/Lennar development in excess of those borne by any other homeowners within Sereno Grove or the surrounding communities. This is a blatant disregard for the property interests of existing homeowners. At this point, the ICP application has not yet been approved; it is currently in a resubmittal phase according to the county website. Last week John Houldsworth advised me that the PPL is tentatively on the BOCC schedule for June 27. Thank you for taking the time to review this and remain engaged on this issue. If you have any questions or would like to schedule a call or a meeting to further discuss these developments, please let me know. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts roberts.sheri@att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 2 a v 0 val 3 t M��N r. LL • r' MI tO Nt1 f� N CD L x--CO CO MI 01 ~ ANN 4 /4_ LD O ry.-m C 3 ..-NN l , �eM-NN H N o• 'ICV O1N al O D v,- z mvr tn MI 1.1JrclOr- LL ���N L � CO Lc; p 1 SC /L a� CD MOr NM �,3 1,1 CVO-1.M. --1-- f`�,�—1 .max. y.a �N� I I LTi O CO� � j, �, I ; i 1 II i r Im• i ; ! I ,n I I I I 1 f ' � I I I I cc i ISI Ic m I! ra � I ri Cal I I E• v g m 1 io I a, G E n i it U ° v iff cv v, u C • CV p v j1v I o tm nfV z V m ,1N N 61 m• O N n an v I vI li v, c r �I rn #Ni v VE ' Im 1c 61 me uu C M ' c O i o s- w E O '° 7-i- -,:, u E v E u ` V ? y C Bi 7.1 J u N -412, I m▪ u 3 0 1 _ o w m m N m E ! mO. 0 VI « = of v at, a u �n o f c $ 1.1 E m 1 E u `m a '^ f m N E O1 ,o I U °m O 1 0 ( E S m g e a s 2 0 U U v o+ m j Qm Ia 6 , at. v m h. M a 'u XMN l7 C j mOl N I N Nm N d •E •.•Y O) axO G Od 0 N Na m N r dY1 N E m (U N •LL w` � Lc u c N i10 D q u� e mm on Q m Ecw'' a � � 0411 >- ~ 1:-. O N V it-0 .c Cop m �c = C � 01 mNmp Z r u vy a` O O1 � � m7 O Sv E u1d du m ! CVv, Ct L 2 . i� a 1--- CO al O N r-- N m "Cru1 l0 c Ex parte Items - Commissioner Andy Solis COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 06/27/17 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. 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]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails I ICalls Meeting: Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold, David Genson, 6/23/17 Correspondence: letters from Carol & Edmund Staley, Cheryl & Gordon Handte Emails: from many from Esplanade Golf and Country Club and other neighbors 9.B. 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 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Planned Unit Development(PUD)to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)for a project known as the Triad RPUD to allow development of 44 single-family dwelling units. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.75± acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-11, as amended by Ordinance No. 05-23, the former Triad Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD- PL20160002564] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ❑Correspondence ®e-mails ❑Calls See companion item 9.C. below. Ex Parte Disclosure—BCC Meeting 6/27/17—Commissioner Andy Solis Page 2 of 5 9.C. 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 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code,which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)for a project known as the MAC RPUD to allow development of 44 single-family dwelling units. The subject property is located on the northwest corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.76± acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-50,the former MAC Residential Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD- PL20160002565] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ❑Correspondence ®e-mails ['Calls Meeting: Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Everett of DR Horton, 6/23/17; Cathy Gorman, 6/23/17 Emails: Douglas Lewis, 6/20/17; Cathy Gorman, 6/21/17 9.D. 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 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code,which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from an Estates (E) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)zoning district for the project to be known as the County Barn Road RPUD,to allow construction of a maximum of 268 multi-family residential dwelling units or 156 single family residential dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types permitted in the PUD, not to exceed a trip cap of 157 p.m. peak hour two-way trips. The subject property is located on the east side of County Barn Road, approximately one quarter mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 8, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 38.59± acres; and by providing an effective date. [PUDZ-PL20160001398]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence e-mails ['Calls Meeting: Bruce Anderson, 6/16/17 Correspondence: Letter from Unity Church — Brian Jones and Diane Scribner Clevenger, 5/8/17 Ex Parte Disclosure—BCC Meeting 6/27/17—Commissioner Andy Solis Page 3 of 5 9.E. 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 No. 2007-46, as amended, the Wolf Creek RPUD, to approve an insubstantial change to the PUD,to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only, and providing for an effective date. The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately one-half mile west of Collier Boulevard, in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 189± acres. [PDI-PL20160000404] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings I 'Correspondence se-mails ['Calls Meetings: Bruce Anderson, 6/16/17; Terrie Abrams & Bev Smith, Black Bear Ridge HOA, 6/16/17 e-mail: Marc Allen, 6/22/17 COUNTY MANAGERS REPORT 11.G. 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 for recording the final plat of Sereno Grove, (Application Number PL20160001884) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE nMeetings ❑Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls Commissioner Solis has a conflict of interest in this matter, and will abstain from discussing or voting on it. A CE Form 8B is attached. CONSENT AGENDA 16.A.2. 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 for recording the final plat of Maple Ridge Amenity Center at Ave Maria, (Application Number PL20170000724) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. >Q NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE nMeetings ❑Correspondence De-mails Calls Ex Parte Disclosure—BCC Meeting 6/27/17—Commissioner Andy Solis Page 4 of 5 16.A.3. 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 for recording the minor final plat of Oyster Harbor at Fiddler's Creek Phase 1 - Replat 3, Application Number PL20170000332. >1 NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ❑Correspondence ❑e-mails ['Calls 16.A.4. 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 for recording the final plat of Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples Phase 4, Parcel "L", (Application Number PL20170001594) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I 'Meetings ['Correspondence ( le-mails ['Calls SUMMARY AGENDA 17.A. 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 Petition VAC-PL20170000730 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the conservation easement described in O.R. Book 4293, Page 4106 of the Official Records of Collier County, Florida. The subject property is located on the west side of Airport Pulling Road, approximately one half mile north of Golden Gate Parkway, in Section 23, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. ❑ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I 'Meetings ❑Correspondence I le-mails ❑Calls 17.B. 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 a Resolution providing for the establishment of a Conditional Use to allow an auto supply store with over 5,000 square feet of gross floor area in the principal structure (Sic Code 5531)within a Commercial Intermediate (C-3)Zoning District pursuant to Section 2.03.03.C.1.c.20 of the Collier County Land Development Code. The subject property containing 1.24 acres on Lots 12-18, South Tamiami Heights subdivision is located on the southwest corner of US 41 and Seminole Avenue, in Section 13, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (CU-PL20150001611) ❑ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I (Meetings ❑Correspondence De-mails Calls Ex Parte Disclosure—BCC Meeting 6/27/17—Commissioner Andy Solis Page 5 of 5 17.C. 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. Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97-70, as amended, Pelican Lake, a Planned Unit Development, to clarify the measurement of actual height of the accessory enclosed utility/storage structure is from the lower of finished floor elevation of the enclosed utility/storage structure or twelve inches above the FEMA flood elevation. The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (SR-951) approximately 1/5 mile south of Tamiami Trail East(US 41), in Section 15, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 101.3+/-acres. [PDI- PL20160003463] NQ NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I 'Meetings ❑Correspondence ne-mails ❑Calls 17.D. 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 Petition VAC-PL20170001974 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1401, Page 2152 and a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1432, Page 1093 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; and approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Quit Claim Deed and Bill of Sale to transfer wastewater facilities from the County to the property owner. The subject property is located on the west side of Bayshore Drive, approximately one quarter mile south of Tamiami Trail East, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. V NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ['Meetings ['Correspondence ne-mails ❑Calls t GoodnerAngela Subject: Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold, David Genson - Addie's Corner Location: BCC Office, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Start: Fri 6/23/2017 2:30 PM End: Fri 6/23/2017 3:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers 1 8854 Vaccaro Ct �.. ����Q��D� Naples, FL 34119 (239) 963-5365 ejsone@aol.com MAY 12 2Q17 May 10, 2017 Andy Solis, Esq.,Vice Chairman ay, Board of County Commissioners Collier County Government Center 3299 East Tamiami Trail,Suite 303 Naples Florida 34112 Dear Mr. Solis: 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 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 Immokalee 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. I'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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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 Immokalee 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, / , • # Edmund J. Staley, Esq. Carol A.Staley 4 GoodnerAngela From: TrochessettAimee Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:43 PM To: TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; SolisAndy;JohnsonEric; Strain Mark 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. itiak.ter County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 25 TMTLINI Collier County Commissioners Collier County Planning Commissioners qi 2 1 Eric Johnson, Collier County Principal Planner Mark Strain, Chief Hearing Examiner B Y Re: Addie's Corner development Collier County Planning Commission Project # 20150001776. We live in Esplanade Golf Et 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 wilt 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 tine will increase sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree tine, 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. t /i MelI/ 3-1//c/ .5//LI/7 e Address Date /L a. kx 1-€.k c c`r� S_C lei. /oaY']t et_ ( � c/ C.G. a C� -�if� IN ^�' .Q.Lf r -y a tom-..y' cP�`.A.A,A 1-- `^ �Ls"� Cc, /j`t t 4c46.6'.l . GoodnerAngela From: Jane Rollins <naplesjanel @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:naplesjanel(a@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 <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, 2 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. 3 GoodnerAngela 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 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed 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: 4 •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 5 GoodnerAngela 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;Johnson Eric; 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: 6 •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 GoodnerAngela From: William Nemeth <wnemeth@icloud.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 1:34 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner development - Collier County Planning Commission Project# 20150001776 Attachments: collier commissioner letter- Naples Esplanade copy.pdf; ATT00001.txt Attached is a letter of comment regarding the Addie's Corner development. We appreciate your time and efforts in careful consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, William A& Laura D Nemeth 8652 Amour Court Naples, Florida 34119 wnemeth@icloud.com (216)496-2995 8 FROM THE DESK OF WILLIAM & LAURA NEMETH May 17,2017 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 To: BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net My wife and I are residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club,along Immokalee Rd. in Naples.The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area consisting of many tall trees. It lies to the east of Esplanade Blvd.and was a significant reason for our choosing both the development and lot where we have settled. We understand the developer of the adjacent property 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 are aware that two types of exotic trees must be removed.The narrow buffer and removal of the exotic trees would result in residents seeing the buildings through what is left of a thin tree line. The thinned tree line will increase sound and light which will negatively impact the enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree line, four-story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values.We encourage you to require the following: •A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100'from Esplanade property 8652 AMOUR CT, NAPLES, FL 34119 • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units.(current zoning allows far less) The attached pictures show the current view,side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction.We hope you consider our concerns and realize the negative impact it will have on our community. Sincerely yours, 0/s, c),,,,,- -q Lo. ( Ki(),(4/L William A. Nemeth & Laura D. Nemeth ._. .�...W..�.. -.., .. .A......._._�,..,.4—,..,_„„ ter:. •ila•,•..+w 'S• w M.• w.r •• ♦rat.... w.• er raw 55* O. o' a `m Zvi • .. .. . ft 4 .. 4 IT ` rG3 S Est r® e e s2 ,1 .i L1 9 o. BZa•.. .. 8652 AMOUR CT, NAPLES, FL 34119 GoodnerAngela 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;Johnson Eric 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. 9 Thank you for your consideration. Irene and Ward Bond 9158 Trivoli Terrace Naples, FL 34119 Sent from my iPad io GoodnerAngela From: jmaiella <maiellajoe@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:42 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; Lily Subject: Addie's Corner Development Attachments: BC 5-1-17_ Esplanade-Plan plan view.pdf;ATT00001.htm Importance: High May 17, 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 are residents 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: • A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Joseph & Lily Maiella 8865 Savona Ct Naples, FL 34119 11 GoodnerAngela From: Tom Coffey <ticoffey@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: 12 Air •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: ticoffey@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 13 GoodnerAngela From: Lois Pogyor <Ipogyor@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 12:37 AM To: SolisAndy Cc: GoodnerAngela Subject: Development of Addie's Corner Dear Mr. Solis: 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 14 GoodnerAngela From: Heidi Holley <heidihimlerholley@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 8:18 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner development Immokolee Rd and Collier Blvd May 10, 2017 Dear Collier County Commissioners, Collier County Principal Planner and Chief Hearing Examiner, I recently bought a home and moved from Minnesota to Collier County in October of 2016.As a new resident of Florida I am concerned about the new development planned adjacent to our community in Esplanade, Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776.As a voting resident I am very concerned about the impact this project will have on the traffic, natural preserve and noise level.The amount of traffic on Immokolee Boulevard is already overloaded and very stressful to drive on. Part of our attraction to this area was the natural beauty of the preserve and I hope in no uncertain terms you will allow it to be reduced in an way. The removal of the exotic trees along our property line will add not only to greater noise levels but to a viewscape that is no longer serene and calming. Please ensure that the trees removed will be replaced by equally large sized trees. I am unable to attend the hearing as we are traveling to Minnesota for a few months. Collier County is our new home and I hope you will do everything possible to protect our property line.Thank you. Sincerely, Heidi Holley 9230 Rialto Lane Naples, FL 34119 15 GoodnerAngela From: Nancy DeMarco <nancyd@carlawyernj.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:09 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Development - Project#20150001776 Attachments: current view.pdf Importance: High Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed 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 Ladies and Gentlemen: 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: *A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet *Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, *Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property *Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Perry A. Pittenger 9091 Sorreno Court Naples, Florida 34119 16 Nancy DeMarco Legal Assistant to Perry A. Pittenger,Esq. Schiller&Pittenger,P.C. 1771 Front Street,Suite D Scotch Plains,New Jersey 07076 Voice: 908-490-0444 Fax: 908-490-0420 Email:nancyd@carlawyernj.com CONNECT: SP ! r This Transmission Is Intended Only for the Party to Whom It Is Addressed and May Contain Legally Privileged and Confidential Information.If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any use,dissemination,or copying of this transmission is prohibited.If you have received this transmission in error,please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail and return this transmission and all copies to us.Thank you. 17 Pniture Pon rear of Amcor Court property buRangf 10024.9-Photo 00.7 = ,3 Picture from rear of Amour Court property 11.46_52.261PG Photo Gallery = LI 6111014 tIF ongan,or share_ Flie &full Print Slide show Edit organize or Mum - Email Pnnt• West.. Irtir • r ! 4 - ‘ 1 a 1 1.4 Mit Mr: — 14 N 4 :1\ X Computes 4 w 71;0 e 7?-2 x 3 El rr- , PIN % 312212017 GoodnerAngela From: William L McGee Jr <willie581950@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:54 AM To: FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Project#20150001776 Attachments: Addie's Corner.docx Thank you for your attention. William L. McGee Jr. 18 William L McGee Jr 8674 Amour Court Naples Florida 34119 9 May 2017 RE: Addie's Corner Development Collier County PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT #20150001776 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I am a resident of Esplanade Golf and Country club, along Immokalee Road. The current view entering the property is completely wooded and secluded to the east of our entrance. I am told the developer has proposed reducing the preserve from 8.85 to 3.45 acres. With this change the residents are likely to see the 4 story buildings and also increase the sound and light affecting the quiet enjoyment on my street. This will seriously degrade the views and property values. I would like to ask that you consider these requests: Limit the heights of the buildings or require step-back heights. Locate the building further east allowing for a larger buffer. Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. I hope you understand our concerns and treat this as if you were a neighbor. Thank you for your consideration, William L. McGee, Jr. Geraldine M. McGee GoodnerAngela From: DAVID FIX <davedds@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 1:55 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Subject: Addie's Corner development Project#20150001776 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed May 9, 2017 My wife and I are residents of Florida and of Esplanade Golf and Country Club. Our property is adjacent to the proposed Barron Collier development at Addie's Corner on Immokalee Road in Naples. We are writing to you in order to express our concerns about the many changes to the existing PUD that Barron Collier is planning. First, we would like to have the the nature preserve maintained at he originally planned 8.85 acres. We would like to have an opaque Type C buffer of at least 100 feet along Esplanade Boulevard. We also disapprove of the construction of multiple four story residential buildings on this property. Driving along Immokalee, we see no other existing four story buildings. Barron Collier knew what the exixting PUD was when he initially purchased this property. There is no reason to even bother writing zoning laws if changes like this are allowed for one individual. Sincerely, Dave and Alayne Fix 8656 Amour Court Naples, Florida 19 GoodnerAngela From: Jane Rollins <naplesjanel@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 8, 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. 20 Sincerely, Michael&Jane Rollins 9368 Terresina Dr.,Naples,FL 34119 21 GoodnerAngela From: fcerminara <fcerminara@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:20 PM To: SolisAndy Subject: RE:Addie's Corner Thank you for your response. I appreciate the concern from Commissioner Solis. Frank Cerminara Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: SolisAndrew Date: 4/11/17 1:12 PM (GMT-05:00) To: fcerminara Subject: RE: Addie's Corner Hello, Mr. & Mrs. Cerminara: Thank you for your email about the proposed development at Addie's Corner. Commissioner Solis appreciates hearing from citizens whenever they wish to share their concerns about a topic. I will add your comments to the others he receives on this issue, and may reach out to you to gather more information if it seems appropriate. Please know that even if we do not contact you again, your voice has been heard. Thank you for taking the time to be an engaged member of our community. Please feel free to call or email whenever we can be of assistance. Angela Goodner, Executive Coordinator for Commissioner Andy Solis Collier County Board of Commissioners, District 2 District Office: 239.252.8602 Fax: 239.252.6947 Sign up for the District 2 newsletter HERE! 22 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: fcerminara [mailto:fcerminara@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 1:09 PM To: SolisAndrew ; McDanielBill ; SaundersBurt ; FialaDonna; TaylorPenny Cc: Sam H. Miller ; scerminara@aol.com; "Frank Cerminara" Subject: Addie's Corner As residents of Esplanade, Amour Ct, we have been concerned about the planned development referred to as Addie's Corner. We are very apprehensive about two items in particular. 1. View. Taylor Morrison promised that the "Preserve " would always exist. We need to keep as much of it as possible through remediation and where buildings are situated. 2. Traffic on Immokalee and Collier Blvd is near gridlock at times (Jan-April.)Adding another development will exacerbate the situation. We at Esplanade need your help. Especially with our views, for which we paid lot premiums of$80-100 thousand or more. Thankyou for your consideration. Respectfully, Frank and Susan Cerminara 8644 Amour Ct Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone 23 GoodnerAngela From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County 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 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 26 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 • PENINSUto'sENGINEERINGLA ' jIO1II 1111r1111, CCC ADDISON, $ LLC '44" NOOPIEMPLIM ,p ADDISON PLACE -.112 sluor1 I D L ;�� ,I 1 , _ It�Ci! �J ■ �•'n..LO�O w -rive �/ ■ WEST �•TM—�—A• `�• -_i1_i�i_ l NNINE BOUNDARY _ w���ry '7m• EXHIBIT ? i pis_ c ���•• ��ni�l�' } x ,Ill ,� I �= Entrance to Esplanade FIPIMPIRrirliVVIIII? ^ „o GoodnerAngela From: Thomas Kleck <tkleck@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:17 AM To: SolisAndy Subject: Addles corner Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed 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(cr�,comcast.net j udykleck(c icomcast.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 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? 27 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 28 GoodnerAngela From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:55 AM To: FialaDonna;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; SolisAndy Cc: Brenda McDermott Subject: Esplanade Residents concerns about Addie's Corner Development Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners.pdf; ATT00001.htm Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed Begin forwarded message: From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank@comcast.net> Date: March 16, 2017 at 9:45:30 AM EDT To: DianeEbert(a�colliergov.net 29 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 GoodnerAngela From: Mark Scimio <mascimio@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:26 AM To: pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; Strain Mark; Johnson Eric Cc: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; Fiala Donna Subject: Addie's Corner Development Attachments: Addies Corner Development Letter of Concern.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed 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 30 GoodnerAngela From: Ron Miller <ronmiller052645@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 4:52 PM To: pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; StrainMark; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: JohnsonEric Subject: Addie's Corner Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed 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, ronmi11er052645@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. 31 GoodnerAngela 16 Subject: Cathy Gorman, Triad /MAC Location: BCC Office, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Start: Fri 6/23/2017 10:30 AM End: Fri 6/23/2017 11:00 AM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers Good afternoon Angela: THANK YOU again for speaking with me this morning about the Mac/Triad (Hadley Place) PUD—I truly appreciate it. Attached are the documents I explained to Commissioner Taylor. I would be grateful for just 10-15 minutes to go over these with Commissioner Solis. This is such an important issue coming before him next Tuesday, and I honestly would just like those few minutes to explain it to him. I will be available absolutely any time you could fit me in. Again,thank you in advance for help in this situation. Cathy Gorman 239-272-8809 1 GoodnerAngela Subject: Rich Yovanovich, Triad & MAC Location: BCC Office, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Start: Fri 6/23/2017 2:00 PM End: Fri 6/23/2017 2:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers 1 GoodnerAngela From: Douglas Lewis <Doug@tllfirm.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 20, 2017 6:13 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Bob; Christopher Hagan; GundlachNancy Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Attachments: MAC-Triad area analysis.pdf; MAC RPUD Review Report 06-12-2017.pdf; ERP Pages.pdf; CCF060617_0006.pdf; Submittal 1 05 Hadley Place W PPL Plans - Prepared.pdf; Submittal 2 08 Triad Open Space.pdf; Submittal 1 06 Plat - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 1 06 PlatO - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 2 09 MAC Open Space.pdf Dear Board Members, In advance of the hearing next week, please find the attached and below for your review. I will update you on any progress between the neighbors, staff and the applicant. Best, Douglas A. Lewis T L THOMPSON LEWIS _ counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail:doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A.Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (I) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent:June 20, 2017 6:03 PM To: 'GundlachNancy'<NancyGundlach@colliergov.net> Cc: 'Bob'<bobcol@comcast.net>; 'Christopher Hagan'<Chris@haganeng.com> Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) 1 Nancy, This will confirm that we have not heard back from the applicant regarding our neighborhood concerns raised back on May 31, 2017. In follow-up to the below May 31st submission and in advance of the BCC hearing next week, please find the attached and below for staff and applicant follow-up (hopefully,we can get these items addressed, agreed to by the parties and solved prior to the hearing) 1. Regarding drainage,the existing drainage ditches along the east and west sides of the RUPD's simply do not work(I am having pictures of the drainage problem sent to your office tomorrow). The ditches are not draining properly, and according to my client,the water has not left the ditches since June 6th. In reviewing the ERP and PPL,the East and West drainage systems are connected by pipe under Palm Springs Boulevard. a. My client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to confirm that both the East and West side drainage ditches will be fully graded and improved by either the County or the applicant, so that they adequately and properly drain (all work to be completed prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project). b. Also, my client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require that the projects drain on both the East and West side drainage ditches and that either the County or the applicant commit to install a barrier(prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project)to help keep incursions and encroachments out of the drainage ditches. 2. Additionally regarding drainage and according to Chris Hagan,the proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9% of the site for storm water management,and this is well below the typical industry standards of 15% percent for a dense single family cluster project. According to Chris Hagan and based on his review of the ERP,the applicant is making up for its lack of storm water management by draining into the preserve area in the Traid RPUD. a. PUD Hagan's office reviewed the ERP cross sections and noted that the applicant wants to put a retaining wall around the north side of the eastern preserve. Upon closer review of the ERP plans, it appears to Mr. Hagan that the applicant is looking to incorporate that preserve into the water management plan to provide storage for storm water. This is inconsistent with Collier County's rules regarding allowances in preserve areas. This inconsistency would disqualify the area from preserve status for onsite preservation. This would require additional offsite mitigation to compensate for this. b. To eliminate this issue, my client asks that Exhibit F to both RPUDs be modified to expressly prohibit any water discharge into to preserve areas. 3. Additionally regarding drainage, according to Chris Hagan, Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end and Palm Springs Blvd. does not comply with County standards. a. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be for the County or the applicant commit to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code, prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project, including the addition of improved drainage swales. As an alternative, my client is still open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. 4. The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. a. My client asks the BCC to reject this Exhibit E deviation request consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. 5. Regarding density, the Density Rating System outlined in the FLUE provides that "a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed,though not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the location and characteristics of the project." In this case and based on the location and characteristics of the project,the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West is for 42 lots (see attached), not 44 units as per the MAC RPUD and the plat for Hadley Place East is for 41 lots (see attached), not 44 lots per the Triad RPUD. 2 a. In view of the forgoing, why does the MAC RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs 42 per the PPL and why does the Triad RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs.41 per the PPL? 6. Regarding open space, LDC 1.08.00 provides as follow, "Open space, usable:Active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds,tennis courts,golf courses, beach frontage,waterways, lakes, lagoons,floodplains, nature trails and other similar open spaces. Usable open space areas shall also include those portions of areas set aside for preservation of native vegetation, required yards (setbacks) and landscaped areas,which are accessible to and usable by residents of an individual lot,the development, or the general public. Open water area beyond the perimeter of the site, street rights-of-way, driveways, off-street parking and loading areas,shall not be counted towards required Usable Open Space." a. RWA prepared document titled Triad Open Space and MAC Open Space showing 6.60 acres and 6.64 acres, respectively, of open space. 1. Can the applicant or staff provide supporting detail for the 2.28 acres of"Residential— Open Space" calculations as shown on both the Triad and MAC Open Space documents? b. It appears that most of the"Residential—Open Space" area is coming from required yard (setbacks). Please confirm. As such, I am only calculating 13,200 square feet or.3+/-acres as required yard (setbacks) as follows: 15 ft front yard, 15 ft rear yard and 5 ft for each side yard or 300 square feet times 44 lots= 13,200 square feet. c. The applicant has also filed its PPL. See the attached confirming a compliance problem with the 60% usable open space requirement as required by the Comprehensive Plan. d. Further,the applicant has filed its ERP for the MAC and Traid RPUD's. See the attached from Chris Hagan confirming only 55.2%open space for the MAC and Triad RPUD's based on applicant's ERP applications. e. In view of the clear problems as outlined above, my client requests that the "Site Summary" on the both MAC and Triad RPUD Master Plans should be modified to confirm how the 60% usable open space requirement will be met and to detail the specific"open space" calculations and break- downs. Additionally,the Master Plans for both the MAC and Triad RUPDs should be modified to show the distances between the preserve areas and the lot lines and the distances between the lake, dry detention areas and preserve. 7. The minimum rear yard setbacks for accessory structures in both the MAC and Traid RPUD's is 0 as measured from "lot boundaries", not easements. However,the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West and Hadley Place East show 32 lots+/-that back up to each other and that have 7.5 feet DE off the lot line and into the platted lot. 8. Also, Section N-N (see attached) places a 6 foot swale on the north property line and a 3 foot retaining wall against the existing rear of the existing properties with the preserve behind. A preserve adjoining residential does not need a buffer, but with the swale and wall and detention behind this would make it aesthetically inconsistent with normal perimeter buffering. a. My client requests that the Triad RPUD Master Plan be modified to show heightened and adequate buffering along the north property line in the event of any proposed swale and retaining wall. 9. Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require the applicant to seek to obtain permits for all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. 10. Finally, see also the attached,follow-up comments from Chris Hagan pertaining to traffic, access and utilities, etc. based on his letter to me dated June 12, 2017. I look forward to speaking with staff and the applicant as soon as possible to address the above items in advance of the hearing next week and will make myself available to meet with the applicant this week. Best, Douglas A. Lewis L THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive 3 Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-do uglas-lewis-1250057.htm l Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A.Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm,PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A.Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used,to (1)avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent: May 31, 2017 12:41 PM To: 'nancygundlach@colliergov.net'<nancvgundlach@colliergov.net> Subject:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Nancy, In follow-up to our phone call and in connection with the rezone applications referenced above, I have been retained by a neighbor that resides directly adjacent to proposed projects (Mr. Colasanti) and will be attending the hearings tomorrow to provide public input on these items. My client is very supportive of single-family use of the properties. However, he offers the following significant concerns and questions from Chris Hagan of Hagan Engineering pertaining to the proposed development of these properties (a summary engineering report from Hagan Engineering will follow by separate e-mail): • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. There is no sidewalk. The pavement is only 19 feet in width. