Agenda 07/07/2015 Item #17B7/7/2015 173.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to consider amending Ordinance Number 2004 -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 Ordinance
No. 92 -15, as amended, which re- established Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit
Development (PUD), by reducing the maximum number of dwelling units from 10,150 to
8,946; by amending Section 2.06 entitled "Project Density" and Section 2.07 entitled
"Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units "; by amending the market absorption schedule;
by amending Section 3.02 entitled "Maximum Dwelling Units "; by amending Section V, C-
2 Commercial/Professional to provide that the square footage limitation does not apply to
residential dwelling units permitted as part of a mixed use project; and by amending
Section VI, C -3 Commercial/Neighborhood to allow C -3 uses and all types of residential
dwelling units as mixed use or stand alone for the C -3 parcel at the corner of Rattlesnake -
Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive; by adding Section XV, Deviations, from the Land
Development Code to increase the number of signs and the size of signs; amending Exhibit
H, the PUD Master Plan to move a C -3 parcel to the east of Lely Grand Drive and adjust
acreages to decrease residential uses and increase commercial uses by 6f acres; and
providing an effective date. The subject property consists of 2,892 acres located between
U.S. 41 and Rattlesnake- Hammock Road west of C.R. 951, in Sections 21, 22, 27, 28, 33 and
34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida [PUDA- PL20140002040].
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) review staff's findings and
recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission
(CCPC) regarding the above referenced petition and render a decision regarding this Planned
Unit Development petition; and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes
and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Board of County
Commissions (BCC) consider an application for an amendment to the existing PUD zoned
project known as the Lely Resort PUD, to allow individual commercial uses to exceed the
existing 20,000 square -foot limitation for stand -alone individual commercial developments in the
C -2 designated portion of the PUD; and to add multi - family dwelling to the permitted uses in the
C -3 designated portion of the PUD and allow stand alone residential or mixed uses; and allow an
additional access point into this tract from Rattlesnake Hammock Road; propose sign deviations
to allow flexibility for the PUD for signage; and to revise Exhibit H, Master Land Use Plan for
the PUD to move; and to also reduce the number of residential dwelling units.
The subject property, as noted above and in the agent provided application, is a 2,892.5 + /- acre
development with the zoning designation of Planned Unit Development (PUD), specifically in
Ordinance 92 -15, recorded on March 23, 1992, as amended. The current ordinance/PUD permits
a variety of uses including 10,150 dwelling units, 820,000 square feet of commercial uses, 350
hotel rooms, and educational facilities.
Packet Page -2649-
7/7/2015 17. B.
This PUDA petition proposed several changes that are summarized below (taken from the
narrative statement provided in the agent provided application and revised during the review
process):
Proposed changes:
• Allow individual commercial uses to exceed the existing 20,000 square -foot limitation
for stand -alone individual commercial developments in the C -2 and C -3 designated
portion of the PUD and providing specific additional regulations for restaurants location
in the C -2 and C -3 portions of the PUD.
• Add multi - family dwelling to the permitted uses in the C -3 designated portion of the
PUD.
• Add an additional access point into the C -3 designated portion of the PUD from
Rattlesnake Hammock Road.
• Revise Exhibit H, Master Land Use Plan for the PUD; and reduce the number of
residential dwelling units.
Proposed Deviations to LDC:
• The introduction of seven new deviations from LDC provisions are described in detail on
page 7 in the staff report.
FISCAL IMPACT: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to
help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used
to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan
as needed to maintain adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in
order to meet the requirements of concurrency management, the developer of every local
development order approved by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated
Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project in accordance with Chapter 74 of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a
building permit include building permit review fees. Finally, additional revenue is generated by
application of ad valorem tax rates, and that revenue is directly related to the value of the
improvements. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria
used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: Future Land Use Element (FLUE):
The subject property is designated Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use
Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). The Urban Mixed
Use District is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non - residential land uses,
including mixed -use developments such as Planned Unit Developments. Certain industrial and
commercial uses are also allowed subject to criteria.
The proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the GMP, and further detail is provided in the
attached staff report. Therefore, zoning staff recommends that the petition be found consistent
with the goals, objective and policies of the overall GMP.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The
CCPC heard this petition on June 4, 2015. By a unanimous vote (6 to 0) with a motion made by
Packet Page -2650-
7/7/2015 17.B.
Commissioner Homiak and seconded by Commissioner Ebert, the CCPC recommended
forwarding this petition to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation
of approval subject to the following limitations:
I . Add section reference to 3.20 section of the PUD Document.
2. The wall on the C -2 parcel shall run from Triangle Boulevard to 25 feet past any
building and to the end of the dumpster location on the north side of the parcel.
3. Deviation 2 shall be for a combined area of signs at 80 square feet.
4. Deviation 1, add that the 90% provision applies to the housing tract that the signage
refers to.
These revisions have been incorporated into the PUD Document that is included in the draft
Ordinance.
No correspondence in opposition to this petition has been submitted for the current proposal; no
one spoke at the CCPC hearing voicing opposition to the project and the CCPC vote was
unanimous. Therefore, this Executive Summary can be placed on the Summary Agenda.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This is an amendment to Ordinance No. 92 -15, as amended, the existing Lely, a resort
Community Planned Unit Development (PUD). The burden falls upon the applicant for the
amendment to prove that the proposal is consistent with all of the criteria set forth below. The
burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), should it consider denial, that
such denial is not arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by
finding that the amendment does not meet one or more of the listed criteria.