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including the addition of a sidewalk and improved drainage swales. As an alternative,my client is open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into I-75. A review of these swales (see below photos in link) by Hagan Engineering found that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these swales, a stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales by the County and/or developer. (At your direction, I can provide proof of the existing swale problem by historic photos from the residents of flooded backyards and roadways). • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. The fact that they are back to back makes this 4 easier. However, the traffic impact statement provided online was only for one project. These should also be considered together so any roadway impacts for turning motions, stacking, etc. would be combined and accommodated as a single project. • The onsite stormwater areas are less than the normal industry standards. This will require substantial additional filling. A floodplain analysis should be done so this additional fill will not adversely impact the regional floodplain. • Preliminary assessment of the existing roadway should be conducted and proposed roadways and finished floor elevations should be included in the PUD Master Plan to address concerns like the height (above existing grade) of the new roadway finish floors in relation to the adjoining properties. Accommodating the perimeter berm and roadways without discharging drainage out onto Palm Springs Boulevard will be difficult. Cross sections should be requested from the developer showing the slopes and heights of these elements and such should be included in the PUD Master Plan. • The elevation differential may require reconstruction and elevation of Palm Springs Blvd. to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway, and with side yards directly abutting the roadway, this will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but the PUD should include a requirement 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall and landscape buffering along the entire northerly project boundary and also along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard to provide additional needed screening. Homes are going to be set close together, and it is possible that side yard equipment would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. • Preserve areas should have exotic vegetation removed and be replanted with native vegetation from Collier County's approved list. No grading in these areas should be allowed. Additionally, • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that the dimensions of all existing easements be depicted on the Mater Plan. Also,that cross-sections be provided on the Master Plan (with elevations and required set-backs) for perimeter buffering, sloping, preserve areas, the lake area, and other features as depicted on the Master Plan. Click on the below link for photos of existing site conditions: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fkObn4vxlct2h5mnhwO Douglas A. Lewis T ITH0MPS0N LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 5 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-do ugla s-lewis-1250057.htm I Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A.Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm,PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. 6 , 6, ! 1 1 l 2.3 2 1 i r 1 , _, ) - -- 1 . *' ,I. II I i I , 2.21221 6 1 _ 2 g a! tli ,I i_ .... . , : * .., , , .. g ______ . ___ - PAZ VI WRINGS RIR In AIM-- 1 i .4 ; --.-- — ...-----. ; .".., P., •••,/ rf,:.---, _Iti ro. .-- - . ,1,1 1;, . , __ _ __ 1 , , , , rg-- --4 ,,c; --..----,g, •• '','I . '. - m). .m --- 1 . i, 1 ,,,,,,l, , L 1,,. ,• 1 I. '., , i . v.Pv , E t 1 9• .-,...,....., ; "b t .2 1... .,. , Ir. ..*„ • iiii '42° I , *' ' 2 11. 1 * 1 1 I J.1 i . , ,r1 ,.1 1 c. E .} , E $ * ,,, -E* .11 r . .. : - ,, ,.\2,- -I 1 ,,, , , ., %, 1 ; •- , , .-- 1 ,[ 0. ? 6 : ,r' 6 4 I 11' - 1 111 I. 1 4 \ ;2 i i 'J'7.2 ' 1 ' ' •• ki el : 1 .14.,_6., 2 •,:51 ,*I 11 1 -.--J-- t ,.. •4- 1 * , 11 7 ' ' 3„, i Fl '' I k ; t .• l'',1, .1 F • C '''Zi I , 1 , I • t , A • 14 lid I a ''''''1 14111 fk,., n-, 1 . ' it i.... ' I'lq •26, ly L., i i •1 . . rt - , I , ,L-C 4 .4M .f. fi I ; !.- , r4 1 . C ..." P, • 11 C , __ .... ,,i) , k\„„, ____ , :.-- ........- ---- ....s. , I - ....,-.-.444 > F, ,,,,„ -, ..---1------r- • .44-4t-ttt-- -- ,-_-.-----t- - , t ti til ' 10 • --r '"`t r- t—— ——ill_ ,, , ., „irtil ,: .... 1 ' rom 1- ' Ui !-- 1 , ii : i 4...... ._,.. -4 - z ft re .11f; , : f; ,got; i g'" i g- r ii e . , - , i -' f. 0 , 1 i 44 J_ .. -, I" I§ 1 Cs- tgA t ? ' i "'AX>iA ,,6-• 74' 2,J 2,i I , > f f A --9,1 - .. i )5 --1 '; Ai > 4. ilitti ' Z ':' t ; s.. , C , ...a Frl n ' i :,-•' '-. 0 2 t t A I,3 1$, . 5 I 6 .. .•ii. } il ... 1 s i, { �1�J SI 1 M 7 10 ,iINmIII i, i _ 1 1 I — ItI imt i i 1 i i 1111111101 ,1- _, .. r i 1.1. 1e N.1..-' f: * I Eat Lila ' w+-- ..-- ice. �uu ,L 1 p �V 6- b-1 1.1 '- s 6¢¢ ` (--J e 1 DETENTRETIONAMR § 1 11T.. : I e -'1 e' k I lit 5.' I :(3 E tl igl: 1 i I I .,, I . hiit IN, a. i [IMI i:,,,, 1, ht ,itt, b, , ,..,,, -.±. :. i ,,41 A 3 J., . ISI al. Iii 4 ,... , ! , f� 1 ;g !� L� 3ppI -� .. � ;�-` > F ice..• .4 ° 'Y`� E R �1 VA 2 I I, i tea.. r �� zo i i c - I Te 1 e ' e r. 4 c n GZt li PAIN aPufzCa snuinrao _ .. \_ -. M 8 >VAII / & ,mooK >; ' r ? • } `() rf 1%i El t Ili tilitiiii F. f. > s i .c i , $ . . ' nazi i B C ill ; D /ypQ 11/;111 S iy�Sllgi Fti s p mi> _ m0 4f E t ' * Z � c c �E a -a s 1g kT 1,...4....., v u,'1 t r 5"'3Z5 1 i I `/ J 1 1 11I PROPERTY eouwOun .,•,, 1,110.61M,9Pv j S 1 c LEGEND \ I' noueod.�� ` ceuinea\r I l•: 4� PRESERVE 1777A PRO..LAKE I ( pE\.asw V zdi LITTORAL AREA s — .6111{ IMI �a K ,, • \. o PR ME1iT la un -- '— 9 —�— cnry aourvo61 rvun� t —.1=',. } -Tr 1 TLIMEVUN VERTICAwnMTKKiS ASE NORTH CONANIErVERSION FROM « IEgil rv.VIM,To nGV029 RRwee-,:R.rv4-w29 I � 1 ' I 1; :� --- e d + •Pi 5 WATER MANAGEMENT SUMMARY BASIN(NAM BASIN °"" ,I -AL1! '- — - �1 1`� 1-' i1p1JII 'I ,.. "„ —1 II ..- 1,� `R.,I Y 11 ` I i , I I ill i 5 I II I I 11 ice. . I : I la J L 8 II �___ j1 I "� ...,.l1-� i� IMl IiiU i .�' --./ — BANTABLE ti 1 — — I A A .. •^ TOTAL &W 1016 __ • 11\tttt I ..°s:n,`..::"ovm�: --�' "_....�e W ,11 --•—•- ' ARFA OUTSIDE CONTROLLED DRAINAGE „� 9 I i x \ BASIN WEST Bk. EAST BASIN S R Lnem I i"r. I I ..a _ + t �c .. r+ .... ,_ TOTAL ROI t �. ,r-•�- _ __ ..-- -... y __ �+-`Y_- - - - - — a , �,. .,. ww w. ,AAL ---- — - — ------- + .71 ,j �nA^„..,...,..,.w`............._, ■.■ 'Rmtii3`�ess - DA HORTON,INC. .ate. HADLEY PLACE _R W ,', ii.2 sT MASTER SITE PLAN �,. .... !- 14011 iI'n',x”" LIZ F...0 ' ;-..:7;,.. - '130019.00.00 I""""031300190200C POI !'";"77 +m�K ter.. 4.:.• L., `,.."11" T il ,.•••,•.- 1j,_ ..'='-•?'-N---_ I',...--.1s ,..= 11 MOW:1,11141W 110211 i 111___111, PI III 1,, SECTION A-A SECTION B-B SECTION C-C MI IIIIIIIIII.IIIII 1111 -0,, 41 I .. m. ..-/ L119111MI 1 MIMI Si‘, .. -- -.7,1-_.-----:-.•4=14:--=',4,-.,---l'- TYPICAL SECTIONS INDEX SECTION P-P SECTION CI-CI SECTION C2-C2 ,.., SECTION D-D SECTION E-E SECTION F-F a., , ir----,- V,------ ----tr _. • - 6-.-'1'''-"..--- SECTION 0-6 SECTION H-H SECTION I-1 SECTION 14 SECTION P-P w, PUS.,6 1-44.SECTION o, .,a ros PRESERVE k DETEK1101,ECIIOM s oTgrol""Tat". .. I . , .. — NIP 4. I,... =ZIP . .4*.'"............."...... '''''. ...11;,, ,,11111,11. --.'"'—'"ca ':—.7 SECTION K-K SECTION L-L SECTION MM SECTION 0-0 SECTION N-N a.: WALL SECTION ...........................,,,........-,,—....................,..................,... SECTION Q-Q D.R.HORTON,INC. R., ....ella,RR.IsiriTiFrSihrg.t.'s '1 LI IC go HADLEY PLACE SISINOIONO '- 43W-- :::-.;: ..:",17,.: - TYPICAL SECTIONS y- ...... -- -... - 7'3;0190000 r.--04 130019020X TS01 HAGAN AGAN Douglas A. Lewis June 12, 2017 Thompson Lewis Counselors at Law 850 Park Shore Drive, Suite 201-A Naples, FL 34103 Re: MAC and Triad RPUD and ERP Applications Review Updated Engineer's Report Dear Mr. Lewis, This letter is submitted to provide a brief review of the pending Collier County zoning applications and South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD)Environmental Resource Permit(ERP) application for the referenced projects. This is done consistent with our previous correspondence and May 25, 2017 agreement. This report is submitted to outline my findings from the review of the applications noted above that are available on line. We have also had a site visit, received photos, and held discussions with you and the adjoining neighbors. Consistent with the agreement we have addressed open space, drainage, access, and utility issues below: 1. Open Space Calculations Attached please find a PDF of the Area Analysis for the zoning and ERP applications. You will note that the ERP,which is a more detailed set of plans, shows a 55.2%open space versus the County calculations that show 61.6%open space. This is above the County zoning minimum of 60%on both independent and combined plans. The big difference between the ERP and zoning plans is in the open space/pervious area. The acreage goes from 11.86 for the ERP to 13.24 acres for the zoning applications. The ERP application shows a smaller open space pervious area. The preserve numbers match up well. The pavement area is also larger for the ERP application than the zoning applications. The spreadsheet has highlighted the items in blue that are lake or water management and in green that are open space. The yellows are the cumulative numbers that calculate out the percentages. The SFWMD review of the ERP application also found that the storage capacity in the water management area maybe exaggerating flood capacity. This could require a further increase in water management area. 2. Drainage • The proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for stormwater management. This is well below the typical industry standards of 15%percent for a dense single family project. The smaller than average water management facilities onsite will result in the need for additional fill. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • The preserve is bisected with a discharge swale and should be left outside of the water management area. The County may not accept the preserve with a drainage easement through the middle like this. • County and SFWMD drainage rules will require a reduced discharge from the site of 0.15cfs/acre. This should help with any overburdened outfall ditches. • A floodplain analysis was done to show that regional floodplain issues are not adversely impacted by the proposed development. The SFWMD is still reviewing this. • Inverted crown roadways proposed for the project should be efficient in directing stormwater internally and reducing costs. This also supports the higher density proposed. • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. The developer should bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including improved drainage swales. ERP cross sections show 3:1 slopes within the County's right of way which may not be acceptable. The swales will also need to be improved not only offsite, but onsite to maintain flow consistent with the resident's photos noting flooding in these areas. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision to the north includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into 1-75. Review of these swales (photos in link) find that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these. A stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales from the County and/or developer. • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. This interconnection will cause conflicts with the utilities and require a County right of way permit. • Perimeter berm elevations around the new project are proposed at elevation 12.3 NAVD. The expected flood waters get high above the edge of pavement of the existing roadway. Roadside swales in these areas it may be 3 to 1 or greater not allowing them to be sodded, but be used in native ground cover. This may not be acceptable in the right of way and need to be addressed during the County right of way permitting. The ERP should be consistent with these requirements and the flow way should be reestablished along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard. • The elevation differential may require that the reconstruction of Palm Springs Boulevard be elevated also to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples,Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The fact that the site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway with side yards directly abutting the roadway will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but should include a 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall to provide additional screening. Homes are going to be set close together it is possible that side yard equipment and would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The ERP shows retaining walls will be used in some areas to segregate the preserve from the water management facilities and may also be required to flatten out slopes as things are more detailed along Palm Springs Boulevard and/or coordinated into a perimeter wall for visual purposes. 3. Utilities • Utility provisions should be made to accommodate the project with connections to the existing utilities on Palm Springs Boulevard. • Looped water distribution system will benefit the community with better fire protection and water quality. • The sanitary sewer system will need to have two onsite pump stations to accommodate the centralized sewage collection. • A sewage force main connection will be required on Palm Spring Boulevard. • A regional pump station network analysis will need to be done to make sure that the existing pumps remain online when the new pump(s) are added. • The County's utility services should be more than adequate to accept the proposed development. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. 4. Access/Traffic • The Traffic Impact Statement shows only the single project. As this project is being processed with both applications. Cumulative impacts should be analyzed and distribution should be handled accordingly. Request for combined Traffic Impact Statement was not provided or addressed. These should be considered together as a single application for traffic impact analysis and turn lane requirements. • The Traffic Impact Statement for the project does not address the necessary improvements that may be required on Palm Springs Boulevard and/or the Radio Lane to accommodate turning movements. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples,Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com • Alignment of the driveways between the MAC and Triad project will require coordination to prevent awkward driving motions. • The elimination of sidewalks and bike lanes in these neighborhood though will put people in the road right of way. The internal roadways are proposed with an inverted crown. This means that the middle of the road will have water in it during rainfall events. This puts pedestrians walking on the apron, which could be a hazard. • The tie in of the project inverted crown roads with the existing Palm Springs Boulevard will result in some grading challenges at the project entries. This will be exacerbated by needing to maintain the perimeter berm for the stormwater management requirements. The new roadway may need to be considerably higher than the existing roadway. • The swale along Palm Springs Boulevard will need to be maintained outside of the turning radii for traffic safety. Below is the link to recent site photos: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547ficObn4vxlct2h5mnhwO I believe this provides an outline of the open space, drainage, utility, and traffic issues associated with the referenced application. These projects need to be considered together as the impacts of both need to be considered as one. Please look this over and let me know if you have any comments, questions, or require any additional information regarding this. Sincerely, 40°44 Chris Hagan 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples,Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com AREA ANALYSIS OF MAC AND TRIAD ERP AND PUD PERMIT APPLICATIONS TOTALS PERCENTS 21.51 ERP PLANS MAY 2017 WEST SIDE AC EST. EAST SIDE AC EST. 657200400 10.75 6572032005 10.75 21.5 IN-BASIN 8.64 IN-BASIN 10.16 18.8 OUT-BASIN 2.11 OUT-BASIN 0.59 2.7 TOTAL 10.75 TOTAL 10.75 21.5 IN-BASIN BREAKDOWN LAKE 0.79 LAKE 0.78 TOTAL BUILDING 2.39 TOTAL BUILDING 2.4 4.79 TOTAL PAVEMENT 1.73 TOTAL PAVEMENT 1.72 3.45 WATER MGT 0.17 WATER MGT 0.14 PRESERVE 0 1.4 1.4 TOTAL OPEN/PERVIOUS 3.56 TOTAL OPEN/PERVIOUS 3.72 7.28 „ TOTAL: 8.64 TOTAL: 10.16 18.8 OUTSIDE-BASIN BREAKDOWN PRESERVE AREA 1.3 PRESERVE AREA 0 1.3 BACKSIDE OF BERM 0.81 BACKSIDE OF BERM 0.59 1.4 TOTAL: 2.11 TOTAL: 0.59 11.86 55.2% MAC(WEST SIDE)BREAKDOWN TRIAD(EAST SIDE)BREAKDOWN LAKE 0.69 LAKE 0.62 POTENTIAL BLDG FP 3.03 POTENTIAL BLDG FP 3.08 6.11 PAVEMENT/WALKS 1.09 PAVEMENT/WALKS 1.07 2.16 WATER MGT 0.18 WATER MGT 0.17 OPEN SPACE: OPEN SPACE: RESIDENTIAL 2.28 RESIDENTIAL 2.28 4.56 R.O.W. 0.47 R.O.W. 0.47 0.94 BUFFER/OTHER 1.71 BUFFER/OTHER 1.61 3.32 PRESERVE 1.31 PRESERVE 1.45 2.76 SUB-TOTAL 0/8: 5.77 SUB-TOTAL O/S: 5.81 13.24 61.6% 10.76 10.75 21.51 LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR SHEET INDEX VRs PAWN FROM MU COMMITMENS -1111 nFIA516 PLOD&UNO1AcCAaS .TED 1117 ■ I■'.Y PLACE WESTNUMBER SHEET DESCRIPTION RPMCM AM)unsaoTS l-PAro VACATES wNou OLLF CM AM)AN Pu2A UNIT MAP OR NAT 11411F0F,As DP VACATES GTO THEDFL 1 COVER SHEET 21,PUNK MCSPOS OF COLLIER COUNTY,RONDINPUT A 6.PAGE 2 GENERAL NOTES PART OF SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49,RANGE 26E, 3 FASTING CONDITIONS WITH AERIAL AND TOPO COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA 4 MASTER SITE PLAN 5 MASTER VILIFY PLAN PREPAREDFOR: E MASTER DRAINAGE AND LOT GRADING PUN 7 PIAN AND PROFILE-HADLEY STREET WEST D.R. HORTON, INC. B PLAN AND PROFILE-TM^NING STREET 9 PLAN AND PROFILE-HADLEY PUCE WEST 10541 BEN C. PRATT SIX MILE CYPRESS PARKWAY, SUITE 100 ,D TYPICAL SECTIONS PAVING,GRADING,AND DRAINAGE DETAILS FORT MYERS, FL 33966 12 STANDARD GENERAL AND POTABLE WATER DETNIS 13 STANDARD WASTEWATER DETAILS (239) 225-2600 14 EROSION CONTROL PLAN a AP.nNNR:v N. n i�lm sil 7- ,21 .v m»L.�s s i a "ow a / prow.,PS -:',. ''* .,t !: c ..; ' A ATTACHMENTS /. PROPERTY ZONING INFO A PRESERVE AREA MANAGEMENT PUN e Nm¢, . ZONING DATA SHEET �.05Ba '7 �BLB.0mP REVISIONS /t QWtln✓t5 No. DATE REVISION APPROVED PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION FODONUMaER 65720040000 PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT SITE BUILDING INFORMATION a*uwwn2auaE FOOTAGE GE)Fx -s.aaB ENGINEERING 6610 Willow Park Drive,Suite 200 eAve... . RL aTMM NAv�a.�GNYION R MRacwAPt Awoa Naples,Florida 34109(239)597-0575 DATE PROJECT NC FAX:(239)597-0578 MATIONS BASED ON NORTH AMEwAN www.consult-Iwa.com APRIL,2017 130019.02.00 19.02.00 .,......a,....a. .,...,.......�-....,_ n_.____ r WATER MOP,.AND SM.NOTES. GENEROL NOTES =======----"'----- , ....„.----.......-...........-..;--- ' -,........- ' ' . ,==:-....• ' EL.:::::::i.',;liZ;I:Ei„FiaT4'EE::::E:E:-='="" •,: ' ,ifffff,T7JEWE°P-Itit-riNg5gIli-'::7°'''E" UST OF STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS rew mwemmu IE. A.SSREVUTION ----- - -- - — - - -------.-- --- - --.-,----__...- :,--,=,-,, :i1REE:.--------":---- ---- .. ----- - - ------„-....... -- --- - ,-„„-- - - „ ..--,------------- ----,-. - --- - CC.LCATIL WY...{ ,.., 10.1.1.WZMC, K ' :=:::========------ ------- - --,--,-- - - - --T..- - ---- - --„- , PAVEMENT WRONG 0.1.SIGNING NOTES: p.m eme.arer oc eusuc mo.usaxre m Eumcx ng.fo.ol,eownot., .,..soncrocworrE nec no FoRK..o.cmcw.urEnK sece niu.........TER kopu mcxu amE cowmen.,coroacior uGm op.. „------- - -_ - , -------„---- „______ , ,----_-_--- -,---- _ ,------„ - - D.R HORTON,INC. mwr HADLEY PLACE WEST INCRIIIIRING GENERAL NOTES .7;;119MM r—'02,3001.2i10.101 1-77.72 .....,,,_ ,.. , , .. * : '.,::.;:.'•:;.. ... 1; ',., /' LEGEND ftPcosEDPBEnvt if / °5 , PROPERTY BOUNDARY 10 75 AC RESERVE AREA 1 30 AC TOTAL CLEARING AREA 9 45 AC . I ALL ELEVAIT.6 REFERENCE NoWD 19B8 , ',' ..'. } . /.... NOTES JR. , . ,. . , , -. !,,:..-..=c,=.:=.,=,.z..-..z7..:.:1•4?.L } . •,...; ;; ,, . . . ..., ., -.... . ... .-'-: ....... .•.' ,‘ A.:.:".:••,,, _ ..— - - rafiroAdir ., ,..... . . . „%.,_:::„ --e?..r:7,-r,--1-r?;- ._....,....,_,...,_...,......________,..,.......,.,.... D.R.HORTON,INC P.M" niii HADLEY PLACE WEST .,,.,zi... EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH AERIAL AND TOPS .0,7;0,,0,00 re...0313.19o.E. czr•-- 11=111E=EMM ! NOTE THE PRESERVE TRACT SHALL BE SUPPLBAENTED WITH /-PROPERTY BOUNDARY ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS TO SATIS38 ROTHLANDSCARE PA.SPRINGS,ILLAGE ZiL..E48=3.114.E8484EN4..gcl,NATIVE PRESERVE ZONING RM3 12373 3 I-1 r 1 I -7'77.77:71.4'7 11C PRESERVE I ' V3.* *.**3*,. 3. 33 I i83•3..*• .3 . • In===7M,MIA 78 i 20 ACRES • , ' ' ' +I • •• . 7 I // ,,F171 - LEGEND 'N II Ir'rf'r' p o/3 AC I I I PROPOSED.. 1 , LT 1 1 ,3,3811.38s3 raw.= n I ' 1 I I 1 1 ; .... ® NATIVE PRESERVE SIGNS _./ 1 1 LAND USE TABLE i , 1 I I 1 r. AKA KRIM PERCENTAGE i 1 1 ez 31 ao 3g 1 1 38 37 35 35 1 i 2 I 1 Fil'air.7.'"' 1 I ..7 1 =-":,17 -=--J-1- , .. 77.777 77 20141.PLIO COMMERCIAL .3388331 1,1 I 1.01.AL 1075 .093 inlIMENIMIFIri ---,—, 1 1 ot.v....1..., : r 3331AC KID ORDINANCE103-503 ,I I 27 28 29 30 1 I 31 32 33 33 3883,833.r I' I ' 1 o3383E8,3338-1-3.- 5 1, I 1 1 8 1 1 1 1 NADIEV PLACIEAST 3.33.3,3,r33,83 333333333.8833333 "'" ' 1 ' Lli ti . 2 — _I L._ ZONING TRIAD RPUD ,...,33.3.3338, ' ........,„„.„. - iiimmENNINF 1 ,,„„., 111111 :1111 1--I '1 26 5 25 23 23 1 1 22 21 20 19 I , 1 1 1 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES , aujitilliffil II /1 , ......... ---- lifilliLjWi I H. •PLA. WE88 EIX:03 p 138 III, • I 1,0.- 3833c83o.38.8,8833 ' I73:g3F3377;;;;;;;;T PLAN 83 PROFILE 51313E3TINDEX . 9 . 11 12 13 la 15 lb 12 . 1 1911, 0 f J L - li ',: IL ""EFEELTI'ZINVTI'l=1.1-4,70.:Z'Ar=, 0, `, ''''r7--- --- --71111111111111111111.1 UNIT SUMMARY _42,__. — — _. -- _ 1 1 ZONING C 3 W a 7„ms REFfirra if: ".', ::: D.R.HORTON,INC HADLEY PLACE WEST ENGINEERING esTR7717-,...,, MASTER SITE PIAN .7. 777. — ,— 7. ... "73;219 o2 oo r'''''04 130019020.SPO1 17173'14 -:=7,:ru. PROPER,BOUN0301–‘ i. \ LEGEND ` II I PPnPoem nnuE DESCAPTION sFwm -' j .. .-__... T 1' ._..._I 1,'L....22,,,,:' ry /)Frx1IN BOX ii MD unn 11( 1 - .-_ r... WiRNGIE) j i I a2 0 40 39 I1 le ro Y_ ~ • Wi�.MIBIEJ I am'''''vn N 1, I ......3 .T yr _ sFMely - FIE HIIXNMAS " .M '� T C;� Y PONFR PoLF s � y r .---a- w --. 'uL y'}�" 9k'_. Wn Wr PII6FRVFF WA WA u F I WA WA PAVEMENT I ,,,,WAW.1 W. OO9ALK I I I lid E a Iii I 1 / - f._._ #`_ — o,O " �...�.` MT TO PERFORM WORKANO,OR _>. NPaL�aMNTOFMAv,aa>vaEO .. _ t vnm rviNF aaw Pw anlA+vw wz !ONOaaOLANF .......,..,....re.-.b.....eM..-..-'��.,.......�..�...,.«.�..�..... D.R.HORTON,INC. ,. HADLEY PLACE WEST ° ' ��3M'i y�1ihoi MASTER UTLITY PLAN ., BIOIN!!lIXO ,,,m w, w1300190200 I"L.,'".,OS 11001902000 UP01 r71A .=,-,....0—,...... l I ROPLRnBODNoaRv\ LEGEND \ $ { N 3 1e,'• Fxenru ProrosEo POrGnC DEscwrvrroN AMMY MYER II: �r l°II „ WaG19N W9 F0.iv NKR LI II II _ Y :1; G� iI ,.it,Nl - tt�\s ,o _ w_ uFAry TW3M6rvDFN INLET/AINCLION BOX wDBIF sroRe 4,..41,44,„,„„„„4„...1,,,, 'B"s'* ■ STORMaEwo b __ a� . _ x K DAMMAM w :!. ASSEMBLYD � N, 2 � .,3fi 1 3 µ I w: w :170;1' .... I I I I !!l.enR�P.17. i T W. :,1 we u'' %P' ei I �,,I I l ,, ,„ �_ W. rro,,, ,, I,l — �” I$ , `Vr W WA W. PW.WEWIrR � RI .1 Y1 T Ee z9 3a 31 I� 3z 3 ))ill g . [ 1„ 1 7 WA MANAGEMENT SUMMARY __— .-... °J .:tr.®n N PY,w1EM 9 T i'll - - I G1 vuO ui �! I E S b I 1 21 20 9 IIN J 3D9 ,r L1 11k J -- n ,' vem I'/ : NT TOE WEST WC., 1l 111LE �_ � 4 11111 1111 L' -- _ u I,, r' .., 1p11 12 13 I V IB M p. POLAL NPO Ir PLAN 8 PROFILE SLIDELONDE2( --4-0,111-- ,n„� ,„p I i I I AREA OUTSIDE CONTROLLED ' �- — f �.'. L. ” t,IC DRAINAGE BASIN BASIN 1N` ea lye +� LAND USE THT lAC.S1 _ 1�. .. •, ..,..•.ate R1's ..m, .. ...�� Yt ro ill 2 1 RADIONOM It -�"x,"''5 ; -- � /VENOM PRaroPuan WOW -.\ AND/OR MAINTENANCE IN PUBLIC MGM Or II --.__.__....,.__.___._... :wAV IS REOUIRFOPpt WORK WIn11N DE %t —- —_.____._._--.._--_—_ _ 1_ .W 0RR0nouNE Rrn■,,■\ D.R.HORTON,INC. HADLEY PLACE WEST ENGINEERING Pbne. a 6952 warm....m „ MASTER DRAINAGE AND LOT GRADING PLAN 77 ..."..,,,..A�e .,.. ....9w — ..m. v. w ��130019.02.W Iw 0613W190200C DEL I fi",1e .., t I �.' ®•" \ tif.l-i PROPERTY.oUw .� 1 ^1 hiIH �� dw, F i ' I 62 21 — 37 36 35 41 S40 39 381' a .Mam 1 mii .- �" 1 � •- I 2] 20 29 30 31 32 33 34 It( t6 5 f '°'i I I I H- 6 4111Trilik 14 t4, , ., „„., F i , __,_ -[ — „ ,,,,,6".#• '' " lin 1 1 ,..1................•••"7-,--•- 19' w.., s 11 111 .w. A i 111 1111 ms MAN R PROM I.MILLI 2,401. ....... M...._....._. ,.,,............_...„r.....,.r ■�■ reno-�e,sma zoo c"`"` D.R.HORTON,INC. HADLEY PLACE WEST Wat sswww���' ;„�MB„„, , „° •NOI �' ®zest Lesssz '^' . e ,, z1s,E PLAN AND PROFILE-HADLEY STREET WEST vpt[300t50200 19'..4107 130o19o200C Pro' 177,74 °']'1 ,,,,,==:L. 1- - PROPERTY BOUNDARY� i „nF e .d T, I I ] 647.'S, a 3 2` I I 1.74:4i4 pi n dc5c , . . , . . . , . , l® 9 II`� y/���.� e n /_ e_ i 10 1... , ,�I�E ux __—....., •, • .... ..... .I. .. j ....4,-r i ell —— r I ,P 1 1 zc, sx <z- T I1 I TxE ril"1111 ' i'''i E' 1:e I � I i I I I I I I a ril 44 0 90 11���F EH 22 0 II w'c �I e..v� , 1J 111111 1Ji m asi I I ' °' I I J 4.00 4.15 •~•�•,.�.r,..n...M�V~ye. ..--..•�- .........,...e.„.. W � D.R.HORTON,INC. mss,.. HADLEY PLACE WEST ble R191s9r4i5.6R191+s,0P9 ,mcr. Potpie ic3^•i of PLAN AND PROFILE-TWINING STREET „ ..a .y. ...., ,,, lNOIN!lIIINO ,,. ,.. "'*1 300190200 1.e, 0B 13001902000 PPo2 I°6 ata „aw,�.aw aye . �„ 5 mI I I 6 1 111. i,.al :.: }r''''' 802£1128 800"04,4 I 26 25 24 23 �22.a 20 19 ' C 1......... '1 10° 13 �1 1a I 1 ui; 1" : ,, .I iii,=,.. i5 20 20 to e TA= 10 , I J� lisF� 1r1 ..,. IIIiIllII ,a � ¢,� 4 -: Eft I 1 1 W nit"r o�..$ ��.= D.R.HORTON,INC. °1O1K` nr•com a 81 fl ,...1.... HADLEY PLACE WEST ENGINEERING` lets E PLAN AND PROFILE-HADLEY PLACE WEST as.z. .,, :d. . �. 0111300190200 11e0913001902JOC PPo3 I9 w�14 Wv_ erwJ -- m. ,0„.„.,-..,w ww.. r .7. . ..W ��- _- ' ___ - wn � � a, . - :o �, SECTION Cl-CI O ,..; ' _— 'I SECTION C-C y' .. [ ,I 1 I [ ' 1 ,,,. .�",. •.,,...., ., ., .. w. �1' mb .....,.. SSL. 1 . L -i+i++- TYPICAL SECTIONS INDEX SECTION C2-C2 SECTION D-D "" XIS kW , ♦ e r ,. t r 5 .vu, [' xx, ♦ ♦ , ,a�.u. P , v , •.vl,n xmc.ui mua uu, anrt, 1111.1 ..rn,u, . n`,w I I ,�iiwm ' _... nuu ,.r.r r.m SECTION H-H SECTION E-E SECTION G-G PRESERVE a SECTION e,i pliP ,,,, ,sgn‘ '''In..! 1111111111M LOT WWII , ... x SECTION I-I SECTION 1-1 SECTION K-K ` SECTION L-L SECTIONPRESERVE a DETENTION SECTION pm M14 "OTTrORAL PLAMING REQUIREMENTS w�v wy..v,�.x _ `^� ,. .� _..11m_,5.... .-. LITTORAL PLANTING TABLE imAiNunonnoN suMMAxr ;�"�,'M":.a:.ww a",:,� - `..' ... :717.776i,=== .,..�.m., r,.Wm,,..m..,.a m�o"o w,J TYPICAL LAKE SECTION W/LITTORAL SHELF TYPICAL LAKE SECTION W D R HORTON,INC HADLEY PLACE WEST �._. ._-.,-......_ .�.,_.._ _.-. �as»sn8s�s?ac-�i»°s'9 os�e nn..r. Ao�l ,,, M,,, ,,, ENOINUWNG Eelsss lerssz w w TYPICAL SECTIONS "7:0'0100200 I x�7to 130019020.4101 170 714 -:`,.=.7.'::- ...... ee®RIeesaesmm©®aP o a�._. .°,';.÷::,i' i 17 I `O J r/ r r ` STOP SIGN L J�• ^• I TYPICAL HEIGHT&LATERAL LOCATION .`E� � -- ��� -- TYPICAL ROAD CROSS SECTION 'n^°„ R3I PRESERVE • lLMCDOam!DETAIL .,.__...—._—_�"..,_-..' "M —M .occ�o .,.,..,, �c0 N BOX __ __ __.__..,__._.. TYPICAL SIDEWALK DETAILy NATIVE a ^M+��^ar a.„ �, (PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT), AREA SIGN DETAIL LITTORAL SHELF PLANTING r AREA SIGN DETAIL v»^ I e •°�°°..,.aaa. I mom" ® ' - SIONS ",...._. . . PnaEDEND se LMITERED END m s w �.w=a TYPICAL RIBBON FILL SECTION . I F.D.O.T."F"CURB AND GUTTER cue ROrts. II W ._ -7'•ilial- _L . 111i..1ll t TYPICAL LO !=`,U7,==-L'“°'''" n ,,,., .v.,_.-, . .. ® GRADING DETAIL ;,727.:-^,r,•,;;T:ra.,,,T,z,„„, „.,,,,,„„ 1"1 .. I'I YARD DRAIN DETNL NOIEREDEM)DETAIL VALLEY GUTTER INLET DETAIL eWoydWnnpM wn mo D R HORTON,INC. HADLEV PLACE WEST R :97:177 i/?'�R3»f9�a t ,ni[ rroRc1. INOINUIUNO rrond. ne ie sss 'n'� PAVING,GRADING,AND DRAINAGE DETAILS 1^^ „.,,,,,,,,,,r:4,.e ,,.Hw .... -- _.. w. w. �t?001903.00 Iu 111300190MOC 0001 11114 ' .....W:1 ......W4..... ..1.:T,':r•V ; _I:- ._ -- - E N , \ .m, exe.e. .tis. .._. W ''''''''-'9 "'P uruu -I;µ Mt WIMP,RPM ,.r M--a Ga an „i... i n ,wt, Ir , __--.: rot, y i . aas•�s- .r. r 1 ..� 1 y -- r. ''r mss. lit mina .1,-. ti I np ! a :� �` ,a pint e C. F- - neat"''.-, _ter ....eww. .Flan-Li -'---•- .'.°.,a, _ _ - - -_;�--,- " x�m tM i11 _r. sere �:.o:d '''',- _ .....w_ g , �_s.. --nermn:'rs_==- ecowma.Perk u're Suite 200 ":..,r' new.. D .HORTON,INC. R�/A\ ¢3 ss B 5' HADLEY PLACE WEST ENGINEERING ®�ect``°e eis�wnwx e " mrr STANDARD GENERAL AND POTABLE WATER DETAILS tj ""' Aw ._. _.. .., OOt402mp INe12 13001902000 0001 I�r2.td 91,76.Oli:71 7:0 ••• • a ,- 1 „,- I yM II "26 EEE/C/C _ >.... ~ m ,_.la,,,'�� r1 ::- ,wok �� a ._''. e \hi 1 ..,..._. P.=_. Fes_ W_ ,.M«aw_B«a MO cam nisei,..,,,,,,LL, ~ m ! 'IR,,( "\rZZ ,I r MI 11 N I� 1/ e .....- -1 ilia ki *11 w.v no, 1 m...Flawwe Qom.w,q' , a..csow-ca.....w: allarihrkenVoite NO ....L.”' D.R.HORTON,INC. `w'.' HADLEY PLACE WESTwamp Bam - . E ,. ' ~' ENGINEERING e>6l53am w. STANDARD WASTEWATER DETAILS .,. uw ~ — 130119133.W r"."'13mon 9D3ppC um 17374 14 „aw.,...a.o w°• .1RIJIllHi- , q _ DOUBLE ROW ......... 21.222 511N141 2 52.22 -:411141110P(' :EriFi5EE17:1-,7i7,FF'"'"'''"='7"-.2- „i STAKE•FILTER FABRIC GENERAL NOTES 5TA CONSTRUCI MN OF A FILTER BARRIER T=Er:Vs"o=o=rire'::cuounnors SPECIFIC APPUCATION `' ”' CONSTRUCTION OF A SYNTHETIC SOCK BARRIER "- TiS„,,zz,F.:=gf=7.1.=".7:n— ,'=„=0,•=7,4.,-.=1.1.:,.:,:„0-7!:.,„:=:,,F....-, 'H.. q INLET SEDIMENT FILTER .' ..., — —I PROPER PLACEMENT OF SYNTIIII1 IC SOCK BARRIER IN A DRAINAGE WAY PROPER PLACEMENT OF A FILTER 1 BARRIER IN A DRAINAGE WAY 4,, 481 2,120 f/MIC . 2 i4 1.. 4...... 171 07242,9=2T0tNiT''' '61=2°1:1-1gTOZ „ SOD ORO.INLE7 PROTECTION SE01/411,11-FENCE DETAIL rk,sn.qe I SEDIMENTATION/EROSION CONTROL OFT.,T ' ' ‘ ''......-FEFFit=cE• afLircL•cciniiii -i' ,' , , ..'.' N.= i r'',,, „_. ,/ ,4.4.114, Sm.m.....1' —— —1--—1---'';'-7r------- t'' -...m., ... . "". 1=, - ...,:;°,..Fgoc. L.—.„--- . , . ,,-- H ,,,,,,,,=,,,,.=:-.,,,,. ,r,,,r--o "."=,:::•11%%-,.---Jarzr. ,'Z'":4' "....X"""". ,2 TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC SOCK SEDIMENT BARRIER r===`;'1"41X=.,.., SILT FENCE LOCATION .....n. 244.001.22.1 OW1,0, 4" 22.,,22...2 IvV...........,.......12.,..-......4...............a.,...,...21,....2.2,.., JD R HORTON,INC '""''' ELULI :975FirSiTAM9jsE7'070 .,2":4 .7..._,,,, HADLEY PLACE WEST !NGINIWNO "*ndalEFTI'ra'n "` '"—'''" EROSION CONTROL PLAN "7;1902 co 14130019010CC ECO1 ... ... .. .... - . HADLEY PLACE WEST Jw&IPLAT BOOK PAGE SHEET 1 OF 2 We. * 1 A REPLAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 1,3 AND 5 AND ENGINEERING ig........ , 81110 WILLOW PAW OWE,SLATE SOO AmeillmaR.S skoshmliNAPLES,MORITA HMO DEDICATIONSMESERVATIONS MMNFRIONIMILIMIN I THAT PART OF VACATED CALLE DEL RAY ....1.711,07.71S7SFAX1230,77.78 FLEHROA GEATIEICATE OF ALITHOWATISNP LESBOS, =prof-TOTER PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.1 -......1.r1,M1P..5..,... lerowtv.,AE44,ror nrst PRESENTS.,,,-%r.NORTON.lg.,THE OWNER OF ME LANDS MUSSED HEREON.HAVE GUSED PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 A MO..TO ME ware PUCE HOMEOWNER Asso.nox.oic.: SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 sou-ni RANGE 26 EAST Nu7pE'c nn nEc ,c,Ern 0 n n.. ' AZ;:',IT,L--1'4 4711.1:=10`114.`,..";),,,`tr.1.7.7.7.!;:,,17.•"="LE, :=1.?,, MO VAINTEWICE COLLIER COUNITY,FLORIDA . ,. ORDED RA HOC FO . THE OFFICIAL DEPICTION OF TIE SUBDIVIDED LANDS HEREIN ANO WIU.IN NO CIRCUMSTANCES BE SUPPLANTED IN AUTIORITI BY PM OTHER 2. Al mom.EASERIMM ILL.)FON SIONNIFAIEN MNAGLIONI R/RPOSES WM,RESPONSIBIS.FON...RENO.. GRAPHIC OR DIGITAL FORM OF THE PLAT THERE MAY BE 3. AL Lmoscsm aum2N osaKIFIS 7ES'E,..'''''''''ury r'''''''''''''''' ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE NOT RECOPOED ON IHIS PLAT 2. No.LAKE 1/NRIENANCE EASEMENTS ELME)WIN RESPONSIBILT MP MAINTENANCE. THAT MAY BE FOUND IN TIE PUBLIC RECORDS OF IHE COUNTY. s. AL mosss EASEMENTS,A.E.)WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR BANIENANCE. O. 4.1.PROW.USE71.73 ILE,WIN RESPONSIBILITY FOR IMANTE.NCE T COUNTYAPPROVALS, ' =44C'E.trc:ZvgD4 fAs'="kal,1:n7.VE irrer2o"=`CR War orr.',1,=1,17 .7:11,1=1,T,=LPNTrgu='''.';'-"Z•2,:or M7,1=LVIMUL'IP= "--"".• 'I ,n='7 .. III di lit- '' IiIM i o— IIR COUNTY ENGINEER =or OMTZOTrAln79HLZroa"NeaslcrOor Ziinw7ogrOr ZoIrCralIZ 7u3'''''.1fr's°Z.,1,`"°"'“' 2'''4".,.`,T.'"'"'"`""'''''''• ,,,'`,.'",0"7"""',..17t11161=o,T"'" "'''''" •''''''""""-'n'"" %,...,:aiLv.:010.....aral A DEO.TE TO M..couNre, NV.. J1.1.1 ....;,. ;II. ...1111LIcri, oBLoso couwry pNoitiE,p .•,,,.::,, ,,.,,,,, .T.,,„::,:,,,,,,, V....-;1111111,111111-111 2. /1.1 DRAINAGE EASEMENTS(D.E.)AS S1.10.HEREON STMOLIT RESPONSIBIUT7 FOR MNINTEMANCE .-r All':"1:7,,' IP,allp! - COUNT/SURVEYOR J. Al Am morLNAHCE EAsmserm VALI AS SHONA HEREON STMONT RESPONSIBIT FOR I/WT.47CE 22 ...,,,, I L. 1IN$I- 4111110. THE PUT NVAGE1,74;711 CPL.COUNT,SURVEYOR me_DAY CC 4 7/Cr CEA:TT-HOU RESPONSIBILITY FOR.INTENANCE AND SUBIEM TO ME CONDEMNS OF ME DED.TION 14 C. MCC.TO COWER COUNTY WATER-SERER Mom, I14 A I. THAT ALL COUNTY UTLITY USENENTS M..)FOR POTABLE WATER,NON-POT.,IRRIGATION WATER AND/OR Wp:p.T.TO rirgER'cort,rreal IHREETRF.T,LorTUI a"7.4":6171%,477.7a4:1 1111a-10.11111-jai Flik0P111.1.-wa...7%in 'II IRRIGATON WAT.AND/OR.STERATER WILT SySTEws.oR PORTIOPOS)MEREOF 7.1.11.1 THE PLAITED Ili.AFTER 'C'OtEll'Ir=7ACI1'.7ES=1 rc'm=ENT,Z1171t 417TES'PO'NXIL7PrgIVINLrE'C'i'111E=74COUNTY ATTORNEY osos.AREA Am PROJECT LOCATION Tcr PUT kr9ROMFA,7,,111 GOWER couxr,Armems Am_ow ' rI2L'ol"co=g23"3',773/n-r4g,z..-...4-1.=,-„vr--=,z7,„,Tznoz:712 NOT TO SON.E TELISARO'"Pr;IrirE17-07FTOTWglinn=s0FIZA="t4/3 TiScRIV"1%7I'VjTA.112r71:12 ACKNOWLEDGMENT scull A STONE msomo Loom,Artomm D. OEMEATE TO COWER COUNT.IPS FRANCRISEEs,ANo ME GEM.NARLEs nos RESCUE DISTIMCi: rotT.,,E Of vFMA., ' tANEITY'AN'inTRAErSELTEWCIENCEr A.WTOISUNISTONS7471110-R'N.T=OrRPC''P"'"' Ic1,1E FOREGONE DEOln,NLAS ACKNOWLECCED BEFORE NE-MIS_Om COUNTY COMMISSION APPROVAL L DEDIGTE TO ALL LICENSED OR FUNCHISED PM.OR PRIVATE UTILITIES: LIZVAITISTEZO'NLY707=701rOrR7,41,NCOICZ"'"''''''''''' DRS PVT APPROW:1 FOR RECORD..IN A REGO.OPEN KUNO BY-11.1E BOARD OF ' Ezi.,..cilit-4,077—Pm-,..tJx—w-m1„,wc.z.%,=.4...V1717-14TROECUIAOULMUEZ. MARECA-1.1. [MAK,couoiSSONERS OF COLLIER COON,rtORICA nib OM wr....0 AMOY PICO SW/ORE Mily0TAPifigaPiziKEIVeLgE7AiR:17,za litiftVilION:NNKZOINiitYjAggktill NAME WPM.PRIWED OR STALIPMS mon'An.,[PAM. !raiCoZraccrrmtr''' Knan wrort ..c.c. .1•71=17.=2, 0„,,,,,„v caw FILING RECORD , :NIZZSi7,7LZ3r1/FPNLAT;.Orcstg3=LI:Ars'Zqr iTT=e' FER^T mo m.Km I333 Rm.F.moom 2, LN..R,,.. IM AITIEsS MIEREcE.IPS MOSNsMISO OMER NM ms-AM IMM PREM..M BE 9...TH. .7,1,47,NT,R07,..:T7 ALL OF BLOCKS I(LOTS 1-7)3(1.07S'ErIMMGTEO GLLE Cp.RAY)I.70 S(LOTS DAMON FMSLISIO.AS,MORIN.NC. Km..IT.F.A NITNI7AS.k. SONNATNON PENTroosT ix AND FOR COLDER Meg,EMI. WITNESS NAM NOTES: NAAS (1/7) OF S.TION SA, TOWNSHIP AS SOO., RANCE 213 DV BEARS i HEREBY CERT.THAT IsItS PUT.9 PREPARED mow A BOUNDARY SURVEY OF 11-1E ,.„,,w,.,,p Appr,comyyrys,o,,5,,,RE9,NoRE op,s,,, OF C.,.T77.F.Ant,.AS MEASED.FIONSIA STAMM.LT IS IURMER CERMET, r.fiL,7 A,-mmrg,==41',g„Tr,zro,'---: `,:``°24•... 5- SEr PRIOR TO FINY.ACCEPTANCE OF NE REOUIRED NPRGAISINTS. A.TH.PROJEcT L.TES IMAIN ME TWO RAM X ORDINANCE 05-11.IS ANDIDED. P.1NC. 4,==...'“Z..Z...' " SUR VEYOR'S SE, HADLEY PLACE WESTA��/A (PLAT BOOK PAGE '[n SHEET 2OF2 A REPEAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 1,3 AND 5 AND " EHGIN�EEMSS EINGu THAT PART OF VACATED CALLE DEL RAYNAPLES" 3 ,2,00,5"5°,"4 "-0,0 « 150 PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.1 ,,,,,,o„„,.=s,s„Lss0 PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA S' ,w0.adxa..eo4,4„4,4,..., '111 '.. ,a 9 4° "s .1 50 li rA I.7.,,,wnox . isl CLIME LINEN 14,401115 DELIA C1•355 50.4424C C1.0 t' r, TilACT C4,3 1,02'55.0rE 1,110.54' as couoin.Ns,Kr5E14ENT n , Raea m Szsm aa8-a„ 544144 mlo 54.34' oCA 12.52' 25.00'zera, N75.17121 12.32. T�,.,o sta. m,o .... t .'a a ••s I ii 8 8 .,.,. au Q a 8 n 8 44 8 x ` •$ss I8 a C$ a _ 41 R 4.,,5�g_-lt a,2 "„ a„ 5.E �StILIVOrll „ ",5 4 x,o�NPC PACE ZE Baa. Cu 12.52' mow nal, xrsst 5144 R L mkrvccu-sesa-ysc-_-_-� - gin * . , ti R o yw ;i 4, In p14 um o[) wa'� .. 8 C1e 85 _ s xm nvmwcx MONUMENT u.r_VAC_ _NA_ _A,AL, r».� j>a,44 5�s' 3e N • i."s a ANGLE ES SIN an ENT m.u 44x515 • R Rn ilk.k. I }i--ao 34 ea - '°44"5.. § / ' xx .'aa 1. �a a 8 x, ,.. c " ^= ata ,0.x..551 a .rooOOB,x os 5,w ow"e.5x cs az, x51 o,2 sumo• sax a`4 aa• ` _ ssr CIS 12.52' 25.W'21441'0r N7591'2414 11.311. : C17 25.75. .,, r.... -T I 1 , , �„5E t 1 cxo ,5e, „m 5.na ,wx 5x`4 �.w0.,8 T t I-",o� �„ ua o .,. -,i-,m 15,2„4_ta a_ moo. o gar LINE tallN.-' sevma�w d _$zs g_a "8 e a •�8 x 8 m . { SINE MARINO LO14,4 . Li Nea38.022 17 Or a"��"m�_J, I o 8 eo, 88-,2,,2 }g.T .--,sm g-... L2 SOSM.531 20 15. v5 a . swam o ,BBo.Odea L4 454105.411 30 CO' EWE. a A A V x•.amE 447.00 ,,.5. oE) 8 L5 552,5.0.4.111 MOO' g._ffilo___i,2J4__3o.1¢_ _w.N___r»:IP'___i..1:ry3w3___.Yao-__34.9_MIA. N L7 1032,e'53I 3 00' 11 LA triAATP.11, 5.0, a s rg 4;'g ,o ci9 n .BJ, ^80, f8, ,4 es s o<^g •Z8 , $a n., LI KM,. ,xm it _8 8 88_ SS s 9_ s c8 C8o a C8 _?iA ,, --i-30.10.---50 '- ,p_. 51`41,,v.0 ,45 c: m T ,v x. a 44.1,2� x yo.,o�_ „ � ,.m. L A "E,x'w`43rga F �. 4O ssmo,a�,ao« i� 0051x:5,2 44".x°' �J x.-/ o song.wµ�s 451 r..s. .._... 51.,25.,`4 558.00 `+. , 9 7 ms. � HADLEY PLACE EAST DATA PST BOOK FACE �`--'==` SHEET 1 OF 2 A REPLAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 2,4 AND 6 AND THAiPART OF ENOIN!!RINGM DEDICADONS/RESERVADONS VACATED CALLE DEL RAY NAPLES Nx MIDD HACTEOAnAv MDOSPT.o5x5 a E"IFIAE PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.1 LS S67S6 rofs7«rmnO RMdT 7 AN sMESSxW Or COE n .t.R.„,R',::,,. I„F'''`"" ."" PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 dN.m 7W5 W.T ERn6Ew wawN..W..N..: EERC rA xEREN.. A. OE7«IE TO ME P.IEr P7«HOMEORxERS...nos INC., SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, NORGEPUT. RECORDED IN S GRAPHICFORM.IS HE OFFICIAL Ar n(P..O.W.))((w.dn STREET DERCON OF THE SUBDIVIDED LINOS HEREIN AND WILL IN NO .mrs DEPICT xm (n,..ME.OS..,F..P.V.E.A .F)«M COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA MSTANCES B UPPI.,NTED IN AUTHOR, B OTHER GRAPHIC OR 0 BE x vsEuu7sn(ME)ran slaNx57n N.Nwwwr Punram nm xvPOl m,u7 ran NAL RESTRICTIONS THAT ARE NOT RECORDED ON THISPUT 3. AL LANDSCARE PLATER Drs(Leal WN REa7x5euTr FOR NNx,Ewcc. THAT MAYBE FOUND IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF THE COUNTY. A ALL IA. n C.N.E.)WIN REQ NCE. 5. NI ACCESS «T5 EASEMENTS WSPwRWUr.FOR w e. µI tilll.TION E\SE II ENro n.E)RIM Ws.o x DRUNAFOL,t,NO STORYWATER MANAGEMENT PURPOSES xCL.NG MINI,.4W COUNTY APPROVALS: EwVAMi* Cr. a ��EC COUNTY ENGINEER c omR..a la cc_ucn cwxm (E,t PE IIO12.2 APPROYED a,ma_BE « zon.AO. Of GOWER dµ77. e A, uC.....5u51In ro n K:- rcw uNvrtxcl. spa -`--""'-I WIxOOT I®ON5 NO7 En Nd«, N om "o 3F xEsTOL I� III �I� z 4C OR4x.X r.eNlNTS(0.E-, EREdx W R IWRIINw� IFi ? J.`_ COINER COuxd ENGINEER µ.UI.NNNRN".EASERENd( .) NE EOx WNdN RESPONdeM7 IanµMIRµµ j'�A �1 .11 'J S. OEOATNE ro MUER C.,NATER �E ,�fe Vim a �I _ ■ 'ri .,I pail. COUNT(BLIRE OR I. I� o T NON-POTABLE.LM r ewr d Cas;o.: v dxM°)�� ;AT~ « �� ,,) ���i 4lIU C COWER cow.Wdame—a.« E N. '0 PCT"M Waa a n. r"EI ro .� mlx PI D. M I E S NmnNa ITA r.4,m �"'“” '"'xNsoE" �'' ,.. .. n4 ,, A , W m a " µam, n,rntr A E., ]� =01 Ili l EI.S4.NND�OM ACCEPTANCE«,H.OdTIONS..,ERmNS A,aNWMPROµ,EMS POURER e,ME PUT. CER" iu inti..m a V' Ir..tf 1■1 'II COUNTY ATTORNEY .O'S ilLaNCHISEES.AM ORDIER Was FIRE O. a d« SEW " MW CER ONSdNn rO WENdRN« °"Na PROJECT LOCATION « AI ,.AO SI. NMES_O.. NOT 111 SGJLE SCO IA NN avg..?...-2.7 W, aeW". O OPEn,O «TOZITNPETC "R 7µ7m,lr MIMI.Y 66:1"nif.,FLE0XPRF.1.1fo,'o:PEOPLFirIGAPC 1:11'171.A=ACL 2EU1217i2OrSA=TEV% MG PIAl APPROVED FOR RECORDING IN A KOMAR OPIM MEER.BY ns ROOM OF OF 30,&D.MOH=MAT IRE NAT IS FEEED 01 THE oFFZE OF ME 0.00(or 11,1E ortouiT MAT Or COWER 00.12 ROAM. DESCRIPTION 7 nlaOmNP,.7 ERS. MCAT E.emv IN «02 ME UNE,Er,G,NEURNER HAS CAUSED THESE PRESENTS TO BE ROOM MIS ROAM OF COATT RUNG RECORD omsw PRESIDENT,MR.NORTON. � .. PRIM.I•WE Jossoscs PENTECOST 21 Awomwm...6f2 now 622_OW Or_.2012 AO.NW On,RECORDED ili.RAT WIND.NAG PAWED OWE Fio':LC'RELLIESTI22.FLOM. 0 ACKNOWLEDGMENT �5 zI4 RVEYORS CERTIFICATE ME A FEET AW DECRIAL ARTS moss, « w xo,r.ZONA wWFOcm HOOK ME m9_uv I. drx,nEM ee wrol'Ixa Pm u71 Ilox TraN7 SV IGInT ) OF SECTICRI 11:. CwP.W.41a a PE "7ERnRd14 nON. P ..ON eRw.«d,E x 5,sys,En7.m� Am xaES.PNOH n . ROME ze EAST eMnS ARE,NxEP7.W««.:cfr 7PNo.E.ENT.. OWNnS WI.5F rw'••.^" 04112 5E)µ) �OwTUYNPOnNa 50N.IwE Ox ..N,5.na,mT NE.,CONN n,I,Weo nPw W aSdN.Na ae-II.A5.NERNO. j�f.0;,,;v+—^ . WATE EETPFO.PWN7a OR V µD) nmon05«ccwER ?F1'A aIn*rexK—_P4x—: :' \\ '„,�.� (/ ' nuns r.KHMER.PS,ulex5e DATE VY/NN razz=r.,:: m.BIEYdI'9 9F4 PLAT BOOK PAGE HADLEY PLACE EAST SHEET 2 OF 2 ENGINEERING A REPLAT OF ALL OF BLOCKS 2,4 AND 6 AND THAT PART OF 0„E200 ;,.;;PARK D „UIQ „ VACATED CALLE DEL RAY "°"""Ow.orm.oE�Ae��.,x.xa7 PALM SPRINGS PLAZA,UNIT NO.1 PLAT BOOK 8,PAGE 21 SECTION 34,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA • S. ssroylr • • 0.F 110,10,114 520.301 x00105.1<5074. Cu..111037x wows cam now sum.oicao i l' :Cowry Aeono/oPrOodc C3 211.75. MOO'tole,, x„01x4,. use a,a., ax.., . , '” '•:=~ I z 'T C.3 311.731 MOO.. _ xawe _ xrx V _ .s,e ,a ^ . w '. 105 s° w -17,,.c,,, 9 , vxs¢riws xm . .0 w m'o iOs'oao o x4,0 W a c,x'vros.,v'>.b . ,. ,ax a - e, e� g� aw'S twweJ 1�J 'm.a a'e* vo5.5w'0»e.0ew., T ,� y 15 s e CIO 11.211. MOO'mew 57,01•111,0 1.2.1r snot/ AI�s-1((```, F1e onE)mnY•vv mow srxa_ —1 D54 ,oen • ca Sew a.5e.wr>r xw,.row x,n ?;� :4v_.1 4o.1a_ M4: _ a.lery�4.>fl _ i_44.m_a5.I¢ l_fo.'Y_p ➢ „ _ ®.�Ig s1 N s1 ,gI ali,aag1 a gd I$ I& J^ ,o' P x • LI STITYVIVIE WW1d I J ',t-!-',!..._ - i P I�}' I -E A .. WIWI-_eo,o.4_ Y-i,o.'ej a'o _ eo.' ,.a pif� ,o = a C '5 '•!:1-� w 5 84 1-.,.x a r gr - ,s >s ax= ga sa -I ,,g1 n $a .x ,. b $ �� -� ' $�a -� i 6� �-� -� a a Ia �`un sevmv'wg ecuuc' �'�-(-��c 9oar T I ..� "uc., '0 'Le aro., MAY _5 1 4Eu� CPRO.od- ni0— r..swexr Q 5""'x'” .mrm x.,�e.,�a eeu .,....L�,,, _ .....:4.110-'7,1-„,-1-..34.w.10.- m'.,v i.e5 V—s�.sr _ °,YO' PAIL.--�Y� O PUT BOOK mw'-0C-.mr • -FOUND Ku. el .'x s,e'xXv xx.a 1y2y___f0.12__34,➢___U.N1 .___44.10.,_._NUR:-_SY]➢___10.,tI_Ym19 A a 9$ ve �� Igo „ qm°$ ° S ' e$ $s ' `„0... d u� ua L o.'o- .,.a, r tx�o ai: 1 _4444.. C 1.4 1 g NOTE'. !NEEDED PLAN ISCONCEPTUAL SE ONLY EUED i EFOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY.THE 2 OVERALL CONFIGURATION,DENSITY AND/OR INTENSITY DEPICTED MAY CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY RASED UPON SURVEY, ENGINEERING,ENVIRONMENTAL,AND/OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS. NOTE'. BUILDING FOOTPRINTS ARE FOR CONCEPTUAL PURPOSES ONLY. I♦OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 2.28±AC. I I OPEN SPACE-ROW. 0.47±AC. OPEN SPACE-BUFFER/OTHER 1.61±AC. OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 1.45±AC. DETENTION/RETENTION 0.17±AC. 1 LAKE 0.62±AC. § � `�. 9 POTENTIAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT 3.08±AC. F{ i ROAD/CURB/WALKS 1.07±AC. A R TOTAL SITE 10.75 AC. T e E Hi II Oill!! OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 2.28±AC.OPEN SPACE-ROW0.47±AC.._ -----------"�% I OPEN SPACE-OTHER 1.61±AC `-E OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 1.45*AC. ° m / LAKE 0.62±AC. 3'`D `\ ---- DETENTION/RETENTION 0.17±AC. I81i TOTAL PROVIDED 6.60 AC. ; I1. TOTAL REQUIRED 6.45 AC. (60%OF TOTAL SITE) — I d2 '— RADIO w .- - , -- A------- --. t - -- --- ------- - - - - - M.T ... , a C R NOTE'. THIS SITE PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND { INTEDED FOR PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY THE e OVERALL CONFIGURATION,DENSITY AND/OR - INTENSITY DEPICTED MAY CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY BASED UPON SURVEY, ENGINEERING,ENVIRONMENTAL,AND/OR REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS. F w.. NOTE: F BUILDING FOOTPRINTS ARE FOR CONCEPTUAL PURPOSES ONLY. w- / , OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 2. AC. 1 I I OPEN SPACE-R.O.W. 0.470 AC. 11111 OPEN SPACE-BUFFER/OTHER 1.71±AC. I OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 1.31.AC. IDETENTION/RETENTION 0.18±AC. & J LAKE 0.69±AC. d POTENTIAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT 3.03±AC. III , 111111111111 ROAD/CURB/WALKS 1.09±AC. DR I TOTAL SITE 10.76 AC. =_,K OilIr&T � -- ' - — OPEN SPACE-RESIDENTIAL 2.28±AC. i i _- -- - -- _ -- - C \--- OPEN SPACE-R.O.W. OPEN SPACE-OTHER 0.471 AC. 1.71±AC. $11t!j OPEN SPACE-PRESERVE 131±AC. u^,aR gP - LAKE 0.69±AC. ;t1 1- --7-- -- - \ ------ DETENTION/RETENTION 0.181 AC. 111 TOTAL PROVIDED 6.64 AC. is I 11 g':. TOTAL REQUIRED 6.46 AC. (60%OF TOTAL SITE) - o Aro �.,wesA M..I•I P�„M ing .0I�P, V YOFNAUW.,11.P '''.117:"7 GoodnerAngela From: Cathy Gorman <gormansauto@comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday,June 21, 2017 3:27 PM To: GoodnerAngela Subject: Thank you and meeting Attachments: Scan (dragged).pdf; Scan (dragged) 1.pdf; Scan (dragged) 2.pdf; Scan (dragged) 3.pdf; Scan (dragged)4.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Good afternoon Angela: THANK YOU again for speaking with me this morning about the Mac/Triad (Hadley Place) PUD—I truly appreciate it. Attached are the documents I explained to Commissioner Taylor. I would be grateful for just 10-15 minutes to go over these with Commissioner Solis. This is such an important issue coming before him next Tuesday, and I honestly would just like those few minutes to explain it to him. I will be available absolutely any time you could fit me in. Again, thank you in advance for help in this situation. Cathy Gorman 239-272-8809 1 11111111 p4,1-__ '%..., I .,, \ : i .... . I 1111111111111 t g t t 11111 i X 1 . _., 7111::11: I— ` ' ri-VI—J.,Ouik/' . ,, .1111111\ Bum .I\ ...... ,----- ; Il, ., . i. iiiiii it * r ` � — 1- S i .0 I ', _! l 0 rlpI ° lo ��_ 1 7 g 1; ' !Ili , a ' I d I - I tith c i � s iI i , a I l ° ! n b ihmr ile.,---2_,1",,,!".,' f1: t♦ YYmamow • �- f t p g r S -I-' grit1 e I 18 _; l't i"��r' .�I �^"`a�. „ , 1 fiqz t 1 \MOB I a i lir I : 1 I , / : i\ i ; i I6 11 on 1, i .........„....:;.: I j' 1 It ' 611111.1.* 11 iI ii I 11 I i i .0 1 L__ _._,Ifcitm I_ 4 i;,. ..____.:_______; _, Y ---__-:.\1 a,... ii a :1 1 ii il II 1 ii \1 . pr. , ,iC1 \ I i •' '- '; I ? •'' -- --Ce-lr'r--z41CC --C\ ! I `q S c- • -S,.. 1. 11111111 n ..i ..--*1 ll"--- c.7—.7).--7::"-Z---" ;' b a .3,:t"'4,.. .„ ZAIs 81111118 a 1 , I ' 1 gi I! 021 t Eda ag x a 1 4 f ! 1 { I�A.t5i k I 45 ~' I__ia 1 a° 'Ef Al a +a 4 ; � {1 ' I Sr a . ! 11 I A T A s a y 1$ 1` A� d + I - ' J 11140 11 sE € a __ ' 1 II 1 Ai illII4 'PN P �71:1,1it '°----4 ___ 5 y E i a 1I , S I 1 1 1 1--il I II 1.1 iii! ....i. 9 a r A 1 14 a i a g :� 1 11 1 x oazais, , i� ii, A� a(' 1 A i-11 01 I -- az 1 (i 9: E � i+ illi �; A i a y S 1• f, i®.„iv.", isa••, qe - ; flit t a ¢ } k I Icl S 0 = � 1' tI1I1 �� lal +M Y I v. - — it, .4 ''''.:14.. ''''' 4 '1,. j:i; ^ ^, 'ftii .„......* „ 414,., .11,,,:, ' ., °L'' - -1 ' „40,.,4',. * .,,,.'t ,O, ' . ..... .t.' . 1,..' I, t.,./A,..7 6 '' `.#, • ''' ,,,, ."1 t. , - .H4 :A , ,'., '',....,,. , 4.^.'.., ',4 .., Alt+ ik, 1,...'-... '4'....7.; -. , AtikA- vAllgiF4 it, --2-4r''''t 146-- _ iti , ,,,, s.. . 4. .211v..,..- , ,.,. s.,, , ' ,v., ,,. * ,...*„.. • , - ,,-* '-ws- ,, . - ,•-iitt. -- _—• —fi ....,,,,.. -.- •,..sz-t—, -i-s, ', ,s * .,,s,. ,:„ ...s' 4t 1 .' it "*.°:1' , 4'N. .,. ", '''' ' ' 1 ' -' ', 17* t"': '' -- • ,,P '",, 1:.!,.. d I ,, ,.. :,-.?-, . •41,4 .. .'„,,1 .._,,,,,,, ,-Lt- ' ...,47,41110.' , - , .. ING souLEV pAL14'''-11 4: .. le , 1 ----' -' - ', .„, , ,;:*-,*'ilts'''' 1 •4 1:' ' ' ''' *14, . ,.,,,,,,.,,,,„: ,,,, 1 -0„, t,- .:,, , ,- ,4, .' , ' :,41,' % ••., -0,1'° IA s„,-:::ii4,„„' ,,r; , ....., •,:1, , . Iht , ,.., cf.)....... g ., , -,..; ',/,'-....: ', , - , , • 1'4, A ' '1-- " $4''" •A,,,,11,1 4, z..., t. -. ,..,'.' - :- , , .., ... -Ell . q II . , 4,' ‘ ' ' l'"*‘' • sit7FA'',I. --/ ,4„v 4 t -' ..t, '„- 'S_,2• ,,K-4..,' 11 v : ,, Aeriv ., 4.1 v v v * ' a . 1 ..4 »M..... - ......... ThI±IEft ----1 it 1 TVLTTT \ E 9£ \ GC 4£ ££ 1 Z £ I 9 ____\ L-- --\-- - —1 i---- i 1 8Z { LZ 9Z t SZ 4Z 1 £Z Z tz I 9 II 1 of 1 u ----1 OZ J1LLth1LE Y- P5'PAUI SPRING BOULEVARD — .fj / f6 ------- /1,,„,,,,,A.,,1-1.--T-1----f-T-1-1---T-_-__ , 44LUJILL),Z4i 046£ 1 9£ S_ , 3✓ 1 £____] ••••••••••001..m.ftwoub........., it 1 9£ S£ 1� 4£ T[1JJ1 ££ Zf tf of 6z 1 i—�- a/� I IIII � 9 ,� rt___t____,_____,_,____,___i__, u 1 L u/ `aK1 9Z 11 LZ 119Z SZ \ 4z £Z 1 ZZ I9—1 Cpyiel4 WO,L_- t 6 It 0 Ai) ' ' al, 1 �1T tt s OZ Ll t 9t SL4l £t _- ---"--111 CIAO . Ihl € _1 Atbi.-- ' rf4 /.s C„ - I 1 0007 A 0 O Z O po 'n m v -o n W5 D p -1 in -0 Fri Z D O D w O rnso tflt73 -1 Z .tni * Z .a m72 O -I E �g' K N m D WNj $ F Z p m �' O m '.2 8 Or m D m A r x T m Q A D O C -I z A to v D -I 3 p �^ { O o D O D A z D A 2020 co Co O r N 0 p N Co00 oo n O m -13 rO r r C� N O r W 0 2 N O N Ch W O j... �! L. J V r T J N V D p V V N r V Po W W tOD OW t�D V V w A Ol J W t0 t0 to r t" O\ $ W 9 H 40O --.Q\,,„ m K D R. n D z 0 -a z n A .o c A W D -4 -I \.0%.\177 cc c av mo v A�'1 x q q.0 0 O un m m 0.o C mA r2 G �ir m D r D -i ? N N iO -0V , A " p v n m m - A Z v W O pp W o MI 0 N m p C m A O m m A Z{ r �n O O m m 3 C C �'^ D V� N 0 0 0 „ 0 O m o D 3` V m D < 3 O r Z Z m m p1 m m m 3 02 Y a `- D c� ty[nn� 0 K D O c z n =t v, tai+ v A O> -I to D O 7c D m tD > Dm r oy� rrON OrwOZ O O w O r N r mpOp rO O co NVVVON N co O In Ln 00 tD N A P N A W JJI 01 to 0 C N 5 O N r > N W O A N 01 N r r CO co b A V ip J 00 t!t �i rAr in t!'� • N A Off+ N. O~t 1-• N A W W pp V. l0 r W _. I-. T— W r ‘7s‘rs N QW1 A l J m C A 11 �, n m 2 to 6)\-....cr. ieNr.e ("w 4 GoodnerAngela `� Subject: Bruce Anderson -Wolf Creek, County Barn, Vanderbilt Commons Location: Collier County Commission Office Start: Fri 6/16/2017 3:00 PM End: Fri 6/16/2017 3:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers 1 - RECEIVED- MAY• MAY 12 2017 unity. Rev. Diane Scribner Clevenger, Senior Minister AY 1 1.2017 2000 Unity Way, Naples, F1.34112 UG�..P/ By' of Naples Ph: (239) 775-3009• Fax: (239) 775-2082 /`'(G/l' /�L •\���� /J_ April 26,2017 eZ0;2411• �y2— �,` . }eCu�Xl1J11L Re:Vacating Application for Marquesa Isles of Naples e . Proposed Easement Vacation To Whom It May Concern, I am writing you on behalf of the Unity Church of Naples,located at 2000 Unity Way,Naples Florida,34112. I serve as a representative for,and am a Member of,the Unity of Naples Board of Trustees. At the request of our Senior Minister,Rev Diane Scribner Clevenger and our Operations Manager,Doreen Zeneski,I am writing you concerning the proposed easement vacation notification letter we received, dated April 20,2017. On April 26,2017 I phoned and spoke with Brent Addison,Project Engineer with Q Grady Minor& Associates,and then subsequently spoke with the Developer of this project to express our"objection and concerns"to the proposed easement vacation. The current easement provides access directly to our church property lake(Amelia Lake).We object to its vacation because our 10acre lake parcel would then become landlocked.We are also concerned because we want to keep our options open for any potential emergency access requirements that we will need to meet when and if we build or expand in the future. We are willing to consider possible optional easement scenarios from the developer. Any final relocated easement determination,agreement or remedy will be subject to approval by the Unity of Naples Board of Trustees. We are,therefore,opposed to this easement being vacated as it would have a detrimental effect to our property and its value to us and future generations. Simerely, DateM n. S 70,'1 ] Brian Jones Member,Unity of Na es Board of Trustees 1\` .' Date /4 0/ c>2O/7 Diane Scribner Clevenger Senior Minister,Unity of Naples GoodnerAngela Subject: Terrie Abrams, Bev Smith, Black Bear Ridge HOA,Wolf Creek PUD Location: Collier County Commission Office Start: Fri 6/16/2017 3:30 PM End: Fri 6/16/2017 4:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers From:Terrie Abrams [mailto:terrie.abrams@gmail.com] Sent: Monday,June 5, 2017 11:43 AM To:GoodnerAngela<AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net> Cc:Smith Beverly<bevsmith116@gmail.com> Subject: Re: email me about any meetings with other commissioners Thank you very much for setting up the meeting. We will be there. Please confirm the location. Should we be there at 3 pm? Sent from my iPad Terrie 630.244.4800 1 This is right out of the Board of County Commissioners 10 —year strategic plan To Preserve and enhance the safety, quality, value, character and heritage of our neighborhoods, communities and region. The residents of Black Bear Ridge have expressed their concern regarding surrounding development by attending County Meetings and sending in hundreds of letters and petitions. Because there are so many parcels involved and complications from a CSA the development has been approved in a piecemeal fashion without the consideration of the area in totality.To support our opposition on April 11,2017 the community attended the County Commissioners Meeting regarding the density change request by the Developer of Vanderbilt Commons. A brief recap of events to date is as follows to show the inconsistencies and piecemeal development approval - Without residential input a storage unit was allowed to be built in a plaza meant to be soft retail (Vanderbilt Commons) - The developer of Vanderbilt Commons is asking for more density and would like to put in usages that are either prohibited or go against intentions of how the property was to be developed - Historically the county has recognized the Pristine Drive Cost Share Agreements allocation of dwelling units in the Wolf Creek Pud.In 2007 an Ordinance added to Wolf Creek the 20 acre parcel requesting the preserve reduction. In the county minutes of March 21,2013 the planning commission recognized and manipulated density to mirror the CSA and specifically allocated 80 units to that parcel preventing others parcels from utilizing units.Yet today the Vanderbilt Reserve (SobelCo)site plan states density—100 more units than allowed by the CSA. The county inconsistently upholds the cost share agreement. - On multiple occasions in the past and the present county minutes make it clear the intent of road improvements needed to support traffic outside of the community should not be borne by residents.The county has a developer bond in place to cover the cost of road improvements yet is asking BBR to pay for the roads.The bond should either be used as intended or released to BBR. Here is the latest development On Junel,the Planning Commission will hear PDI—P120160000404 Wolf Creek RPUD by the developer of parcels 3b and 9 to reduce preserves. If the proposal passes it will move on to a Commission Meeting on June 27,2017.We are preparing to speak at both meetings and met with the planning staff several weeks ago to identify our concerns.As previously expressed none of this can be looked at in isolation or decisions will be made that only perpetuate negative impacts to the quality of living in Naples.IT WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION This reduction in preserves is opposed for 7 reasons 1. II this owner reduces preserves on their property it brings the preserves down to the minimum required for the PUD and prevents Black Bear Ridge from installing passive recreational uses as allowed by the LDC and PUD.The developer should not be given preferential treatment and allowed unequitable fair share of maintaining preserves. - The breakdown of preserve per parcel is as follows. Black Bear Ridge ^'18% Vanderbilt Reserves (with reduction) Raffia ^'26% Portofino "16% 2. By reducing the preserves to 9%where is the greenspace for their residents? 3. The surrounding area is a playground for documented wild life such as bear/panther and turtles.This is tragic for our wildlife to be at the mercy of what the developer calls himself "opportunistic".This developer does not have Naples interest in balance with profit. It is unnecessary as the developer can only build 104 units. There should be a need if preserves are going to be reduced and in this situation there is no need. 4. When the PUD was amended unit density was added and the corresponding preserves should have been as well. 5. Where is the necessity? The county makes decisions on the good of the many not"the few.This is a pocket of residential moderately upscale homes. If allowed to develop not how it was meant to be the benefits is for only a single developer and does not help Naples coffers and harms the home owners already in place. This is not a situation where a few owners are impacted for the good of Naples by providing compatible services,professional jobs or improving the tax base. 6. This builder has openly admitted in front of their attorney and ours they made a mistake and missed the land constraints. Their mistake should not be solved by the county at our expense. There are other ways for them to develop the property that will allow them profit and not impact the quality,value and character of our area. 7. To quote the county attorney dealing with a Collier issue"at the end of the day,it's a basic fairness issue" You are asked to please consider what is right and fair for our quality of life and Naples. Please exercise your stewardship. Respectfully, Terrie Abrams a Black Bear Ridge full time resident mall Terrie Abrams<terrie.abrams@gmail.com> pertinent pages from PUD documents showing allocation of du's 1 message marc alien<mallencny@yahoo.com> Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:19 PM Reply To: marc alien<mallencny@yahoo.com> To: Terrie Abrams <terrie.abrams@gmail.com>, Mike Fuchs <flguy55@gmail.com>, Rob Nossen <thenossens@aol.com>, Beverly Smith<bevsmith116@gmail.com> here are pages from the Wolf Creek PUD ordinances with the references to the added units for mederos and for palermo cove going to specific parcels and not into a "pool" - also minutes from the BCC may 22, 2007 meeting when mederos was added with the discussion about only 80 du's being asked for with no density bonus in 2013 when palermo cove was added the verbiage discussing the 80 du's for mederos was crossed out as they no longer were restricting approval of building permits because vanderbilt and collier were done - see attached from 2013 Marc 4 attachments .ff) Ordinance 2007-46 eighty dwelling units assigned to Mederos pdf.pdf 104K Ordinance 2013-37 Wolf Creek PUD max units rafia part copy.pdf 165K ,w Ordinance 2013-37 Wolf Creek PUD may be able to negotiate copy.pdf 165K BCC Minutes 0522-232007 R 2007 add mederos copy.pdf 1096K May 22-23, 2007 Will Dempsey and Rick Mercer. CHAIRMAN COLETTA: Thank you. Mr. Pritt? MR. PRITT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. My name is Robert Pritt. I'm here on behalf of Prime Homes, LLC -- Prime Homes at Portofino Falls. It's owner of parcel number five, which we would like to add to the existing Wolf Creek PUD. I have with me -- I think you've named all the names, but Dave Underhill is also with us in case you need to have anybody testify as to planning, zoning, engineering matters, and we also have. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Abbo, who's the founder of the company here today, as well as Larry Abbo, Linda Socolow and also Steve Greenfield? As has been said, Rich Yovanovich is also here. I believe that Mr. Hoover is here also on behalf of the Catalina Land Group, owner of the balance of the Wolf Creek PUD. The background here is that we're requesting a rezone from rural agricultural and planned development, planned unit development, to residential planned unit development zoning district. And as was said, we're just going to add 20.26 acres and are requesting 80 dwelling units to be added to the existing Wolf Creek PUD. This would make for a total of 167.96 acres and a total of 671 dwelling units, which may be single or multifamily dwellings, and we also are going to amend the PUD document and the associated master plan. As also has been said in the introduction, the proposal is to reduce the maximum height of multifamily structures from 42 feet and three stories to 38 feet and two stories and to eliminate some uses. The location of the property is on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road approximately one half mile west of Collier Boulevard, and we can show you that on the map. This map here, it's kind of hard Page 70 general configuration of which is also illustrated by Exhibit"A"and Exhibit'A- 1". B. Areas illustrated as lakes by Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1" shall be constructed as lakes or, upon approval, parts thereof may be constructed as shallow, intermittent wet and dry depressions for water retention purposes. Such areas, lakes and intermittent wet and dry areas shall be in the same general configuration and contain the same general acreage as shown by Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1". Minor modification to all tracts, lakes or other boundaries may be permitted at the time of subdivision plat or SDP approval, subject to the provisions of the LDC. C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1", such easements as necessary (utility, private, semi-public) shall be established within or along the various Tracts as may be necessary. 2.4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY OR INTENSITY OF LAND USES A maximum of 67-4754 residential dwelling units shall be constructed in the residential areas of the project. The gross project area is 167.96188.78± acres. The gross project density shall be a maximum of 3.99 units per acre if all 674-754 dwelling units are approved and constructed,-. A minimum of 83 dwelling units will be assigned to parcels 1A - 3A due to the additional acreage being added to the PUD by the owner of those parcels. In addition, parcels 1A-3A shall be entitled to incorporate any other density owned by the developer of these parcels. There shall be a maximum density of 163 dwelling units on parcels 1A-3A. 2.5 RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS A. Prior to the recording of a record plat, and/or condominium plat for all or part of the RPUD, final plans of all required improvements shall receive approval of the appropriate Collier County governmental agency to insure compliance with the RPUD Master Plan, Collier County subdivision rules, and the platting laws of the State of Florida. B. Exhibit "A", RPUD Master Plan and Exhibit "A-1" RPUD Master Plan Amended, constitutes the required RPUD development plan. Subsequent to or concurrent with RPUD approval, a subdivision plat or SDP, as applicable, may be submitted for areas covered by the RPUD Master Plan. Any division of the property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the RPUD Master Plan Exhibit"A" and Exhibit "A-1" -and LOC. C. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructural improvements regarding any dedications to Collier County and the methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities. Words siraek-through are deleted;words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD PL2012-0650 Revised 5-14-2013 Page 11 of 26 H. Access points, including both driveways and proposed streets, shown on the RPUD Master Plan shall be considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property frontage. All such access issues shall be approved or denied during the review of required subsequent site plan or final plat submissions. All such access points shall be consistent with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution No. 01-247), as it may be amended from time to time, and with the Collier County Long- Range Transportation Plan. 1. When ingress and egress improvements are determined, as necessary, right-of-way and compensating right-of-way shall be provided for and in conjunction with said improvements. J. All work within the Collier County rights-of-way or public easements shall require a right-of-way permit. K. All internal access ways, drive aisles and roadways, not located within County right-of-way shall be privately maintained by an entity created by the developer, its successor in title, or assigns. All internal roads, driveways, alleys, pathways, sidewalks and interconnections to adjacent developments shall be operated and maintained by an entity created by the developer and Collier County shall have no responsibility for maintenance of any such facilities. L. The proposed loop road located around the Mission Hills development, that would provide access for the project onto Collier Boulevard, is conceptually shown on the RPUD Master Plan and shall be a public roadway. It shall be designed and constructed to a minimum 30 mile per hour design speed. The construction costs of the loop road shall not be eligible for impact fee credits, but the developer of the roadway may be able to privately negotiate "fair share" payments or reimbursements from neighboring property owners. M. No building permits shall be issued for any of the additional 80 units approved in the 20 acres that is being added to this PUD until such time as Vanderbilt Beach Boulevard between Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Livingston Road, and CR 951 between Golden Gate Boulevard and Immokalee Road are substantially complete. N. Within 30 days of the adoption date of this RPUD rezone, the developers owning the property fronting Pristine Drive shall convey in fee simple to Collier County the right-of-way necessary for the two-lane construction of Pristine Drive. Each developer shall convey 30 feet for the Pristine Drive right-of-way. The anticipated width of the right-of-way is 60 feet. The turn lanes required for each individual project shall be accommodated within the project's boundary. Revised 5/31/07 to reflect BCC changes 17 Ok - Bev asked a couple of great questions on dwelling units and the Raffia addition from Palermo Cove So, in review Before the Mederos property was added in 2007 all of the dwelling units were assigned/allocated by the CSA and not in a "pool" - there were no unaccounted for dwelling units - all were assigned When the Mederos property N 20 acres was added in 2007, 80 dwelling units were added and the minutes from the County Commission on May 22- 23, 2007, when the ordinance was approved, have the representative of the property's owners saying that they were " not asking for any density bonuses ... so the site would be eligible for four dwelling units per acre and the requested density is actually 3.99." ... "we're asking for four units per acre essentially) (page 71 of minutes CCBoard May 22-23, 2007) so 80 units were approved(error in 1st page of ordinance that says 117) and in the 2007-46 WCPUD ordinance it refers (on page 17 of the traffic portion) to the "additional 80 units approved in the 20 acres being added to this PUD" so it seems the county "allocated" those units specifically to the Mederos property - they were not put into a "pool" in 2013 when the Palermo Cove property was brought in with Scenic woods, 83 units were added for the '' 21 acres and these units were again assigned and not put into a pool 2013-37 Ordinance WCPUD pg 11 - "A minimum of 83 dwelling units will be assigned to parcels 1A-3A due to the additional acreage being added to the PUD." Also it says (pg 11 2013-37) "in addition. parcels 1A-3A shall be entitled to incorporate any other density owned by the developer of these parcels. There shall be a maximum density of 163 dwelling units on parcels 1A-3A." so - "other density owned" - what does this mean - who "owns" density unless there is an agreement like the CSA that allocates the units, otherwise they would be in a pool and it would be 1st come 1st serve as the county told us at the recent meeting therefore, the "owned" units must be those allocated by the CSA, which is 40 units each for the upper two parcels, which when added to the 83 would be 163 this would leave Vanderbilt Reserve 80 units from the Mederos parcel and 3A,3B had an allocation of 40 so the most that would be available to Vanderbilt Reserve would be 120 and if the parcel 3 allocation was split according to acreage - — 8 acres 3A and 12 acres 3B then there would only be 24 units(60%) to add to the Mederos 80 = 104 dwelling units All through the Wolf Creek PUD amendments when property was added it seems to have been assigned thus seemingly recognizing that there is no "pool" of units in the WCPUD and that they are owned according to the parameters of the CSA and the subsequent amendments Marc - 2007 minutes attached Tap to Download BCC iviinut...ederos.pd( 792 KP 3467972 011: 3635 PG: 1672 RBCORDBD in OFFICIAL WORDS of COLLIBR COUMTT, FL 09/01/2004 at 10:13AX DNIGBT B. BROCK, CLERK This instrument was prepared RBC FBI 239.50 without an opinion of title and INDIUM3.00 rafter recording return to: Retn: i Gregory L.Urbancic,Esq. GOODLBTTB COLUMN BT AL v Goodlette,Coleman&Johnson,P.A. 4001 TAMIAMI TR N #300 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300 MAPLES FL 34103 Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (space above this line for recording data) COST SHARING AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SHARED ACCESS ROAD THIS COST SHARING AG T7:11\,,, DEV LOP i'NT OF A SHARED ACCESS ROAD(this"Agreement"),ijj- .arni enter i ,�y of �6r , 2004, by and among the following: (i)W if k Estates,LLC,a •li "ted liability c mpany("Wolf Creek Estates"); (ii)William L. Hoov , asrTcustee_oflthe Fallen Timbis Lgnd Trust dated November 5, 2003 ("Hoover/Fallen Timbers"); (iii) arld4L-4 indndf;'asiT tee die unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D January 4, 1999 ("Lindner/T st " iy) 3([4Li*. a ..A; s,_ ust . under unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D May 21, 1999 ("Lin er2'), �(� 'ks ore.:ita es, ' LC, a Florida limited liability company("Buckstone Estates ). �� 1 WITNESSET T A •L WHEREAS, the parties\"i a o\own adjacent tea ,p .C."). Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East,Collier County,Flon a(" d ��/s. -<:\ f '�'T/13---17r. _ _ i WHEREAS, the parties hereto o e fo 1o.ving properties which are the subject of this Agreement,with said individual properties being legally described on Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof: OWNER: PARCEL: Lindner/Trust 1 Parcel 1 Lindner/Trust 2 Parcel 2 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 4 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 5 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 6 Buckstone Estates Parcel 7 Hoover/Fallen Timbers Parcel 8(west half) Buckstone Estates Parcel 8(east half) Buckstone Estates Parcel 9 Lindner/Trust 1 Parcel 10 Buckstone Estates Parcel 11 • 1 OR: 3635 PG: 1673 WHEREAS, Parcels I, Parcel 2, and Parcels 4 through 12, inclusive, are depicted on the illustration attached hereto as Exhibit"B"(said parcels shall sometimes collectively be referred to herein as the"Parcels");and WHEREAS, Dania Luisa Mederos, as Trustee of the Dania Luisa Mederos Land Trust dated August 15,2000(who is not a party to this agreement) is the owner of that certain real property in Collier County,Florida legally described as follows: The South 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida("Parcel 3");and WHEREAS,the parties hereto desire to formalize an agreement with respect to the construction of an access road generally along the north-south half-section line in Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County; and WHEREAS, Exhibit "B" also depicts the general, proposed location of the access road with the various segment points on the access road being labeled with alphabetical designations. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,the parties hereto do hereby deal 0 a as follows: V (. � >' I. Recitals. The abov eitals,are true and c�r�b incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Pending Transaction' ture Development. T� intent of this Section is for the parties to disclose various pending tran�sacti ns(**Llii ..may._or may�tot clos andevelopment petitions involving or affecting the Parcels. Unless a c s xll� l sta -t dis losures contained in this Section shall not be construed as a req re t e op a at'ti l i qr any particular manner. L., (a) Parcel 10 is u ger purchas'ec tr ey "'th\V i 11.9 ver, or assignee, with a petition request to Collier County to de to a specialty retailJo f,par o 4f,of parcel. f (b) This Agreement sUa11 a disclosed by the Ellr Involved in the transaction to the purchaser described in subsection(a).'£ her,this Agregm t' ll be disclosed to any other prospective purchaser of any one or more of the Parte s./� t`_`�,� �k1_:2 (c) Parcel I and Parcel 2 are expected but not required to be developed as a multi-family project. (d) Parcel 4,Parcel 5,and Parcel 6 are expected but not required to be developed as a single- family project. (e) Parcel 7, Parcel 8, Parcel 9, and Parcel 11 are expected but not required to be developed as a single-family project. 3. Mederos Parcel (Parcel 31. Parcel 3 is owned by Dania Luisa Mederos, as Trustee of the Dania Luisa Mederos Land Trust dated August 15, 2000 ("Mederos") and Mederos is not a party to this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed as affecting or encumbering Parcel 3 except under the circumstances provided under Section 6(g). Further,this Agreement shall not be construed in a manner so as to provide any third-party rights for Mederos. 4. General Development Standard. All Parcels shall be developed in a high quality manner commensurate with the projects recently constructed or being constructed concurrently in the 2 OR: 3635 PG: 1674 Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road corridors, located between Livingston Road and Collier Boulevard. The Parcels are permitted to have differing land uses but the actual land uses shall be compatible with each other. The Parcels shall be developed using a similar architectural theme along the access roads, quality buffering and screening between the differing land uses, and common site design techniques. All Parcels shall be designed and developed to minimize any negative impacts on abutting and neighboring Parcels. 5. Zoning. Each owner (and the owner's successor, assign, and successor in title) agrees that it shall not object to any rezoning and/or development consistent with the following provisions: (a) Parcel 10 may be rezoned and developed for specialty retail and office land uses. The most westerly 175 feet of Parcel 10 shall be designed and developed only for offices,banks,drug stores, sit-down restaurants, retail shops, and similar intensity commercial uses, and shall not be permitted to have gas stations,convenience stores,fast food restaurants,and stand alone bars or lounges. (b) Parcel 1, Parcel 2, and Parcels 4 through 9, inclusive, may be developed for residential use. Said parcels have been rezoned to the Wolf Creek PUD, Collier County Ordinance No. 03-45 (hereinafter "Wolf Creek PUD") and shall be developed according to the development standards within the Wolf Creek PUD. Any owner of one of thescparcels.may apply for a PUD Amendment to the Wolf Creek PUD through Collier County for,ei r f ie fbl(oWip►y,14, rposes without written permission of the remaining owner(s) of the Wolf Crce • property: (1)-rni WO Rd moderate intensity changes to said owner's own parcel or(ii)to into orate dditional property in e Wolf Creek PUD, including,without 1P p P g limitation, Parcel 3,Parcel 11, a)id/orithe-neighboring parcel wit ' Section 34 owned by Comcast. Any amendment to the Wolf Creek•P shall`- int"' the'Same pe itte principal uses and the same or substantially the same devel j)me s and :: i i 111t;th . f C eek PUD at the time of such amendment. Further, any am nd n s b�p �u s lg,oc Idevelopment consultants experienced in Collier County PUD rezon' QQand - • t o cess s. c- (c) The owner of knee_1 or Parcel 2 have 'gh at y e,as to said owner's parcels,to request a rezoning to allow d vloiment for residents± x us'sFelj hes, private schools, child care facilities,and/or adult living facilt 4.