Criteria for PUD Amendments
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for
approval or not.
1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development
proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic
and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements,
contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as
they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation
and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained
at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only
after consultation with the County Attorney.
3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies
of the Growth Management Plan.
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which
conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on
design, and buffering and screening requirements.
Packet Page -2651-
7/7/2015 17.B.
5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve
the development?
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of
assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and
private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to
accommodate expansion.
8. Consider: Conformity with 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.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies_ and
future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan?
10. Will the proposed PUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use
pattern?
11. Would the requested PUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district
unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts?
12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to
existing conditions on the property proposed for change.
13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the
proposed amendment necessary.
14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood?
15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create
types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak
volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction
phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety?
16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem?
17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas?
18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations?
Packet Page -2652-
7/7/2015 17.B.
20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege
to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ( "reasonably ") be used in
accordance with existing zoning? (a "core" question...)
22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county?
23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site
alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range
of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification.
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed PUD rezone on
the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of
service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and
implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code
ch.] 06, art.Il], as amended.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the PUD rezone request that
the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the
public health, safety, and welfare?
The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the
written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive
Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the
BCC hearing as these items relate to these criteria. This item has been approved as to form and
legality, and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval (HFAC)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendations of the CCPC including the
conditions noted in the approval motion and further recommends that the Board of County
Commissioners approves the request subject to the attached Ordinance.
Prepared by: Michael Sawyer, Project Manager, Zoning Division, Growth Management
Department.
Attachments: 1) Staff Report
2) Ordinance
3) Legal Ad
4) Back -up information; Due to the size of this document, a web link has been
provided for viewing at:
httn: / /vAw",.collier ,2ov. net /ftn /AE endaJulvO7l 5/ GrowthM2mt /9C- PUDA- PL20140002040-
Lely %20Resort%20PUD.pdf
Packet Page -2653-
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 17.17.8.
7/7/2015 17.B.
Item Summary: Recommendation to consider amending Ordinance Number 2004 -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
Ordinance No. 92 -15, as amended, which re- established Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit
Development (PUD), by reducing the maximum number of dwelling units from 10,150 to 8,946;
by amending Section 2.06 entitled "Project Density" and Section 2.07 entitled "Permitted
Variations of Dwelling Units "; by amending the market absorption schedule; by amending
Section 3.02 entitled "Maximum Dwelling Units "; by amending Section V, C -2
Commercial /Professional to provide that the square footage limitation does not apply to
residential dwelling units permitted as part of a mixed use project; and by amending Section Vl,
C -3 Commercial /Neighborhood to allow C -3 uses and all types of residential dwelling units as
mixed use or stand alone for the C -3 parcel at the corner of Rattlesnake- Hammock Road and
Grand Lely Drive; by adding Section XV, Deviations, from the Land Development Code to
increase the number of signs and the size of signs; amending Exhibit H, the PUD Master Plan to
move a C -3 parcel to the east of Lely Grand Drive and adjust acreages to decrease residential
uses and increase commercial uses by 6± acres; and providing an effective date. The subject
property consists of 2,892 acres located between U.S. 41 and Rattlesnake- Hammock Road west
of C.R. 951, in Sections 21, 22, 27, 28, 33 and 34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and
Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida [PUDA- PL20140002040].
Meeting Date: 7/7/2015
Prepared By
Name: SawyerMichael
Title: Project Manager, Growth Management Department
6/10/2015 3:03:11 PM
Approved By
Name: PuigJudy
Title: Operations Analyst, Growth Management Department
Date: 6/15/2015 4:59:10 PM
Packet Page -2654-
7/7/2015 17.B.
Name: PuigJudy
Title: Operations Analyst, Growth Management Department
Date: 6/16/2015 9:48:30 AM
Name: BosiMichael
Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning, Growth Management Department
Date: 6/17/2015 9:22:42 AM
Name: BellowsRay
Title: Manager - Planning, Growth Management Department
Date: 6/17/2015 4:47:43 PM
Name: AshtonHeidi
Title: Managing Assistant County Attorney, CAO Land Use/Transportation
Date: 6/18/2015 3:00:22 PM
Name: CasalanguidaNick
Title: Deputy County Manager, County Managers Office
Date: 6 /21/2015 10:39:17 AM
Name: AshtonHeidi
Title: Managing Assistant County Attorney, CAO Land Use/Transportation
Date: 6/22/2015 3:10:57 PM
Name: lsacksonMark
Title: Division Director - Corp Fin & Mgmt Svc, Office of Management & Budget
Date: 6/22/2015 3:20:53 PM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney,
Date: 6/24/2015 1:46:48 PM
Name: CasalanguidaNick
Title: Deputy County Manager, County Managers Office
Date: 6/25/2015 3:57:18 PM
Packet Page -2655-
7/7/2015 17.B.
AGENDA ITEfy, z,-%.
Coil�er County
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE: MAY 21, 2015
SUBJECT: PUDA- PL20140002040: LELY RESORT, PUD
PROPERTY OWNER & APPLICANT /AGENT:
Property Owner /Applicant: Agents:
Stock Development, LLC Alexis Crespo, AICP Richard Yovanovich, Esq.
2647 Professional Circle, Waldrop Engineering, P.A. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
Suite 1201 28100 Bonita Grande Dr, 4001 Tamiami Trail North,
Naples, Fl 34119 Bonita Springs, Fl 34135 Naples, F134103
The C -3 parcel at the corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive is owned by Stock
Development, LLC., and the C -2 parcel along US 41 is owned by Stock Development Tract 4, LLC. There
are thousands of owners in this PUD.
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is asking the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) to consider an
application for an amendment to the existing PUD zoned project known as the Lely Resort PUD,
to allow individual commercial uses to exceed the existing 20,000 square foot limitation for
stand -alone individual commercial developments in the C -2 designated portion of the PUD; and
to add multi - family dwelling to the permitted uses in the C -3 designated portion of the PUD and
allow stand alone residential or mixed uses; and allow an additional access point into this tract
from Rattlesnake Hammock Road; propose sign deviations to allow flexibility for the PUD for
signage; and to revise Exhibit H, Master Land Use Plan for the PUD to move; and to also reduce
the number of residential dwelling units.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property, consisting of 2,892.5 + /- acres, is located to the west of Collier Boulevard
(CR 951), east of Tamiami Trail East (US 41), and south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road, within
Sections 21 -22, 27 -28, and 33 -34, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 3, Township
51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County Florida.
(See location map on the following page)
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 1 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2656-
7/7/2015 17.B.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The subject property, as noted above and in the agent provided application, is a 2,892.5 + /- acre
development with the zoning designation of Planned Unit Development (PUD), specifically in
Ordinance 92 -15, recorded on March 23, 1992, as amended. The current ordinance /PUD permits
a variety of uses including 10,150 dwelling units, 820,000 square feet of commercial uses, 350
hotel rooms, and educational facilities.
This PUDA petition proposed several changes that are summarized below (taken from the
narrative statement provided in the agent provided application and revised during the review
process):
Proposed changes:
• Allow individual commercial uses to exceed the existing 20,000 square foot limitation for
stand -alone individual commercial developments in the C -2 and C -3 designated portion
of the PUD and providing specific additional regulations for restaurants location in the C-
2 and C -3 portions of the PUD.
• Add multi- family dwelling to the permitted uses in the C -3 designated portion of the
PUD.
• Add an additional access point into the C -3 designated portion of the PUD from
Rattlesnake Hammock Road.
• Revise Exhibit H, Master Land Use Plan for the PUD; and reduce the number of
residential dwelling units.
Proposed Deviations to LDC:
• The introduction of seven new deviations from LDC provisions are described in detail on
page 7 of this staff report.
Because this PUD is already partially developed, the petitioner cannot prepare a new PUD
document using the latest format, e.g., Exhibits A -F rather than sections. To do so could create
non - conformities in the existing development. Instead the petitioner is providing the proposed
changes in a strike thru/underline format, showing the new information in underlined text and
showing the text to be removed in a strike thru format. As noted above, the petitioner is seeking
approval of seven deviations. These deviations are discussed later in this report. The proposed
changes reduce the number of dwelling units from 10,150 dwelling units to 8,946 dwelling units
for a reduction in density from 3.5 +/- dwelling units per acre to 3.1 +/- dwelling units per acre.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: The Rattlesnake Hammock Road ROW, then several developed residential parcels with
zoning designations of Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Residential Multi- Family (RMF-
6); specifically from west to east along Rattlesnake Hammock Road, the Mandalay PUD, then
the RMF -6 district, then the Shadowwood PUD, and then the Naples Lake County.
East: The Collier Boulevard ROW, then numerous developed and undeveloped parcels with
zoning designations of Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD), Planned Unit
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 3 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13-15)
Packet Page -2658-
7/7/2015 17. B.
Development (PUD), Travel Trailer - Recreational Vehicle Campground ( TTRVC), Agriculture
(A), Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), and intermediate Commercial (C-3);
specifically from north to south along Collier Boulevard, the Hacienda Lakes MPUD, then the
Collier Regional Medical Center PUD, then a TTRVC district, then an Agriculture district, then
the Rockedge (RPUD), then another Agriculture district, then the Winding Cypress PUD, then
another Agriculture district, then the Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD, and then the C -3
district.
Southeast: The Tamiami Trail East ROW, and several developed and undeveloped tracts with
zoning designations of General Commercial (C -4) and Intermediate Commercial (C -3);
specifically from southeast to northeast along Tamiami Trail east, the C -4 district and then the C-
3 district.
West: Starting at the southwest corner; the developed County Park with the zoning designations
of Public Use (P) and agriculture (A), then Lely High School with the zoning designation of
Agricultural (A), then developed residences with the zoning designation of Residential Single
Family (RSF -4), then the developed Lely County Club with a zoning designation of (PUD).
Aerial Photo (subject site depiction is approximate)
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 4 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2659-
7/7/2015 W.B.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUEJ:
The subject property is designated Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential
Subdistrict, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use
Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). The Urban Mixed
Use District... is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non - residential land uses,
including mixed -use developments such as Planned Unit Developments. Certain industrial and
commercial uses are also allowed subject to criteria.
The purpose of the Urban Residential Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with
fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are
concentrated. Maximum eligible residential density shall be determined through the Density
Rating System but shall not exceed 16 dwelling units per acre except in accordance with the
Transfer of Development Rights Section of the LDC.
The PUD is approved for ±8,300 multi - family units and 1,850 single - family units, varying each
up to 20% as not to exceed 10,150 total dwelling units. This total dwelling unit maximum may
be exceeded with a fractional reduction in multi - family units if the single - family units exceed
2,220.