�\�� f%(..1 (d) The owner of Parcel 1 ltas' -t. f� It; pMe, as to said owner's parcel, to request a al rezoning to allow development for residential' hurehtees,private schools,child care facilities, and/or adult living facilities. (e) The owner of Parcel 11 has the right at any time, as to said owner's parcel, to request a rezoning to allow development for residential uses,churches,and/or child care facilities. (f) Any 3-story buildings on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be setback a minimum of thirty-five (35) feet from the North-South Road(as hereinafter defined)between Points "A"through "D"as shown on Exhibit"B"attached hereto and made a part hereof. Additionally,any buildings on Parcel 1 or Parcel 2 shall have tile, metal, or wood roofs, and either a carport or garage for each residential unit. None of the Parcels shall be developed for Affordable Housing, as defined within the Collier County Affordable Housing Density Bonus Ordinance,as amended from time to time. 6. Design,Permitting,and Construction of North-South Access Road. (a) General. The parties intend for a 2-lane north-south access road to be constructed generally in the location shown on Exhibit "B" from Point "A" to Point "F" (the "North-South Road"). All references herein to a particular "Point" shall mean and refer to those labels on Exhibit "B". The 3 OR: 3635 PG: 1675 North-South Road shall be constructed to then-current Collier County road standards,shall include utility improvements of sufficient size and capacity to serve all Parcels,and shall be designed and constructed so as to be shared access road intended to serve three (3)moderately upscale residential communities. The North-South Road shall include such related facilities as required by Collier County which may include, without limitation, sidewalks;turn lanes;curbs; entry features; signage; median improvements; lights,light poles and related facilities; stormwater drainage lines,pipes, and related facilities; landscaping; and other utility and infrastructure improvements. All segments of the North-South Road shall be designed and constructed in a consistent manner so as to be compatible with one another. (b) Intersection Improvements. The owners of the Parcels shall each pay a proportionate share,based upon each parcel's acreage as shown on Exhibit"C"attached hereto and made a part hereof, of the design, permitting and construction costs for all North-South Road/Vanderbilt Beach Road intersection improvements such as turn lanes,bridges/culverts,arterial level street lighting,and a possible traffic signal, located approximately between Points"A-1"to "A-2" ("Intersection Improvements"). If a traffic signal is required after completion and payment of the costs of the Intersection Improvements by the owners of the Parcels,the future costs for the traffic signal shall be shared as shown on Exhibit"C". (c) Segment 1. The owners of Parcel 1, Parcel 2, Parcel 9 and Parcel 10 shall be equally responsible for the design,permitting and construction-costs of the North-South Road between Point"A- 2" (a point on the southern property li f l f1--- ? cel 10) and either Point "D" or such other endpoint between Point "C" and Pot '3''``as may be`'a19vdby Collier County (the "Segment 1 Endpoint"). The design and const'ucttPit for said portion of tbe�t'North-South Road shall include all turn lanes required by Collier County/ffransportation\Services during their i' view of the construction drawings for this portion of the road. Thportion'of the,North:Soul{h•Road betwe n Point"A-2"and the Segment 1 Endpoint together with the Int ersection -•Imp oXre a ,)be;so im referred to herein as"Segment 1". Design and permitting fo Se t h o en "' t esh fiir f o 2004 by Buckstone Estates. A copy of the Preliminary Opin o oba let st ared t . Minor& Associates, P.A. for construction of Segment 1 (w tai„ ¢oin -o oint" ,") i' .ttalc fid:hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit"D". Said exhibit is a e for informational p ose a the costs and improvements detailed therein are preliminary and su jet modification. A' tpptub.estimated design, permitting, and related costs prepared by Q.Gra ift or,P.E.for Segment ''-. ith.. t endpoint of Point"D")is attached hereto and made a part hereof as E6it " Said exhibi is`"' , ghed for informational purposes and the costs detailed therein are preliminary an j ._•fo "" iati n. (d) Segment 2. The portion of the North-South Road between the Segment 1 Endpoint and Point"F"shall be sometimes referred to herein as"Segment 2". In the event that the Segment 1 Endpoint is the same as Point"D", the owners of Parcel 4, Parcel 5, and Parcel 6 shall be equally responsible for the design,permitting and construction costs of the North-South Road for"Segment 2". In the event the Segment 1 Endpoint lies south of Point"D",the costs shall be divided as follows: (i)the owners of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall pay for fifty percent (50%) of the design, permitting and construction costs of the North-South Road between the Segment 1 Endpoint and Point "D"; (ii) the owner of Parcel 9 shall pay for the other fifty percent(50%)of the design,permitting and construction costs of the North-South Road between the Segment 1 Endpoint and Point"D"; and (iii)the owners of Parcel 4, Parcel 5, and Parcel 6 shall be equally responsible for the remaining design, permitting and construction costs for Segment 2. The design and construction for Segment 2 shall include all turn lanes required by Collier County Transportation Services during their review of the construction drawings for this portion of the North- South Road, excluding any turn lanes on Parcel 2 or Parcel 9 that would be paid for by the owner of Parcel 2 or Parcel 9,as the case may be. (e) Dedication to Collier County. Upon completion of the construction of the North-South Road, the owners of the Parcels agree the North-South Road shall be dedicated to Collier County unless 4 OR: 3635 PG: 1676 either (i) all owners agree in writing that the North-South Road should remain private or (ii) the dedication of the North-South Road is not accepted by Collier County. In the event the owners of the Parcels agree to maintain the North-South Road as a private road, the written agreement among the owners shall make a provision for the on-going maintenance and repair of the North-South Road and a means for sharing the costs and expenses of the same. In the event the North-South Road including any of the appurtenances thereto, or any portion thereof) is not accepted by Collier County, the owners shall enter into a written agreement regarding the on-going maintenance and repair thereof. All owners agree to promptly execute such documentation and provide such information as may be requested or required by Collier County to complete the dedication. (f) Maintenance of North-South Road. Any Developer(as hereinafter defined) completing construction of the North-South Road or any segment thereof shall maintain and repair, in keeping with all governmental permits and approvals, such portion of the North-South Road, until such time as the North-South Road is dedicated to (and such dedication is accepted by) Collier County, and Collier County accepts the North-South Road for maintenance, in accordance herewith. The owners shall be obligated to reimburse the Developer (as the case may be) for their pro rata share of the costs and expenses incurred by the Developer in connection with the maintenance and repair of the North-South Road (or portion thereof) for so long as the Developer is obligated to maintain and repair same as provided herein. Each owner's pro rata shareoffir-maintenance and repair cost shall be the same as each ' f owner's share for the initial construction Jas die b1 on. Each owner shall deliver its pro rata share of such maintenance and repajr �ts`to the Deve78 n five (5)business days of receipt of a bill therefore from the Develop r ) r'the event that the -South Road (including any of the appurtenances thereto, or any p iornr ereof)-ins not accepted b Colter County as a public road and/or for maintenance within one (L y rafter a date oftc°�pletio o the North-South Road, then the Developer shall no longer be resdo s'b �° 1 ca"-or ''r o the North-South Road and the owners of the Parcels shall a ee p n e ie o tr)a eV i future maintenance, which method may include, without limitati n,, of f o uni qev eloE ent district pursuant to Section 190, Florida Statutes("CDD" oil, a ortna 'on"of a ster h"" ec w l r association("MHOA"). In the event a CDD is formed for the-purpose of maintainingig d a' ' it lei; North-South South Road, the CDD shall have the responsibility fo`Rpt•Arming the maintenie lair work and paying the cost and expense of the same. Notwiths ding,anything to the co-" ary.>the CDD shall only have financial responsibility pertaining to the lan , is benefited acid ed by the CDD. The CDD shall have no financial obligations to or for any Fel ��}}o iib��j1��(tg�E$ CDD. The CDD shall have the authority to collect for such cost and expense in mainta�u _tlleorth-South Road through assessments or such other collection mechanism as may be authorized pursuant to Section 190,Florida Statutes. In the event a MHOA is formed, the MHOA shall have the responsibility for performing the maintenance and repair work and paying the cost and expense of the same. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary,the MHOA shall only have financial responsibility pertaining to the land which is benefited and burdened by the MHOA. The MHOA shall have no financial obligations to or for any parcels not subjected to the MHOA. The MHOA shall have the authority to collect for such cost and expense in maintaining the North-South Road through assessments. (g) Mederos Property (Parcel 3). Parcel 3, owned by Mederos, is not included within the scope of this Agreement. It is agreed that in the event that one or more signatories hereto(individually or collectively)or Prime Investors and Developers, Inc. acquire Parcel 3 prior to construction of Segment 2 of the North-South Road, then said party will cooperate by promptly granting such easements as may be necessary to develop Segment 2 of the North-South Road. The alignment of the North-South Road shall thereafter be adjusted onto Parcel 3, with the width of the road on Parcel 3 being the greater of the following: (i) thirty (30) feet or (ii) one-half of the width of the North-South Road as proposed for the segment of the North-South Road encompassing Parcel 3 and Parcel 8. The conveyance of such an easement by such owner(s)prior to Collier County's approval of the roadway drawings and plans for the 5 1 I OR: 3635 PG: 1677 i construction of Segment 2 shall be deemed to be the payment of said owner(s)fair share of the cost of the North-South Road with respect to Parcel 3. 7. Wolf Creek PUD. (a) Allocation. The Wolf Creek PUD encompasses Parcel 1, Parcel 2,Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive, and Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive. The Wolf Creek PUD permits 591 residential dwelling units. Unless otherwise provided herein, density shall not be transferred from one parcel to another within the Wolf Creek PUD without prior written permission of the owner of the property losing density. The Wolf Creek PUD allocated the 591 residential units as follows and as shown on Exhibit"F"attached hereto and made a part hereof: Parcel 1-64 units;Parcel 7-41 units; and all other parcels in the PUD- 81 units each. Upon the execution of this Agreement, 41 dwelling units each shall be automatically transferred from each of Parcels 4, Parcel 5, and Parcel 6, at no cost, to Parcel 1, with a total resulting transfer of 123 units to Parcel 1. Accordingly,the number of residential units allocated to Parcel 1 under the Wolf Creek PUD shall be 187. (b) Option to Purchase Additional Density. The owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 ("Purchaser")shall have the option to purchase(in addition to the density allocated to Parcel 1 and Parcel pursuant to subsection (a) hereof) from the owner of,_Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive, ("Seller") up to 92 dwelling units which have been alloc ed-O art O; absection (a) hereof to Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive. Said option may be exerpi eki r_yty}� haser-Jp'4 re than two transactions on or before December 31, 2005 ("Expiration 00,:The purchase pri e 9t,each individual dwelling unit shall be $500.00. In the event Purchaser eL o exercise this option, chaser shall,on or before the Expiration Date, notify Seller of the num er of uto l -purehase�l. Closing f any such purchase of dwelling units shall occur within 20 day, of Seller's reaei t- notice from P ch ser. The purchase price shall be paid in cash, wired funds, or ycas fir As� '7,7-a'p`% ' an office in Collier County, Florida or such other method as may e a ,e tabl t 1: ,.-iii � 's role iscretion. Seller shall have the e :Ping e..a signed. Purchaser shall pay all sole discretion to determine dill h_ lx i ,....... .._ _ g. costs associated with the tra fer of dwelling units. 's o do $ l terminate on midnight of the Ex iration Date and be of no f orce and effect.td ~) (c) Contingency. In.. e�qgv,� t any statute, lawj c4i�r nce, resolution,rule,or regulation is adopted and enforced by the state i'ifi`ty -other_.go ,e td`I entity (or any agency or department thereof) that would have the effect of i~e o l hi t� the number of dwelling units that can be constructed within the Wolf Creek PUD(in its entirefyj,the parties agree that Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be collectively allocated 33% of any such temporary allocation and Parcels 4 through 9 shall be allocated 67% of any such temporary allocation; provided, however, that such temporary allocation shall not have the effect of reallocating density among the parcels. For the purposes of this paragraph only, the term "temporary"shall mean for a period of no more than twelve(12)months. 8. Native Vegetation. Unless otherwise agreed by the owners of the various Parcels, all Parcels within the Wolf Creek PUD shall be designed to stand alone. All Parcels with indigenous native vegetation, as determined by Collier County, will be required to preserve or replant 25% of such native vegetation,as described in Section 3.9.5.5.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended, or in the event of a repeal of said section, such other section of the Collier County Land Development Code controlling the same subject matter. Each of the Parcels shall provide for its own native vegetation requirements as shown within the Collier County approved environmental impact study that was submitted in conjunction with the Wolf Creek PUD rezoning petition,unless otherwise agreed to by any one or more Parcels owners. Parcels providing in excess of 25% native vegetation can transfer such credit to another Parcel under different ownership only upon written agreement of the property owner transferring the excess credit. 6 a i1 OR: 3635 PG: 1678 9. Access Easements/Signature Entry Feature. In order to construct the North-South Road,various road right-of-way easements will be required from the owners of the Parcels. To the extent not previously provided,the owners of the Parcels agree to convey the easements described in this section at no cost to the other owners within twenty(20)days of a receipt of a written request from the Developer (as defined in Section 11 below), and further agree to the conditions and limitations described in this section. (a) Parcel 2/Parcel 8. The owner of Parcel 2 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the east 30 feet of Parcel 2 for the benefit of all Parcels. The owner of Parcel 8 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the west 30 feet of Parcel 8 for the benefit of all Parcels. The owner of Parcel 9 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the west 30 feet of Parcel 9 for the benefit of all Parcels. Where the minimum road width is required by Collier County Transportation Services to be wider than 60 feet,the easement width provided shall be increased the minimum amount necessary to accommodate the North-South Road, with the center of the roadway remaining on the half section line where possible(unless the Developer controls the land on both sides of the roadway,in which I case the Developer shall determine in its sole discretion where to locate the centerline of the North-South j Road for said portions);provided, however, that where a wider road right-of-way is needed to provide a turn lane into a particular project the additional road right-of-way easement area shall come from the parcel needing such turn lane. (b) Parcel 1/Parcel 10. o PtSint":-A---2"-t---Po oip the owner of Parcel 1 shall provide a non-exclusive 42-foot wide pe • :.5rhad right-of-way ease -'nt al g the east 42 feet of Parcel 1 and the owner of Parcel 10 shall pro 'de : omexchisive 42-f.•t wid• .- ent road right-of-way easement along the western 42 feet of P: cel 0, dh-f e�benefi of all ': ce s. From Point"B"to Point"C", the roadway width is intende• to •,:,• ''4 •'N:4440, / 'ght f-way to 60-foot road right-of- way. The owner of Parcel 1 - :11 . •, 'd• a o e u. e�3 G t t. 42 foot wide permanent road right- of-way easement along the ea.t $ to '..2,,5 et f jl •,and I c o C •f Parcel 10 shall provide a non- exclusive 30-foot to 42-foot d- .- ••men - righ-.f-w. •ea t;:, along the western 30 to 42 feet of Parcel 10, each for the ben •• all Parcels. The ac �•�:1 dth qb•ch road right-of-way shall be as determined by Collier County sportation Services'-? ' : ,the`/ -view of the roadway plans for Segment 1. Where the minimum cfiddth is required by oll& j6unty Transportation Services to be wider than contemplated herein,thevAvent width provid d•`; ' cel 1 and Parcel 10 shall be increased the minimum amount necessary to acc riirthe . +4 lct oad. (c) Purpose of Easements. Theseae sements provided for in this section are for the purpose of providing unrestricted ingress and egress for all of the Parcels and shall also be for the construction of the North-South Road, including all necessary or required utilities, sidewalks, water management facilities,landscaping,and signage. (d) Signature Entry Feature. (i) Permitted Owners/Location. The easements described in subsection 9(b)of this Agreement (or in a separate easement if desired by the owner of Parcel 1 or Parcel 10) shall permit the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, the owner of Parcels 7 through 9, or the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 ("Permitted Owners")to construct a signature entry feature(hereinafter"Signature Entry Feature")upon no more than 400 square feet in area and located north of where the North-South Road intersects with Vanderbilt Beach Road. For purposes of this section, the term Permitted Owners shall be deemed to include and mean, as to each individual Permitted Owner, said Permitted Owner's successor, assign, or successor in title. The Signature Entry Feature may be constructed at any time subsequent to the commencement of construction of the North-South Road between Points "A-2"and "C". The Signature Entry Feature may be located, at the sole discretion of the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, in either the 7 OR: 3635 PG: 1679 North-South Road median or in wing walls along each side of the North-South Road. (ii) Constructing Owner. The owner constructing the Signature Entry Feature shall be referred to herein as the Constructing Owner. Any of the Permitted Owners may become the Constructing Owner, subject to the provisions of this paragraph. Buckstone Estates, because of its designation as the Developer of Segment 1, shall have the initial option to become the Constructing Owner. Buckstone Estates may become the Constructing Owner by delivering written notice to the other Permitted Owners of its desire to be the Constructing Owner no less than thirty-five (35) days prior to commencing construction of Segment 1 of the North-South Road. If Buckstone Estates shall either(1) fail to commence construction of Segment 1 (for any reason) on or before April 1, 2005 or (2) fail to commence construction of the Signature Entry Feature on or before April 1, 2005, then the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall have the right to become the Constructing Owner. In such an event, if the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall elect to be the Constructing Owner, said owner shall deliver written j notice to the other Permitted Owners on or before April 30,2005. If such an election is not made by the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2, the Permitted Owners shall thereafter enter into a separate written agreement specifying the owner who shall assume the duty as Constructing Owner; provided all other terms of this section shall be unchanged. Any notice required under this paragraph shall include a sketch showing the intended Signature Entry Feature and a cost estimate(including a 10% contingency) for the design and construction costs of the Signature-E (iii) Design, ertttr"e Entry Fea i be properly permitted throughCollier +� try F F y County and any proposed constrct in wing walls shall b esi ed to not unreasonably block pre- existing signage on Parcel 1 or P: ce/ fronrthyew:f otorist' tr�-ling on Vanderbilt Beach Road or the North-South Road to be co stru ted uant to s A eement. Pri•r to commencing construction of the Signature Entry Feature, e . ••,\••• 'n�.. �, .: k11. e ' the other Permitted Owners with a copy of the design plans for ..e ` 1.1 ;tt E -: ''c a 'gn .lans shall show the location of the proposed Signature Entry ,i e. Ea9' e. (wner‘h 1 h ye, en(10)days after receipt of said design plans to review and a. ao e`tlTe saltie;wh'cI ��p�? rovii`1='"s , of be unreasonably withheld or conditioned. If any Permitted 11,, ., -r has not or does df pesp n./tom, ,e Constructing Owner in writing within such ten(10)day period, .`ard 'ermitted Owner shale, • -a o have approved such plans. (iv) '. cel 1 an•k; r - -2..1.tion OU _y ' er of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall have the option to opt out of participation i -tk g e t`ry„ eature as described in this paragraph. The owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall each I1oti }'L c nuistructing Owner within thirty (30) days after receipt of notice from the Constructing Owner under subsection (ii) above if it desires to opt out of participation in the construction of the Signature Entry Feature and use of any portion of the sign face that would otherwise be allocated to said parcels. The failure of the owner of Parcel I and Parcel 2 to respond with said thirty(30)day period shall be deemed a conclusive election by such owner to participate. In the event the owner of Parcel I and Parcel 2 opts out of participation,then the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive,shall have the option to allow the owner of Parcel 10 to participate instead. In such a case and with the agreement of the owner of Parcel 10, all further references to Parcel I and Parcel 2 in this Section shall mean and refer to Parcel 10. (v) Sign Face(s). The following conditions shall apply to the sign face(s): (a)the sign face(s) shall be equally divided among the parcels as defined in this subsection. In the event the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 elect to participate, the sign face(s) shall be equally divided into thirds,with one-third of the sign face(s)for the project on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2; one- third of the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 7 through 9,inclusive; and one-third of the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive. In the event the owner of Parcel I and Parcel 2 elect not to participate(and Parcel 10 is not substituted),the sign face(s) shall be equally divided, with one-half of 8 OR: 3635 PG: 1680 the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive and one-half of the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 4 through 6,inclusive;and (b)each non-constructing owner not opting out of the shared signage shall notify the Constructing Owner of its project name for the sign(s) within thirty (30) days of notice from the Constructing Owner or the Constructing Owner shall leave the sign face blank for any non-constructing owner not timely notifying the Constructing Owner of its project name; and (c) each of share of the sign face(s) shall be equally visible to both westbound and eastbound motorists traveling along Vanderbilt Beach Road. (vi) Cost. The costs for design, permitting, and construction of the Signature Entry Feature shall be shared as described in this paragraph. In the event the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 elect to participate, the costs shall be divided as follows: one-third of the total costs shall be paid by the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive; one-third by the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2; and one-third by the owners of Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive. In the event the owners of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 elect not to participate (and Parcel 10 is not substituted), the costs shall be divided as follows: one-half of the total costs shall be paid by the owner of Parcels 4 through 6,inclusive; and one-half by the owners of Parcels 7 through 9,inclusive. � //�f; V .-061 (vii) Payment. Thr- str5rcting Owii 'a? .vide the non-constructing owners with a detailed billing statement for th-' dtist(ction cost within fo u`- 45)days after the completion of the initial construction and installatio of tf Stgnatue Entry Feature, . d e h of said non-constructing owners shall remit payment to the Co :tru g w' ih r (30) so ys f the receipt of such bill. If any such bill(s) is not paid within :aid it'- •. 0) •(a , .: ,v; t f all such invoices together with interest thereon at nine '- : 9/o~ s . i yynti t., pert' ( st Ii- o said non-constructing owner's property,unless and until paid; .1 I,e .4 '.g I f+'ur ma - or. c such lien in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida ag:. ' eno -co oti g-c diner's' .p qt., d bring legal action against the non-constructing owner for .b- , n-constructing own•,:' c ins. `C. n costs; and (c) may, at the Constructing Owner's option, fo i. o any such lien de 'ti.-. at. 3 ' the same manner as a mortgage lien on real property, and interest, .sts d reasonable attome ,- fee of any such action will be added to the amount of any such lien, and s : ig verable in the a Constructing Owner prevails in any such action. ?'//y' "'�'(r-` A ;'� f '}�.\ Imo' \/ ,/r' (viii) Maintenance. The Signature Entry Feature shall be maintained and repaired from time to time,which maintenance and repair shall be performed in accordance with all governmental permits and approvals. The Constructing Owner (or its successor or assign) shall be responsible for such maintenance and repair, unless otherwise agreed among the owners participating in the Signature Entry Feature. The costs for any such maintenance or repair to the Signature Entry Feature shall be shared in the same manner described in Section 9(d)(v) above relating to construction costs. Any owner may assign its obligations for payment of such maintenance and repair costs to a property owners' association or condominium association formed with respect to such owner's parcel(s). The Constructing Owner may assign its obligation for maintenance and repair of the Signature Entry Feature to a property owners' association or condominium association formed with respect to the Constructing Owner's parcel(s). (e) Directional Signage. At the request of the owner of Parcels 4 though 6, inclusive, or the owners of Parcels 7 though 9, inclusive, the owner of Parcel 10 shall provide the owners of Parcels 4 through 6 and Parcels 7 through 9 with a non-exclusive sign easement having an area of four(4) square feet for the purpose of erecting and sharing a directional sign along the eastern side of the North-South Road,where the North-South Road intersects with the access road into Parcel 10. The easement shall be in a location such that that the directional sign is easily visible to northbound motorists. 9 • OR: 3635 PG: 1681 10. Stormwater Management. Water management for the section of the North-South Road located between Point "A" and Point "C" shall be provided on Parcel 10. Water management for the section of the North-South Road located between Point"C"and Point "E" shall be provided on Parcel 8 or Parcel 9. Water management for the North-South Road located between Point"E"and Point"F"shall be provided on Parcel 4,Parcel 5, or Parcel 6. Any owner whose parcel has the responsibility for water management under this section may redirect said responsibility to another property through a separate written agreement without the consent of the other parties hereto; provided,however,no such agreement shall release said owner of its obligations under this section. 11. Developer. (a) Identification of Developer. The North-South Road may be constructed either in a single phase or in two separate phases. If the manner of construction is in two separate phases,the first phase of construction shall be Segment I and the second phase of construction shall be Segment 2. The phases may be developed concurrently. Any of the owners of Parcel 1, Parcel 2, or Parcels 4 through 10, inclusive, may individually or collectively be the developer of the North-South Road or Segment 1 of the North-South Road. If, however,the North-South Road is developed in phases,only the owner for Parcel 4, Parcel 5, or Parcel 6 may develop Segment 2. The term "Developer"as used herein shall mean and refer to any such owner which elects to const�c ,,of,the North-South Road. The owners agree and acknowledge that Buckstone Es te(s z ,�4 is 1. for Segment 1. Buckstone Estates has submitted roadway plans to Collier oeconnection Wit, a submittal for its properties. If at any time Buckstone Estates ceases(fo aicy' anon)its pursuit of the ' for the construction of Segment 1 at any time prior to March 1, 2 05, u kg a ff'Esta:tes sl? Il noti other owners of the same within twenty (20) days and thereaft an.therawnet • assum the ro o the Developer of Segment 1 by notifying the other owners in ' . . -" ' r ton Estates fails(for any reason)to obtain permits for the constru do (of e t I o or,,�#,,0. r c. 1, 005 or fails(for any reason)to commence construction of Se e o .r tufo '1.ril 1, 015, anph er owner may elect to be the Developer of Segment 1 and nbti the~ether.' rs ill' t the same. In any case where Buckstone Estates shall cease t he Developer of Se t ..' then owner seeks to become the Developer of Segment 1, such 't owner shall within ays of assuming the role of the Developer of Segment 1 promp' ,, elu uburse Buckstone s k.f r the new Developer's share (see Section 6(c) of this Agreement) o . C signand permi ;'gg_� expended by Buckstone Estates for Segment 1. Upon receipt of such pa t, _ .1.' s all promptly provide the new Developer with copies of its materials related to the .-. e"ff',ng;mud construction of Segment 1. Wolf Creek Estates shall be the Developer of Segment 2; provided,however that Buckstone Estates, with the written consent of Wolf Creek Estates, may instead be the Developer of Segment 2. The Developer shall be responsible for the design, permitting, and construction of those portion(s) of the North South Road (including the related improvements) it will be constructing, with the costs of which to be shared as described herein. The name of the North-South Road shall be Pristine Drive unless Collier County shall rescind its prior approval. (b) Design P1ans/Peumitting. The North-South Road shall be designed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. If the North-South Road is being constructed in phases, both phases shall be designed and constructed in a consistent manner so as to be compatible with one another, All plans and specifications for the North-South Road shall be prepared by a licensed and reputable engineering firm. The Developer shall be responsible for obtaining any permits or governmental approvals necessary or appropriate to construct the North-South Road("Road Permits and Approvals"). All owners of the Parcels will cooperate in good faith with the Developer and the Developer is hereby expressly authorized by the other parties hereto to apply for or to pursue in the Developer's name (or in the names of the owners of the Parcels or both as the Developer may deem desirable)the Road Permits and Approvals which may be required to construct the North-South Road. The owners of the Parcels further agree to promptly execute, 10 OR: 3635 PG: 1682 acknowledge,consent to,join in, and deliver all documents,applications and other papers which may be necessary to make such applications or to obtain the Road Permits and Approvals. (c) Development of Segment 1. Upon completion of the final plans and specifications for Segment 1,and approval of the same by Collier County,the Developer shall furnish such finals plans and specifications for the construction of Segment 1,including sidewalks,accompanying utilities,landscaping, signage (except for the signature entry feature), and other related improvements to the other owners for their review. No sooner than fifteen(15) days after such plans and specifications have been delivered to the other owners, the Developer shall seek bids for the construction and installation of Segment 1 from not less than three (3) qualified, licensed contractors previously experienced in Collier County as road contractors. At the sole option of the Developer, the Developer may also seek up to two (2) bids from qualified, licensed contractors not previously experienced in Collier County. When such bids are solicited by the Developer,the Developer shall notify the other owners and provide them with a copy of the request for bid and a list of the contractors from whom bids are being solicited. When the bids are returned, the Developer shall provide copies of all completed bids to the other owners. In the event the Developer selects any complete bidder other than the lowest complete bidder,the Developer shall provide the other owners with its reason(s)for selecting the applicable bidder,and the other owners shall have the right of approval with regard thereto, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned. If any owner fails to notify the Developer in writing of their disapproval of the selected bidder within five (5) business days after sethereof from the Developer, such selection shall be deemed to have been appy. A,,e k'/ twithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the other owne - h .'e no rightTh - al if the Developer selects the low complete bidder. (...r:// .,, p No less than thirty-five (35 �da firer to c.mmg 'n con true 'on of Segment$ 1,the Developer provide the owners of th- of - ;: OR: 3635 PG: 1683 recoverable in the event the constructing owner prevails in any such action. The right to foreclose specified hereunder may not be exercised prior to August 1, 2006; provided, however, such time limitation shall immediately cease to apply in the event of a sale, transfer or other disposition of the real property(or any portion thereof or any interest therein)that is subject to any such lien. (e) Temporary Construction Easement. Upon the request of the Developer, any owner when so requested by the Developer will grant to the Developer a temporary easement for access over,across,and upon such portion of its property as shall be reasonably requested by the Developer for the initial installation and construction of the North-South Road. Said temporary easement will be prepared so as to terminate upon completion of the initial construction of the North-South Road. The Developer shall restore any improvements damaged during its use of any such temporary construction easement. (f) Construction Liens. The Developer shall keep the other Parcels at all times free and clear of construction liens, mechanic's liens and any other liens for labor, services, supplies, equipment or materials purchased or procured, directly or indirectly,by or for the Developer (or any entity related or affiliated with the Developer). The Developer agrees that it will timely pay, satisfy or otherwise discharge all liens of contractors, subcontractors, mechanics, laborers, materialmen and others of like character on account of such a lien or the enforcement or foreclosure thereof. In the event of non- payment or non-satisfaction of any such lien y the,Developer, the owner of the parcel shall have the right,but not the obligation,to pay off or-kiWaiClt, provide the Developer with a bill covering all costs and expenses of the develo.i sui5Irae 1\.any such bill is not paid within twenty (20) days, then (a) the amount of • hj .1f-together with inte • t,)h on at lesser of eighteen percent per annum(18%) or the highest rate .. low _by last shall constitute a ien p the Developer's property,unless and until paid; (b) the parcel o• er m red re-a"t1err iufi a Pub 'c cords of Collier County, Florida against the Developer's • .•- , an• b ' : le:. ti 'nt.ih- P:veI er for said amount; and(c)may, ti at the parcel owner's option, ore•1 :'s c. c b d . -, d interest, costs and reasonable attorney's fees of any such ac .n 011 a d.• • �t f c i and shall be recoverable in the event the parcel owner prevails ' :. ( Iia *'•/ ,, - 7 4.. ;:• nty -yct 12. Notices. Any n•.-- request,demand,in .tct oxor,o er communication to be given to any party hereunder shall be i 4fri'lipg and either handy f delivered by overnight courier, facsimile transmission, or sent by s dor certified mlil receipt requested,postage prepaid, addressed as follows: ')'i--..-r-y - '\) If to Lindner/Trust 1, Lindner/Trust 2: c/o Naples Realty Services 4980 Tamiami Trail North Naples,Florida 34110 Attention: Mark L.Lindner Telephone: (239)213-2686 Facsimile: (239)434-2747 If to Wolf Creek Estates. Hoover/Fallen Timbers, 3785 Airport Road North,Suite B-1 or Buckstone Estates: Naples,Florida 34105 Attention: William L.Hoover Telephone: (239)403-8899 Facsimile: (239)403-9009 Any notice demand, request or other communication shall be deemed to be given upon actual receipt in the case of hand delivery, facsimile transmission, or delivery by overnight courier, or three (3) 12 OR: 3635 PG: 1684 business days after depositing the same in a letter box or by other means placed within the possession of the United States Postal Service,properly addressed to the party in accordance with the foregoing and with the proper amount of postage affixed thereto. In the event of any notice via facsimile transmission,a hard copy shall be sent via regular mail on the day of such transmission. Any such transmission received after 5:00 p.m.Eastern Standard Time(or Daylight Savings Time,whichever then applicable)shall be deemed to have been given on the next following business day. The addressees and addresses for the purpose of this Section may be changed by any party by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided herein. For the purpose of changing such addresses or addressees only, unless and until such written notice is received, the last addressee and respective address stated herein shall be deemed to continue in effect for all purposes. 13. Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with Florida law (exclusive of choice of law rules). Venue for any action arising hereunder shall lie exclusively in Collier County,Florida. 14. Prevailing Party. The prevailing party in any litigation involving this Agreement shall be entitled to recover from the non-prevailing party all attorneys' fees,paralegal fees and costs incurred in connection with such litigation,at arbitratioyor-a al-�otherwise,including reasonable attorneys' fees and paralegal fees in the enforcement,of;:fll+.��t3.4' der. The owners of the parcels herein described shall only.be liable for i. ation of this •A nt during their respective periods of ownership, and in the event any is brought for recoV: - -.o monetary damages for any breach hereof, the claimant shall look olel, to--the--interest of the th o r of the parcel in breach for the recovery of such monetary da ges .-,-,. ----Ni 15. No Third P,,A t e.elle , - •. :vi i s -s gement are for the exclusive benefit of the parties, their h..' E, c•est. a, ' a s�., d as ' s, • ce•t as otherwise provided herein, and not for the benefit of an �t . .-rs`on, or`-.lr ..s A e . deemed to have conferred any rights, express or implied, upo' Tr third person. Notw! sta in:, f ing herein to the contrary, it is recognized by all parties hereto t ' 'me Investors and' 6v o. c. is presently under contract to purchase Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 t ' e�Contract"). For p .s�s•.f this paragraph, the term "Prime" shall mean and refer only to Prime s.,and Develo - I ..r to a corporation that is the assignee of the interests of Prime Investors and.1 ,. Ckand under the Prime Contract; provided, however that (i) said assignee �"e ht'ub--i ty shall hay �-t �"ori shareholders as Prime Investors and Developers, Inc. and (ii) Prime shall provide written notice to the owners of the Parcels within ten (10) days of any such an assignment and the verifying shareholder information. In the event of an assignment not complying with the foregoing terms,all of Prime's third-party beneficiary rights referenced hereunder shall immediately cease. Provided that the Prime Contract is in full force and effect and Prime is not in default under the Prime Contract, it is recognized by all parties hereto that Prime is a third party beneficiary of this Agreement and as such, has a vested interest in and to the terms hereof. Once this Agreement is executed,no changes, modifications and or alterations to this Agreement shall be permitted unless same shall be in writing and has the written consent of Prime;provided,however,consent of Prime shall not be required under the following conditions: (i) the Prime Contract is no longer in full force or effect or (ii) Prime is in default under the Prime Contract. In any event, the requirement for Prime's consent under this paragraph and Prime's third-party beneficiary rights hereunder shall cease and terminate as of October 31,2004. 16. Partial Invalidity. If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall, to any extent, be declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, such term or 13 OR: 3635 PG: 1685 provision shall be modified to the minimum extent necessary to make it or its application valid and enforceable, and the validity and enforceability of all other provisions of this Agreement and all other applications of any such term or provision shall not be affected thereby,and each term and provision of this Agreement shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 17. Modifications. Except as expressly provided herein, this Agreement may not be modified in any respect whatsoever or rescinded, in whole or in part, except by the consent of the owners) of the Parcels, and then only by written instrument duly executed, acknowledged by all of said owners,and recorded in the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. No modification or termination of this Agreement shall affect the rights of any lienholder of any portion of any of the Parcels unless the lienholder consents in writing to the modification or termination. 