The 2014 DRI /PUD Monitoring Report for the Lely Resort PUD indicates 1,866 multi - family
units and 2,060 single- family units have been constructed to date.
The "Resort Center" allows for up to 350 transient lodging rooms of which 200 have been
constructed to date. The Resort Center also allows up to 315,000 sq. ft. of commercial space.
The PUD is approved for up to 820,000 sq. ft. of commercial and office space on 84 acres of
which 251,141 sq. ft. have been constructed to date.
This PUD amendment is to allocate up to 175 of the total approved dwelling units to be
developed at a not before allowed location — in the C -2/C -3 tract fronting US 41.
Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Policy 5.4 requires new developments to be compatible with
the surrounding land area. Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to the Zoning
Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety.
In order to promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of
Collier County, the following FLUE policies shall be implemented for new development and
redevelopment projects, where applicable. Each policy is followed by staff analysis in [bold
text].
Objective 7:
In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places: The
Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, and
adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be
implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable.
Policy 7.1:
The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to
fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without
violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [The northerly C -3
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 5 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2660-
7/7/2015 173.
tract fronts Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Secondary road access is also provided to
Rattlesnake Hammock Road via Grand Lely Drive. The Proposed Plan depicts a single,
direct access to Rattlesnake Hammock Road from northerly C -3 tract, classified as a
collector road in the Transportation Element. The southerly C -2 tract fronts US 41. This
tract does not provide direct connection to US 41 but provides indirect access via Triangle
Boulevard. US 41 is classified as a major arterial road in the Transportation Element.]
Policy 7.2:
The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle
congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [PUD
application, Evaluation Criteria do not address this Policy as it does not apply to the
specifics of the present proposal.]
Policy 7.3:
All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and their
interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land
use type. [PUD application, Evaluation Criteria do not address this Policy as it does not
apply to the specifics of the present proposal.]
Policy 7.4:
The County shall encourage new developments densities, common open spaces, civic facilities
and a range of housing prices and types. [PUD application, Evaluation Criteria do not address
this Policy as it does not apply to the specifics of the present proposal.]
Comprehensive Planning Comments related to requested Deviations
Minor sign deviations are not Comprehensive Planning matters.
Based upon the above analysis, the proposed PUD may be deemed consistent with the
Future Land Use Element.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff
found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element
(CCME) because there are no changes to the current environmental provisions of the PUD.
Transportation Element: The proposed PUD amendment has been found consistent with the
applicable policies of the transportation element.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria
upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code
(LDC) Subsection 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to
as the "PUD Findings "), and Subsection 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning
Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings "), which establish the legal bases to
support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the bases for their
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in tarn use the criteria to
support its action on the rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these
subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning Services Analysis." In addition, staff
offers the following analyses:
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 6 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2661-
7/7/2015 17.B.
Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD
document to address environmental concerns. This project does not require Environmental
Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land
development project reviews as identified in Section 2 -1193 of the Collier County Codes of
Laws and Ordinances.
Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD
document and Master Plan for right -of -way and access issues and is recommending approval
subject to the Transportation Section C of the General Development Commitments contained in
Section XIV of the PUD Ordinance, and the staff recommended condition of approval 1.
Zoning Services Review: FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and
complementary to, the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the requested
uses and intensity on the subject site, the compatibility analysis included a review of the subject
proposal comparing it to surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and
densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building
mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space
and location. Zoning staff is of the opinion that this project will be compatible with and
complementary to, the surrounding land uses.
The development standards contained in the PUD document have not been changed except for
revisions requested in the application and noted above. The residential uses proposed for the C -3
portion of the PUD will utilize the existing single or multi - family development standards as
applicable that are currently provided for in PUD Section Three. The applicant is also reducing
the number of approved dwelling units for the PUD from the current 10,150 dwelling units to
8,946 dwelling units.
Deviation Discussion:
The petitioner is seeking seven deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are
listed in the deviation portion of the PUD.
Deviation 1 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 instead allow a
temporary sign or banner up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and a maximum of 8 feet in
height, subject to approval under the temporary sign permitting process in the LDC. The
temporary sign or banner shall be limited to 14 day duration, not to exceed 28 days per calendar
year. This deviation to apply to the entire PUD.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following:
"The requested deviation will allow for a larger banner sign, which has been previously
approved for other residential communities within the County. The sign will be
temporary, and will undergo the requisite temporary sign permit process in accordance
with Section 5.04.06 "
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 7 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2662-
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this
deviation subject to the following stipulation, the deviation be tied to new construction
activities such that once 90 percent of the new dwelling units are sold the temporary sign
allowance reverts to LDC minimum code standards: staff further finds 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."
Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5,06.02,B.6.b which permits two (2) ground or wall
signs per entrance to the development with a combined sign area of 64 square feet, to allow for
two (2) ground or wall signs at the entrance to residential projects within the PUD with a sign
area of 890 s.f. per sign, and not to exceed the height or length of the wall upon which it is
located. This deviation will apply to the entire PUD.
Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation:
"The applicant is requesting additional sign are to allow for design flexibility and enhance
the branding of the individual communities internal to the Lely Resorts Master planned
development. This deviation request is similar to previous requests approved for master -
planned communities within Collier County. The setbacks will meet LDC standards, thereby
ensuringpublic health, safety and welfare is protected. "
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved. It is noted that several other residential PUD's have been approved with similar
sidewalk deviations. 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."
Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6, which limits the maximum sign height
to 8 feet at each multi or single family development, to instead allow a maximum sign height of
10 feet.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following:
"The applicant is seeking an increase to allowable entry signage height to ensure
visibility of internal communities within the PUD. The deviation is also intended to allow
,for flexibility in the type of structure that the sign can be placed upon, such as walls, bell
towers, or other architectural features that typically exceed 8 feet in height. This
deviation request is similar to previous requests approved for master planned
communities within Collier County, such as Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples,
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 8 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2663-
7/7/2015 17.B.
Fiddlers Creek and Esplanade at Hacienda Lakes. The setbacks will meet LDC
standards, thereby ensuringpublic health, safety and weifare is protected.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved. 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 "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least
equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.12.a.i, which permits a maximum of two
(2) ground signs with a height of 8 feet and sign copy of no more than 32 square feet at the main
entrance to internal community amenity facilities, to allow instead a maximum of one (1) ground
or wall sign for each individual amenity within the Player's Club at Lely Resort, in addition to
the main entrance signs, not to exceed a height of ten (10) feet and sign copy area of 64 square
feet per sign.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following:
"The Player's Club & Spa is a unique community amenity site in terms of both size and
scope. It functions as an amenity campus for the entire development and combines resort
style amenities with active recreational uses and entertainment. The additional signage
will allow the Applicant to brand each internal amenity designation within the Players'
Club campus, such as the pool area, tennis club, theater, dog park, etc. "
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this
deviation, subiect to the following stipulation; that the deviation be limited to allow a total of six
(6) additional amenity site signs; staff further finds 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."
Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.13. 14.b which permits boundary marker signs
in residential zoning districts with a maximum sigh face area of 24 square feet, to instead allow
for boundary marker signs with a maximum sign face area of 32 square feet at each corner of the
C -3 tract at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely Drive.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following:
"The applicant is seeking an additional boundary marker sign within a commercial tract
proposed for both residential and commercial uses. The boundary marker is proposed at
the corner of an arterial and collector roadway and is intended to increase the
community's visibility and better delineate the property from surrounding master-
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 9 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2664-
7/7/2015 17. B.
planned communities. The additional sign will be integrated into a wall or similar
feature fronting on Rattlesnake Hammock, and will not negatively impact view sheds
from surrounding roadways. The signage setback from right -of -way will meet LDC
standards, thereby ensuring public health, safety and welfare is protected. "
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved 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 10.02.133.51, 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."
Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.F.1, which permits an additional pole or
ground sign where there is a minimum of a 1,000 foot separation between such signs, to instead
allow for a maximum of two (2) pole or ground signs on the C -2 tract that fronts on U.S. 41, one
of which may be located on the U.S. 41 frontage and the second which may be located on the
Triangle Boulevard frontage, with a minimum spacing of 400 feet between signs.
Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation:
"Based upon the relatively high travel speeds on U.S. 41 and the property's frontage on
two (2) public roads the request for a maximum of two (2) signs for the parcel is
appropriate. The 400 foot spacing is reasonable in consideration of the subject property's
configuration as a corner lot, and the anticipated signage locations based on the
property's ingress /egress from Triangle Boulevard. "
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is
approved 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."
Deviation 7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.F.1.c which allows a maximum allowable sign
area of 80 square feet for a pole or ground sign located on an arterial roadway to allow for a
maximum sign area of 100 square feet for a pole or ground sign located on the C -2 tract that fronts
on U.S. 41 and the C -3 tract at the southwest corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Grand Lely
Drive.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following:
"The subject property fronts an arterial roadway with relatively high travel speeds. The
applicant is proposing a modest increase to the maximum signage area to allow for
increased visibility. The required setback from rights -of -way for entry signs will meet
LDC standards, thereby ensuring public health, safety and welfare is protected.
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 10 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -266S-
7/7/2015 17.B.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff finds that the petitioner's deviation and rationale
supportable for this project. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends
APPROVAL of this deviation with the limitations suggested above, 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,"
LDC Section 10.02.133.51, 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."
Staff recommends approval of the seven proposed deviations with stipulations outlined above
and further delineated in staff recommended conditions at the end of this report.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
PUD Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.13.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the
CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria"
(Staffs responses to these criteria are provided in bold font):
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and believes the uses and property
development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The
commitments made by the applicant should provide adequate assurances that the proposed
change should not adversely affect living conditions in the area.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements.,
contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may
relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance
of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's
Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be
required to gain platting and /or site development approval. Both processes will ensure that
appropriate stipulations for the provision of and continuing operation and maintenance of
infrastructure will be provided by the developer.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
Staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives
and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion and the analysis provided by
Comprehensive Planning staff and the zoning analysis of this staff report. Based on those
staff analyses, planning zoning staff is of the opinion that this PUD Amendment remains
consistent with the overall GMP.
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 11 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised; 5- 13-15)
Packet Page -2666-
7/7/2015 17.B.