18. Covenants Running with Land. All of the provisions of this Agreement,including all of the benefits and burdens described herein,shall run with the Parcels and shall be binding upon the Parcels and the successors in title to each of the Parcels. The rights and obligations in and to this Agreement are and shall be assignable to any and all successors in title to each of the Parcels, without the necessity of a formal assignment. However, should any party acquiring title to any of the Parcels request a formal assignment,the parties hereto agree to cooperate in the approval and execution of any such assignment. 19. Interpretation ofet Ili'[te'�s�tisi6i�`exRressly provided, the term "owner" when used in this Agreement shall be deet eCh aelttde and mein- .1b er and the owner's successors,assigns, or successor in title. 11(j 20. Integration. 's greeihent.embodies flee entire dersttanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter herein,an the, .11� `11t pl-} et sy sede all prior understandings. 21. Counter „ i s grr m m�yi exec tee in lain), umber of counterparts,each of which shall be deemed to be ging as gaitistcan a74... o i_, ture appears thereon and all of which shall together constitute d the same instrume .... 1 22. Recording. This " ent shall be recordeaA7 d Public Records of Collier County, Florida. • (SIGNATURES BEGIN ON NEXT PAGE) 14 OR: 3635 PG: 1686 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. WOLF CREEK ESTATES: WOLF CREEK ESTATES,LLC, a Florida limited liability company 411,1 1 ,If I By: Catalina Land Group,Inc. a Florida corporation, II — / its Manager Print Name. _ad .. t-- G •o. t ►.t a a d, OR. r,# By: 2"L/ V21/00-1...---. Print Name: ..7:1' 1. ...IN .t. 1 William L.Hoover,President STATE OF 16 'i /L�,. ss. COUNTY OF / }.-.--__•-\----_ The foregoing rostrum= t s c w d • • '; n n t •1 I' of , 2004 by William L.Hoover as Presi.• taa' a d • •,Inc.1 a to' 1a,•orporation, e mana of Wolf Creek Estates, LLC, a Florida' nt• -ha Ili •'c.' fin b"k 'o 414i• entities who is(/personally known to me or( )has produ -. ', ,`54j.vidence of identification. ti .• (SEAL) 4 4,11 cf / (''""Pitipakik....., �„�. 4. BRANDY A. L'','-'''.._. �! � �� * * MY COMMISSION#OO 168976 -,1 i/-, 1_,I P IC EXPIRES,February 16,2007 ` me hoods ° Bonded Thru Budget Wary Services (Type or Print) My Commission Expires: 15 OR: 3635 PG: 1687 HOOVER/FALLEN TIMBERS: ._ Print L • William L.Hoover,as Trustee of Fallen Timbers Land Trust dated November 5,2003 Print Name: 44" y _t STA Lb OF r t_a �fts, ) ss. COUNTY OF Qt-i � � ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me,this 2L\ of 201)4 by William L. Hoover, as Trustee of the Fad-Timbirs--L.agd Trust dated November 5, 3, who is (IIT d personally known to me or ( ) harrIeCOO as evidence of identification. (SEAL) NY ill, ...._.. 1♦ _..�T" ^-, 6 _ Z E SOF M1�'�, 8' ••ThN. 7 ' ry0.\\\ * 1.1.11111 i •- ! Print) n y Co ' san! xpires: ,�. �.) 16 OR: 3635 PG: 1688 • ! / DNE' RUST 1: ./moi ., i.Ade All '. A l . Print N> �� i1,� 0 Mark L. finder,as Tins under r• Unrecorded Land Trust UiT/D January 4,L999 • /.- . • STATE OF ) - )ss1. COUNTY OF 'cSSC ) . • The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me,this Of 3 of AU�USt , 2004 by Mark L. Lindner, as Trustee under that unrecord Land Tru D January 4, 1999 who is( ) personally known to me or ( ) has produced .. 1�,,ATIO. . as evi ce of • identification. (SEAL) r," i ice!"i.. ✓ ./ t C)! f Name „i. IP I. 9 . �f pee• Tint) ('�� "'141:9No iinissi0n ices:. AY/ ,a k %tr Ce ., :..4.4,....:.::.:. •...,:...,.. "-,..4%.0::;_sgti14A:... i 6-1(72;-‘.. .--7.-. . -e\r .,,....:,,,%0„..c.,•,.,,,,,..,,,,..;..3,,,,,„„ . :. .; • •`^1 ,r/• I'' - art{t.;:.1..:,.`,,o.( :••• 7:' • . i? • • Z L 'd 8862 9E6 6EZ A183>OD/1SI31N 1108A Wd8E: 1 V00Z—EE—8 OR: 3635. PG: 1689 • / NDN RUST 2: 7 • % ., - Print • 111:4_ 11/7MiXir 66 Mark L.Linder,as Trustee under AAMF/ � Unrecorded Land Trust U/TID May 21,1999 . • """'" t,2s e: ON r Ad,gA�L ' � A �.( is 1"1 STATE OF d. 1 2 ) . )ss. • S• COUNTY OF 55G'e' ) • "The foregoing instnunenl was acknowledged bcfore me,this ,';:3L l 3 of idc./ �Sr 2004 . ` •r by Murk L. Lindner, as Trustee under that unreeord ,,Land Trust U/T/D May 21, 1999 who is ( ) personally known to me or ( ) has produced `, i•.,.-,,,mn as eviden • of identification. • (SEAL) - ' ,- ,. ..e," de3tr._./S.iJI / C�/1Qame: �lYT�% ! ._ (Type or•riot) [ Commission I Expires: .ho ' Ni -Ilk OW�i/ 77 1 „. t ..tiute. r,;��` 777- 171— s r :•i•OM1'! r�r . • 2\J ^• � . Lel.•JJ�;, ....,•.-:, .t �.C(2,,,� , /'�„it. . ,fet., . . . 5-ii y„,,,(::9. .;;....,. ,-.:...,:•••. • . , ,., . . . ................_......_...;•----(‘), -\-/ -,..,,.....,,,.... , ) { • • • t i ig 1 1 1 ti E l •d 8862 9E6 6EZ Ald3NO3/1S 131N 1108d fr d6E: T V00Z—EZ—8 1 I t 1 1 OR: 3635 PG: 1690 BUCKSTONE ESTATES: BUCKSTONE ESTATES,LLC, a Florida limited liability company .� / By: Catalina Land Group,Inc. a Florida corporation, .�•. 1111 l.. its Manager Print Name: - , ., • ►i1 . s. • A ' • By: Print Name: (g.MeillrAP. William L.Hoover,President STATE OF P-Or-i.-1 ) )ss. COUNTY OF 0 ZAWQr -- ; f ' - The foregoing instrument+iowledged before me, s tot , 2004 by William L. Hoover as Presi �nt ► -atalina nd Gr v Inc. a Floridao L.-......�._�Q. P� c rpora n, the manager of Buckstone Estates, LLC, a Fl da f li bility\comPaVy, on , hairof said company who is ( personally known to me or p as evidence of identification. (((((( ""r > r .fit 4 (SEAL) w .- _ ;rr41?� - / ..I ! ;NT &wICY CQM't� 00158076 e. EXPIRES: i' ,2007 L). (Type or Print) 4'80r00 BoM.dIt": " fission Expires: •� Er CI S%Greet:Wad FtdderAlicowAirsentseCoa string Ae.mmt-NorthrsorYAa 19 011: 3635 PG: 1691 EXHIBIT A PARCEL LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS Parcel 1: (Owned by:Mark L.Lindner,as Trustee under unrecorded Land Trust UIT/D January 4, 1999) The South 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East, Collier County,Florida,less the south 145.00 feet thereof for road right-of-way. Parcel 2: (Owned by:Mark L.Lindner,as Trustee under unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D May 21, 1999) The North 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. Parcel 4: (Owned by:Wolf Creek Estates,LLC) The North 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 114 of Section 34,Township 48 South,R 2f-(Estllier County,Florida. Parcel 5: (Owned by:Wolf Cr k es,LLC) The South 1/2 of th- goiltimeiel/4 of orthw ,t 1 • of Section 34, Township 48 but ,Ran a 2as Collier oun , to 'da. Parcel 6: (Owned by:W if C Esta(€) The South 1/2 t - Southeast 1/4 of th",north es VI 4f Section 34,Township 4 4 l th,Range 26 East, ..4 er ‘ lorida. Parcel 7: (Owned by:Bucksto s The South 1/2 of the Nort�lrwe / o\ -Southeast 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. Parcel 8: (Owned by:William L.Hoover,as Trustee of the Fallen Timbers Land Trust dated November 5, 2003(owns west half of described parcel)&Buckstone Estates,LLC(owns east half of described parcel)) The South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. Parcel 9: (Owned by:Buckstone Estates,LLC) The North 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida Less and except that real property conveyed to Collier County in that certain Warranty Deed recorded in Official Records Book 3573,Page 0782 of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. 20 . OR: 3635 PG: 1692 Parcel 10: (Owned by:Mark L.Lindner,as Trustee under unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D January 4, 1999) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA;THENCE RUN NORTH 89°46'10" WEST,ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,322.24 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE RUN NORTH 02°14'20" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, FOR A DISTANCE OF 145.13 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD, A 175 FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY,AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 02°1470" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUI'H.WEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34,FOR A DISTAXIV IV .6"-:1;13 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 1/2 O' 140.7i4 - • “lit-I/ Oli,HE SOUTHEAST 114 OF SAID SECTION 34;THE1 ECR ' NORTH 89°47'3 ` K ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH /2 o}t/CHE SOUTHWEST 1/4 6' TH SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, eR •T E�..OL 22.04 ' E TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF • E SIU ♦F 1 SO HWES 1/4 IF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SE O E' 4,, t ► .ti, 'I {t 13' ." EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE IF t I. S caya . 11 , to .i.f• .O EAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, • ' a IS . .1t.'8 F T I • t OINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-W• ' . . • 'r 'RB BE• ROAD; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89°46' 1 t ST, ALONG THE R 'TH RI F-WAY LINE OF SAID VANDERBILT t :,,e4 ROAD, FOR A s4.%' 1,322.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG t•CONTAINING 15.: ' y / ORE OR LESS. Less and except that`s i .sent/yCctlo-Collier County in that certain Warranty Deed recorded its r • It�s-13ook 3573,Page 0780 of the Public Records of Collier County,Flora-a:— Parcel lorida.—Parcel 11: (Owned by:Buckstone Estates,LLC) The West 330 feet of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. 21 OR: 3635 PG: 1693 GENERAL LOCATION MAP OF PARCELS AND GENERAL LOCATION OF NORTH-SOUTH ROAD EXHIBIT "B" General Location Map of Parcels #4 ?if #7 naa nLard D , ietad wind ti N10 RaMunif CJC�l4/ Mission I srStopping Ow*, .. #1 A2 #10 Wrirdarbift Sow*Road A-I EXHIBIT`B" 22 • OR: 3635 PG: 1694 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT COST ALLOCATION • Parcel Owner's Share of Intersection Improvement Costs • #6 12% COO 1 • Cad Napes taw $ G% rar ir sit pm/Mgt*box/ 4•4 Tem Aare Lind blond Walk PUO rtwar,rr ^• 1 � 296 6,A Mash,MVOs (. #1 ;I g amity 95% A-2 9.5% VandarbitRunlRoad EXHIBIT"C" 23 OR: 3635 PG: 1695 POINT"A-I"TO POINT"D" PRELIMINARY OPINION OF PROBABLE COST BLACK BEAR RIDGE PHASE I Preliminary Opinion of Probable Cost \ ,, CON N.// . ,1- \\\ Prepared for: A wIti�.:Hoo R ( r75A ;I_.4: 'o . to rf ��}� I C, _4, __:„..„..,,,. ` -:,.....,_____C fir` ped_byr, - Q.Grady Minor&Associates,P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs,FL 34134 (239)947-1144 (239)947.0375(Fax) May,2004 (52-- --a.5/17/0"" Norman . bk. iicoc P.E. Florida Registration Number 47116 r.NIowWJabnny age re..:el.�oec w EXHIBIT"D"-Page 1 of 3 24 OR: 3635 PG: 1696 Mack BairRidoe-Phase I Budget Off-site Improvements Item-North-South Outer Loop Road Quantity Unit Price Total 1 Ckaring and Grubbing 2 AC 53,500.00 37,000.00 2 Silt Fence 2,800 LF 51.50 $4,200.00 3 Fill 8,500 CY 39.00 376,500.00 4 Final Grade 1 LS 56,500.00 56,500.00 5 Valley Gutta 7,700 LF 55.50 514,850.00 6 8'Lirnerock Bue(compacted and prima!) 4,800 SY $7.50 $36,000.00 7 12'Stabilized Sobgradc 5,750 SY $2.25 $12,937.50 8 3'Asphalt 4,800 SY 58.50 540,800.00 9 Signing&pavement markings 1 LS 56,500.00 56,500.00 . 10 Sodding 5,800 SY $1.50 58,700.00 I I 5'WideConcrwe Sidewalk 1,500 SY $16.50 $24,750.00 12 4'Lfinerock(under sidewalk) 1,500 SY $4.50 56,750.00 13 Maintenance of Traffic t LS $2,50000 32,500.00 Sub-total .,t..r, lfi>'.,f�...''.3 $247,937.50 Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements Qaaatity Unit Price Total I Turn Lanes Complete(WB Rs,ES Lt) ,, LS-- 340,000.00 $80,000.00 • 2 Signaifaition '�-{ li R, L.it. St3,000.00 $130,000.00 3 Side Drain Drainer(4 DBI,DBL ren 36") i — _,.-.�. /j38,000,00 535,00000 4 Lighting /(('''\��� I !3'-..,`e$2. 600.0 525,000.00 4.1 Sob-total ',a,,'e�, ` .,5270,000.00 Item-North-South Outer I,00p R d -1_,___.__, r. \ SanitarySewnf / '-'E•' -..u. Quoin, '' Unit Pries\ T tat I 8'PVC Force Main(C-900 CI's 200) 1 L Y r.00... $28, .00 2 8'Plug Valve w/Box (7'T"'�i /' c 1 0O,t�052,76 .00 3 Hot Tap Future 16'Force .,on V: v 1 t j, 55, .00 "1 /� o 1 ^;1 I', :42 6,24.00 . ,,, . item-North-SouthOute ' eitd--` sk- c---(. `---- t-'s' Water Mata anantl `1, Unit.,.j I Hot Tap Extrting 30-Reinf Con In ,'k. I (or aR Jlb and tap new prop 24" - 111 1 LS>�x S3Si0 i P4 000.00 2 12'PVC Water Main(CL 200) v 1,4000 LE 't d0 2 55,700.00 3 12'date Vance wakes ` 2 BA jl .o'h'JS3,00o.00 4 Fin Hydrant(Complete Assembly) O 2 EA,..-.'" . $4,100.00 5 Permanent Bacterial Sample Point --- \$, l 1.00 $1,000.00 6 Temporary Bacterial Sample Point P ... f Y ,,-:.,...-.1900.00 $900.00 7 AirRelease Valve • \',,. $1,550.00 $3,100.00 Sub-Tahl ';ry.V;ti't,•L„Y:.tx:?:Mg $83,500.00 Item-North-South Outer Loop Road- Drainage Quantity Unit Price Total I Control Structure 1 EA 54,000.00 $4,000.00 2 15"PCP 100 LF 523.00 52300.00 3 18"RCP 350 LF $25.00 58,750.00 4 24'RCP 1,200 LP $34.00 540,800.00 5 Wiley Gutter Throat Inlet 6 EA $2,300.00 512,000.00 6 Crate Inlet 4 EA $1,700.00 $6,800.00 7 Junction Box I EA $1,850.00 514,800.00 8 15'Flared End Section 1 EA $900.00 $900.00 Sob-Total ,,E?`r..a . >: 590,350.00 OIFSIteTetats tBSYMNBAN$723,097.50 5/!4/2004 EXHIBIT"D"-Page 2 of 3 25 OR: 3635 PG: 1697 Black Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget Assumptions Construction stake out excluded. Permit fees excluded. Impact fees excluded. Engineering fees excluded. • Testing services excluded. Street lighting excluded(except VBR intersection). Conservation Area No mitigation,or replanting costs included(clearing only). • Sewer Sewer profile has been adjusted to include service for the potential lots on the Come Drainage Water 1,G4.... ::::::: C L' . Fill from lakes is limited to only I vation depth below existing d, D/// """ r commendation. An average of I.6 ft of fill over the tilt eveloped site. a� 1 / Rock excavation,rock crushing andh(atg' incidental to the lake exca Paving Sidewalk cost included in initial infrastructure. Offsite inner loop road to be built by others,Including turn lanes to serve site(no costs assumed). Vanderbilt Beach Rd 6 lane improvements in place(I.e.force main). Vanderbilt Beach Rd temporary turn lanes not required(Le.payment to county to build improvements to support project end to built as part of 6 lane improvements). '� .....,:e.47 -cd-r-. 3 0-0-Le .7047--1--e-0‘, ••*" /6 duo EXHIBIT`D"-Page 3 of 3 26 OR: 3635 PG: 1698 Q. GRADY MINOR,P.E. 1415 Panther Lane,Suite 232 Naples,Florida 34109 Phone 239-591-6795 Fax 239-591-6732 July 23,2004 RE: Estimate of Engineering, Surveying&Permitting Costs for Pristine Drive Segment One Engineering Design and Permitting of Pristine Drive $35,000 Engineering Design and Permitting of Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Int. Improvements $10,000 Pristine Drive Permitting Costs $1,500 Estimated Costs for Engineering Design and Permitting $46,500 Construction Engineering for Pristine Drive $9,372 Construction Engineering for Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Int./ROW Improvements $4,565 Total Estimated Costs for Constructions t `' �-_ $13,937 Construction Surveying for Pris ve $18,656 Construction Surveying for V de Beat Rd. Int./R01-\\ p vements $6,017 Total Estimated Costs for Cos ctiatl8eying�'1 $24,673 /,--?,,,--<:,(.---1,7.„\ --„:.\--b).--:-v7 C . � \. . - h'} .. . 308A5[engrcosts EXHIBIT"E" 27 * OR: 3635 PG: 1699 *** INITIAL DENSITY ALLOCATION-WOLF CREEK PUD Wolf Creek PUD's Initial Residential Unit Allocation 681 81 A -2 • L,••• X11 #4 " #7 c.+,wen,land 51 41 Neon t Land IMO 74- rem oviriand Wind Walk -- -- 04 PUDRMkMn1Yl ifttlon -7„ shoppiv Center 64 A,? vbmirbe Beach Rend A-I Tots/of 147.69 acres end 591 Units EXHIBIT"F" 28 GoodnerAngela Subject: Bruce Anderson -Wolf Creek, County Barn, Vanderbilt Commons Location: Collier County Commission Office Start: Fri 6/16/2017 3:00 PM End: Fri 6/16/2017 3:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Meeting Status: Meeting organizer Organizer: SolisAndy Required Attendees: Andrew I. Solis (ASolis@cohenlaw.com) Categories: Commission Chambers 1 GoodnerAngela From: marc alien <mallencny@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday,June 22, 2017 8:05 AM To: SolisAndy Subject: Re: PDI - PL20160000404 Wolf Creek RPUD Preserve Reduction Re: PDI - PL20160000404: Wolf Creek RPUD by the developer of parcels 3b and 9 to reduce preserves Dear Commissioner Solis, First, let me be clear, I am not against development, nor against this developer's right to develop his property. The property is, however, within a residential planned urban development, Wolf Creek, and development should be in keeping with the agreements and ordinances associated with the RPUD, and should be compatible with other developments in the RPUD. There are two facets to this proposal; preserve reduction and residential density, although only one is being considered with this PDI. To be properly assessed the project should be looked at in its entirety, not piecemeal. Please consider the following: With respect to the preserves: There were no excess preserves or excess native vegetation prior to 2013 when a portion of Palermo Cove was brought into the Wolf Creek PUD. As noted in the CCPC minutes of 3/21/2013, it was intended that there be no net effect upon preserves and no increase in density in the Wolf Creek RPUD and Palermo Cove PUD, with the 2013 WCPUD and Palermo Cove amendments. Thus, the apparent "excess" should not have existed. The excess appeared when the required preserves for SFWMD, which were more than the county's native vegetation requirement, were added to the WCPUD map exhibit as preserve, but not taken into account as required native vegetation because only a portion was required. The excess was an unintended consequence and a reduction should therefore not be approved. With respect to the density: While other county PUDs may have dwelling unit "pools", Wolf Creek dwelling units have been allocated to the different parcels in the PUD, initially by a Cost Sharing Agreement* and subsequently by county ordinances** as parcels were added to the PUD. This was done with intent as documented in county minutes*** CCPC minutes from 3/21/13 document specific allocation of dwelling units to prevent them from being "used" by other parcels, which would change density Parcel 9 was allocated 80 dwelling units for a density of 3.99 dwelling units per acre when it was brought into the Wolf Creek RPUD in 2007 - that was the request and that was what was approved Parcel 3b, representing N 60% of the original parcel 3, would be allocated N 24 dwelling units based upon acreage and the original 2004 CSA post transfer of units to Falls at Portofino Thus, parcels 3b and 9 have N 104 dwelling units allocated to them under current ordinances and agreements - this yields an allocated density of N 3.3 du's/acre Comparable densities are: Black Bear Ridge - density 1.97 built out (N 4 allocated) Raffia(WCPUD portion) - N 2.3 Adjacent Island Walk - 3.04 Falls at Portofino - — 6.85 - these were initially high end town homes selling in the N $500K range - the allocation plan was for one higher density multifamily project on the periphery of WCPUD with lesser density elsewhere There is a companion application PL20160000157 which proposes a 215 dwelling unit project with — 88% of the buildings being 7-9 flex units - this is a high density row house type development of N 6.82 du's/acre - more than twice the approved/allocated density. parcels 3b and 9 do not have 215 dwelling units allocated to them and there is no request to increase the approved density the developer is claiming density he does not appear to have At every juncture, the county has historically upheld the allocation of dwelling units within the Wolf Creek PUD, documented in meeting minutes and ordinances. The county should be consistent and continue to recognize the historical allocation and not allow a claim for unused but allocated dwelling units within the PUD. 2 In conclusion please consider: The PDI for a requested reconfiguration of the preserve map and decrease in preserves should not be approved as there should be no "excess" preserves. The companion PL 20160000157 should not be approved as the requested number of dwelling units is more than twice that allocated. The high density row house type development is not compatible with the original plan and not in keeping with the majority of the adjacent developments. Note that there is no opposition to development according to parameters of the original plan; a development of —104 dwelling units, which may be multifamily, possibly with a mild or moderate increase in density, but this proposal is not that. We have met with the developer in an attempt to work out something mutually agreeable. They have been unwilling to consider any compromise in their proposed density, to which they are not entitled according to allocation. Thank you for your time, Respectfully, Marc Allen, 7347 Acorn Way, Naples FL *OR 3635 PGS 1672-1699, recognized as valid and enforceable as documented in various county meeting minutes **Ordinances 2007-46 and 2013-37 ***BCC minutes 5/22-23/2007, CCPC minutes 3/21/13 3 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 06/27/17 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. 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]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls MET WITH 12 RESIDENTS OF ESPLANADE GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB ON MARCH 30TH AND MET WITH Rich Yovanovich, David Genson, Wayne Arnold ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21ST OUR OFFICE HAS RECEIVED EMAILS AND CALLS FROM MARCH 2017 UNTIL JUNE 2017 9.B. 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 04-41, as amended,the Collier County Land Development Code, which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from Planned Unit Development(PUD)to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)for a project known as the Triad RPUD to allow development of 44 single-family dwelling units. The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Palm Springs Boulevard and Radio Lane in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 10.75± acres; providing for repeal of Ordinance No. 05-11, as amended by Ordinance No. 05-23, the former Triad Planned Unit Development, and by providing an effective date. [PUD- PL20160002564] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ['Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls Met with Rich Yovanovich, ON THURSDAY,JUNE 22ND AND CATHY GORMAN ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 215T Emails have been exchanged to set up mtgs and to discuss the subject. 9.E. 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 No. 2007-46, as amended,the Wolf Creek RPUD, to approve an insubstantial change to the PUD,to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only, and providing for an effective date. The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately one-half mile west of Collier Boulevard, in Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 189± acres. [PDI-PL20160000404] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ['Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls Met with Carrie Abrams and Bev Smith on Monday, June 12, 2017 and met with Bruce Anderson, Cheffy Passidomo on Wednesday, June, 21, 2017 COUNTY MANAGERS REPORT 11.G. 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 for recording the final plat of Sereno Grove, (Application Number PL20160001884) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ['Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls MET WITH Dave Bankston, Sheri Roberts ON MONDAY, MARCH 20TH AND HAVE HAD PHONES CALLS & Emails BACK AND FORTH SINCE THAT TIME, HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH Rich Yovanovich ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21ST CONSENT AGENDA 16.A.2. 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 for recording the final plat of Maple Ridge Amenity Center at Ave Maria, (Application Number PL20170000724) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. M NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ['Meetings ['Correspondence ❑e-mails ['Calls 4 17.C. 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. Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 97-70, as amended, Pelican Lake, a Planned Unit Development,to clarify the measurement of actual height of the accessory enclosed utility/storage structure is from the lower of finished floor elevation of the enclosed utility/storage structure or twelve inches above the FEMA flood elevation. The subject property is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (SR-951) approximately 1/5 mile south of Tamiami Trail East(US 41), in Section 15,Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 101.3+/-acres. [PDI- PL20160003463] X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ['Correspondence De-mails nCalls 17.D. 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 Petition VAC-PL20170001974 to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1401, Page 2152 and a portion of the 15-foot Utility Easement recorded in Official Record Book 1432, Page 1093 of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida; and approve and authorize the Chairman to execute a Quit Claim Deed and Bill of Sale to transfer wastewater facilities from the County to the property owner.The subject property is located on the west side of Bayshore Drive, approximately one quarter mile south of Tamiami Trail East, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ['Meetings ['Correspondence ne-mails ®Calls Discussions with staff and phone calls GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner- Rich Yovanovich, David Genson, Wayne Arnold Location: your office Start: Wed 6/21/2017 11:00 AM End: Wed 6/21/2017 11:30 AM Recurrence: (none) 9. A Organizer: TaylorPenny flcfji &S c.corner GrecoSherry From: Tom Coffey <ticoffey@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: 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net'<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 GrecoSherry 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 GrecoSherry 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. 1 GrecoSherry From: Tom Coffey <ticoffey@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: 1 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 GrecoSherry From: William Nemeth <wnemeth@icloud.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 1:34 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner development - Collier County Planning Commission Project# 20150001776 Attachments: collier commissioner letter- Naples Esplanade copy.pdf; ATT00001.txt Attached is a letter of comment regarding the Addie's Corner development. We appreciate your time and efforts in careful consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, William A& Laura D Nemeth 8652 Amour Court Naples, Florida 34119 wnemeth@icloud.com (216)496-2995 1 FROM THE DESK OF WILLIAM & LAURA NEMETH May 17, 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 To: BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net My wife and I are residents of Esplanade Golf and Country Club,along Immokalee Rd. in Naples.The current view entering Esplanade is enhanced by a wooded area consisting of many tall trees. It lies to the east of Esplanade Blvd.and was a significant reason for our choosing both the development and lot where we have settled. We understand the developer of the adjacent property 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 are aware that two types of exotic trees must be removed.The narrow buffer and removal of the exotic trees would result in residents seeing the buildings through what is left of a thin tree line. The thinned tree line will increase sound and light which will negatively impact the enjoyment of properties on Amour Court. Even with the existing tree line, four-story buildings will rise above the trees and degrade the views and property values.We encourage you to require the following: •A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100'from Esplanade property 8652 AMOUR CT, NAPLES, FL 34119 W f z v i 'ii1- o- JZ i O H Q m I �y°- jSe ` i 5o z coo_ Y NW4lLU 1I 919 Q J 0 z 3 ill I ZZFaa'((, & 0 p o w i 11 ,ZZIlst 00 a a m g/ : i A i # aag� e i t , :- ' ',' ( It'll 112 -'I kiLlIr":\410! .. 1 1 a I 4,-, ,,.., � rrravil, �a " x. ..,, ,,, ,, ,„! iii, .ii M. _MI MI. \, ,vial -ligiciT_ 1 It T'--.1, asii ' 1 �J 1it 31 4 t i' 1 v y, # •rtill+1111-1- r----11 1 - ,.....; ...., ra- 7p� � � _11, I. =111:\ \\ ( - In k i000001. y )8.e M K gym..e5um .,gw Y Io 4\ w ....n _• l a � \ 000 us+wc i=f H. .\,,.P'%9'. `M Y W Z �n S p 4f 4 y_, .Z , '1 l' ti C to . ,. - { GrecoSherry From: jmaiella <maiellajoe@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:42 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue; Lily Subject: Addie's Corner Development Attachments: BC 5-1-17_ Esplanade-Plan plan view.pdf; ATT00001.htm Importance: High May 17, 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 are residents 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: • A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet • Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, • Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property • Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Joseph& Lily Maiella 8865 Savona Ct Naples, FL 34119 i GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndrew; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County 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 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 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:17 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndrew; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; Fiala Donna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County 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 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 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel(c@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins(a colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 GrecoSherry 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 lmmokalee 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: 1 •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 2 GrecoSherry From: Heidi Holley <heidihimlerholley@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 8:18 AM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner development Immokolee Rd and Collier Blvd May 10, 2017 Dear Collier County Commissioners, Collier County Principal Planner and Chief Hearing Examiner, I recently bought a home and moved from Minnesota to Collier County in October of 2016.As a new resident of Florida I am concerned about the new development planned adjacent to our community in Esplanade, Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776.As a voting resident I am very concerned about the impact this project will have on the traffic, natural preserve and noise level. The amount of traffic on Immokolee Boulevard is already overloaded and very stressful to drive on. Part of our attraction to this area was the natural beauty of the preserve and I hope in no uncertain terms you will allow it to be reduced in an way. The removal of the exotic trees along our property line will add not only to greater noise levels but to a viewscape that is no longer serene and calming. Please ensure that the trees removed will be replaced by equally large sized trees. I am unable to attend the hearing as we are traveling to Minnesota for a few months. Collier County is our new home and I hope you will do everything possible to protect our property line. Thank you. Sincerely, Heidi Holley 9230 Rialto Lane Naples, FL 34119 1 GrecoSherry 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: Addles 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 i GrecoSherry From: Mark Scimio <mascimio@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:26 AM To: pdearborn@johnrwood.com; EbertDiane; ChrzanowskiStan; SchmittJoseph; Strain Mark; 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 i GrecoSherry From: LykinsDave Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 2:38 PM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Per our earlier conversation, I responded to Mr. Miller as noted below...have not heard from him since. Dave Lykins Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders davelykins@colliergov.net 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (23,92252-8603 Co 4r County Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity.Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing. From: LykinsDave Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 1:56 PM To: 'Miller, Sam H.' ; SaundersBurt Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Mr. Miller, Thank you for sharing your concerns,for the information you provided, and for the requested meeting. The dates you have requested for a meeting, regrettably cannot be accommodated. Commissioner Saunders is available on the following dates/times. Monday March 27 9:30 am, 10:30 am or 11 am. Monday April 10 10 am, 1 pm or 3:30 pm Perhaps one of these two dates may be achievable based on your scheduling. Please advise at your convenience. Regards... Dave Lykins Executive Coord. to District 3 Commissioner Burt Saunders davelykinscolliergov.net 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (239 252-8603 Co -ter County 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 From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:24 AM To:SaundersBurt<BurtSaunders@colliergov.net> Cc: LykinsDave<DaveLykins@colliergov.net> Subject: FW: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Mr. Saunders, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net'<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 2 GrecoSherry From: William L McGee Jr <willie581950@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:54 AM To: FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Project#20150001776 Attachments: Addie's Corner.docx Thank you for your attention. William L. McGee Jr. 1 GrecoSherry From: Thomas Kleck <tkleck@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 11:17 AM To: TaylorPenny 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 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 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 2 GrecoSherry From: fcerminara <fcerminara@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday,April 11, 2017 1:09 PM To: SolisAndrew; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna;TaylorPenny Cc: Sam H. Miller; scerminara@aol.com; "Frank Cerminara" Subject: Addie's Corner As residents of Esplanade, Amour Ct, we have been concerned about the planned development referred to as Addie's Corner. We are very apprehensive about two items in particular. 1. View. Taylor Morrison promised that the "Preserve " would always exist. We need to keep as much of it as possible through remediation and where buildings are situated. 2. Traffic on Immokalee and Collier Blvd is near gridlock at times (Jan-April.)Adding another development will exacerbate the situation. We at Esplanade need your help. Especially with our views, for which we paid lot premiums of$80-100 thousand or more. Thankyou for your consideration. Respectfully, Frank and Susan Cerminara 8644 Amour Ct Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone 1 GrecoSherry 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, ronmiller052645gmail.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 GrecoSherry From: Nancy DeMarco <nancyd@carlawyernj.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 1:09 PM To: McDanielBill; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Cc: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: Addie's Corner Development- Project#20150001776 Attachments: current view.pdf Importance: High 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 Ladies and Gentlemen: 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 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. We encourage you to require the following: *A Type C buffer of at least 100 feet *Limit the height of the buildings to 2 stories, *Locate their buildings no closer than 100' from Esplanade property *Limit the project to no more than 200 residential units. (current zoning allows far less) The attached file shows the current view, side by side with what we are concerned will be seen after construction. I hope you can understand our concerns. Sincerely, Perry A. Pittenger 9091 Sorreno Court Naples, Florida 34119 i Nancy DeMarco Legal Assistant to Perry A. Pittenger,Esq. Schiller&Pittenger,P.C. 1771 Front Street,Suite D Scotch Plains,New Jersey 07076 Voice: 908-490-0444 Fax:908-490-0420 Email: nancyd@carlawyernj.com CONNECT: Sp Ei r This Transmission Is Intended Only for the Party to Whom It Is Addressed and May Contain Legally Privileged and Confidential Information.If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any use,dissemination,or copying of this transmission is prohibited.If you have received this transmission in error,please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail and return this transmission and all copies to us.Thank you. 2 GrecoSherry 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: 1 •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 2 GrecoSherry From: TrochessettAimee Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:43 PM To: TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; SolisAndrew;JohnsonEric; Strain Mark 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. Co ler County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 1 1 4 I ' ,,,,\' ..E'.'11''''''''31.1rF, ,,' Ek,,'rr !, i .7.000:: '',.. 1t 0 , 41 2, d / j, 31 I 0 e ' Ei 0 ,• 1 f x 1 . C` • t ; _ F`. r v . # •. , - , hi i _. \ } : C_.1°°—— �I 1 i - •, . -I .... ; , .._.,.. ,..... . .,, t. , ,..,: L77,1i. , 4, )i { _ '+} -j1 O@117111 D4 I- p r x ' r • a • ✓ f I b I:. ¢ L 1- V . 1` $Q '. x , , (1 B , 1.� z 1_ w o .;r2 t F[ GrecoSherry From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:55 AM To: FialaDonna;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; SolisAndrew Cc: Brenda McDermott Subject: Esplanade Residents concerns about Addie's Corner Development Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners.pdf; ATT00001.htm Begin forwarded message: From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frankcomcast.net> Date: March 16, 2017 at 9:45:30 AM EDT To: DianeEbert@colliergov.net 1 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 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 GrecoSherry From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:55 AM To: FialaDonna; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; SolisAndrew Cc: Brenda McDermott Subject: Esplanade Residents concerns about Addie's Corner Development Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners.pdf; ATT00001.htm Begin forwarded message: From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank(a�comcast.net> Date: March 16, 2017 at 9:45:30 AM EDT To: DianeEbertCa�colliergov.net i 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 GrecoSherry From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:55 AM To: FialaDonna;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; SolisAndrew Cc: Brenda McDermott Subject: Esplanade Residents concerns about Addie's Corner Development Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners.pdf; ATT00001.htm Begin forwarded message: From: Frank McDermott <mcdermott.frank(&comcast.net> Date: March 16, 2017 at 9:45:30 AM EDT To: DianeEbert(a�colliergov.net 1 GrecoSherry From: Robert Knuppel <bob@knuppel.org> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2017 9:28 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Esplanade v Barron Collier developments across from Esplanade cc.. I live directly across from the proposed building by Barron Collier which is in the preserve East of Amour Ct. Our view will be destroyed as we bought to be across from the preserve and high thick trees. Our recent attempts for diplomacy have met with no changes accepted by Barron Cotler to our suggestions. The HOA attorney met with BC representatives and all suggestions were rejected. We desired 1. Opacity at 80% 2. Movement of the buildings easterly. 