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
Staff has provided a review of the proposed changes and believes that the project will be
compatible with the surrounding area. The approved uses within the PUD are not
proposed to change as part of this amendment; however the applicant is requesting to add
residential use(s) in the C -3 tract. The uses approved in the original PUD rezone were
determined to be compatible and continue to be compatible with the changes proposed by
this request. The petitioner is proposing a number of changes as noted above, however
staff believes uses remain compatible given the development standards and project
commitments.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The amount of native preserve 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 has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this
time, i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP
Transportation Element consistency review. The project's development must comply with
all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are
sought. Additionally, the PUD document contains additional developer commitments that
should help ensure there are adequate facilities available to serve this project.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as road capacity, wastewater
disposal system, and potable water supplies to accommodate this project based upon the
commitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities
requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in
the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting
public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
The petitioner is seeking seven deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the
purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06.A).
This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and
deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be
required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff has provided an analysis
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 12 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13-15)
Packet Page -2667-
7/7/2015 17.B.
of the deviations in the Deviation Discussion portion of this staff report, and is
recommending approval of the deviations.
Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08. F. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land,
the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County
Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed
change in relation to the following when applicable" (Staff's responses to these criteria are
provided in bold font):
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, & policies of
the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
The zoning analysis provides an in -depth review of the proposed amendment. Staff is of
the opinion that the project as proposed is consistent with GMP FLUE Policy 5.4 requiring
the project to be compatible with neighborhood development. Staff recommends that this
petition be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. The petition can also be deemed
consistent with the CCME and the Transportation Element. Therefore, staff recommends
that this petition be deemed consistent with the GMP because uses are not changing with
this amendment.
2. The existing land use pattern;
Staff has described the existing land use pattern in the "Surrounding Land Use and
Zoning" portion of this report and discussed it at length in the zoning review analysis.
Staff believes the proposed amendment is appropriate given the existing land use pattern,
and development restrictions included in the PUD Ordinance.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts;
The proposed PUD amendment would not create an isolated zoning district because the
subject site is already zoned PUD and there are no land additions proposed as part of this
amendment.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
Staff is of the opinion that the district boundaries are logically drawn given the current
property ownership boundaries and the existing PUD zoning.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning
necessary.
The proposed amendment is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance
with the LDC provisions to seek such amendment to allow the owner the opportunity to
develop the land with uses other than what the existing zoning district would allow.
Without this amendment, the property could be developed in compliance with the existing
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 13 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2668-
7/7/2015 17.B.
PUD ordinance regulations. The applicant's request is consistent with the proposed
GMPA.
6 Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood;
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed amendment, with the commitments made by the
applicant, can been deemed consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected
by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The project includes restrictions
and development standards that are designed to address compatibility of the project.
Development in compliance with the proposed PUD amendment should not adversely
impact living conditions in the area.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or
create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes
or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the
development, or otherwise affect public safety.
The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project with the
commitment that has been provided by the developer.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem;
The proposed amendment should not create drainage or surface water problems. The
developer of the project will be required to adhere to a surface water management permit
from the SFWMD in conjunction with any local site development plan approvals and
ultimate construction on site.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas;
If this amendment petition is approved, any subsequent development would need to comply
with the applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document.
The location of the proposed buildings, combined with the setbacks and project buffers will
help insure that light and air to adjacent areas will not be reduced.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area;
This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or
external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors
including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value
determination is driven by market conditions.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with. existing regulations;
The proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent
properties.
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 14 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13-15)
Packet Page -2669
7/7/2015 17.B.
12, Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasting with the public welfare;
The proposed development complies with the Growth Management Plan which is a public
policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said
Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant
of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public
welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning;
The subject property could be developed within the parameters of the existing zoning
designations; however, the petitioner is seeking this amendment in compliance with LDC
provisions for such action. The petition can be evaluated and action taken as deemed
appropriate through the public hearing process. Staff believes the proposed amendment
meets the intent of the PUD district, if staff s conditions of approval are adopted, and
further, believes the public interest will be maintained.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
County;
As noted previously, the subject property already has a zoning designation of PUD; the
PUD rezoning was evaluated at the rezoning stage and was deemed consistent with the
GMP. The GMP is a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density and intensity
of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout the urban - designated areas of Collier
County. Staff is of the opinion that the development standards and the 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 on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC;
and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. The proposed
amendment is consistent with the GMP as it is proposed to be amended as discussed in
other portions of the staff report.
16 The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which
would he required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
Additional development anticipated by the PUD document would require considerable site
alteration. This project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and
local development regulations during the site development plan or platting approval
process and again later as part of the building permit process.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services
consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 15 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -16)
Packet Page -2670-
7/7/2015 17.B.
as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance,
as amended.
This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional
elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have
concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments
contained in the PUD document.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC)
shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare,
To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
This petitioner held a duly advertised NIM on January 13, 2015. See attached synopsis.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report for this petition on May 13, 2015.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDA-
PL20140002040 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval subject to the three staff
recommended conditions of approval below:
1) The Developer shall conduct a comprehensive traffic analysis of Triangle Boulevard from
U.S. 41 to CK 951 (Collier Boulevard) for County review and approval. The study shall be
completed and approved prior to the approval of the next Site Development Plan. The study
shall evaluate both existing and projected (build -out) volumes and analyze all access drives
both existing and proposed. The study shall include an access management plan to improve
safety and maximize traffic flow. The Developer shall be solely responsible for the
implementation of the approved recommendations upon completion of the study.
2) Approval of Deviation 1 with the stipulation that the deviation be tied to the remaining
new construction activities such that once 90 percent of the dwelling units are sold the
temporary sign allowance reverts to LDC minimum code standards.