3. Restore more of the preserve from the 50% reduction BC plans.. 4. Build a berm and foliage covered wall to hide the car and building lights and reduce noise. 5. do not build buiding higher than 50 feet. We ask for reasonable creative thinking to achieve population and community compatability. In addition,the corner of Collier and Immokalee is a very dangerous intersection. Thank you for your time. Robert Knuppel MD, MBA, MPH 8628 Amour Ct Naples, Fl 34119 908-812-5240 1 GrecoSherry 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 GrecoSherry From: Jane Rollins <naplesjanel @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 8, 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 1-75,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, 1 GrecoSherry From: Lois Pogyor <Ipogyor@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 12:34 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Development of Addie's Corner Dear MS Taylor: 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 GrecoSherry 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. CO ler County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 1 GrecoSherry 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. Co ier County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 1 GrecoSherry From: TrochessettAimee Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:43 PM To: TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; SolisAndrew;JohnsonEric; Strain Mark 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. Co ier County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 1 GrecoSherry From: TrochessettAimee Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 4:43 PM To: TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; SolisAndrew;JohnsonEric; Strain Mark 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. Co ier County Communication&Customer Relations Division 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. 1 GrecoSherry From: GrecoSherry on behalf of TaylorPenny Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:47 PM To: 'Miller, Sam H.' Subject: RE:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Good afternoon, I have you down to meet with Commissioner Taylor on Thursday, March 30th at 11:00 AM, please confirm you are still available for this date and time. Thank you. SIierj ( reco Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 SherryGreco@colliergov.net Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter O $1' CCotitrtty From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To:TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 1 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor(a@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala(a@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 2 GrecoSherry From: Jane Rollins <naplesjanel @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 <EricJohnsongcolliergov.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:naplesjanel@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 Wcolliergov.net>; TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; BrownleeMichael <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; GoodnerAngela <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; LykinsDave <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; GrecoSherry 1 <SherryGrecoCa@colliergov.net>; FilsonSue<SueFilson@colliergov.net>;JohnsonEric <EricJohnson@colliergov.net> Subject:Collier County Planning Commission Project#20150001776. 1 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 1 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, 2 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. 3 GrecoSherry Subject: Sam Miller- Addie's Corner ( other neighbors are coming) 12 people total Location: conf rm Start: Thu 3/30/2017 2:00 PM End: Thu 3/30/2017 2:30 PM Show Time As: Free Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny Sherry, We have 12 people interested in attending, all residents of Amour Court, which is within Esplanade Golf&Country Club. Here are those who are coming: 1. Frank Cerminara 2. Sue Cerminara 3. Chuck Weller 4. Brent Lilliston 5. Geri McGee 6. Bill McGee 7. Jill Austin 8. Tom Gardner 9. Fred Faust 10. Ron Miller 11. Rochelle Miller 12. Sam Miller(me) There may be a few more. We thank you and Commissioner Taylor for arranging this meeting. Sam Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 Li Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preser... Li Thursday March 30th,2pm 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Attachments: Email to Collier County Planning Commissioners and County Commissioners, 3-18-17.pdf; Picture from rear of Amour Court property, IMG_5226.JPG Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 1 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 8:32 AM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Thursday March 30th, 2pm Sherry, We have 12 people interested in attending, all residents of Amour Court, which is within Esplanade Golf&Country Club. Here are those who are coming: 1. Frank Cerminara 2. Sue Cerminara 3. Chuck Weller 4. Brent Lilliston 5. Geri McGee 6. Bill McGee 7. Jill Austin 8. Tom Gardner 9. Fred Faust 10. Ron Miller 11. Rochelle Miller 12. Sam Miller(me) There may be a few more.We thank you and Commissioner Taylor for arranging this meeting. Sam Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: GrecoSherry [mailto:SherryGreco@colliergov.net] On Behalf Of TaylorPenny Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:47 PM To: Miller,Sam H. Subject: RE:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Good afternoon, I have you down to meet with Commissioner Taylor on Thursday, March 30th at 11:00 AM, please confirm you are still available for this date and time.Thank you. sherry Greco Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 SherryGreco@colliergov.net Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter Cro er +Cminty From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Cc: GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net' <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. 3 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 8:32 AM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Thursday March 30th, 2pm Sherry, We have 12 people interested in attending, all residents of Amour Court,which is within Esplanade Golf& Country Club. Here are those who are coming: 1. Frank Cerminara 2. Sue Cerminara 3. Chuck Weller 4. Brent Lilliston 5. Geri McGee 6. Bill McGee 7. Jill Austin 8. Tom Gardner 9. Fred Faust 10. Ron Miller 11. Rochelle Miller 12. Sam Miller(me) There may be a few more. We thank you and Commissioner Taylor for arranging this meeting. Sam Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: GrecoSherry [mailto:SherryGreco@colliergov.net] On Behalf Of TaylorPenny Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:47 PM To: Miller, Sam H. Subject: RE:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Good afternoon, I have you down to meet with Commissioner Taylor on Thursday, March 30th at 11:00 AM, please confirm you are still available for this date and time.Thank you. Sherry 4reco Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 SherryGreco@colliergov.net 1 Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter er City From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Cc: GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net <SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. 3 GrecoSherry From: Miller, Sam H. <shmiller@trumbull.com> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 8:32 AM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Thursday March 30th, 2pm Sherry, We have 12 people interested in attending, all residents of Amour Court, which is within Esplanade Golf&Country Club. Here are those who are coming: 1. Frank Cerminara 2. Sue Cerminara 3. Chuck Weller 4. Brent Lilliston 5. Geri McGee 6. Bill McGee 7. Jill Austin 8. Tom Gardner 9. Fred Faust 10. Ron Miller 11. Rochelle Miller 12. Sam Miller(me) There may be a few more. We thank you and Commissioner Taylor for arranging this meeting. Sam Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From:GrecoSherry [mailto:SherryGreco@colliergov.net] On Behalf Of TaylorPenny Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:47 PM To: Miller,Sam H. Subject: RE: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Good afternoon, I have you down to meet with Commissioner Taylor on Thursday, March 30th at 11:00 AM, please confirm you are still available for this date and time.Thank you. Skerry 4reco Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 S h e r ryG reco @ co l l i e rgov.n et Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter er Cm/1V From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Cc: GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net> Subject: Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net'<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 .0116611110011111.1111011111610, This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam. 3 GrecoSherry 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, 1 Ron and Lynn Fischer 8625 Amour Ct Naples, FL 34119 617-953-0174 2 GrecoSherry From: Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 2:31 PM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Meeting Request: Addies Corner Good afternoon, Rich, along with Wayne Arnold and David Genson would like to meet with Commissioner Taylor regarding the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: Addies Corner. Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: Monday June 19th 9:00—3:00 Tuesday June 20th 10:00— 12:00; 2:30-5:00 Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0—5:00 Friday June 23rd 11:30—3:00 Thank you. Dianna Qicintanilra LEMAN Legal Assistant to Richard D. CO Yovanovich,Esq. YOVANOVICH Coleman Yovanovich & Koester,P.A. KOE TE 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (239)435-1218 (f) 1 GrecoSherry From: Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 2:34 PM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Meeting Request: MAC &Triad Good afternoon, Rich, along with Wayne Arnold and David Genson would like to meet with Commissioner Taylor regarding the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: Addies Corner. Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: Monday June 19th 9:00—3:00 Tuesday June 20th 10:00— 12:00; 2:30-5:00 Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0—5:00 Friday June 23rd 11:30—3:00 Thank you. Dianna Quintania COLEMAN Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. YOVANOV1CH Coleman Yovanovich & Koester,P.A. KOE TE 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (239)435-1218 (f) 1 GrecoSherry From: GrecoSherry on behalf of TaylorPenny Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:47 PM To: 'Miller, Sam H.' Subject: RE:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Good afternoon, I have you down to meet with Commissioner Taylor on Thursday, March 30th at 11:00 AM, please confirm you are still available for this date and time. Thank you. Skerry 6rreco Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 SherryGreco@colliergov.net Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter Co er County From: Miller, Sam H. [mailto:shmiller@trumbull.com] Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:27 AM To:TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Request for appointment Dear Ms.Taylor, Below is an email sent to all County Commissioners. If possible, I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you at your Tamiami Trail office. Would you have 10 minutes to meet at any of the following times: Wednesday March 29, 2:30 or later Thursday March 30, between 8 and 5 Friday March 31, between 8 and 1 pm Thank you very much. Sam H. Miller 8632 Amour Court Naples, FL 34119 Cell: 330-565-2726 1 From: Miller, Sam H. Sent:Saturday, March 18, 2017 10:16 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net' <BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net>; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net' <AndySolis@colliergov.net>; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net' <BurtSaunders@colliergov.net>; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net' <PennyTaylor@colliergov.net>; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net' <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net> Cc: 'MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net' <MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net>; 'AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net' <AngelaGoodner@colliergov.net>; 'DaveLykins@colliergov.net' <DaveLykins@colliergov.net>; 'SherryGreco@colliergov.net' <SherryGreco@colliergov.net>; 'SueFilson@colliergov.net'<SueFilson@colliergov.net> Subject:Addie's Corner, PLEASE, Preserve the Preserve, Letter to Collier County Commissioners To: Collier County 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 2 GrecoSherry 8 74- -4-9C From: Douglas Lewis <Doug@tllfirm.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 20, 2017 6:13 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Bob; Christopher Hagan; GundlachNancy Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Attachments: MAC-Triad area analysis.pdf; MAC RPUD Review Report 06-12-2017.pdf; ERP Pages.pdf; CCF060617_0006.pdf; Submittal 1 05 Hadley Place W PPL Plans - Prepared.pdf; Submittal 2 08 Triad Open Space.pdf; Submittal 1 06 Plat- Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 1 06 Plat0 - Prepared (Received).pdf; Submittal 2 09 MAC Open Space.pdf Dear Board Members, In advance of the hearing next week, please find the attached and below for your review. I will update you on any progress between the neighbors, staff and the applicant. Best, Douglas A. Lewis L THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail:doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used,to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent:June 20, 2017 6:03 PM To: 'GundlachNancy' <NancyGundlach@colliergov.net> Cc:'Bob' <bobcol@comcast.net>; 'Christopher Hagan' <Chris@haganeng.com> Subject: FW:Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) 1 Nancy, This will confirm that we have not heard back from the applicant regarding our neighborhood concerns raised back on May 31, 2017. In follow-up to the below May 31st submission and in advance of the BCC hearing next week, please find the attached and below for staff and applicant follow-up (hopefully, we can get these items addressed, agreed to by the parties and solved prior to the hearing) 1. Regarding drainage, the existing drainage ditches along the east and west sides of the RUPD's simply do not work(I am having pictures of the drainage problem sent to your office tomorrow). The ditches are not draining properly, and according to my client,the water has not left the ditches since June 6th. In reviewing the ERP and PPL,the East and West drainage systems are connected by pipe under Palm Springs Boulevard. a. My client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to confirm that both the East and West side drainage ditches will be fully graded and improved by either the County or the applicant, so that they adequately and properly drain (all work to be completed prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project). b. Also, my client respectfully requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require that the projects drain on both the East and West side drainage ditches and that either the County or the applicant commit to install a barrier(prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project)to help keep incursions and encroachments out of the drainage ditches. 2. Additionally regarding drainage and according to Chris Hagan, the proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for storm water management, and this is well below the typical industry standards of 15% percent for a dense single family cluster project. According to Chris Hagan and based on his review of the ERP,the applicant is making up for its lack of storm water management by draining into the preserve area in the Traid RPUD. a. PUD Hagan's office reviewed the ERP cross sections and noted that the applicant wants to put a retaining wall around the north side of the eastern preserve. Upon closer review of the ERP plans, it appears to Mr. Hagan that the applicant is looking to incorporate that preserve into the water management plan to provide storage for storm water. This is inconsistent with Collier County's rules regarding allowances in preserve areas. This inconsistency would disqualify the area from preserve status for onsite preservation. This would require additional offsite mitigation to compensate for this. b. To eliminate this issue, my client asks that Exhibit F to both RPUDs be modified to expressly prohibit any water discharge into to preserve areas. 3. Additionally regarding drainage, according to Chris Hagan, Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end and Palm Springs Blvd. does not comply with County standards. a. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be for the County or the applicant commit to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code, prior to the issuance of any building permit for the project, including the addition of improved drainage swales. As an alternative, my client is still open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. 4. The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. a. My client asks the BCC to reject this Exhibit E deviation request consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation. 5. Regarding density, the Density Rating System outlined in the FLUE provides that "a base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed,though not an entitlement.This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the location and characteristics of the project." In this case and based on the location and characteristics of the project, the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West is for 42 lots (see attached), not 44 units as per the MAC RPUD and the plat for Hadley Place East is for 41 lots (see attached), not 44 lots per the Triad RPUD. 2 a. In view of the forgoing, why does the MAC RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs 42 per the PPL and why does the Triad RPUD provide for 44 single-family units vs.41 per the PPL? 6. Regarding open space, LDC 1.08.00 provides as follow, "Open space, usable: Active or passive recreation areas such as parks, playgrounds,tennis courts,golf courses, beach frontage,waterways, lakes, lagoons,floodplains, nature trails and other similar open spaces. Usable open space areas shall also include those portions of areas set aside for preservation of native vegetation, required yards (setbacks) and landscaped areas, which are accessible to and usable by residents of an individual lot,the development, or the general public. Open water area beyond the perimeter of the site, street rights-of-way, driveways, off-street parking and loading areas, shall not be counted towards required Usable Open Space." a. RWA prepared document titled Triad Open Space and MAC Open Space showing 6.60 acres and 6.64 acres, respectively, of open space. 1. Can the applicant or staff provide supporting detail for the 2.28 acres of"Residential— Open Space" calculations as shown on both the Triad and MAC Open Space documents? b. It appears that most of the "Residential—Open Space" area is coming from required yard (setbacks). Please confirm. As such, I am only calculating 13,200 square feet or.3+/-acres as required yard (setbacks) as follows: 15 ft front yard, 15 ft rear yard and 5 ft for each side yard or 300 square feet times 44 lots= 13,200 square feet. c. The applicant has also filed its PPL. See the attached confirming a compliance problem with the 60% usable open space requirement as required by the Comprehensive Plan. d. Further,the applicant has filed its ERP for the MAC and Traid RPUD's. See the attached from Chris Hagan confirming only 55.2% open space for the MAC and Triad RPUD's based on applicant's ERP applications. e. In view of the clear problems as outlined above, my client requests that the "Site Summary" on the both MAC and Triad RPUD Master Plans should be modified to confirm how the 60% usable open space requirement will be met and to detail the specific"open space" calculations and break- downs. Additionally,the Master Plans for both the MAC and Triad RUPDs should be modified to show the distances between the preserve areas and the lot lines and the distances between the lake, dry detention areas and preserve. 7. The minimum rear yard setbacks for accessory structures in both the MAC and Traid RPUD's is 0 as measured from "lot boundaries", not easements. However,the applicant's plat for Hadley Place West and Hadley Place East show 32 lots+/-that back up to each other and that have 7.5 feet DE off the lot line and into the platted lot. 8. Also, Section N-N (see attached) places a 6 foot swale on the north property line and a 3 foot retaining wall against the existing rear of the existing properties with the preserve behind. A preserve adjoining residential does not need a buffer, but with the swale and wall and detention behind this would make it aesthetically inconsistent with normal perimeter buffering. a. My client requests that the Triad RPUD Master Plan be modified to show heightened and adequate buffering along the north property line in the event of any proposed swale and retaining wall. 9. Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that Exhibit F to the RPUDs be modified to require the applicant to seek to obtain permits for all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. 10. Finally, see also the attached, follow-up comments from Chris Hagan pertaining to traffic, access and utilities, etc. based on his letter to me dated June 12, 2017. I look forward to speaking with staff and the applicant as soon as possible to address the above items in advance of the hearing next week and will make myself available to meet with the applicant this week. Best, Douglas A. Lewis T T THOMPSON LEWIS counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive 3 Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Finn, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged,confidential and exempt fi-om disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used,and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. From: Douglas Lewis Sent: May 31, 2017 12:41 PM To: 'nancygundlach@colliergov.net' <nancygundlach@colliergov.net> Subject: Triad RPUD (PL#20160002564) & MAC PUD (PL#2016-0002565) Nancy, fi In follow-up to our phone call and in connection with the rezone applications referenced above, I have been retained by a neighbor that resides directly adjacent to proposed projects (Mr. Colasanti) and will be attending the hearings tomorrow to provide public input on these items. My client is very supportive of single-family use of the properties. However, he offers the following significant concerns and questions from Chris Hagan of Hagan Engineering pertaining to the proposed development of these properties (a summary engineering report from Hagan Engineering will follow by separate e-mail): • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south end. There is no sidewalk. The pavement is only 19 feet in width. My client requests that a stipulation of the approval should be to bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code including the addition of a sidewalk and improved drainage swales. As an alternative, my client is open to exploring the possibility of modifying the Master Plan to put all project access (in and out of the proposed project) directly on Radio Lane. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision includes swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and discharging out into I-75. A review of these swales (see below photos in link)by Hagan Engineering found that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these swales, a stipulation of the approval should include rehabilitation of the swales by the County and/or developer. (At your direction, I can provide proof of the existing swale problem by historic photos from the residents of flooded backyards and roadways). • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single application. The fact that they are back to back makes this 4 easier. However,the traffic impact statement provided online was only for one project. These should also be considered together so any roadway impacts for turning motions, stacking, etc. would be combined and accommodated as a single project. • The onsite stormwater areas are less than the normal industry standards. This will require substantial additional filling. A floodplain analysis should be done so this additional fill will not adversely impact the regional floodplain. • Preliminary assessment of the existing roadway should be conducted and proposed roadways and finished floor elevations should be included in the PUD Master Plan to address concerns like the height (above existing grade) of the new roadway finish floors in relation to the adjoining properties. Accommodating the perimeter berm and roadways without discharging drainage out onto Palm Springs Boulevard will be difficult. Cross sections should be requested from the developer showing the slopes and heights of these elements and such should be included in the PUD Master Plan. • The elevation differential may require reconstruction and elevation of Palm Springs Blvd. to prevent discharge from the subdivisions. • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any existing County owned, operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway, and with side yards directly abutting the roadway,this will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but the PUD should include a requirement 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall and landscape buffering along the entire northerly project boundary and also along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard to provide additional needed screening. Homes are going to be set close together, and it is possible that side yard equipment would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. • Preserve areas should have exotic vegetation removed and be replanted with native vegetation from Collier County's approved list. No grading in these areas should be allowed. Additionally, • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD, my client requests that all construction access occur off Radio Lane and not involve Palm Springs Boulevard. • Consistent with the existing Triad PUD,my client requests that the dimensions of all existing easements be depicted on the Mater Plan. Also, that cross-sections be provided on the Master Plan(with elevations and required set-backs) for perimeter buffering, sloping, preserve areas, the lake area, and other features as depicted on the Master Plan. Click on the below link for photos of existing site conditions: https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fIcObn4vxlct2h5mnhwO Douglas A. Lewis 1.1 THOMPSON LEWIS TS > L counselors at law 850 Park Shore Drive Suite 201-A Naples, Florida 34103 5 Direct Dial Phone: (239)316-3004 General Office Phone: (239)316-3006 Facsimile: (239)307-4839 E-Mail: doug@tllfirm.com http://www.martindale.com/Douglas-A-Lewis/1419349-lawyer.htm http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/34108-fl-douglas-lewis-1250057.html Licensed to practice law in Florida, Texas and Washington DC Both Douglas A. Lewis and the Thompson Lewis Law Firm, PLLC intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized disclosure or use of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please permanently dispose of the original message and notify Douglas A. Lewis immediately at 1(239)316-3006. Thank you. Any federal tax advice contained herein or in any attachment hereto is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, to (1) avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or(2) support the promotion or marketing of any transaction or matter. This legend has been affixed to comply with U.S. Treasury Regulations governing tax practice. 6 T ,..9 xo,ws Ww'e...�-4nsvm'xwx 15V3 SLSO'4.65(UZI xy SL50L65'6EZ.Y40 1191HX33DVd5 N3dO a1°1 1Y � 601.E 11992 93 1002 a9n5'aw a.t.,ws011VA 0199 6 _ 2569 9l 1992 93 00!=1..1vry)0...J.).PI IA 1$d3 9NI1133NI_N3 ';',1 I 3OU3�3NId Ed`9 y-j VMEI '7N1'N019OH 1113 3i-a, 9 1 <<<<<<S< li I I +1 H H H+IH+I H Q col"-In1--Nwn 1^ vuuLivv NV'tDVs000 I. QQQQQQ [] .1.--; O NOs-.-OOrclr- O cO l��v1 N1+I < Q I I !"' sn 3- NVtD�lO� O I I ��q ace Z_ EV O��0 0 b O z z = a zo'd _o ' -4 , OI w�Osz H Z L.' - 5vin Z EY � 2 Q C71 -66i''' nz6z � " Rgng ' =- ZZ > )ww0 I IZ= f'ofO 2f[Lla- 0 � --- I I09C 1 Sw ! d0LU-St9?° '- UUUzazoa r 5 8- m0 as QaaP Z\ _51, uUUV z 0 00 I I LO_ Vw.- z zZZzww Wo Q aaaa O a ..,,Ce u- I I v'W zZ---'9 a "- -'9-°-"<OO O an En vl an Z O ols.->5uz o 00000_10_1Y I- ZZZZwu1 z.-3o?�Wa o o.daaY�" I- I-2_ zh [1 111111 OOOOa� p`� I I 1 I I 1 1 1 ; 1 I 1 -- I I .._...__. ___-" Ii, _.... ._.... _._ III I t x, a 1I1 .uxrn x-,. n III 1 I II I I II I J I I I I I 1 I L I W II I 8 '1 1u , i' 1JI Ifj i 1 I l i 3 o 1 I I o 1VI � I I E I �. I I i I c 1 1 ,, „.., i ,. , I s1� p 1 C :!-I PI 1 1 i ....... $ IIKIII 09111615 NtlYd a.' ( - , I ' I , •, -.) 1g f i m i4# gia„ W CV L, aLI 3 W='a7�g' Ai5sntawW 3,¢zv ° I I E _ me_ Ia64 °omw ig s 88ge0 = � K `�6 ° CO s=! <.woa83 V, m gii11! ?°oR' o 118. dWWQA H;,0a i s oGogaWc " 7fi ng g. �,„g `s_ H `9Fmo� `> '-a g s� ai L �_, G N 4 �E es5 §.po § �6e ean%o6 og 6. sax WY6ir°1 ':F/I a i g I q gn 62 a 9 1 g. 1__ g8$ be`= o b Wad° . Z gt4g .. .2.-urr h r !,6 t Q .r8 t s- �gb 6.tI I: '" ` ;=^icos 3 E 3;g1 ~ - Mingug J j a3 s2 j . SE � _ oa z - a$,°, E F8... ouz "' ='°a'-o': '- 3-ki i 8 8 8 . h S .g N7 8 moo° __ m - w s $ °a >D F" Q 0 W . Cf) 0 J T 0 �u� Wm �� W Z W O z < is :6 Q0Z Q0 i�'� Ilp =a ok � 07 W ° d=ry s W --I Z cv O I►_T �i" z s QWa W COQ O ~ W lari '1137—oreggi O I a LL U U N0_ O �����n \ Q se _ has = 0 J > Z CO -' . I 1r=. —Wi g LIP.1 P „66 o e", o 2 s }' Q WO Q Z W '��'.. r—r`°" 6r..77,W-mi,!M ii0 x ogo g W taZ 15 g R g ^ „ V'o � Q � � � O ,. Z spa • 12 Q < V o Tri 1 i1� . ••\ s n� �a -z ��' a = ass Q �j C- a" ° oa 5'§ » ga c aha Q Z t c� ^ 3 e: o F.1 N ih: ° N g oo cc 1 pr�. 1li31e ° w§ g a a�a= 3x19. x 66 Q U < GSA Eo t8 7�:0 °z. _ ry ., . 4i W co a� oNy°y y5y5� FL o s �g g° € sE ggv`XSi'd h a5J, 2 u 5 - �O6 ao5 ill S '<3 5'5 Iii! Y? 5541F : 1191 A 4p -; OWas €g -$ _ 1 ag way a .1_1 t6 w5 a o 61 ao a 6:%-. - o e�W �` $ < mp w w 5 81-2111L 41=L s '' g, g= A grain = g 3 ;11 a Wim=ar:z55 la 2 6 ~ ga°2gg '24 : 22 b 40 M W 0 .— 7.° E e ° E °_ V W.3ae 7 ° - e= a a gas ' =s7m!c4 oo 34: ra r_ ti. 3a= W`L W IS a 5° °Wo a6�Wa a6 65 ° s r g 1111 fi \a as ,.`1 i s E u ag l=i6ossa gg. s E sN6.2 §9.1 w a aa` 3,4 W 1 7 �G w W 8.5i0Wo„Wgh � ° W o a 85 m5° ' W SW5= a i`> _g ! :5 c w 0 g4 sg s° g 6-15,0! as:gb E EA 2.E'.14, s=g w g° w 6N V i g c 2 r, a ;"`i n Ba y/ _fil g a s a! €° a W w a sa Ild Si= =�Y= w �Wg °6 . s,.„,,-,?..-%050a AO 4,, z ,.w€ E g 1 W5 g.W. 0 ¢5oaE4 "fin 32 o " dao WW�����na36 ��76 ,�° g e § 5"'��°� WESWQ € �€ 6go� � �Wa E. 4 E 6 7.n°m=W 8 g b egg : ° ° a' x45:y€, 2-6 Fmi887;4r a�°33t g,, 6 �. W +,-,t,.0 =isg4 2 ; _gss'y gW, N c 8 6 ; - a a a� 0 2°°o„ wa WWW 5�"W' W w W W 6. S a g"W o „Wg 2 s5 ° 7088.0 365 3 ° a' g .rip€� g. mW ° :Ili l3 Y s Cp mgEgo �."W W W ag 3 a Pio <7'6 g hO ; § <F€y ... 5 -... �W a < g <& g' s wo 8 i P 1R6 n W N ,01''- ;6 Eg,-W X_ Q L_ i WN 7 §z i5$- W" 0_ �gi ?mll ;' PH :k z N ng 6 00 4sssa 1g 311-;,16 i W x g /g w ��4E '"3g.3oo��aaYu� 10 R„ �i Y o f- O m Ili E W a ,<.g \ b LI .sz' L3.Ls.lLA061. .. j' aG¢SoS J fb 101 r 0009 AOW '.. 000'.0069 9f LL wz06¢0 .SL SCI x.LS.lZl10N V ry ,f6'l01 fb'tOl �u C6'lol c � ..........—__....L 62bL �• (rye , 114::] Zau9 ag 2 I .'0 4..00,ILDox o�KLS.aUON I ii K.[S,ILwON ' T Fi Wr,Jn52 uT _ IR .arml .mml uI'� V I ^^� .msal Y f '-7 £ 0.00.ILAM to TM.Li.I},004 4.1'.1..004 o ll.1t.IL.00x c o ww b o 9 • p �c.o 8 % ^ ^ '�f R 8 lu `5 ' '3'0.9�_I.. z 00'001 SZ .SL ,00'001 70.S0•a1 40'001 �^: 1 ,00''01 O9 0,15,10..000 J 1 315.12.00600.1 0...S.IZ.000 -0” I .ILLIO.00N LL 01 'l '1 o a ¢ ' 0 �000�'d,OIyR I I_3.0.00''01 t 1^,0''.00501 0 I:u I .00'ml I 0.L9.IL.00N u -� I •Y.1S,1ZL0 � x.LS,1Zmx ACLS,I2.0ON -""'""- ab o� 0 oo 3 a. 61 I o o$ l° I �_ P..t"ltl,tsor 1J 111__....,.._1..,._h,- 8-r --00"001-}. • ::',I1 fbom.�re, 4 �u- Ro.f s' 1-+ a W o Rai.h Ti _r4 sjtaarT',III!:go T ig i, .F .1^ '7 3'0'09'°`-4!111;, i ! 1-1 - .00'001 Z I ,00'00} I ,00'001 o R .00''01 µ,1s,}1.0ON x.1S.IZ.0ON I ••,,1S,IL.0ON - 111,5•IL.00N .d - - i a �� a o� i „w 8 2 8 I��81 . 1 43.0• "' .e. R_'81-.-a'n'e�.ol ?a $ - a 00001 " ,00'901 I 00 SOL 0 0 } _ x..s.umn I M,L'.1LmN I ALL'.t°. I 0.i0300 18 aS a r, W3 a a_ a -oa 8 - „-:.-2,2.2_ 8 ,8 'E 8i R R R 81 8 g c .00'001 Ids I ,00501 0''100'001 ,SLI.R I .00'23'0.S I-1 u"5 F-- ... _ x.1S.1L.0ON x•,15.12 q 'o µ.1S.1ZCIX1 "o , x„10.12.004 a W _.. OCss J/ I ��---lase--4- --..w --—IA 1 .00501 e� M.<5,1z.0011 •00�A�LS,lLL10N !7 0 ,00'0.1 MLS.IL.0O4 I I At[9,lLdON e Z } CD �a Iuu174uL OL'C6C 3.LS.M009 O n -2.1 - FQ Q N f S .0tTel NLS'JNINNIMI 3 " -3,0WAIT p - ?^.3 —.387,SI `�► II 0 CC LU _o a J .0 VO9 ,01'09 ,0409 .01'05 .0,3, ' 04K ALOI• 'xJ - I MA51Z.0ON W W »W 8 1 1 Z o Z Q D hg m - '# 3 8 090 I . o 'i g Q Z o 8 ''...3-8 �8 8 8 .$ o m,ao5s1 0.5,10004 f C7 W f_' N CCCL z T- Re. 0988.. Ra Ro ., 8 as o I -J z O - . . 1 8- . O9.L-C- 8^ mm . 8 T J W = I I JII E ° -I-F--.00L $ '" r U Q 0 H LL M'Nt 3.O,6l 06 - .01'09 n 01'05 01'09 .01'09 n 01'19 I I 0110 00 'R„ .00'901 I ooM0 0 r <� 51�m4 .04 g Q - 1.-501.0.11. . O Q _CO - —� W J °* en Z----_..... • u ,O,.x.01,61.0010 J > zm2 '' WJ uo i ~ CO W - JU _ Q --J,..., Q nit r,-1-- J I- = - ^ $ R oR $ mR ^ e8 = 008 3 R n R � r N k R Q a 0_ � o e . m rio : : CO 1 n i w W n 2 w f , t w w ! 5 ; , w 5 w I w z � = o _ " � o O § a a R : . . . : A : : ; : 14 4 E ;'z : 18 R g R 2 R 8 8 8 0 8 .1 8 8 2 0 8 8 8 S 2 8 a 888 ^ 8 2 R 8 .122g2 :! 2 2g +§§" 2 w w T w ¢w t¢ 8 0 e n ' ' ' n '. n « e $ $ n o ' ' : d 4 i . 8 8Z 4 '1 V 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 ' 16 3 9 3 9 8 3 8 8 ., . . . o . ., o . 7 R HAGAN Douglas A. Lewis June 12, 2017 Thompson Lewis Counselors at Law 850 Park Shore Drive, Suite 201-A Naples, FL 34103 Re: MAC and Triad RPUD and ERP Applications Review Updated Engineer's Report Dear Mr. Lewis, This letter is submitted to provide a brief review of the pending Collier County zoning applications and South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD) Environmental Resource Permit(ERP) application for the referenced projects. This is done consistent with our previous correspondence and May 25, 2017 agreement. This report is submitted to outline my findings from the review of the applications noted above that are available on line. We have also had a site visit,received photos, and held discussions with you and the adjoining neighbors. Consistent with the agreement we have addressed open space, drainage, access, and utility issues below: 1. Open Space Calculations Attached please find a PDF of the Area Analysis for the zoning and ERP applications. You will note that the ERP,which is a more detailed set of plans, shows a 55.2%open space versus the County calculations that show 61.6%open space. This is above the County zoning minimum of 60%on both independent and combined plans. The big difference between the ERP and zoning plans is in the open space/pervious area. The acreage goes from 11.86 for the ERP to 13.24 acres for the zoning applications. The ERP application shows a smaller open space pervious area. The preserve numbers match up well. The pavement area is also larger for the ERP application than the zoning applications. The spreadsheet has highlighted the items in blue that are lake or water management and in green that are open space. The yellows are the cumulative numbers that calculate out the percentages. The SFWMD review of the ERP application also found that the storage capacity in the water management area maybe exaggerating flood capacity. This could require a further increase in water management area. 2. Drainage • The proposed land use breakdown only allows approximately 9%of the site for stormwater management. This is well below the typical industry standards of 15%percent for a dense single family project. The smaller than average water management facilities onsite will result in the need for additional fill. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples,Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com 1 II . i 1 i 1 • The preserve is bisected with a discharge swale and should be left outside i of the water management area. The County may not accept the preserve iwith a drainage easement through the middle like this. • County and SFWMD drainage rules will require a reduced discharge from i 1 the site of 0.15cfs/acre. This should help with any overburdened outfall i ditches. i • A floodplain analysis was done to show that regional floodplain issues are i not adversely impacted by the proposed development. The SFWMD is i still reviewing this. 1 ; 1 • Inverted crown roadways proposed for the project should be efficient in , i directing stormwater internally and reducing costs. This also supports the , higher density proposed. , 3 • Palm Springs Blvd. roadside drainage swales are inconsistent at the south , i end. The developer should bring Palm Springs Blvd. up to current code I including improved drainage swales. ERP cross sections show 3:1 slopes 1 1 1 within the County's right of way which may not be acceptable. The , i swales will also need to be improved not only offsite, but onsite to i maintain flow consistent with the resident's photos noting flooding in these areas. • Existing outfall drainage system for the subdivision to the north includes 1 swales on the east and west side of the subdivision along with an I interconnection of roadside swales and ditches down to a lake and 1 discharging out into 1-75. Review of these swales (photos in link) find that they do not meet County minimum standards and do not appear to I have been regularly maintained. Some of the single family homeowners I have built intrusions into the swales that impact the flow. As the County is to maintain these. A stipulation of the approval should include I i rehabilitation of the swales from the County and/or developer. i • The developer's proposed interconnection of the drainage systems under i the roadway show that the projects should be processed as a single i application. This interconnection will cause conflicts with the utilities and 4 ' require a County right of way permit. 1 1 1 • Perimeter berm elevations around the new project are proposed at 1 1 elevation 12.3 NAVD. The expected flood waters get high above the edge i 1 of pavement of the existing roadway. Roadside swales in these areas it i i may be 3 to 1 or greater not allowing them to be sodded, but be used in 1 native ground cover. This may not be acceptable in the right of way and i I need to be addressed during the County right of way permitting. The ERP i should be consistent with these requirements and the flow way should be i reestablished along both sides of Palm Springs Boulevard. 