3) Approval of Deviation 4 with the stipulation that the deviation be limited to allow a total
of six (6) additional amenity site signs.
Attachments: A. Application
B. Draft PUD Ordinance
C. NIM Synopsis
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD Amendment Page 16 of 17
May 4, 2015 (last revised: 5- 13 -15)
Packet Page -2671-
PREPARED BY:
OJECT MANAGER
ZONING DIVISION
REVIEWED BY:
)
RAYMOI,O'V. 'ELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER
ZONING DIVISION
MICHAEL BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR
ZONING DIVISION
APPROVED BY:
MIE FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
NICK/CASALANGUI Jam, D
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
PY COUNTY MANAGER
ARTMENT
r
� � t�
DATE
15
DATE
frs- rJr
DATE
DATE
DATE
Tentati`,ely scheduled for the July 14, 201.5 Board. of County Commissioners Meeting
PUDA- PL20140002040: Lely Resort PUD
April 24, 2015 (Revised)
Packet Page -2672-
7/7/2015 17.B.
7/7/2015 17.B.
ORDINANCE NO. 15-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 92 -15,
AS AMENDED, WHICH RE- ESTABLISHED LELY, A RESORT
COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD), BY
REDUCING THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM
10,150 TO 8,946; BY AMENDING SECTION 2.06 ENTITLED "PROJECT
DENSITY" AND SECTION 2.07 ENTITLED "PERMITTED VARIATIONS
OF DWELLING UNITS "; BY AMENDING THE MARKET ABSORPTION
SCHEDULE; BY AMENDING SECTION 3.02 ENTITLED "MAXIMUM
DWELLING UNITS"; BY AMENDING SECTION V, C -2
COMMERCIAL /PROFESSIONAL TO PROVIDE THAT THE SQUARE
FOOTAGE LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED AS PART OF A MIXED USE
PROJECT; AND BY AMENDING SECTION VI, C -3
COMMERCIAL/NEIGHBORHOOD TO ALLOW C -3 USES AND ALL
TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AS MIXED USE OR
STAND ALONE FOR THE C -3 PARCEL AT THE CORNER OF
RATTLESNAKE- HAMMOCK ROAD AND GRAND LELY DRIVE; BY
ADDING SECTION XV, DEVIATIONS, FROM THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SIGNS AND
THE SIZE OF SIGNS; AMENDING EXHIBIT H, THE PUD MASTER
PLAN TO MOVE A C -3 PARCEL TO THE EAST OF GRAND LELY
DRIVE AND ADJUST ACREAGES TO DECREASE RESIDENTIAL USES
AND INCREASE COMMERCIAL USES BY 6f ACRES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
CONSISTS OF 2,892 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN U.S. 41 AND
RATTLESNAKE- HAMMOCK ROAD WEST OF C.R. 951, IN SECTIONS
21, 22, 27, 28, 33 AND 34, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PUDA- PL20140002040]
WHEREAS, on March 10, 1992, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) approved
Ordinance No. 92 -15 which established the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit
Development (PUD); and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2007, the Board approved Ordinance No. 07 -72 which
amended the PUD; and
[ 14- CPS - 01392/1188398/11 108 — rev. 6/18/15 Page 1 of 4
Lely Resort — PUDA- PL20140002040
Words struek- thfeuggh are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -2673-
7/7/2015 17. B.
WHEREAS, Alexis Crespo, AICP of Waldrop Engineering and Richard Yovanovich,
Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. representing Stock Development, LLC,
petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida to further amend
Ordinance No. 92 -15, as amended, the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: Amendments to Index.
The Index to Ordinance No. 92 -15, as amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned
Unit Development) is hereby amended to add the following:
SECTION XV Deviations from the LDC. 15 -1 Lpplicable to entire PUD unless otherwise
noted
SECTION TWO. Amendment to List of Exhibits and Tables.
See Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION TWO: Amendments to Project Density.
Section 2.06 entitled "Project Density" of Ordinance No. 92 -15, as amended (the Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
See Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION THREE: Amendments to Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units.
Section 2.07 entitled Permitted Variations of Dwelling Units" of Ordinance No. 92 -15, as
amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to
read as follows:
See Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FOUR: Amendment to Estimated Market Absorption Schedule.
The estimated Market Absorption Schedule, Table 1, of Ordinance No. 92 -15, as
amended, (the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as
follows:
[14- CPS - 01392/1188398/1] 108 —rev. 6/18/15 Page 2 of
Lely Resort — PUDA- PL20140002040
Words °wa^ 4wough are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -2674-
7/7/2015 17.B.
See Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION FIVE: Amendment to Maximum Dwelling Units.
Section 3.02 entitled "Maximum Dwelling Units" of Ordinance No. 92 -15, as amended,
(the Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
3.02 Maximum Dwelling Units.
A maximum number of 10,150 8.946 dwelling units may be constructed on lands
designated as "R" except as permitted by Section 2.07 or "C -2" or "C -3" where expressly
permitted.
SECTION SIX: Amendments to Section V, C -2 CommerciaVProfessional.
Section V, C -2 Commercial /Professional of Ordinance Number 92 -15, as amended,
(Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to read as follows:
See Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION SEVEN: Amendments to Section VI, C -3 Commercial/Neighborhood.