7 • The elevation differential may require that the reconstruction of Palm 1 Springs Boulevard be elevated also to prevent discharge from the 1 i subdivisions. J • The developer proposes inverted crown roadways internally. This is an ) exception to the LDC and is inconsistent with any County owned, i operated, and maintained roadways to our knowledge. This design has i i 1 I , 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples,Florida 34102 i 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com 1 , , - y F some inherent challenges that need to be accommodated so that roadway maintenance is improved. • The fact that the site is going to have to be elevated above the existing roadway with side yards directly abutting the roadway will result in a negative visual impact. The request to reduce the perimeter buffer type should not be accepted, but should include a 6 or 8 foot tall concrete block wall to provide additional screening. Homes are going to be set close together it is possible that side yard equipment and would be readily seen from Palm Springs Boulevard. • The ERP shows retaining walls will be used in some areas to segregate the preserve from the water management facilities and may also be required to flatten out slopes as things are more detailed along Palm Springs Boulevard and/or coordinated into a perimeter wall for visual purposes. 3. Utilities • Utility provisions should be made to accommodate the project with connections to the existing utilities on Palm Springs Boulevard. • Looped water distribution system will benefit the community with better fire protection and water quality. • The sanitary sewer system will need to have two onsite pump stations to accommodate the centralized sewage collection. • A sewage force main connection will be required on Palm Spring Boulevard. • A regional pump station network analysis will need to be done to make sure that the existing pumps remain online when the new pump(s) are added. • The County's utility services should be more than adequate to accept the proposed development. • The interconnect between the two projects will cross County water and force main lines requiring air release valves (ARVs). These ARVs should be hidden in the perimeter buffer landscaping to protect them so they will not be an eyesore. 4. Access/Traffic • The Traffic Impact Statement shows only the single project. As this project is being processed with both applications. Cumulative impacts should be analyzed and distribution should be handled accordingly. Request for combined Traffic Impact Statement was not provided or addressed. These should be considered together as a single application for traffic impact analysis and turn lane requirements. • The Traffic Impact Statement for the project does not address the necessary improvements that may be required on Palm Springs Boulevard and/or the Radio Lane to accommodate turning movements. 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com 7 i • Alignment of the driveways between the MAC and Triad project will require coordination to prevent awkward driving motions. • The elimination of sidewalks and bike lanes in these neighborhood though I will put people in the road right of way. The internal roadways are proposed with an inverted crown. This means that the middle of the road will have water in it during rainfall events. This puts pedestrians walking on the apron,which could be a hazard. • The tie in of the project inverted crown roads with the existing Palm Springs Boulevard will result in some grading challenges at the project entries. This will be exacerbated by needing to maintain the perimeter berm for the stormwater management requirements. The new roadway may need to be considerably higher than the existing roadway. • The swale along Palm Springs Boulevard will need to be maintained outside of the turning radii for traffic safety. 1 Below is the link to recent site photos: i https://app.box.com/s/5bwxbg5tgb547fkObn4vxlct2h5mnhw0 I believe this provides an outline of the open space, drainage, utility, and traffic issues associated with the referenced application. These projects need to be considered together as the impacts of both need to be considered as one. Please look this over and let me know if you have any comments, questions, or require any additional information regarding this. Sincerely, ' / 11 / . ` --t"- Chris Hagan g 1pp s I 3 i 1 4 1 5 1 t i 3 t 1250 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 203B Naples, Florida 34102 239-228-7742 Chris@HaganEng.com f i g^ica Y'- a - I I I ;§ / <o ¢ „—a9sa7aa ZseaR =1 1 hoz m - 0 3a ~Ci ry n 1 z> N W�y z1 ¢ x aI ; I I 400 2 i'l€file 111.LEgl� ; i ;, }2k>1 3 i 8 ox.4 g t sa 3 a2- a a �a z ~ I I W 8 c"a 1 I 0 _ __ i J�'w' •I 8 o,, ;_• _ `,- iii i M I- Aii A- f, a ""—" , IItI - vl. I m I :III- z ,,,/ . ', �� I I i1 I h 1 I i ? I , l I I w I s a I f I o < zt .I _10 — — 1. ..- - -- y ,"t / .12-4 , :.-..-.....; ,_:-.17:,,f11,4'.:-,-- .-7;,,„,,,T.,-,.,. 1 tt Ille „., ,I I 'NW .. ‘ ',. ?... ,'t x = I'§ I I II " ! H i 1 I I. ,vs S i...i I s 4 LIl,_ c I ,,_V 1. ___,_' WI ` - -E i 551! I 1,C. E 1 M g si 910' x EI .3 r i' & - Yom__ — `- _r. .. 4713 gl! •'__ _may � _�__ ., , _9 j„ { y •, , , , I R Ye 11 9 LL� ; '-t;= L I., 1 !i I 1 11 i I ' g I j g , _ `tet,_!o` 4iJJ uu1��44 Y I ; 1 I I, 1 ; 1 .�, .':::.- -,.. -,'_,.-t-r."_-EQ —1-i-I — II 11——:-;--1 r—7., —1 ,-, .1(7., -.,t , 1 1 - 1 - ' - " IT riTLL 1- Zz i^„. ,r, ir. ',N.Y. @ ,. I f, I I I k ,,,� " a ' ' :,,+____I m I ." c s I � � :I sn ) 1 • —�..__. ..r.. `� —�—— _ i=_— 11TH i_1 1.,s,„\::,:‘,"..,,,,I A, , fin. " ��. g4:L" 9A q ,, - -4,-, 1'" i a i , " I ;i II ' \'i j � / R . ) i e 2 . o g ' 91Ml1U, ' i IP II li • • S II 3f 3 N NP Q P �i z R 13 r �grD _.. Ii x., m S g it j. { n! MN. MI , o h `< 0- ...-� oW — --_ / W s o ill' gi =MN , I , ,,- o : i _ g �� �� Q III W in VW i i �� JI CJ VJ „. r. - 111111._g; i v' li Y g i go Z:5 z' e I 1 1I ° g e 1 5 ' 0.= .1 G� 6' y �,j ,n J z Z G • s ,4 r v ik s 1 i3 a1 =22 Y =�� z z0 - F S� ,..s Z z d y i9 4 > 0 i ` a� Ni } I F yy • ' W —71 N 7= a� ! R g xW s? 5 aidg' — x� I s 111::IL zz m= a e 1-ear, 1 1 D.: 0 ,,, N , r . pog� I w =a^V-$ I3r g: S> i i qLL IS a } LL g zm�aSW it ;i ,0 it a • S { a g LL R W V a F b 5 II 'y> raj Y 3 g ii (7 y Vj all P. Z 6 0 o Z S CiCi 1 1 o 0 11 ' "k' Rfl II . 9 . _� II , a I It Y iLI1i --__ I IL = II 1111 :l Q_ Q:_ w - 1 5 *r_ _ a Q x: I m 8 I' w { B A a 5 q - s1, 1 , ii! // 11 !I i _ ---}111 , r— 2 gi i - x. 1 +'- { I .1 , ..- . t_ r— -- . -_, _ _____ __-----i . —.17_ , PIUDIAC111, ..., kit !II'"0:77T: a tY `A`Y ¢ C ! It; '' S� I' y 6�m I I� R I 'i-� ;C. f—y H Hz Ev. !UU •el 1 . '.. ,4p I ';�ql itr ; Ip cs e1 t-. — L� ,'L.1`' S a1• I= I ' --FI'—�' I---- _--- i , f4 �" `i- s �� "1 a — �� �L.ea— 1 —b, { .-Tra,,L4C,i o '3-,,r1 3 ' A II i i4 ; 1 I s i g , I r j.. 1 Li]ii ( E ti^.'`tom y I I IIIM or -c 2 ' ° ! � if. E t `t ti I� .w 'it� ,� j,7-77----' hh 1 a O• Z I I f_ g I_ ! 71 - iI i. O $ n p:.. ,,' i J c t - i q. ...- -- ,-. ..,•_.-_-: ‘ -.-... in;1_ a__ za� .,J u---- .-- - —,.-- — q--- - —II _. �"► '1 L — r 5 S I ! ` • I ,% o g 9,- aRNI! gRq 8 4 ¢ . S P 1E 't.1. ...4I 11 m g§ 3, � m 3 '3 UiIII H_m 8k m ��-. ^ me �� s 3 y 3> 3' m ; = s i i lsg ' slm it a au 0 11 £ 3 kap R "�_Qp 10 O - 41,11i i f A p° $ A . � z s a 1 ... VIIIIM t ;" Jiro 11111111111M1W11•1 ;MIN 1"'' i =• ,.; ' i I 1 S e _ 1.'1 j",:_—__ t1 ' ' { i. 0 t o '' "', , z 1 7 ..a P • A ' 'Z l'-'it iORIg A rt ;i 1 i •!% T i1 4 •Z i i s ! -r If a , \ 1 1 ,..._ I i , 1. 1 ii tet`' _ _ • _�® I .I e..' # ; ris:i 11 • . , 13.. 1 t 3 i' ! ,•I - iy' ` 1 I N N' I i Ifl ii I_ e �_ 1 of - �.i , , r,o. , Q i F a_' ' tlJ � r _ --- ter _.. _ F r A • �.. J Z r} f- 17 - . -_ !s P ft ii ii ' . till i ., . ,., , I rtZ ,E7, : iil... iTTY •ii• -: ‘ I#3 L 1,1:1:11111111111. �S s s A . : ♦ ty #E 8 '.III J S 8 _: i: „,..i i m si Z _ e _ til J 4. ° l iiiiii at' .i O loatlltailitai ill O ` '. N Z H \L=3 Wo Z U' � a N < W w Zg C o d � Z UI < z 3 w 0 3 { 1 11- r_ 2 2 T M--`I o w 2L' � 5 a F ?H � l10 \/a �F LT. � ° WzW ng � z V `� g e. W = 3 z i i o a . T W ° aaw ; w a1 N 'm �_ F i9 d 5- ging Z V'� SWI C`o 12 O a 3 0 o O g p Z G Z H d p oow � 1aadEg � 3o [� w 'o /� L 'i z 5, g W a a a ¢ 8 a - z C� <. J 8 w V > cc Z Z Z r r z y ° d s2 2555 � a ww ffi o z1a_ IoQ',i i io O 8 0, IP o T021 ,:t-p,..-.. , ,., ,Iii ,Iao C 1a`ONINdS}(Pd Y. III, Wl"' - U z cc 4-1 44 < IL rb" � o 4 A my W r. 00 Y� Z O uj N W O01=4pQ a43�g v aO U W W ^ ...,.,,._ ,..,.�,� C9 o it 3 o. >- rn w -LLLL 3 �_ W = M o _ e € x Z3 Z W a 3 t W 7 w PI 1 0 WO I— LLI , ----- o QU 04 fr cc Q Z CD1 o g: 0_ ” ,- c.) LJJ g ds 1 a a = ,- ,..wmm; i zw O ..- i T j I S } Wo=� z z a nom o o z o�ioa H �so$o '" 0 H w8= o= '„WU , .ito ww Q g "26 '° o °8 eaz�"o a z =�W C7 ��a g W a z A till J,6v p„ W /'-z oWioa 0 a - W a W PAgr, A" io a o P] 390 a :y4 'e� if 17' E,, F G 1 w €"=_ao =i Rif g tz r czv ge gt6g 4ivia. ?.pagE 1 ii LI s LI, go p ill lig"'. g s ' ifi 3 _ . ,,,, ,t , q,` 33 il6l g05' s tie r�; 144 8. 111 1111`;111@11`! III 319 iii . A 0 G wiWii•filg.w3a'gaaaoAa44saa1a=a = o s kiw K F Z 0 21a x i55 li4gi;-z125141d 13 12 81Vi2"/ z 15 g 9ad g 4 i i Q . gni 2 s ia 2#;5 e Y HJtiIi : ° e _.1El eE qg ° "- . aE gl SZ4 5 i ! F , , 6i3 g _i 1 a ss at ; Si a e p P d e i a :p, a 6 $ �o° ;g, Y4 s6 q Y f8 F I a g ° 4 3 a zY as .,Ys iia E I _ _ 5dH 9Ea 3ti sE£¢ g9 i�l ode 8lg F a Y _3 D 4E4 4 � =¢ i �� E{ a 3 is9 3 s f ' €E :1 e 6 0 1 : & !z= gD£i II g 1 iMik t4 E"' 3-F° 3° ii _ _ � , [ gE 1e ! 7 4 3"sE i § E ;ii- a� s 5c _ n oa ,2211 cEi !22 glpee 3 a a R{ a g r 42 4 g c g gg= '`. as 4 a p:g€ w Z Illid a 'p5 �k 2 d FiY � S 2 � � �g9a c p i� ;PA '° � Ph!!! ���°g yD 4c :i F „_ t a a � _ 3 = s 4 rq g d a 9 ii a g° ■ WW1!' 1 g_ o tl Xi i,gri i 6 a Poi_6 F Y o !I g's 3 o s 3 i iS i a '_ ? 31 2i 3 g3 g-! 4 ¢a g1 }a ge E % 0' 331" ,g'i dl 3• i .g9 E- ° 3 : u g s e €12 a o -$a a € 'aar 9 •s°" is A 4+e= gga ,`af 5e °a 3 3aa - pp a ag 54 °� ��% 6 g 6 ;Wiwi pli a 5 0 ;21 ?qh Efiggil ggig El ;1 h ; li 1 5 '5 3 6 - :12(8 =; S lc g! ! `a i i S P s d w! o A s ' • seae 'sg a a is ix pi ; Sg g lg 5 6 g-E4g€S E 5 15 W 5 E1 € 4ES 1 tl a a6 °G eea 3 0 € (E, a` D g e iF i O E" D n ig: s .Y_ .x 4 j .4 5 `c tl '!_ YY � ° !a i � ��'g�ai �g � $ Y 2 g p�oC Y � 3 g � � F� � ��� a "a= 3 �� A g ° � � i� @ 4 �• ���9 � � 3iia a@ D- ��i= ��'eo a° a= s ��g ie= "13, a i, 61 : g 1i, itit : g; C gg gs 1ae ya1 I! Fh 1 is ± ipg i !_ igyg��ag5gl ig ¢g 6 i !I6 Y 1 E°,`I 1 6H x g_ ga E1 2 "Yc Ei.E v 7a 4 3 A iggigl.itt D 3a g@ i� S. a ggii F 3g Ba .,_: i :,a : i 3Sc g :a :6 g 3 1 a S 5 8 7= 4 . e 9 i !I !I OE 5 ° F ga i g . 'c g !x E 5 7 5 i ii Al s s8 g 3 i 4 Sl o� 0 : s gl "= i A 6 6 i 6 _ a [EF c f 1a §i , g' fg $E g a i 3 e E ,a 1P 4 gi ki g a 3 NA $ ; S 3 1 Dp a 2 sg 5gig 1 : ? 2a e _ IE 6,a g s gi - 4i i 4 k 6$ 1'5 6 f i f ! a g j < !I / 1111 Y a_ 9 i i i 1 ? 4 ! gl . Ill g ' 6 " a! M g£ aE �` 3� Ili i'Fii' 21! 1? a 44 7 i '- 5 = F 's� A ! $ sq6 i i g - Ig 1e3Ca2 Nig _T pp9 4 ° r. g i g ' iti Mg sgg3i pa S- 1 '3 c 3Q 'S - i2 i 8cf ; ie • S E[!e 2°'F i- ! $ ! ' i : e 1 3 3 1 I: II Iii vl • f e 11 ae EII ; i is is i ; D 1 D3 ip°p ; 4at {i ' a E g �i, I • 1 - ■ Yg I 9 F p ' p y i�3 ya b e . 2 0 1 D e y i l 5` P icy a iii d 'il l 1x3 ill $g £D- °ai 4 C' - s f3 p . g c _ . g 4 6 9E I � d °4 3 � a. pS a 5 �ft _�q �� � 3 g' G ; 3 3 "Y + 6 �e ° 'S° l 1,155 x li" ei 1 1 eg' qii ligg a ff P i e� i '2H IE s ° g 1 S0 S g „ q ai i 1 g e4 51 .E a g i° 0; ,�tg S Ilia 1' 316 . --g g "si •s" 'Y 3 d ' • 0.0. : 2 . : 5 _- /'` i i z r • t�511!F g °2 131261.1 .a g.4 1 g fE. ? ; 3 A 5 3 g . ae f `€ 1 56,1 .1 Sys a7 e g - g � � e I. i � 7141°a• 3F�' �£° �S �Y a gig 4e° Y � i 1� � g 2 a4 7 � a � I e 3 1 °s 11 a 211 11/14/g�igas3..:$ea g.$ gliig3 0 i!g i 142 igi 1 ! _ 2 ag 0 i ! a 1 ! I. g= i 1 _ 1_ ;g1 g49Y ,4 a€ i� X3CII !II 76 8F qq : i'9 ! Mill Qs i 1 -g g6 ENi X4S...�,g:95 : - :y35 3 5.. EA: iv,' g3�. 'iE Zg 's `c 4 iE �' 3 : g t 3 ° i / 1 I 4411.! aV_tl £a I $ ^ yyfi5 b fir tl W N ilibil cot 3 ...1 ' o� z o ,uZl z se� z' E_Y 59� ii W=" s Fges Se V gS- i'§ o`W.a- a $$$ 8g� Ri li 55.53. 5Y �„ a0 • JQZ Y'� �d2Y� NY[ �G 6aY d W w J 72 5 8 i I wr I o r 1 I Q H. # a O p !i Z iI Q 1 Q s - '',. U w ir -..__ y 3, o 4� _ 4..i..4.:, �4 s, ti. ,5_ m - ;-,,,,,i ,t. 3 5 �1--^SII -, o i 5R -_. �v v § V A V �:i� - " O w u \b 5' i m „ ''$I�-4�♦ `.'%"'' A �\ \� c \♦ £ JO ^' • \ • \ \\ �i wee \ \ \ �':7.T �•'' Viz" fir. \ • , , •, 31 ° s b • 4` g t 3 1 p I'll 9 i. 2 4• s 1 t r v e w. / 1 �R ° a i 7 ti w aax ---aa 5N.aaa 1 W Q o Aa g3 51 s C7 g 0 o S W F a w e'a 9 a d 1s 'Ir'ri 4 N a a a a e o $ i iii r Ln fk !i A y 33 p Y i!8<~ [� E i 1 3 23 1fc Ye' � 1i`3 Ii Q $ o 4 a 11 Nog = 6 o F = - Q 2 ` 8 44 ; j UL 1I2,1I I11 IIIIII11 IIII. II 1III I 11III 1I 1aa1111 1 I II �r \ 1.I I � g2 -I IIr I r ,_r 6 E� j.' •'((� 111 Iii 1111 W i III i II ' I l 1' '11I III 111 1111 �I I II III I 111 III III II II �O 11 I II III �—I- r... It 1)I LI I1 J;, 1 III ( ilk . / ��- �-1.. -ill tl 'IN. y Hs- "— -1,./ I ,tom ,,t }- � — ' //'v — s-- , aavnautoe sawaas rrna�`� z _... . .. . : : _ ( Z W I — — L -- j I ' 1 ' �� ` � o W A LLi, j� h x 1' clk Gay s • l' t 1.., I I erih a_ : t? I o XX L. I I' `.I 18F.' s ; .I II , , " I 1 el 1... 1. m I I" a, 1 r ® .. I1I y , c ....-.....m..a.. ..t "` , , I n I I n i- •cI I _J 1 I a - g I J L m w t.. ._, I� II II �-4-- 'L. ::� �: .. ..L. 1L , Fl 1] h I m c T .7'1 ..... ... L�1. oIII: 2. f I r� 4 3.g Q 9 o .... _ Sri I I .1 I 1 ` I€� .isc3e W > • /N NOLL1-1 9 e �— - E Iq a c:r1 /NOLLN3 'V ^' , A, :4 aT - -- _..Z�N]S 9NINLW. -- ! '1 ei •I i I I m % I 14,< 1 11 leeWmi --Jvuw 4I1 ni. —. O 1 Y o � 'I I I - m 1,.I '�I I 1 a A A ,, i a s g a s f61' - /I I `\\ 1. 3v Sg l 3 I1 0 :`, I I f remill , t ....,.._..,..„...„. ,„. , itimula : , . H y } I t.t 3q 91/ E s i 11 Z =i g W, m r .. o ..g $ ,fo4c> Ag8 g mum NI jo �„ 1N F p 3 0 ., s o 0 0 A . 3`3 d - a 1 r = C YSi W ,„ 1 1 1 1 +�� F- ..l I I i z z z �I 31 w SL • i t I # •i 10l A i T +''{ z ? MI _N� r°. a�z� 3 0 I I I I JL� = a Seo VEg IH + ui * IIII I, I_� i. ,., 10 w .. o i 1 1 1 1 z,oQ = _ III - 6 1 1 1 I ila °m g ._SII ; .III ` ' IIII III IIIA '; I m 1 :` I.;I I IIII III I IIII III IIII ro 1 Ili' 1 W IIII III u VI, \ 5 Gm ��`' M L ��..`JI I I S^ `• /�L-'--_' ,jII, l, II'- 1 "lilt 1,r---_' 11i i', 1^ .' ,, 4,!;; ,, I l'1: 1 1 iii Iia , �.• tf�n.----- �. l�t III Y Ild I � 1 �� n II III k II II I. sill 1 p IIII 'a III II R•T`.`•• 11 ` III IIII 1 fill 1 < Iii III I it rtx•.=....!It i)I (IIII 1. IIII 1 = 4-1_t.v.‘5.— IBI ��� .✓Int I IIL__ - �- Ill .. ,�.� < , ._ _ _ 2`C I _... -r---mn'ea'moes�xivasrrna9 'r �s i---, z I lr � :1..-_�.- '..4.......,;71.- it.-...4, b,..,._-------- -.41, I' --__-—— I 1-1 1 o ',:,,,,,,. i 0 E.01 �a Ni; I 11= I -I I Z • 1.11.11.11L. .. �I b��m I I 6Egl£ ° F 1 I z :....., " liizit' I ! '.0 � Ii I I l� , • f _I„,. , A., ” __,lel,11L:. m . , :S III EF m 1 _ !-I ,.I-4 h t C I -. e Y I I I.{ II I . i, n �i II f ,,, I I m . 1 1 F 1 I I , , , 1 1 1 m .4,i , II ISI I I 11„ . 1 b I lu S I; 1 ::II I i -,..,-„,-.e,-,_._._. l L� ._.`- m I I 1 1 m I I I. (�I� ---._ I I tj t g i. �I I i -III I ,—_ 1 1_, „ ---- _ ----J L— __ ; , I j l il i - i —-1 I--— � I i t I 1,II I4 s §;? •* Hi...,-;...ti..,' it I 'a 3 j 1 . . . II. 11 I e s L - l 1-1. L_, L` ��Ia £ t'III YF I I I II I :;�5t�8 I I L _ I I m 11 I i 1 = 1 I I I4 t a aag 1 L _I` ” _' .- �ti < Ii`II 1 11 I I 8 4 0 V3N'NOUN-3130 a m t 1I l �aays�w• anu__ ' I I II I I i .l aW ----- -- - I--- M m 1 �I I 1 Z 4 -, I ii 3 SSM •' -- £I 1 ' m m I - 1 1 n - --1 i` ' I I Io v I 1 _ I III - J i`i I ,t I 3 j I, i 1 I I l I # 1I \ I li yY r • I 1 I I I 4 93 F t 1 i I v 5 i i Y • Y§ sZ ' si i _ 3 R.N 8@ ^ ia Q ° = GS�" w 2 .. 121 N ' am rr + a- w -1 eRw 6 p , W ." m i Zi ` w w glHIZ i i i ". _ a1N w i ! i ; z3 e1g. m SYggq!aiiFZN r og I I I +• *• 1 + } #'' g � s : _ aivi t-;.: o1OD o g.' w , o g `id2. 01 I I i K EJgg €mi --. aW 5gOi w 01t... iax i= e Q =3 tj 0 IllJ—% W a g ozp w i• I I I 10 i i i , ; 1,51g� �o <b'"' 5 I I i I J Z!5,o j (`'�'i *_ (Cs::::.------r,'-))r„",.`.�_'z.5�' . + J,niliJJi 'FSI i i1 I �a 41 �_r, _ ' d 1 .I I I I 1 t II - i III I u IRI I id k ip i II yI �i GS L''. '' ` I I III I Vit d I I I II✓ ! I '0 f I Y + y N I ,� I I I FII I I 1 :17 r I /---1- ' f ___=”11 L IJI I I I I l I h' ril I co t r r �� Ja. �13.`d-T 1.- _ I F °HYAN-MOH S`ONRI=S WT'd _I 1 —"` ItI Z 7 . •.:- *) -e. . , m 7 `� a I� f �PP I Z 1- � _,. ®p IIE .aur I I ^� �. I I w D K Z Q m 7 `i I it€ m` C t1 1I , 1 _7 1I�� : Ih o z }} :_.• - -I o 1� i z F. m ®'` + I ma 4i° N?i. 411 �, �a I �I r, LI , I '1lIt w- v. row I I) f, i ¢ • '▪ i , II,' `s m fir � I I a �I a m yII r Y _ �I • 'J I L L.1. r ., 0 ;@, I I...;, il, {L �? — 1 ;I c 1 ••'J 1 I 7 r(tm> r` IC. �-..�:______T moitAi 3 �t I t l I � II-�- rw1 I o� j (' A k ,I I ; VI �I moel s z9Fais • �yL( , t_ a fr �' 11 ' _1"L.' _= //' R I 1�. I I F 5.1f,-'.1. . I -J ' a 1� r„.„/"*.......... / o I G E I I „o 'Ij 4....! I P. 4 z � ;yll • I I'' IIi �I" I �77j`"`1III 1} W, I "�'M A �.. \�NOI/N313H° �--- � = _ I�Iy _ • J '41 � e • `I QXoe y `; — ,h,--_—,--;,33b.ES Onatom1+'� _ I a ;II i II I I I I °`, , '— 1' ' — 1-2 i. 'i 11' 1 II c:1 II i li 1 1 0 ' r 1( i '(m i 'e _.. �I' I e '1! _ 1( 4 ZD I dj I o ._ I 1 1, • 1 1 I (I1 II 5 I jIF \ 3 \ ;�^ ':! Ia 4 'i s I,- t 1 � w f 11117:112":.:7,,r• y 1 a1 '11'1,6 L !111LI s 1 i 9 1 9 i i 3 A a ti _._...4..-- ,.. INN lad ,i.E.i .,_, t,- jljnim j . 'i. 1.1b.RIVIES wL3 Y a16- LL ++++++- ' , �1. I_ j Ir � I ALL r-- a n o_ y ++++++ + ice`'-�_� - r'/'lli �l 1� 1Y N...._..'-..._-e-....1.. .I. ' '_._.. ..._a io_..__�._..._ b €8 { e I _� 1 Y___— I t_7,1-HL__ FL c I I� ,� ____ y ":17-7:711". w 3- 4.�-.anzabwnasmva : i.. N: __-g .a._ __. '- _ ._ `IM .._. L" ;>,�_- : -,1. 4. „ t1 > -- . a ��,. � _ w A—. — 7 __-- / _ 1.. - o - _._._.. m o11I ye I I 1 w + r .. pr- ,:'','. If- A , 1,- i Ill Vii.` ;... € I .I I I C; ! / � L:_ z 1 m I� m �a Iz M __ 1. !- mq MI r r. I �1 ZI I I I � � I _I ��, I I.._� _ I 1 li„. _ , �+ 1_ 1 a 3g — 1r i k F11 I` P1.-,;,,, , ,_ , " i I' w� I to i :.i_t r III 1, - � LL L117 11 . 8 - _ 1i'T . 0 N i_ z^�€.- gs t �����■I�4.wI � i R vil , —8 Yo ,qT ai L,- 111 I:,, e 7 . I �!� 1 -- - 1-i m __L—_. 3 m� d + + + t. 9.: 1 -1_ i_ € i ry 44.E 1 II ' __ I - 1 4 kri 1-4 . = is ~ .-i ( ++ + tl3tl N tl ,. /NON31a ^ Q 4 1 + aN /al I Y li , ' t f . _ 1. ;, + +. + t _ I �� t, + + + .� t ♦ i a ..e I `'E+* N m 9 e N I I o---m--�---: J N o m e : N o 4 y 3 „ I I P. a 4 Y{{ 7 I } Y i f i z ti 's $ s` 111-* ,,,,_ ,, , 32 4p la n 51 172 _ l�, � 5 3 0 w8 I} a I� _ = s + 8. " A h s Sm gu.. $� + S . 7J_µ_�r®t £ fJ m i_ I i Y • Wy= ; P FLN II � I - I g i v III IY Ii s ,; z Z • T I Pi: I11ry := E 1 ao r. m Iiif g l I 5 o — ixI• d! I , � i. o EzNI T_. W� n nye I .��_ 5 1 i` , ,,k _. ...__ S a �. .s m 1' p e -k ± s _•s a Y .. f 3Ai - Y g I i iI i WW1 T10 g 1, I _ iliil s y ___-I..YI I ._g. __...:_....._I.......... a Yxf a4 m ii € I n ,, 93 _ m 9 o §t 3 T ° [ i��p 1 .. I. ... �^im J s I „ 1-1 si - y �•>. Y a A E2 , I t .n 'g'2,;:',1,-,'12 a o Z ! i. z r, Y RADIO LANE 1 ---.z,.._.•.....,,,,„„__. _- 9 g. _ • i g I I I P p3 F I I 3 i i F & 7d IrmoIi 8 H ���.Ir� a O d w � 3 V FriCmol---= g 8 Fi' 10 I 2 —� '1 q; 14 IIi1 I lli :PI 1 SII l l] I(1 ti m m - o m a .a o n Y I o a ,I 111 I J � e � °` -J1 I I- J 1 O 3111 i {o 1111 I - .....__1- . ._ ...._ ......... G m I g F�' 1 10 'et ii 1 - _ z g . II Y 11 , 2 L Y-1 C . J Iy .N y _-____ �'' OATH 3DNUHd$WRd ---T ' II " U a 1 1 I il_ L w . z __ 4 -- ... l (^� ,I J , ii 1 it ,_ w I I I" I �Y .i: p 1 t•l 1LI b X O I S m Q 3 t ° i 1 1 it s` _� a .- I r :1 —_.I_._._.._I '._ t... ..__,.. .__.I 8 a.z 62 u AO 3 $ z I I 4 IY t a- � I i -.L __� I I I I I_.._ __._ S ..__.--___..._I _ .._..I[ 9' r I I )-1 �I I€ o I I i I ` 1 1 9 1 4 T. ill 1 - '-_ y I __. §ft'i.• , �. Dg N ,rasT 1 4 I i iI 1 I __. I "i_ 8 i °s 1 i q "' 11 1 A ow,' iu L z ® �= a:-- J el VIII YI r—w=bei �'---I' -- - 5! `s 1. L I I ,, I.� .. 1 3) I ( 8 8 q o N 1 III sE: Iiii I Mgt's - l i 1I N L .6.�. I a..... i_ g m '�"$'"o�� ,d,, „ i 1 ' 1 !!! m I I_l E. : 1 i � � Y a „ b m d �o _. ^ { , f/t;','t I ,,, -1-1: I 1_,:); t i r.; s• - 1 I 'is'�JNINIMl I i .._1 i- -11 i-7- 1 u'.3uy :yr ` =�3G� 1 I §v f k�-t t -T- pi Hi 1 1 tic I ii, r,. T -ant ! '1 m q ,' o w u IC, m �e 4 Aia T`I i 1 Y 4 Lj y iI I, i I', p. :21 _ Wit; § F I, # O II l i 7 0 Sis Ir• 1 9 i 4 i x ygF� g fY I J E. i', e L r [ g a - , a HI i X: §G a : 11111! 111 .Et -y :� 1 I 1 x 3 ::'I 1— —1 1 ti O S R 1 .-1'. i pe,^"J Z N W o w ti E W I v o1I -�-ti �1 1m i ¢ 1 g g 'z� �°R, F �z _ � � �o o `\ • k $ a x Z ‘,1,- - J -" o� a • g U N z= g g Z oz o Z W x: q;" wi k, w ti o L7. o' o4 F- h _ h r, "'hi ! zzIN.C--- § 4 m• i N.111 p w,i,„. . , . _ _ , , El g i ii ... tg g ., ,,. ,. t i : hi : z I w. T 1 w S O ,. a11 ! N t Y w z . ;1 y "�-1 z' O ! 1 a= �I f . IEf, y . . y ff � sl o I 1 II isSi t0We ig d e e s i 5 i i s x-; z (2 F.. U ^ #01.1---511:�'� C: WC7 d a 'I-1 " I-- z Ni E..45pgag 31-,- : ta - a8 I `sx till i § iN1411 w iiiiihn ;a _ 0tW-� x, .,. 3 „ °6 °` 2 aalYb %3<3„ r"agT ,Pi rn ..a3Y€g8 I--� Cj _ ig _ ❑ d�eo3i�g 34 �aes.°"4T:= °' ili2 s=' a `e a a'C€-„, yn � iG 11 41 x '6'26! _,%, 11 a R a 1-- -1 § T3 A s_a�x ale€ §�aaa g w et- 1 mws, �. =�osz I w= 8 s U r I13 i R`€ ri ae1 . U x E t NklA ba 6. ys o a z ut Z ZZ 0 ��r ddd w2g il r; ua° I I € a a Q :r. a � 3 Ww - 1pr.b i;,�'� � § paAAI w� I t” a'ice !cli< apgg h wLI gt I I _ kp !P i b`ngi j .mw, C7 2• 0 '••`� • z Ha a3 ,t-, l• ift ■•.:•�. 9 tai ▪ i¢ fr. ``r " � _ = g s1 7111!)1 a agy� v t. em �ffiRgz„ �y 3 EsiiQimm.,ze ,� s -9SA r _w Y, pxI I ` i 01V '� V 8 5 If'—I di imi 3 m IIII w - - I . .1 .t g9 . xa, I`0:2,21222222!222 2-- : :: ° Ca I-16111' h; !l 3€; 3 log € a• _a V -;i ! d isi€ !€E ii a ed ?i i ! ;€eeesaasaas€3 ;f € I i! iii � a3 �s €3i� 9e .!!! !4 !! s 7 e •il-sexe.4. I 1 I, 1_I-+-t i' € !1 ill I PIO I i! 5- 9 i€ p: ,' e;P_eo-—!. 1 /\ / Ap•• . i!i I ;, tji !7d o 'i! ii 1 h a i UG 5 :p 9E;s$=:e:33 1;§a s tg�11i°5€3 al�a ,! E y -f.s. n:In, 4 !S a Z a :a3 II �i aI I €4S p -iti3tt:ttiitii R � a ,! bi,ill lill;e 31 ii 5! !9l W @ - — H^:" e € I �- ��;9!o! ! g �e•�s •a r' 1!•_� : iz€ —i` w s •...:ssssitiftt IIr i i ie € ;Pi ipp[I[{Pt!11 9l ae !,€. S [i; > _ ❑ e .:::yiiZ 3S � !i�!•5!I €€1!3 Piai ItF,.! � al!€ � Z ;t:izr,Yzziii. Id I—=� , €3 o j ±! a`-E aP atii is I Di IF! I'!!€`a ������iiiii���i������ii�ii��'> a i t'i:§tttiit€:: ii 0 e.i Se;;le fIpi; [ a: " ❑ girtltrnWr -r Wiwi V _r..�.e.a,„ ,e !a. P! smo % ,h !1!) 's$i II P 01fil 9e�a 8 i jj Au --,1 I F n amml,„ '01 y- ,..,,,, I-7 1 g \-" all 1 ' .z' I ,0 1 ! Olga N 0 2 ji .11 ( :=.... i9 L L J �L a �. 9 P mumrmn u 5 !P 1 a 1-�1 -1 il 71 ,7 ;, ll I I,- MR • j•1 7 A / N '1 I e 11; • " D2 :J. 40 iii 1 0 "! i hi ; ,I, IF 1.1 - \ if li .; i ,111jr,fir R!‘-ji \ ! lj 41 '' , \ 1 .; A e ,. -, !I..1 g 1 ei Il ,A 2 ._ 4 In 1 I I I 1 = 4 v ". 3 tf:' 11 I i 1 11 li 11111141 4 c_ § 1— . Air::: 1 . gA li 1, Ill I 1!'r"-- !,,w 1 , 1,11 1,1$ Ii ii!"11,i >- - i: ii IN2 g 7 ' 0 1110.'"' ' I' U4i1 li II la?Iti' 1 : !I 1E 01 i;11 NI '- UPI 1 ' E, g,iii 11 ii 11.1111i I . . I 11 9 g 211;I 41 ,tx1 2ILIIM. ( al!ll fk 11 14114 1 s;I ,.. I i' g_ . ., 11 oi 11.1iii.6;11!1111111tZ , is,.i 1 i I I I V f o 1 v hvylci, ii0-1 i V I. I 1E El I eqE41*In ! 1 WPM NI V• V, 1 fq;,...!1 AAA:s: ' -..; ° ; I tonsiim • 1.4 co s r. , i iiiiiHIS ,11 .1 iii I ti ii,,ig,i V -,. fuilgli ( .._,__ ,!;,-\ ÷ii-, :,) i , i :.1 fi , t IS= „minim. -. LIIIIIHIM: :_ 0.11 9 ei li gil It g li:4 . minii tem - i, "i . -A- 7,3 1, .,,, 1.114,. 11 : 13'3ip I Ili:11(11g r -- r , .. '! ; Ag il i 2 2!12 IC i N.FAIPM141 -; I iiefillillii :_,I. r , iqe! !Ili : ., 111.,01{,ii_. 3.._.. ; . p \.„. •,, '„a u.1 I— Li ti z Z I- 0 2 1-, 1TRI Will!!! `i-.-.----..r.s.e•Fgaw.ss 11111d i i d'ili 1 ,1 '4.:,..,'11, jg 1111'1. '‘1: cc o o z shiuMIlsown ' - ., . .... = a 14 1,1ii 011irlilliii I-ri.....eAr...-.•,11_,_. _ hii . O4 P,, 'I ) lag; ia hi 0 il I 71 z 1 8; 1 , e:-:. gi ii a I.? i IVI I 110 lir :1/i., ° 1, Pb.! 111 1 lq I I IN hii di!' — . R:1 III :i ' I. IT lin \ r h....?..„ i ., • 1' if , s 1 -1 ..: • 4 ,,, fi E, i IA611 8 .q i . •''• 5• ' — li n ---I- I I: 1 li111 11 i n ' I 1- iz It ) lir - 014 1 I 1 iii ' \\ I i ii I 14 x'i j di li \ E .' 01 if 12El 2 ;6$3E31 I el 1 1 2 f ; .1. ..-..i .I 1 m -,,,:'-- EM I I -••--- I 1 iregiL, ii it 1 v, I .4 ! dill *I• I 1 !', i 4:il 4 ' 1 dY iirg ' 1 li Zf 1111i:; glifil 1 17-2 elif I;II .' I 0 "0111 E 1141L 10 I . 1 . i'Si II1; 1 n3 le ----,,--,-7 ; .,>" 5 I •14I 1 1 I g I ; g 1 I it •el 1 ; g \., t—,, I ,_ r. • 11,111 I g _01 ___II I„/1 9•1 ji /it. 3 3 RI lin it ; ; MID ft l•iAlv--- •1;1'1 I. 1 i; o z I l'igilp ji 1 t4 111111'0,N I! I. 313 V.... ...". '..- ii 13 31 3! ihi/ it kg 1 - 11 J lel • , 0 i .2,1 a I /1 _hot Iplyf 1 i Wit ; ! 1 1 C113 ihIg ire 1 §1 1 1 it I P i 1 I I I I I- Ili 1,igh iimi i 1 ,q01 ; , .— .•3- ' ' .- NI ...: 1... 1 1 If.,k! 114,..,,A 1 1 %HP I 1 ... _ 0 14 if sly i 1,-.41,..1 g g a Bal NI ': !!I.4 i i 1 0;3 E-E 51 I j;0161 I , ,114;1/1:4%! I 11'4 l ' 6;11. "or; ---, 1 ,al "I ! I i Ild 11 4.11 • ryikic I 1 g• 1,4, Nig 1;41 4E i 1 i .4,F 1 f ••-•• ! 1 1.1 al ''. ., '='I.;1.15. 11 11.0:11• , tee .-, fi filfgd it gg gAiNfi ig i IIIM ill NA!!" ii lli!Pip h II MID!I ; ' 1 - •" '• "I" -- 11°4 1,!! I 'AIN, 4 d E; E a A i 0 I • 4 I 1 I i OA /IA :7 I i', ..-1-:.••-• --I`H;I ! !I !I . - ; '•' Mai I 1 Eg iilii ' Ill E 26-'4 E. 6 1 !PP ! II' I hE E. I 6 i -V 3 10111111tit • . f 0 IL I ji 1 th!A ig i! 11 4 11 A g A: I II LINE OA ii It 41;ii 4. -I i — - g Plii. - 1-1 1 / 1 i i i e 71 3 s ' A' -f ' ;p 11111A ii r3 Y1'1 _ 1 I:I 1., g dIi a ��V .. III • H I' I 9 4 ! !s II!! !lit!III " h ' . _ 11i1 " a ig gagE 9c e , I t Pil w 3?�EI .ef; fYllFli )fF 1 ----i,...�, 1 �11 1 1..11: 11 z 3 Ao e '�' s1.1: Irl .: , o p 41` '�eV11 1 al'y E I r1� F z ' 1?. !� ;9R�f 1 lig i i1 un an n _� ill = gib all 11 C c 1 111 qt. liiiileiiiii`p, 1 t1 , B " _9 i I! Li 1e1a1 1 u1Jlt1l11 : y I I - ` 7,1r- ----if''''' s 9,1' 1i1p 1 1'I 4 1 1 1 1 i 111 \` i/// iii ��1� '` 'i itMI'1111CA, A 1 7 n V:ra ' V" 8 N$moa !Ili E? ,�l IiVIl1 i I f m DIL .LLQ„V _a cyst h. i1 11' �� € n E v-- W4132 i111 '90 i1 1Eyn I a, - . a , k? nil 1714 51 1 El INt epi Mit 11 111 1 11 i! I Iii ! 1 �; ; ' 1 Ill P oco 11y1l is 1l„.1; , Il�.ur~; II i a X131 1 Z II !i9 j I€! ,lK Y lig ilii i s e l 1 t 9 1 1 di 1 lil11 �� 'INR r!i Iii ill11 li 1 i-1' 11 e9e 11: 1 f✓�Il a 1_t�U!! 1 15E 1 Yi i ! i 1 E I 1 1 1 1 I a I F i I 1 I 1 :§ . e SI Ig a 3 s ".��'' S -. iii a 3 e au § ..-• ••,. t- 0 a i, . ,::.2.,„:., ._31 ,5,„ :47-4 mu- iq ,r4 y . , ' FQ 0 W, ". „, s H o •-ti, IN q� -, .4 o a�i _I w 4h11,7-- - -- _ NM g it u ph _ o N ! — --- z0 1 i @ tl I I_—_-- V g r `� ...�-a. 39 2E A i i I p C ,S € aYy wLL 15 Hii g °Yff ha 0 fie° 1 !Ili S 24;g4 ` i 5 I I i— j p ��� 8 § ZMil li Illi — gi!vg 1 J Z d $ 1L rt' 8 ii y2 ac I i zO b aut O V N = Z u4 o Z \\ \ \ g Z \ 0 {g� ,. Y '� § ss Z 0 c E :3.: :, LLa .U7 a b 9 i i? -o H 11 ; 1 y r 4p 2- ';t 0.i74\ 1 511 „ . _ps A!hi A i\.0: ih = r44 nj Z' rig 6 4 \ e I': O b' :46°,11:\ ii ---W:= ' 30 I vv •yEP Poi11 y d g x ( 1— r .` o� gge w w h 3i ! O 2 4. E ii\! r §aI1!! .I ; r ileF a Li \ II I\ , 11 ligl ;.i_ t = ► g II Air ),001-. z \ e_ gd F x� I w 0, 3 \ g 6-53 33flair$ `' O '.I Ps x " tl- A \ \ 1 1111a< <a4grein4 V �i.i 00 g wv-�. an 1 \ w0 -- 11 w3l. a r 3 \ ,,$ O - — Q S 3 z mff§ 00 } $ \ 0 ,i W o i. en: O VI/ -alga' \ \ :moi a o �.. e— �I515. z \\ \\ x `��. pig i e \ w • b% : s 5 N t0 FF- uj .-I Z V1 to w U K W a to a pp N r/ M to v-i Q to coh. In ^ C CO V 11-i -i 1111 111 Ol M n to O N N N N v m i W D d O M N N H Z H t!1 H If1 lD Ln co N V N 01 01 N co r m W n r1 lA ei n Ln n w n .-i n 1` V n 1-1 d' n .-i O L0 In t0 O O .--I N V tO a0 U Q O U O O D O p N '4 O ~ M H O O Z O M .--1 O N O c-1 .--1 to O� J t O J a to F to a F Q a In O CC Z w H O O w w O m O Q H --+ w H Lu Ln Ln W O fi Z tp > K m"It' I- a 0 In J w w w w WQ ¢ > O CC a m F- O a O F Z w 0 03 Z ❑ �' Q -� Q aW. v1 v1 H 3 0 Y w w LI- ¢ O u = H > 3 m w H O Q D. m Q d d w LU H ¢ FC H a Z Q U Q 2 >_ 101 .'-' , 0 Q , ZQ ¢ I j 1^ V ,-1 `^ to O1 01 m n t0 11.1 N e-1 O1 m Q1 0o co n �-i .-1 n cc U.) n 1„ fi n m m � 'i o n o CO ri o o N v m m � w d (J a t.J 0o N 6 O N •-1 O m 00 O N Z O M .-i O N O .-I .-1 In O6 a a Q z ¢ 0 0 _i a vi o. z H ‘,1 H Y H H Q a v1 0 W L 0 r- 0 z J ;:-'t O H W W H l7 J w D o D o Z Z 0 a 2 u j s m < m w OJ O H 2 w U Q H > H v1 o r u v1 Q Q Y w J > CC LU a Z_ W p ❑ W °� Z O O a0 v~i m O CC a J a F w Z w 0 Z O H m ¢ ¢ a m In en O Z H Q °' w w y w w W a wcc a cc W J In O O O ❑ Q O Q m Jn. m H H H CO a s W d OU w ? OH 0 Z 0 ate,. • (6E4.el SLSO+.,..+. 153M �� 8 - 6L9PL6916EOxaI 960L6S6EZaoylp 1191HX3 3]Vd5 N3d0 069E MG 1N 1:II....1tMI MIcI GYM OL99 5 '8 256981 F99L 93 uwtauWtatl W,atoy!La3tpuali 153M I ONNII133NION3 30H3A3NId as g _ Vilna Rik 97j IDNI"NOIHOH 110 _wa,� ,•i 4 4alr110 U U U U V U U U <<<«<<< U Hii*'H+I+1+1 ii Q UUUUUU V-rcnNIWF000 <<<<<< • U kJ Z N.16,-,--EI O('n O -H+I+I+I+1-H Q Q y "Si HZ mr.-.-mw "'I-NM'''. N0.-,-00� 0 w _ z O.,cal (:13'' Q I- z�. >a O p H WZO?w- l w >O aioo6,z,Z v g6wi.wZ Z Z > z a�oazf o w0 �1 o w •w� O oz�opOO' . �dmacc 53 xw z Nzz�w�>> O w\ G]\ WdF-OC W 0 oN 6,`�G wQ ViJVVZ w reccOa. w w w zW,_L�i �d Q¢¢QO_ ¢O u.., wwww 5 5O 6OIn cc< Oo zQ3o v�an to F- I-V uuuu Z =oj gZg a wwww FYHQ !¢- Rd<d O d .FF- o� _2 aaaaw 00 O `L'�'IL"" Z O oli'i5"'iuz�9 OOOOO-,aw r- ZZZZww z�?o?v6 w"6�+ o aaaaYw 1- ~o °z� 11111111 0000�� � �`° 1 ,_ f I I i1 lO I r R , O 1 C a g � I I I I I i W 11g a • 1 8 C . I i I , I g $ a 3 3 I r._ 1 ` 1 I '11111111 I I3 _ I d , I I Y • /, 1 2 1 u I t , I a s s I 1 1 I 1 C J p° 1 L e 8 1 1 8 I 1 .a I i H P. d s '-'11'11 33 4 a- his ia gg p • �¢ �iiff6j�?�`ppe ffd851d8'sg110"431.11 14i 11&113 o [V1_11 ti m ,a O W O g " g W6g93g 8c ' g ion :mazig g : ' :`,1 €oTp a a o63mE6LLI ° w wobozg =go' .e.(f) q �o� n A a =ag f1440n „ e oWag a WE W=" W 9 111111; O "d zw W W .o was. w -. M �zZ cco: <_;" 4E4 ap FWwDj Iry g S < 3�0„-' I ��go wr d , ,g.8.-,9-,411 a 58it, W. iaw3 <oz z z >¢ 1" I g��¢ g. c ga z y ya��o --$" l z-°am a c_ > E q a 3 €g 8 t= !'lx i 5� mop N ua¢f ao Zg4-'6 ZY T g4 w N m� G g8! ¢ r£� ,moo O G¢ v ao�g°f a 3 z a a e € g g �_' 1p wow ba_ nc" q W �°�''> v EgEEg , z 3 PA z 5P S WOE 4." Q Sd"'€6 i 8 3111 i�oo,,gX 8 v ,Ty `18 8 x gm 8 �g �7 ° s0`od a$2 F. _ ..S, �__ h _a_`o g�€ ht 0 VI cn 11 W __.....4., - atgQ (ON 111,1111 N 4- = I 110._IQ Z O Z Q baa 3'« a `� WQa} Zcco o � " • co N -Tl `` �7 g al 0 NI L5, U Q o Q Q p ._.. „ O g oa- F. €" W -s J < ao 5 8, 3 m g, Ucn � � O I , :�r . a o ''e s = a nOzcof m-4 amW J Qa= 1— Cf)Z W �i • � •1 lid L1. Li-D_ !g1.0 5 a � < , ,ou LL U U7 J a_ b J INI &� = •=p J I1i4& iàcm-gym o gg_o W 5 = Z � ja�s z o w j#t}!� a= Y 52 S .6'l:�RO 2 y 7 G 3W a " o$a1M. -„Wp - a$ -ism 1 q 1 o a;'-g2 n, - RI d= mWigcgg. s\ g W W „ 15 5 1 .a k as";X a 99 2'a 9� 'g5<5W W Ea i g• i• rli a g" ay� I/ �, o ms ggp y�y ga 3 s%ggoz� g rr 1 '" Sh $_:111_1: F 5- .-Ggi :991 3 FS t�3 n3a6Ei=i g o I43S a € W ..€ s` ze gE =" Wag : Wa� Gygi g a m zod' o oW = y 7i� _ - i ;_ - €Jgso c g nW8 '� 232W $oWao = ��"eS Ya Lc 6" o uEi i3'Qo §ui4 0"3" �" Ga a g a, g ..Neem g 5 a 112Y3=gi:i 2 61 QYl d" 1 h 9 g to 6. 11tS 4 iW . wY gTWF - 1asfM ay s� g - mg ii til; $ v i 1 W W❑ _ I a W g Dhlgiiii_"%= e 33 _highiy�: =n o�L12 _ �� t w hG "a 3 <3" `3 OW "� E gW o_k "au i 3 L% • Egg, 4 Pe g , gw l=� O gs" W r"a 4 AD o � aG W'"$��m Pei 5;g3o WGA Y: �xY2 g,5..�d �� Qg` > 7 4 r E 7g 62 0�}y, 8 �o g _ im g Sasag w wo gagg 3g 5ao Ewv 3_n 31 „1 w -3. 44158 W S ai WwWs 8:.R " S a 'i 7WWW>>8 zea ary at � a € 2§gY g a o $gds i 3 o jggSGY i 5 ° oa ,9Ssaap5EsO55 g o ° 6 as x g 17 <<' 3 3 d =§i ' g i d :h' < on aiiersh „a 1 1 1 1 1 ,g - i o G < m " e w s l a a s 66 Xg d :N S - 51. 11.1N N I� og�w 0 L. ,cal < 0 0 - p,KoW$ "6 CV ti8 , I- a 6 § 3 iNizw gillo aRa„e = 111 il111 1 II 1 • s a CO G 43 7 I- 24 Lg; mmol E, 266€ _ 6¢ :� �yg8s _" Y §�4a � a, oa Z T gi wwW � woo. 5 �oocan igg1!ao / ,,;',1 6' n ,20„L 3.f1,siD5 .GST IS ISOL3YHL fro F .A.1-..1-g-5.7 ai W o-ilg .M'8ZZ 3.82,12.05 .,Z6YL1 Kfl,1.# J 3 ., OFd� .01'05 ,Ot'OS .01'05 .OIYi .Ot 1i .01'06 .10 SSI 1 i t:- I iat S a4su•--1 m; 1° I 7:"i2 J i SL 1-4 In.00'SZ{00'SZ 3,fit.K.0I5 g LL x a � 'u-i '4g ' ___...._.__ "§-W �i -_.RIC Zl 6s .01'61 .catfi ,157r-7)i6r�4 of $ 3.SI.ssDos ��S ()& \ • ti 8 13'0 0N8 3'0'd .09'B8L K81,KDN } .00.W1 n w w A Bl d 11,•3I'3Y'M/8),06Y1f 3-Bt.K1ta5 -I c 1 i f --- 1.171:1 LOYAL 1331SLS 1W101hMA g E 4.d ml 5 8 11•�� 00'OLl K84,K.051 w S'll - 86.[1 4L1� n 0� - .00:49 -f---�� I J 3-01.1..000 1. _ K21,0,LBIN ' f� c 1 ,00'501 0 a r $ 011 8 n 14'. �. 1 3.St.KD65 I 3.61.1..008 I. I 3.81,15005 1 '� 3.5\,1..005 r I I ,00501 I .00,01 I .00'501 I -�TN"J o .2. .00501 c o °~J s 3'4S� „ 12. s n W 8 ^ ru d 3.6 1,1..005 I 3.84,15.005 3I 1 3.81.K.00S u _ u 3.61,1..005 I DOYOt •°°4,1.`,0:-.,.--,V .00'50\ n 00,01 I 34.1-I _ r3'n'd.Ol om R R a R u 91-..-711,1,13‘i .KDOSrL r r 3.Bl,5005 n 3.Bl,KA05 n I Y S 3.Bl.K.0OS I a I I ,m'S0t u3- i .00,01 I1 I .00,01 1 C e 6 .00'501 :ci 8 e '•2 o8 lit d:ow, i o 0 -P n g 1 I w �iO p n;CI `-ISS VSD0,,"i "113.81.1..005+78-8 8 S�1-3.61,1..0LOS 3.BI,Y.A05-IT-� sol._{13 r+ 00'101_ w 9- oos61_ +� g .'= u-4-1_-00,01__ 1_g S, .bl, ,r1 c+IT-• T t,..,„,, I .1 T 0 a - u y n e T, IW o-Jr 8 n 1 - R n I- ''-I-^. n C 2u 1' n I- 8. 2 " 12 n I2 o I lil^ 8 ^I� 14 8 I ;61.1....05 I I 3.8 t,15D0S ' 3.61,1..005 u8381,KO05 i I .00501 #00.1.00.501 I ; .00'501 305 .00501 I u u a "'1 c r I of 8 'o . c 30'd,01 a-RIti,i o I i 8 1- 8 g+ n In . I 3.61.1..005 ; i 3.61.05.005 In 41 3.81,10D05 W 3.61.1..005 I I .03501 34511-1 .00,01 1 .00.01 O e .00,01 I1.o i -1 8 0 a' 44 H 8 I- 8 n 1, .sz 1- 18 83- _..I �3re'151 ��1 3,61.1..015 1 3.51.1..005 I p i, I 3.81005 CC y� 3.01 VS.005 I 00'031 I .00,01 1 •00,01 Q Q : 051 j RH N KCa, ,o19f .1z00n St180 Z6lOt Dtr .ZS'lOt YLLB.T - /1,LBfOZ KLS.IiDN--- ',1Z'05 ,LL'Bf --,TO'SL WI` ..z.....„.., eL aL.us z ( 1 W n �8� 8 0 < Z O Z Q 4 F _...__ - _ d -I- 1 aQZ a0_ Wa W 10 CCHNcr -' - --- W 0 •Z W C3 F- O I 14 � $ d g ' e m g2 2 a_ s Q O 1- i s g it F f, P k W W n . n n W a P n R is N J J Z 8 e - 8 0 3 2 ^ a s S I r CL SL D g ' : : : . m : z z ^ N a ^ i s m 8 8 1 8 9 8 8 $ 8 8 8 8 8 . G7 Q O g ,, 88 , 8888882 n U OO _ O 21 ^ aka „ ka . n a ' ak' a 'san ^ '08aormr " . ammml O a Z m = . 8 a a 8 t e 8 m 8 ` e m m 8 8 a 8 8 . 1i -- :', i , a' 8 k f WCC a J w 88888888888858888888 ; _ . ten 9 r 8 .4 o O > _ O --I,-, E 8 ^ ^ - t 8 t t t - t R R _ n t ^ e < 4 a- 077 U 1880888888 : :, : .. 1, ., ; ,7 7, $ = o Z • Q ~ J U 0_ W W W CC Q GrecoSherry From: Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 2:34 PM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Meeting Request: MAC &Triad9. , Good afternoon,nelroon, Rich, along with Wayne Arnold and David Genson would like to meet with Commissioner I gard. the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: Addies Corner. Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: Monday June 19th 9:00—3:00 Tuesday June 20th 10:00— 12:00; 2:30 -5:00 Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0—5:00 Friday June 23rd 11:30—3:00 Thank you. Dianna Quintani.Qa COLEMAN Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. YOVANOVICH Coleman Yovanovich & Koester,P.A. KOESTER 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (239)435-1218 (f) 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Mac &Triad - Rich Yovanovich Location: your office Start: Thu 6/22/2017 1:00 PM End: Thu 6/22/2017 1:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny GrecoSherry Subject: Hadley Place (Mac &Triad PUD)- Cathy Gorman Location: yor office Start: Wed 6/21/2017 11:30 AM End: Wed 6/21/2017 12:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny Coming before the board on 6/27 239-272-8809 1 GrecoSherry From: Dianna Quintanilla <DQuintanilla@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2017 2:34 PM To: GrecoSherry Subject: Meeting Request: MAC &Triadg • Good afternoon, ( Jjic RikAb Rich, along with Wayne Arnold and David Genson would like to meet with Commissioner Taylor regarding the upcoming agenda item on June 27th: Addies Corner. Would the Commissioner have any time on the following dates: Monday June 19th 9:00—3:00 Tuesday June 20th 10:00— 12:00; 2:30 -5:00 Thursday June 22nd 3:3:0—5:00 Friday June 23rd 11:30—3:00 Thank you. Dianna Quintanifra Legal Assistant to Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. YOVAN OV I Coleman Yovanovich& Koester,P.A. KOESTER 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (239)435-1218 (1) 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Hadley Place (Mac &Triad PUD)- Cathy Gorman Location: yor office Start: Wed 6/21/2017 11:30 AM End: Wed 6/21/2017 12:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny Coming before the board on 6/27 239-272-8809 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Mac &Triad - Rich Yovanovich Location: your office Start: Thu 6/22/2017 1:00 PM End: Thu 6/22/2017 1:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny GrecoSherry From: LevyMichael Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 3:44 PM To: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: May monthly report Attachments: Projects by District - Application Type May 2017.xlsx Good afternoon, Please find attached the monthly report for May. Thanks Mike Michael S. Levy Operations Analyst Growth Management Department - Collier County Government 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL, 34104 Phone: 239-252-4283 Fax: 239-252-6349 michaellevy@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. 1 Lo co J Or, v, -1, W NJ — V,.y F.• coo r Cn Ul N N , N91 D n rr A 0 4 4 5 d d Cl) o Cl) Cl) -• ci, w co co O 0 fD t7 0 C d - - w a o• � °° y° .-o �rC IW-' y �+_ �+- CO •9 V qD co ° G b VV cto 1••• m Hto n it nV G Cl 0 o O\ W VO W r ,� Ccwj O F-, N N n C° O Cl. co o' jV �. •7ei. rT' C .'�'. p• p� p ° ° co O `G O co ra, O O "yam n N O w 0 rna� v n Co 0 tt ozo� � � it ° - ° n ,-11 ° co o [- o 7d r, .,' G 9k * O CCtyJ o N 4:10 ft CD G y A n iD 5. y 'r. ro 7y � o 1 E�Pa td V E�bfD c.. co rt o o o aaC wy ft, y E ril a. ' �• (D tr CA ow o ti d d 1 C c-D GM " 0 .. CD A V1 g6 P cr- co Pa co CD tra 'CC• 2 b o E'. MI C7 ,�, U P.o CI H'0 d o ti G. •w, o n �00 5%.9 o C7 ° a °.t5. a b �y° 'F: '4'0 y o 0 G `< r. p t [ b ° b < CD ,- o a m d .- 0" " < A-as C 0 -. tt rrr . :r O. O 0 E'° o v' n o C o G f7 C 0 o ^ o o C, Cro o ti c4 N C7 w G w n n G 5 co co p, b rn a p .•. o o Po '0 o w G p,'0 , w o Cl o o. a- r. w Fa." o.rt 0 A, p p, o u o rn o fD CCD; y' ` o co o cn ff a c°o co <�. m' � O �y �• .� cD u, n - A• Cl .'7 A, WO Ci O Cl '0 �.<< \ cD o ° • A o 0 g- a = a °� C CD a CDC coo o ��C c(o on c". ° . 'd a. _ •9 d 0 aq a o o fD co P, r' P al.-- v) �i h7 ° td ro tQo p m �D o :r mCD C13. cD n ° o NA n w ° w m rt + G n co t7 D.,* 0 a w 5 m �r� A.� n� .d cD o `�° ao^ m � o m o „* y , U, A, [fin O.• .7' Cn O a p p.. �, N co n a, p O n ( , V, it m w CD o tn 00 el' p O O W m •°-',.y o O r. 0 ,tiy o p w . m .0 D m Vn t,D —. , • �'?f a v1 O• c Gs' cn A go, w O. co rt H �. H r (") V C\/] Cl a. fD o n, !x] 0 d w ,-. a 0 >< n '.°m 7'`C o , . Z. 'a- 0- 'b 0 CD H o G a m • G �' a ° o n ° �' ; m �. CY 'd ooaP °° '� �n m � � o x0oa °' ap.. 5 5 "n o y CD fr �: P Cwcn 970 b °, yw'rD �co rD �t• pp"7s ' y °FL (� w r+ (9 N W • 'g''dQ " rv, rr '.7 `< �. ,rt co y `r •0`c N \ rt rt P. Eo:v co , w �5 CD 0 rte aS. o. no ooh , o � o oma. � �- w CDn• ooa CD " ,�do pooq '- . �-acro an n C ro CD 0 ND rDD n o con G b ° ,-C �yyT d 57' ti Z %' %' w 0 ,_. N o, N G .°7 P• N m o° N 0 N N C.DrC O 00 OC CD O m ' O CA O O . w. O, O O, 5. Z. O, O O CA M w 0WO Ai'. O0�' 0 ° nnL7 c, 0 cD A, o oA, 0 00. 00. . an co . a D ° 8`, a\ mcCDD C ,., O Cr C b `f OD N rD P H '0 CD cD N ' n cD C 'c7 O .d b �° 0-',b m ° b O r° n cob cD G,b c d cD CD 0 0,'cy ' DD) o' w 'o a,¢y , o a b P, T a P < ti'b Cr.D cD o b < o �'b m C in',o P., °CD< m ? w o a o' a0< co ft CD CD g n ti a ON n A n y CD n ° rD ti a. R° P-. a w \ o a 0 0 rn Q o o o CD CD0 ti co o 0 0 0 .wy O\ A o C y ,'O o C y .1O o o, O O n O\ \ O \ , \ N ° rn yah C " rn . m ,oo w oo0o00 5 ° 00o aa0 d ft _ V V V V V V _ O O O O O O O b V V V V V V V Cl rt A a l0 co - a, In A W N O .- -- .. W - W N W .• .. > (/) L7 y by y G n' G � C �7 :1-1. � ,, aw 0 w a w ? m P• w m CD w CD ti CD w w cn ca yy cn r'' ro 0 W ° W ti+ O M iJ Uri Cil, x N zm b � roH co �� 2 ° w -, G ?; � b zb a cH cm , °, o y va a CDA' ca :r°' ° w 0, 0 CO � �. c � � � � ° z Wz � � � gc� mow' w ° w ~! a. cn cn [rJ C O `C G H W o ,�, w V R (-) w tC n o K H. p W W rn 0 coo -P. O coN 12 8 n $ � oA C 0 a o CA $ �� `°a opa p 00tij 0 td, ,,, w V W z 0 Cr,,C 0 cwn N '+ A '7, °or � r 0C CO CAD Ot.. ,� 0\ • VI ro rn CD O w • co O A w N .H-• 0 y O m coW 4 C p, ~ ~ co 0 0 0 O ,.ii V C c • P., 2 0 NI • ON . y z fa C Cori w p w a 0 C4tii a a o w A ME CD rt Et 0 4. ,0 0 K <9 'P. vC 0 P. m G. til Cn A ti 'C . hl �z R.CD 'b gn Cl) o ,b „.,o 1., d 'CS d CD R co o o' o, w �, CD 4, fro co t) 4° 'a � ro ° copo pra �, ro aro ° fD � b � C w oo �Db 11 ti fir" , H. a o a a ° %' E. 0 a 5 w ` o o � a w 7y � b ; tiro ° 'ti o w .1i �• ,y� ' 4 0- 11) co °G ab ' ° co ..v° 0o ° C .o°v p.CaH. Z � ° o 2b o• 0 'O ,ti c m � a• Z CD° 0 � ° c� w�* � o �o A) �c b o. O Ar w aro ° ° cn rn ti a y ° by 0. N 0 ° '.� y LAS. ifp PD a --' �,d 0 Cn (o ,,,t el=v' H CD O O t)En '11 �' '•+ rt• CCD u,.�P C y (� o ° FF P. a O w Oo CI, y' ci,° ry o m O ro .,, cD a. o Cara 9,•1 oa '* r' ° �» ° w cD cD m' -, b ., 0 O O cD 0 w0 Oti E 0 0°q 0 o O ,O 0.n ° E 0- a.N �, C,"`.0 ro V O a,,r*_, 0 4, K o O V] m ci) ti 5--) O �+ t7 G fD O d ' o `' w w m '� „y . . m cat, ,CD 0., 0 5t ro o w •t7 .v, t5. rJ — . a* 0-,0 a' 5' P. 0 + 0 + a°, co co Co •- ° W N CD O" a Ur �° a E' co o co ° o a �' y �° .A O• ti O P. O � CD � O CO Oaw 0 a` CcD �' cn + b Cn w ° 0 c aCD ,- 5+ p o 0 a o C- Cti w 2 � 0 a� 0�'.G .w�, CP 0.. 0 cD :s N m 0 ,: CD . 0 0 •a.co w co a,0 + Y ti y- .r CD N .N+• N , n M cD H o N O W 0°Q rd aF'. 00 act CDD 0 `0 o Do w co a' N 0 0 r. ° C a0co ° °, coo v°� co r.co 0.0 (0�'rt' 't �. u G �.•• co c, 2 O• 0 ,0 co cD .0 0 ., rr 0 0 ,. N rt N cD O 2 E. cp a cn `c O ° 0 ° , CD N ° P•,-'co ° CD . w '.aC G�• ro K .,,CD (-D N . rob m 0,o ,b 'SI 0 Clti u, y a °y o pa cn , �Y 2. 4 5 5 o cn 00 0 0 .- 0 . 0'. CD cn • ,y ,Y QOq : A. - ° �' P ° . ° o m 0 & . o- CD ro ° ro t-, t•. N N N ro N N N .-1:1 0 0 -N la °r\ 01.-, NO OH N a. O, 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 'C 0 '0 0 'd 0 0 0 0 0 0 'CI 0 b 0 10 O 0 O 0 N W f+ O 2 0 .'0 .,0 0 ca •A 00 W r 2 c 2 OW - 0O ,0 0 ' W a, - 0_ ' II0-' � G 'b Ca p p p, COA 5 5 '7 b b .0 b 'C tCD m co co oco ' CID CD 0 ob ,b Do w P, N 'y w ' AD Q' CCc' 0 T '0 -.0 d _ `''3 n teb pbb q. wob ob pp ' cop,N N t,rl. , ow CD CDCD (1) co '0 is": (7 o co' o0 ,42" 0,Oo0 o N0 ( 0 CDo ao N N N G\ CD W CD r CD p, 01 07 W r - V 0 0 01 r r '-.. ,r O, D\ O, O, C' r O, D\ 0' 0 r O• O OZ OZ O o OZ OZ O , N N N N N N N N N Nn O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ✓ V V V V V V V V 1 N N N N N N N N iv N tD oo v m In A W N O CJ - N Ul CO N -P - 0) N > C 4 Ct Cl) Cl w co O 0700. co w ' G co w ° w co co Na. o cnM N -• CA y r.C/ O U7 p CO N W 0ON � N 3• O P. w 0, 0 a CITO p CD O O o O 0 G' 40 0-. ' ' G �,'dWC) 0:? A�. O " wd p � G p N Cn OH w C � Ozn N co, w � Go(D o 0 � ( � 0w 0 � N0 zzz ( zTP- •• C aCD 0 0 OCcc �w w oo 'ti a0 ti YoQ.o CD CD 0 noCA fW w o C7d V000 W 4 CO O - w av Cpoo , .. o " H o '0 y -, . n 7 "dm t� FiaO N w ; O * Q° Oa 0. NWO� G cT wOw Cl - w V ,...I ' Z N ,Ti O v `CT 0 CD cn o cor wp � 7y o ''' O0 0 0,,-0 by CA 'CCO S' udm O ' z o W N O iN N O Nb O w oz �pO .A OO f i H O Vn 'U " N • 0. O w o 0 ° OO o `� O _ cOs", V °• O r r P a HCO " co 0 O G . CO " 0 S,'." o 0,- Z 0 bcn 2. .., rri 1 CM -.e CA o 0 0 0 �, it ft PO 00 0 it to et 0 ft 0 lo z ft ftF (n 0 CO w d" ( b b11)SI Ct � 'Odyb b rd(o n ,. d °� ° ° a� Gi . ° w °° °' �. ° O yn : ."0 0 tioM cG o vam M ( b m 0 0 *rD CL. CPI co a. oo0Q. .-• p up C Po p (,y o r' G 0oti wE. a w 0, 7O 0 O .O o cn 0 ww yM -,.. (., O oCDm mr) a M (DGa o Ob fOr+ 0 oa • Gw � o ° �. Fp. o Ox , », Cl b O ' d y w S. 0 (o o w n , . m o, 0 0" W�Q° �� h7 0 ym ( . Cbw M D hn � a . p0CD G .... w ergo a,'". CD ( G p " � d C 'R7 ro tiO `1p N 00 0 - bo H- `10O .— qq. g 'Clw CDCo O m rCO ri 'CI M • • oOM tra co q G c o c5o • (cM n =0 S m a, ' 5-5. vcb ."• 0d o oG., wfR '—, g N o O o • G m O o '-noOc(D dw (] nW O x + Oti r �. G NSG° m o o » ° ° tio' �GoNK Cm 'Clwv° o O CD o .G. rD ° w ° GO �na - 0w a , no �Do Co CLco w °m o ' LCD• aw Q0 a DS. o • w °0 CD uCD+ G � C' p O w• wti • 'Cl' as cn `? h- r. o 0 + 0 "0 � o o m CD ,b w np. v0 5Oa w tra . Do w` Q d P: . O� c.b CD CDoy, co r ro b b '-Cl 'Cl b N ON N N N 10 'Cl N N N0 O, 0 0 0 0 0 D CA 5, 0 0 0 00 00O 0 0 O 0 0 00 p 0 0 0` OO V O, nc0 O - 0 '\O 4 O CT Ch N CO 01 p ,.0 ' 1 I I G C17 `0 0 0 .1:1 'r1 'b '0 ',.51 b °,b 'Cl '0 'U cofD w w co C R. co cogCD Na .0 'Cl 'Cl ''OU' '0 co AD AZ AD b b 'Cl O 0Ob ' � O O pO0O 7 a. 7 CY O' cr N cCo t cr :IL CD CD (o (c Oa O.. a o O(o m m Co0 ° O 0 CD ,Do a, a a P. a, p 0 O Cl o o o rn cn . cn co � F. -.. �•, µ H N N r _ CT 0 VO 0' O\ 0 C' CT as CT C' CT CT 0\ CT CA N N N N N N N N N N n O O O O O O O O O o V V V V V V V V V V W W O CO - D C/] o w a 0 w N O 0 O7 O CA ,O O d CD ni 4D SW O C.4 . M 4 y d07 so w N. O P- Z'0 ,71 ^ Z' w• °D o a o - C) 0 0r 0 Cri CD 0qD0 ` r. 0 n. d W . CA n oil o l� rn 4. G UQ m d • t) C • CD "0 P° VV4 ' ° M' C] 0 10 '0" mCo tt a, 5 o oO, b .-0c G ,( rt O CD 0 .iN ,' bc0'O dnd rt D o w ' n CDOcadb co by ,. O r., ,a n ,-.1 o O o ,b w N 7. b 5 y et cn "4 N O y gGNN - -,. Nry a; O c'CD . e: u)-0 - c„ Fn @ pw d• x 0 0 0oM moo p,,, ,-1,- ,,,,,,,, • 0. oo e. aovcn c ' no . 0 vCDoao' w ,. rooovmcr. � oc p' oww v w ° ° p" aa 0 o b :o . Cw c7 p � N W 0 d o , CD R Cp /15 a ooa fD G v .' 0 ,� a ,pq d � co cKoP'o cn A, 5• i 0 o: 00 8 H < : 41 p, a P. CAd•A dGOo7cv' vN Or o' 4ag Gcp, w".D07 o o as •dpS .9' op —P.' p m m ° y b Go CIDI. B mb0 9 w Cy & a. 0 co (0'- p �G. o Hila. o GrD w p.� w b 9oz . o . c . vi ' o p ,ero0 i0 p' cO na5.Go 'bCa.wO Oyp - trG Cr r« • CD �cp ° d . • 0 m0 ,0 y + atiOQ 0 CbN Pp D co G D o4 w I, 0 0 - CD G w aDCD8 0 2 —,CDo W w , ,D ,j g, cp ,omG cncDM „ o CDg. RD, ii o w . 5. , 5. G o0 -, 5n O � p o 0 w . 2 CD CD N P.ci . Cyt” , O n a N 0. "0 CD CD w CD c CD V ' n C� 0 . rCD 'O ,G ONo ,d acp � O� `<r1-1 aM 0 'bhb .n' M`7 CF0 • CD .,nU . .1 CD G o ' w btio 5 `' ,bp,, = H- ap - ° 5 FL Mw0 5'a' cp b 2 P o 0 CD w r" ; • oo 2 0'• :r NN .N C 0 m . o o 6 'b - o " G w G CD g " o - w rD oom o wbCGwoa,' np o-' -, o P `do C .0 a tR b + cG 5 , RcD . CD 4- CD '1 trj crA o J p w 0 0y � y CwG . CD • CDG• CO0.cnoa' CD Nb - mweCb3 p r+ / ,, M Gon CDD ob .., . ., ,G i " ot7 aCDoa o B b o owcD o0" y x 0 c o ' 0 . wN p a tiw CD• cpa CD CD a . Oowvay oCD a 0a cn CAD .1, b r N ,1D 0nu N 0 O 0 0 N 0 O w O - lo ,O a W N b N O, CD ,O O T \ 0 b N CO CD N N a 0 rD o w b G b C 0- rD rn a. 0 0 O, O` V V 1 N N 0 0 .. V V J Ol V, A Cu N N .-, N N Cn Cl) D 4 CA r, 0 CID C7 0 p, m c w 2 o 0 0 0 Cr, 'TCl) 'O 'x] W a. * i y ° 0n r tt 92 ''y CD CO CO 0 G ° 0 O` Cl) O CG ,nN n O W 00- tl (T + 0 y 'J rD g, 'U fD w to no O7y N Q +0 n O cp n to5w cn N P O w ° Z p " Gvi a n .co o G o 00 to a' o-%. ti `° 0 0 -Ti °„o° ' 0 co b 0 CDN 34 y 'b & •~+ aAD d• 0 O co 0 ro ro 0 0 0 m ry n b ."..2 A y ra p� �, P w y Cl) ., C V CD 4 to Po co 0 o' .+ rt rt 0' CO pc1 a p b 4. d d ° �- Wm M 7 ' m G dN W O d mop,bW 0 0 o bd , o. . .t w uw p 'I b � • • pO o > '1p ° w wH 6. p . vti b G. a.•cnoCDoo ''7rD �: o i CD 0C ' O G ' Gpd mG , c 5• m m O ti, carr CCO''' . 0 0CD n. . WC7 CD . C ° or* p, ccD00 •$ Aw W rn 5. `o a d 0- G , . a 5. ° dc4 * � 0O w ° ° C • oC • . bw crctd n b o• rCD cco bt.-„H-". E j.5. • b •• : , ,bwp,d b 7p P m ';-'g n. 0-'m<*o r 0 O pao G \CD N b(n '4 corOO ca ooa .c wr < `9 5...8 <* x � • p. '17 —P. C0 ° " 2 CD cnP0% q cN oG lw 'd coNW w � p b c7a 0O , . O CD rG O , CD W O ,- roy � p � QoaGr"� m � 7p oam m HG r+ c . , b ° rt EL:c- pd o ° % o o' ro � o N Ew � cD0rDw3 ° p y R H oa co' Gm r o � o 5 Nr+• r rTh • n1- GG + p ., p � yr p CD r m aU ° a o n ° n d ppm 5. ow ' ro . ' ° w o 0 i' �' 5..., n wp o 0 7 =W O N G 0 °' N C r. r : nvO R° w . COO : aco7C0 En "^ .+ R. C, , ". GO . w b b G. E ,O `.c . 7. .. , ..to rD ° d • 0HGtiO 4. N � b 0 d Cm a a. -• b S. W 0- yO D, yp-' G DL-ii • " cDG � ° Oppwpy . °n va n �° m P CD ,Q � w , ° ap . o cD / R "' n ,_ b • rcm0 '' d Grp .n a ti r 7 T • O ,,, �. � m GN R C AD w w U Gn C * m G cn El, CD 0" , y i' b ; N G on 'id Ga. 0'0 p, d cr+ w r+ w • 5b ° eD ° 3bopGco 20wpi tSn + 3 O r* o ° ,Vvrb ° p p d ° CD CD CD is+ w w � Np.CM G U ° co .- G ,, , .. 5' b 0< °;Crq pwo po � 9 0 � O p � m CA o 0 Dem �, a Daro cn: ti a, a' r .4 • a.k° �' C7 dCD ionpo f9pp . o cl °Q co .. G o 9, " cD oaoam , 0' C ., rn * � QcD p ova p ', p ° C 6,- , R N N N N N 'G N O 0 0 O O2 0 0 O O p O O, O 0 W co OO ON O IQ N N cn - co VD V A 'C Cn W .~. O' 4 'C 'U 'r3 'd N C,-1D N N CD CD svdb b Cl , w '0 b '( b b a a a a a a 0o 0 0 00 0. - - ... Cl) N N p 1-, r O, Q` (T CT CT CT as CT CT CT \ \ \ \ \ V V V V V N Ll O O O O O O V V V V V r V . .A 4, A 4, 4, w w In - W N — O 'a W Cn Cn 0 , W " 01 - > y 4 y co co cn 1 G ro w d d 0 G 0 d `C m O Do a G in' w co G G ° co co y �. 1 W W V w 'd .b °` 0 W 'U V 'd ° '-d 01 O A W H0 cn ti co .w-t G .p Q` C7 G' CCD O CCD co V co G O G O r 0 CD G td G - G 00°J z n d ti p a- y •• p, °" Z °' n O rn'd a, < 'a G o `�° °o 'p Z o b ob O O oc ' N co Ov 0Cn co v of Z 01 CD V 0Z ' v N V N n " Np O ,-o ° ro r Vorl O ° co r OW ° 01 ° t" 0 o O W O.. O N rn °O W r °O W 0 �p W 'i7 N 4, O O 'r1 -- W V - Co N yy W N O C Z a n ro y a 0 c d 2 ,� vV, CM n 5 tA r r• d z E 0 a b o O I'd a a �' 0 a o '+ b 4. 0 P m ori O m cn d n' ° 0 m ' G 'd 't7 C C cn W o. d b 'dd �,--., ami ro a 'b p 0, g w P, CD ,+,CA E. Y w' 0 Q' �C rn o •-,-, C 0 t7 2 C o• n o n w '� ac CM as 'd as 0 co as as x 04 5 o� y w uy �y/- G 'v a m m -• w a'd o OW Z. w `0 p CA N. G G G !n A� M, O w 7`C a' p .Z.. CD w O , 0 TJ O° CM k co. td N a' �- 0 `� a r-'. 0 O rn w O C a a cc, G N C n G n p < o apa 2. Y u) p 5 '-• d 5 a' w o 6, o a n - cD '.1 '�. 'J a 0 cn w . 'y CD cn ° '-h w rte-. co ' ,rt '"� w w 'ti' p 'b `0 s a' u, w rwi• N N Y. rte+ ri v'7i ° w 'CS cwi� ,-'• crit .y 0 a 5. G. cn r' c0 n co 0 'd o CO ci, '�+ Pp• G. `C vy' ercb �7 ,�. p, o •aGc cGo C 0� ° °'_'' y N G • y* 0 r, o ,coo w •GD w d 1 a w 0GQ • td d w p,v a a y co' O r+ y m m t- w ° C ° 0 �, 0 d w - n w n w a w n n p; rn ti 7y co 'd ,' ti cc : •„ r. G G C n rr. "'� C3 crqp • ,&'. Co,: ti Z n n - 0a, co CD G b d n a G w p cnD oGauo w r+ w w O p, r N a. .p7 0 N N " '°0 p 0 rzr, O � CM n o C• ° a' ct p; 'moi o. °� w O w n o r. m a 0 co Cn b C• ° •wz Cm CD b d P ti n w + <7', G .ag cn cn x O w cn cn — y �• °p w '71 Y` �' rv'-''b �' �- C' aY N , OP n '1 o cn' - G. CY n c7'1, 'CD w .n, w 'b p a P., o a c•ri ,, Po n h '-« i-,.0 " r-• cac m "7 `n '�• n o 0 .n.. fa, O a co G r G N " N N w '1' n 0 CM r 5. w-r n . .94 'D d'cn cn naq y' - y °' C3 aGa y p p co trQ N N a r« ro r 'd N 'd 'd '-d 'd N ° r r r N N N O p' N 0 N O O O O� O a, a, a, Q� a a °O - O O O 00o co V O O O W 03 W W CO CJO CAD CZ 0-1CA UT ��., O W -• 0 V N -A N 'a a' d 4, b .b '7C 'O 'c7 '0 ,y '-d n '0 cD co co CD n N T 'O 't7 V b b w w w J '7 'cy ° ''L7 'ci 'd b c n n co n n n n a. co a• a Oa a O 0 o O ° o a o 0 0 - - a ,-, o F+ �+ N N a 0 C+ ,, r V CT as O, 0, a, 0, a' 0, V Ll V V V V V V V N O O O O O O O O V V V V V V V V v' into -I,. .A A A N _, o l0 Co J 61 N W CO - N W N D C/) C/) CA 0 g P w tn ,- w C ° g °fi co ti o v CD u, Cyn cn 00 - co 4 w Np p 0 O Cb F. yCn O pd tt pwn :11' Vi O oo w co �- p PI co E p w H w el) CP rn G OG G e, �is ON ,— rn CD tr CD C4E29 vrb n Q, C P. V C p zCD p 0-, z n CD n° Q'mooCD Q'0x1 o rnn z v 7, G ° .. N 7p bSnr ° ° ° Ozo ° o.00CiiN oz woo .lk O Q° O .. N w r's1 p 0 � w 00IQ marcs op wW'L70' W A .. CA O W O pp N O O 0�+, w.o Os 0 O r 0 tom'• 0cil Op ' N N W O r CD CT tt-' 01 01 0 P d N K �* C p A, rr FX fl) COP ur oil ft � � R X C i 5. 0 '0 t _. y o G 04 cn* e 0 ca C I go .. Co 0 ., e ., W Cl) -co n n a' cr. 'Got7 ar ti o a o o •••1 ]w �C3rm d ° n w G G. wb � po .. . C1 . ' CTv [1 p ( CG • y 'b 0 1 5. (n � ° 2. owaccDa ° 5t CD '' ° rDm•bN ~.oCp o ., 0': O O o .Q ' am .4. CD 1 ti ° mA, p4NNO 7•ti b 7y i , y p G ' �i a, av O D n w m . 0, Jj o R go o � N „ yo wOrt b �, °w n 5. wG wx' 7. CD • x'vbp \ Fc+o 7 y . 0 CD0 eD , cDG. 0 "C Cr P. ". P. C. 0 P G b w am •1, 0 R 0 woGoo CDDtiw C CD cn w N2 °' °"a-w .r O : ' 0 'vppOso ro ° C) cm cn 0 ,n 0 PP *. 0 ° x •tfD G b ,y 7do000CD * pG2mwy a' a. wo- p, ,H � fir . CDo .000 ,Y ' Do HO G ? y4 ,_ ^ h .• o nb ocDCDasp-o --aa5a' 5., n ToN. � o C) O w0 0 , .. P '( Cn N 0 ° r' f ,-, 'x1 CD "', ." CD Ow ` Fr, C ii 5 C G' ° Cam w• CD C D a w [s " r:!-:10o C XiGnQ. �,R. p ( "h O G ca0 P• CD as CD r' P. (n Dy 0 0. w CD 8 o " O N z° (DowjbpMWb • W M ° 0 J 00 0 0 r.' 0, o c a4 . ,.1..... r.,.0 co oz Co a9 p " cr -a . pp w rt bCD o yctro CD ct, mg, 2 o0b , ,o q Q' ". y o n plU Om bQ `J aQ „ O rw -wis) G i* w aO O 't 0 O p. w O ,', G ,' „ o „ 0 c NO 0 0 Cl - '- Cl °; D 0 - et ' '0 � 7yC0 to � C5' o p. oa6' , 0 � Dmc�nN a. a, O 0”0 7y 0cn7. 0 a. n Al O m w o ,-0..0 m a'0.. . O 0 „ x , Pon ° °« �S. ? 0' ' OD c ° m C0WCw •- , awo o - a .' , Mwaa ]- O 5 c O N. O r to N iO vZIL r: O ,+ C C a ,. ti O N moG •s [�m a � G a O m 7y• y . H ., w CC „ - o G, <10 0r. CO CDo Wv, tiler, �+ pn op D�, CCn rn 0 O0 O OO ( S ' ° y �a' � MC 4 m . 'N 5 wOO CD O 2 T .. O p cD ° , (1) 5, ,Y CD p •0 4 < w ON GC o 'O Gm o. O s---4, O C c. C 5 mOa p., O O'e, p, w 5 4 y .1 cm 5 or. 0 O n G o �ti ° o. 0 ao' '�o °t et A o o4� p °am RmI— ij1i '- i o Om0 m mp � mC °� w °pooCJ pH, o vcD » " CoC D w .f., ,a N O .`r (D .,y N N N N N N O 0N ., . O O O 0 p .. r .• ., V V V a, V rn o 0 O 0 O O O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 W 00 co° sGo cr,O 0 W co N O8 CT co O co ,O bb 'DJ 'Dy 'b 'C 'C7 co CD CD ti CD C �D CSD Cl Cl w w tib ' b b'C) 'b 'bb 'b " D CDN CCCD CD CD CD 0. 0L. a a a. a p. o o 0 o o o 0 o w CT co 'O coNV ., V V V V V V V o, CT O, O, 0' O` p, N N N N N N N Gl O 0 0 0 0 0 O V VV V .V V 1 W N O l0 Co �I 0, Vi A W .A Cl Ul -IP N N N Cn ca -P %) D 4 4 4 Cl) Cl) A5 H go d do 0 0 d 0 `C d w o a a O cn cnn cnn O co o co co co co cn cn M - b W CO N !ry-i o--� 7J 'r1 N �+ ° CT w CO � u, P n n o o °` T1 5 0 ro CDO C ° ° 'b7 Or * * Cn CCD Vo 0 O CD co yCO 'd a V , 7 'b m rrr CN w r V l0 N ,0 Cd t+ 0" � N SaONp0CCW-P. CDC/) O al f ( CD (D CD CCDN , M wtt 00 rD Z AO ° a Ii lii O CO rG ow � a nm O o 4. PP CA 00 O0 to Cilw O CDo � aG GOV N7t r ° b7 pl7N ��' wV d o, o a. oN o a- FbW lVWC N b O CW0, CO CCGpC0CD O o rn C � °° a 8-,' _IQ », v, TCo Coo nyto p CP z o my ,.i.1N0 ° ° oma- ° ° ° Z, o wo ,, § H do d oW o dO a, ° ( O y O y N V ° R7 , o O p• o OO Y00 O ,`D a. o rte" C" W o to to ps d 0'. .y' �"0 0 CA Oit 1' P1. 0'002 O 0 0 H OE. 5 .11 CD n ^a _ O c' Cn o a 5 .. cr btJ o o C r4 Q � � ^ h W OQ 5' CD V, a. y E. rt 0 b CCD 7d 'q C/) C7 Go cn co co boOoO rc NO° U.0 el 9 .0 ° ' 9 Cn oabdo G oCD c' rn 5. 7rt v, � m a a ° °m y w w a � D y + - CDAD ..CDG0,,d a,ct, C 0 ^ 0 O o po0O CDo c° 'a ooC0p, pw o G, oN , W '�* a CC " w0w .1 goC nM0cD AOGCDiti a ° °+V0 0 a + N O 0 0 rr a, Ncn vjA+ (1) co CCD OC O . CN a. ar. Op AOD _C � • , o c � p - 0 - a w /lz, rc,„ fa, . m Dla m Cb : A, 0 r- ° �. ° CD G y w w r* .0 COQG 0. oa GG . a' : a• o p- ,_, �' 0a CD "C , o4, Q ar-I m b o w 0 . rn 0 pp w 5, O 0 O 0 . ,. • 5 ° V F'` ON 'om ` E 0wOC oME 0"ry yR G rn cl). a cDd d O nti V p ti w Ppt, a, w w G O g cD Do w CD N pq wAo, 7 o D .0 bt 8.oEr CA ND 7. ed • . w o o i ° CD G A ti C) m Z. M b r• r Cb.' r t" N N ' O � r r N ON 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 VO r 0 O O °1,1 0 0 0 O O O O 0 O O p O O 4, .°A W W 0 O 00 0 0 Oa, °Q. CO V CIl N Cl 0 O O, Cr, V l0 N i i i 5.- 8 CVT a, W W V .0 .Dy .0 'b O b b .y 0 0 ? 0.2 co C?D .b b co ii co m ° d b w m n w 01 ww w Dbb b bbb b b b o 0 0 0 C701 b co co m co co co Co 0 0 o CD . , , 0- a aa a o0 o 0da o a a a, a, 0 0 w WWN F+ 4, r r � r , ' ' V V V V V V ., \ F\., r V V V ' V V CT 0, 0, Cr, CT CT CT CT CT CT 0, C \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ V V V V V V V V V V V \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Gl N N N N N N N N N N N O O 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 O O .J V-C r r " r r r r -+V V 21+ V V V V V V V V J J V - J 0, 61 CT 61 Ol 6, A W N O l0 co V Ol Lr A CA N W N N - '- co cri co , y so WAD o G w p, c'i, p n CD rn' 5' w Pt CD o CD G :? ti .0-.. O o w° -I' ° W rJ O O ..- 2 "i O Z • • '.. OO a AO 0 pO a' 0- V w .ON R' g. 01. Is• zz w . 1.C° V Co n5 O m � � N. oay °° ed ou N e `� ° Oo o . 00oO G CD Ow WDjVao VD o ,° 0O to ? " :; � � ° o0o ao � a 0? o ',y OD CD o ° f o ° N y4 a D O o b7 co a4 cn cra,a 00 N a W N a s 0 f rte' o a VW G ° .. O * w o Cn o� CD CD o, O CO w . tiy ° O w - w cN Co C A., 0 P0 el' oo° Co 41m. n ° OO t 0' p , - ' ° w° CD rna, co • r o "il ro y po ° y ro 1 z Z y ..0 � % b • V m (o 0 C ( m Fr ° h co r-re., m 'ti0 .1 co it 0 0y ti � eD m roO coM Oo co et aQro ro y C et 0 " �b o (o � mm b cm et it 0.o CrO cii ft cn EL. O. ti" w tdb 0) fio ao .0w II, CD N b bN b 0'd ° Ob q w 0 on . cn• ON CJ C•,° aw v Co w y P y G ' a 2 ' ci4 ti . G. 0V . - p,d 0y . 0 'CI 00 NLP °A � N 00 C0 ' 0 - wC 'a, N otio "' E •W' l''' o Goo. 9m e. o7 ° � 'd 0'. ' ° •C Cn b0 m ° WCd d" p ry. b CID o O C7 . � 7 b w b4 " C 'd y '-' T'Ul .1 !-11 d 0pO CM °o S oo 'b ; ° fae. H . .-na, w m moo � CD fa)o CDobb roq wti0 c, b Cn`yw �cvb o b a o w cn 5 a Q'' N r. � 0 el' ' Yn NDD ' SN ° M n JO D O N CD 'w 1 CD -. p2 ti o O CD 'b rD 't • CD ocD "' 2 FtJ p co 0' pn .y p N D •'bCO . � H. 0 ,.., ',d O • cb NoO a'4 oo G 2. o u coco 2 ° aoa °. a ono • O d O co tsw N . IL' ° � � �EOm � xO o o w .o �� ; ooay � rt0 "g w ti CQ .z N V • m5 O OO �. O "0° wGAcorO EateW' �CO-� p a � o O a O0wv G Cwaw � VCO 0 . ^'. < IQ O bb�5R. � vo o oo � �: ' ri y, . G G. O CD a rr CD N7 'do a' , • D °, ti 7' �+ ?� 0 N 'do w ''* etq b co O C (D < .i Ho 0.`C CGq 0 0cwp▪ 0 o • o , O d S Cn O Y VD K pO o• .Y 0 Cno0H. Co 0 p 0 w CD EG, N ° a 7 ° ' r , Po ° m ° Mo0 " G oo 7 wONo O OtN to D .. r D co ; "coU , yP rf) �ry'd b 0 G 50o He' wC5NG N' VO " N � ' '* w ;a CD pN q y wD P.o w C G ° y .C Go O FL L -t 00 rp[ y > p.n nN• N rt r 'ti p r r r N "'d O O O r ND O O O O V O� O O O O0Vo 0 Oi Op O O0 O0 O O O o Op O oO 0 O V V° O O 00001 p .0 .0 00 � 01V ? acoO co O0\ W .d V. b no CCD .1 c, ? CCD m b w w m b N bbw , , P, 0 '0 w'U b T '0 'U wb 0 0 0 bbb o 0 co 0 CDm CDCCD CD co m CD CD CD 04 o• a- a a a 0" CD C a o (D CD a 0 a a a N \ � ' 00 CO N N CO W W \ F\, \ V V r - r rcri " r V V V V Vai V V V V a+ O, a, a, O\ C' CT ON ON a' C' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ - \ V V V V V V V V V V V \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N IC IC N N N N N N N N G1 0 0 O o O O O O O O O N S S S F- S . F+ . S F- V V V V V V V V V V V . . os, W �I J J V J W N _ O l0 W .I c„, ,. W - . - - U1 N N D w 4 w cc)G 'zi ,o7 ''7l y 0 • W0 m P m '-G dG Pi aJ w N Ai 0 0 cn in' 0 CD Cn 0 — '=i w o GI ° 0' n1 °� w �. 0 CO w Cn ~O• ,-3 0 0 .•Cin O col f] ch rn 0 7y C)0 p o• o rn w cn o r � i 11 U7 0' t" ry �k "�' N 00 '�y1/7 [*D N r, U7 ra o 00 cn h7 w fD w 0 O c" C+7 CD C=7 0 0 '�' O 0+Cu p 0 N PC' d W N p, O 00 �O C)�i N C Lr '71 r 000C1 to � ° p8 Dao°1 co p o o 0 n V o �. 0° �n° „ 7o W :o O kg, ° N °oma oo •Arn '�N noo a �� c°n � "-' a '"3 tt 0 ' N 'T N ? i O c, 0 cn O , oo bp O co 00 N 4 0 O0o 5i) 50 M0O 0 ,zy V N ""' �, O Co t" w ., by C C" b m K 1 K CD 4 AD aPo y4 coo CD C/3 ro ro ro �! w .0 '-3 w b w '':i N N G 0 n P m 0 (-) w P b G cc) '-i cn O 0 W d 9 N y o .11 n 9 2 G p ' b y to p.o C ^ aGa a s G w �* b b 0 0 pR 0 O G CD tz7 ., to tw1 rm 0 'U" p•co d CD y 0- rte» 5 c ,1 CCD Cl) A, rt `'y N, p O 0 `jJ N b y Cn d (o �' ""+ l7 b ti �. m L12 '0 m m (ID; b o 5.'0 b rn p G `1 tii so o O ,n p�p� �i p'y <o ,�_,, cOi, O o 0 O 9a, c, �, o 4 ccoo p' g4 o 0' Cl �y ,b rG+ cyo C. P .-1- v,•0 0 ..n �*' ' rte+ a'CD O. D CrA r+(4 til �,cn rn w •+ c� G to + p �, 7, co co o b o o G' G o cn 0 a p G• m OA 0 n� w o a s m w Cl r1 'jJ Cl o b w 0 co •, b p '-'' 0 CD Cio 0 o ca, w w O y t7,CCD p'd ,-t o w' ,, g' w_ G E.G_ a C/11CC o' Q n ,.�. O A' Y'p, m O d 4 'd• tr o p `y'05. 09 cD 0 O r•. r' ' 'c7 P� p o to p= ,+ 0 C 5 0 2 T p O ac ,w_,y r O F °. O m N N 'n "d c .J 0 r''' 0 a.0 A y 5. c) 0 y 0 m as p p tip, 0 �• .,,a, ,,, 0 m x n C.u, C� 0 0 CD C7 a. o co co „• o m D 0- m 0 0 �) Cw as Vi' p m 0 r•r 0,0 y co 0 o C :r..o rn �° CD 0 G m p a.m P, E p 0 ° A, 'U a. 0 y y o •O CD a, 0. < ,ti 0'M m y m w co o Fn' `p owc w 5 C~• a G o 0 w p'.C] y rr cp P w __ p, m � o, U M o S. + b ro 0 cn ,A�0 co 0 m o �. 0 c w G w co o 6 r•: m (D o G'CD 0- DD., c�i w a'0 rn w p G 00.K CD ' N O CD w O N rA+ P-.0 CD O 0 0 co cn 0 m .0 '0 0 G p. •,,0 o G 0 G o 0 c� ty Clo E. fp Pr G Oa y b b m d .+ y G+ 0 G CA �-" N 0. 0 0 �' 0 N.••< ypp� vOi A07 r0+ N lCD '�' g-7 p O ti 0 b w C fi •s.yyr ' ,[* 0 ,�0.co • Cn co ti ',:J N d N L�. C] d cp a.CDD y o `.�i cyo CA. r+ M. F 2. 0 ry N P, CQ w m zT w >y [.° °± m AD CD G cD o O CD -, cp •w - o 0 N C. . r0+ a'�. 0- - co•AA) a. r+ o rA. w 0 p, o'• O O •y of �• y 4 cm Ag N N N N N N N N N 0 O O 0 O O O O r r O O O 0 0 O 00 o O O O O O o o o oo O OC 0 0 0 O o o W O - Co V rn CO .ly 'Cl 'Cl 'Cl 'Cl 'Cl 'Cl y 'Cl M Y •Y Y 0CD CD CD CD CD CD T CD" CD'Cl 'Cl 'Cl b 'Cl 'o .0 '0 'Cl 'Cl '0 CDCD CD CD CD CD CD CDCD a a a a, a a a a a G N N N N N - \ no N w w V VV V VV V V 1 - \ - N , N , , , Cl N 00O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 V V V V V V V V V 00 CO CO 00 00 CO W N -' O l0 CO V O, 01 A s A W A N N N - N N D co H w wU 1 cn co •C 0 `C o O O cip Co co w O O w G o a o �' ti ti' w cn• cn cn CO c '11 o cn o a o• N u, o' - V Ca cn V - 0 C w Co 0.0 w0 0 'b cn c7 Po 0 H on V �y G7 0 ti -P h7 w cn N N 0 b7 0 Q, 5 0, G . O cn V,W V,rt NPO .Oy 0. 0 'ID 0 0 CVaa '+ CO cn a o w Cn 0cr, CD CO 'ted c ''O W '9 0 c4 0 0 O' 9: W w 0 0PP O 00 V� 0, 0 0 . W 0 N N 00 0 0 x Cl CD. O O d O W O 0 - o C CO d 00 0 O V 0 • * cn * O C21 - n °O �. '�7 Co Cts 0 w N w O O co °O 0' 0• w 0, h SD cn °\ 041 o 0 0 'o'^ ik o 0 B 0 o 0 o. Co �• d 0 0 0 I* o' c,co . ccnn H V 1* N :'y 4 td Z V CD n 00 ii It eo7 tila4 b o n co it na b n g o ° m iv r. n0 o w o to F 0aCD o 0. o. -^0 "tz a. ° 0- ro °,d C CD 00co 0 CD coC '0 CD n. o O 0 CD CD 'd '"� •OD cyb O . E 'b w „, o, o " oo D0cn , X5. 9 w t7 0 � d .o ° m 0 o o °• h7 Cao o p P O ° ' „CD G a 'd o' �: a a OGa 'd O 0 O �00s.. 0 p. G r * V+ O w a P a m a' Cif '' co by a Col N `C (D ° O my CD b O 'w'� CD n '7 g N "6' :7.5: cro -Y N 'l7 a G N ° C7 15) O 'b G V O ti 0 O by •A p �' O �, b C by W '' �. o G ti co 0 aro • a O CD a, w o K O G co O .. 0 G.hd :+ 0'cn P P R '» 0 h7 ti we m * G 0 C y cn �' 0 CD 0 a. O o w. co o b P v0 r ca 0 + co E. ,,'fD o Er G o, 0-co �' 0:0 by co 0 co h7 p0q hi cD G' co d o cD 0 �' .� a w m cY w o w 0 co 0c .-ti 0' 0 pr M 0. '.CD Fii o ..+ „. ..... ti 0q 0 O 5. o C, rCy vi 4 'G OQ CD w ra, w w "hi o p O 10 M o fwiy 0• 0,';40 ,.00 o ed • 0 t0 a`p , 0 0 0 ti cn o 0 CM o G c0<o c y 0 00 O o 0 0 h:, G " d p O p' ° �'by O O Po d p k a r 'd O O C 'Y w M a' ti n fD (D w N 0 O P .y.. rr w .y w �+ w cn by w u0. w 0 p 0' m co co + co m 0 ti !� O C w 0 ', 0 0 rn O „Pl.' EL' 0 w 0 c9 0 0 m cD , r+ a CD 0 Cn �• 0 Uq p Q, Gy r0* CO Uq Cm O a N cn• y CZ N a'. rr lD �.• y O - 0' G b7 ,'J,� A.A. p N ' rr�� °� 0 w a c�D wi 0 0 G o a 'O-r n, �0j' ,,b 0 ���j•' Cn 0q hd a 0 "w..t' 'y CDD a.$'cn CD w CO ti H o co `H O '°'D '0'+ O '0+ ON o ti 0 0 cr a • K, y (D .7L�' H., 0 s 0 a CD 0 P. C p by a oO p, fD CD �. ° o , 0 o m 2.00 CbD tzt . 0•`a ds0' _,o G O m vrn M o) ap ti K . l+, o �. G 0 N '1 oq O 0 CD 0 0 0 ° * bCD cn a`= 0 0 x E °' w o O 0 b w • rn ▪ CDco Cif v ° o wac4. Zm ac w amp", m a2 - o .to-q o o °: a cocc, a x °= 0 o , r'• a �. O O 2 Cn 0 O �: A •C '1R. CD rt CD Ort N w CD OQ• A, td p co O 4 n -• 0: a '. 0p� 0 a . .t 0 0. 0CD w a pc0 5 CD 0 o m c- II rD- P • 0. 0. 0 0 x '-t 't 0 OP •J M cm r r r r N C" C" C t" C, ro" N N N 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 0 V V V V l-' .. 0 0 0 0 V V V V V O000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � 0' W t~n nc - CO CO N V0 �+ Cn CO V COW •A N 00 CCD CCD Cl CD CD CD CSD CD CD ? 'r, PP w CO0 CO CO CCO CO 'O CN CO CO CO "Cl by CO by CO CO 17 "0 CD co co co co CD CD CD CD 0 a a a 0. a a a a a CD a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 p p o 0 01 Co Co cn W N N \., \ \ \ \cn \ cn W " f., 8 8 \ V V V V V V V V V V O' 0' 0, 0' a, O, a, a, O\ a, VV V V V •V N N N N N N N N N N G-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V V V V V V V V V V f J ' 01+ OOOOOQQO O O O C m V C A ✓- T n W N — 0 UJ CO V T l!i A W N O •, -P 41, W 4 N CA 4 N > C/1 ! H n7 H H w H ° HCA w C C 0 C7 0 co 0 w o o o cn o :° CO �'° 0 ° .-1 -0 • V W - W 0 0 C 01 u) i v .17 cn '71 cn 0 ,�7 I°-1,Cn * w O o "�I 0• W w p n 0 O b r. f] o rn 0 0 ,0 CD N ° N �. VD G7 O W Coy 01--, ti N w L' ? N00 1z7 t.H O O o D O ` 0 0 ' ° co 00 0*N - 00 p v, txl Oco CDa0n0 Cao ° N cCa. a • w O 00 • 2I ac • 0 w �U Gn cri a. N a.0- ., O ,Ti 'i 7 TJ tic . r. cm OD o ° o o . VN (Ti N , ° N •' O ° p. p ' ° o � w * °° , i0 ' . o Oc01 nMM 8 O cm CA I it d 0 b 0, n 5 ti o V ° ' ri . p. rt z z a co 0: �' °+ c,n 0N CO CI; K b m m y01 IA tiz cr cf til m o CA fg 1 m y P. t) `° c :r a- CD 1,I ° _ .11 w g g _ b fDd co cn CD 0 0 n• d al .-.•a `n a b �y o c ° g ao '.0 pb p a a a K G] 0 b v 0 w o CD N In ° C� - .w, w 08 ° a, 0 0o 8 ° �• CD y d d .Oi,CMO G. (n .r.-. :* w M 'C 'tet '�.' fD fD 00 0 p P 0 0 Ib CD + w o CD o o �i rn 0 o �?cD O b a, a.0 o: K °0 ,°oo ° 0 •--, b � G 0CM o N s °r+ • °° 0° 0 ° o av8o w ° ci, - m ° '^ CD , o mrrq I-f Cn cn CD 0 Ol 0 C r' O 4. cA `y w p, E. CD O O '.CD O m G CH,- oa `i' as °. w a m �. ed o r. o r�. a 1-L ch n . wca,N o w b o c G CI 0 $. R w < ° wy CD I-'a w 0 5'3. oc 0 c� a ocn y1$ 00 go 00 o ow b °' d - c°ocn aa. i. .,,° 0 b CA b o t. 0- m H a'w °y w �,° v°, m ,�.� m co Q' 0 "0 ti Z CCD b °+ a A) t� H ' ° CD - + to d o 0•o' co 0 a �� N 8 vas ro r r r %r 0 rr rI r N N 1, t+ N O 0, 0 0O 0 0 O OO 0 0 0V V V O iv i-L 0 0 N '0 '0 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '0 V N 01 W W so i-, o V o V ny h7 -° •C7 N W - N W 0) cf CD co co I I I I I I b b .0 b b 'ti h7 b .0 CD CD CD CD fa) CD T .0 .0 "0 'b w P, N A, w 'wU- O 0 0 0 "0 '1 '' ''U' "0 '0 Cv CY O. 0- o' 0- 0-' 0- CD CD CD coCD CD co co CD co CD co co co CD a a a a a a a a a a 8 p p o 0 a o o O o ch CT CT Q, cl C 0 0 0w Co p, W W S r F N N 0 •~A W V V V V V V ~ V V V V N N N N N N N N N F) O O O o O O O o O O ✓ V V V V V V V V V GrecoSherry From: Michele M. Gowdy <mmgowdy@napleslaw.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 6, 2017 9:34 AM To: GrecoSherry Subject: June 27 BCC Meeting q . D • Good morning, Sherry. Thank you for your time on the phone. COW1411 'n Bruce needs a half hour appointment to discuss three things: 1) Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment kd 2) County Barn Road PUD 3) (and if on the Agenda)Vanderbilt Commons PUD& Growth Management Plan Amendments. Bruce will be the only attendee. Let me know if you need anything else. Michele M. Gowdy Real Estate Assistant CHEFFYPASSIDOMO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. ATTOfN£T!AT LAW 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239) 261-9300 telephone (239) 261-9782 facsimile mmgowdy(c�napleslaw.com www.napleslaw.com This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain information that is confidential or privileged.If this e-mail is not addressed to you(or if you have any reason to believe that it is not intended for you),please notify the sender by return e-mail or by telephoning us(collect)at 239-261-9300 and delete this message immediately from your computer.Any unauthorized review,use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the law firm. 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Bruce Anderson, Cheffy Passidomo re:Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment, County Barn Road PUD, (and if on the Agenda) Vanderbilt Commons PUD & Growth Management Plan Amendments Location: your office Start: Wed 6/21/2017 10:30 AM End: Wed 6/21/2017 11:00 AM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny 1 GrecoSherry From: Michele M. Gowdy <mmgowdy@napleslaw.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 6, 2017 9:34 AM r • To: GrecoSherry Subject: June 27 BCC Meeting d)" ' tv F Good morning, Sherry. Thank you for your time on the phone. Cre eK Bruce needs a half hour appointment to discuss three things: 1) Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment 2) County Barn Road PUD 3) (and if on the Agenda)Vanderbilt Commons PUD &Growth Management Plan Amendments. Bruce will be the only attendee. Let me know if you need anything else. Michele M. Gowdy Real Estate Assistant CHEFFYPASSIDOMO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. ATTOINtY8 At LAW 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239) 261-9300 telephone (239) 261-9782 facsimile mmgowdynapleslaw.com www.napleslaw.com This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain information that is confidential or privileged.If this e-mail is not addressed to you(or if you have any reason to believe that it is not intended for you),please notify the sender by return e-mail or by telephoning us(collect)at 239-261-9300 and delete this message immediately from your computer.Any unauthorized review,use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the law firm. 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Black Bear Ridge - Carrie Abrams and Bev Smith Location: your office Start: Mon 6/12/2017 2:00 PM End: Mon 6/12/2017 2:30 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny Wolf Creek ?? 630-244-4800 She is meeting with McDaniel at 1:00 PM 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Bruce Anderson, Cheffy Passidomo re: Wolf Creek Insubstantial PUD Amendment, County Barn Road PUD, (and if on the Agenda) Vanderbilt Commons PUD & Growth Management Plan Amendments Location: your office Start: Wed 6/21/2017 10:30 AM End: Wed 6/21/2017 11:00 AM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny 1 GrecoSherry From: GrecoSherry Sent: Wednesday,June 21, 2017 2:05 PM To: Leo OchsI & Cc: BrockMaryJo Subject: FW: Sereno Grove Further Update Sere rt O As per your conversation with Commissioner Taylor (see below email) GroVe-- fe.- Semj freco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 SherryGreco@colliergov.net From:Sheri Roberts [mailto:roberts.sheri@att.net] Sent: Wednesday,June 21, 2017 1:28 PM To:TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Cc: GrecoSherry<SherryGreco@colliergov.net> Subject:Sereno Grove Further Update Commissioner Taylor, As a follow-up to my June 12, 2017 email to you, yesterday afternoon WCI/Lennar's requested changes to the Sereno Grove plat and construction plans ("PPL") were approved through the "insubstantial change" process (application #20170001891), despite the significance of the changes. Under Sec. 250-58 of the Code of Laws we should have 30 days from the June 20, 2017 decision to file an appeal. We advised county staff that we intend to do so. Despite this, county staff (Matt McLean) advised us that the PPL will be on the agenda to be considered by the Board of County Commissioners next Tuesday, June 27, 2017, essentially shortening our 30-day appeal period on the ICP to less than one week. We have advised Mr. McLean that we feel that scheduling the PPL for next Tuesday is premature and potentially prejudices our due process rights. However, we have received no indication that he intends to change it. Can you ask the staff why they would not continue the PPL until after the BCC, as the Board of Zoning Appeals, considers the ICP appeal? If the decision to approve the ICP is overturned, the PPL is not ready for consideration by the BCC. In the past week, I also learned additional information about the redesign of the wastewater and water distribution systems that was proposed and permitted to be accomplished as an "insubstantial change." WCI/Lennar now plans to run the water and sewer connections all the way from Livingston Road which is approximately 1/4 mile west of their western property line (not counting the access road), rather than use the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs that are approximately 12.5 feet to the east, as originally planned. The changes also include: (1) using an unlooped water system which can result in poor water quality, (2) a very long distance between the water connection and the further points in Sereno Grove which will likely result in poor water pressure, (3) a privately-managed sanitary sewer system that includes an extremely long force main and low flow, and (4) the removal of the requirement for a standby generator for the wastewater pumping station, which removes any protection against failure. According to the updated opinion of WCI/Lennar's own 1 GrecoSherry From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 8:32 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh • Attachments: Ltr to Commissioner Taylor 2.7.17.pdf;Attachment 1 - Sereno Grove Plan 1.11.17.pdf; Attachment 2 - Sereno Grove Alternative Plan 1.23.17.pdf; Attachment 3 - Key to Markings on Sereno Grove Alternative Plan 1.23.17.pdf; Attachment 4 - Sereno Grove Plan in Context 1.11.17.pdf Commissioner Taylor: My neighbors and I would like to raise with you our concerns regarding the "Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh" development in Naples. Please see the attached letter and the attachments referenced in that letter. We would appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss. Thank you for your consideration. Kind regards, Sheri Roberts Roberts.sheri@att.net Mobile: (248) 630-5194 1 Attachment 3 Key to Markings on Sereno Grove Alternative Plan 1. The proposed internal roadway and lot line relocations are shown in heavy black lines. 2. The sewer lift station previously located on the north side of the internal roadway to the southwest of Lot 61 is now on the south side of the roadway, so as to have the lift station be located on the west end of Dry Detention #3 where shown;that is labelled and depicted in black. 3. That lift station relocation allowed this portion of the roadway itself to be moved northward slightly by—15+' on the western end to—10' on the eastern end of that curved roadway section shown again in heavy black lines,to allow further separation from the northern or side yard of the Roberts' lot. 4. The blue lines reflect the location and cross-sections we believe would mitigate the impacts as best as possible with the 10'of landscaping to be located on the east side of the eight (8')foot high wall for relocated lots 13 &47 as shown in Cross-Sections A-A, with the wall on the top of the perimeter berm. 5. The same color lines and 8'wall height are shown on top of the perimeter berm as depicted for Cross-section B-B to the north of the Roberts' home. 6. The dwelling units to be located on lots 13 and 47 are sought to be limited to one story height for their habitable space; and 7. The red lines generally reflect the existing facilities as presently proposed for the location of the internal roadways and lot lines,for perspective. ry , 6 4 il \ Z V _ I. W Q I I I H \� , Q b ' z u C A g a 11 ( I s` t 1 - . ...____id '' I was 0 . „ • ,-' ------ ——7 111 if 9--- l 1 1 r1 r (/111 \e :a, I t J _ O I I F III CCE- i I 1 —I L-- a p 11 y I I 111 1t /, 1 Z°I s Q v El i —_ t —� .a. T F- Q_ an ii \}, \ 7~'7 sCR ii 5i ,la 1 1 I ., .2 i ,., viliss,\.)11 'r-17 ,-'.„, 1 1 I I o F = N O 1 1 L7,Litt I I / , , 4 v 1 w i ,.. /, 1 i,,, //,/' w z / I 1 � I z° P' --1 < 1 11 r -t- 1 11 k 1 H 7144 1 II °i a �I, „a , F. L d1 1 , "f7 =1- 1� _ der 7.41 x I g r) I) m I 1 1 = 1 i; gi° I i GrecoSherry From: Sheri Roberts <roberts.sheri@att.net> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 7:56 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: GrecoSherry Subject: Sereno Grove Update Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Commissioner Taylor, Once again, I would like to thank you for taking the time to meet with me, my neighbor and the representative of our Wilshire Lakes Homeowners Association ("HOA") on March 20, 2017. Unfortunately, since that date things have not improved with respect to the development known as Sereno Grove at Pelican Marsh. WCI/Lennar continues to refuse to speak to us and now they are seeking approval of changes to their plat and construction plans for Sereno Grove ("PPL") through a process termed an insubstantial change ("ICP"), in order to avoid ever needing to do so (application #20170001891). However, the changes they propose are not "insubstantial;" they involve a complete re-work of the wastewater and water distribution facilities for the PPL. In mid-April, we were advised that management of WCI/Lennar would meet with us to discuss our concerns, and we were asked to contact Rhonda Brewer, their VP of Community Development, to set up a meeting. I called and spoke to Ms. Brewer on April 19, 2017, and provided her with my availability: three full days and one half-day from April 25 through May 2. She thanked me for being so flexible, but then never contacted me to arrange a meeting. Instead, WCI/Lennar was working behind the scenes to reconfigure their PPL, a revised version of which was filed with the county on May 24 along with their request for an ICP. As a reminder and by way of background with respect to the ICP, in February WCI/Lennar's agent contacted our HOA President to discuss WCI/Lennar's need for easements to tie into the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs for water and sewer, since no such easements exist. Use of the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs was assumed in WCI/Lennar's initial plans as it would be the most cost-effective location and alignment to provide the necessary water and sewer connections for Sereno Grove. Our HOA President advised the representative that she wanted to include me and my neighbors in the discussion so that we could resolve all issues at the same time. Initially, they agreed and a meeting was set for February 13. However, on or about February 3 when WCI/Lennar's counsel advised ours that WCI "did not see any benefit to discussing" our request to address the location of the roadway in their plan, WCI/Lennar's agent canceled that February 13 meeting. In connection with their current application for an ICP, WCI/Lennar has significantly reconfigured their plan, spending time and money to do so, to avoid speaking to our HOA about those stub-outs and, therefore, avoiding the need to address the positioning of their roadway so close to my home and the homes of my neighbors. In their revised PPL, they intend to move the utility connection locations to Livingston Road, which would result in a connection that is approximately 1/4 mile west of their westernmost property line, rather than use the Wilshire Lakes stub-outs which are located approximately 10 feet east of their easternmost property line. They then argue that, because of the time required to obtain the necessary permits to do this, it would create a "considerable economic hardship to the developer" and they propose that the wastewater facilities will now be privately owned and maintained. They claim that this self-imposed hardship entitles them to obtain approval for these changes through the ICP process. It is obvious that their unwillingness to address the positioning of their roadway so close to our homes has nothing to do with either the cost of doing so or the time necessary to re-work their plans. The alternative plan created by our engineer (who we hired and paid) was provided to WCI/Lennar in January; the changes 1 GrecoSherry Subject: WCI Sereno Grove - Dave Bankston, Sheri Roberts Location: bcc conf rm Start: Mon 3/20/2017 10:00 AM End: Mon 3/20/2017 10:30 AM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny 4-5 people Serena Grove at Pelican Marsh 1