Section VI, C -3 Commercial/Neighborhood of Ordinance Number 92 -15, as amended,
(Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to read as follows:
See Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION EIGHT: Amendments to Section XIV, General Developer Commitments.
Section XIV, General Developer Commitments of Ordinance Number 92 -15, as
amended, (Lely, A Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended to add the
following:
C. Transportation
I CfPrior to SDP anl?roval_of,imprnyements on the C -2 41arcel flirt_ 13As frctl1WI -S M
the owner shall Host a-Perl'onn�nce �ruarantee�cl� as a bond,-, or-1-1 e,tier of credit in the
amount of $Sf) (l0()n ��rder to.._secure owner's fatr share ___cr1.__trli,t�rtatin
n1?provements to Trianule Boulevard including but not limited to. turn lanes. median
modifications and /nr a� traffic circle alone Tria 7'he perfprmance.
guarantee shall be released by Count4 u - on execution of a deve er s contribution
agreement by QA,,ngr or upon creation of a commercial municipal service taN_1n°-
district and /or benefit unit by County. The amount of the contribution shall be
determined at time of execution of developers contribution aurcenzen_ or
calculated in accordance with the tax`ina district
[14-CPS-01392/1188398/1] 108 —rev. 6/18/15 Page3of4
Lely Resort — PUDA- PL20140002040
Words stfaeh throug are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -2675-
7/7/2015 17. B.
SECTION NINE: Amendments to Add Section XV, Deviations from LDC.
Section XV, Deviations from LDC of Ordinance Number 92 -15, as amended, (Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby added to read as follows:
See Exhibit F, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION TEN: Amendment to Master Plan.
Exhibit H, "Master Land Use Plan" of Ordinance No. 92 -15, as amended, (the Lely, A
Resort Community Planned Unit Development) is hereby amended as follows:
See Exhibit H, attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION ELEVEN: Effective Date.
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super- majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this _ day of .2015.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
By: By:
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form and legality:
Heidi Ashton -Cicko '
Managing Assistant County Attorney
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
TIM NANCE, Chairman
Attachment: Exhibit A — List of Exhibits and Tables
Exhibit B — Section II, Sections 2.06 and 2.07
Exhibit C — Estimated Market Absorption Schedule
Exhibit D — Section V, C -2 Commercial /Professional
Exhibit E — Section VI, C -3 Commercial/Neighborhood
Exhibit F — Section XV — Deviations from LDC
Exhibit H to Ord. 92 -15, as amended — Revised Master Plan
Exhibit I to Ord. 92 -15, as amended - Buffer Exhibit
[14- CPS - 01392/1188398/1] 108 —rev. 6/18/15 Page 4 of 4
Lely Resort — PUDA- PL20140002040
Words stfuek through are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -2676-
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
EXHIBIT H $ Master Land Use Plan (Prepared by Wilson, Miller, BaFten
)daldroo Epgino', P.A.)
EXHIBIT I BUFFER EXHIBIT
TABLE I Estimated Market Absorption Schedule
TABLE II A Development Standards `R' Residential Areas
TABLE II B Development Standards `R' Residential Areas
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
EXHIBIT A
ii
Packet Page -2677-
7/7/2015 17.B.
Words stfuek thfeugh are deleted;
Words underlined are added
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.06 PROJECT DENSITY
7/7/2015 17. B.
The total acreage of the Lely Resort property is approximately 2892.5 acres. The maximum number of
dwelling units to be built on the total acreage is 10,150 46. The number of dwelling units per gross
acre is approximately 3.1 -S. The density on individual parcels of land throughout the project may vary
according to the type of housing placed on each parcel of land but shall comply with guidelines
established in this document.
2.07 PERMITTED VARIATIONS OF DWELLING UNITS
All properties designated for residential uses may be developed at the maximum number of dwelling units
as assigned under Section 2.05, provided that the total number of dwelling units shall not exceed 10,150
(. The Development Services Director shall be notified of such an increase and the resulting
reduction in the corresponding residential land use or other categories so that the total number of dwelling
units shall not exceed 10,150 f. Approximately 1850 single family units and S3$0 IX26 multi - family
units have been planned. Variations from these numbers without an adjustment to the maximum number
of units within the project shall be permitted provided that the maximum number of dwelling units by
type shall not vary by more than twenty (20) percent. The maximum number of dwelling units shall
include all caretaker's units but does not include the designated hotel rooms. The project may exceed the
variation of twenty (20) percent of the unit types set forth in this section provided that for every single
family unit permitted in excess of 2220, the maximum number of dwelling units shall be reduced by
1.667 units.
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
EXHIBIT B
2 -1
Packet Page -2678-
Words seek thfengh are deleted;
Words underline are added
7/7/2015 17.B.
ESTIMATED MARKET ABSORPTION SCHEDULE
TABLE 1
PHASE
YEAR
RESIDENT
COMMER.
GC
EC
RC
CC
UNITS
S . FT.
HOLES
STUDENTS
HOTEL RMS
SEATING
I
1985-
264
3,600
18
1990
II
1991-
1328
300,400
36
364
*350 Rooms
1.1995
III
1996-
1482
56,000
736
1850
2000
IV
2001-
1526
2005
V
2006-
1250
90,000
1400
2010
VI
2011-
4380 -1 QQS2
100,000
2015
VII
2016-
4- 5991,Q4Q
135,000
2020
VIII
2021-
4-588 i-Q9-6
135,000
2025
TOTALS
40
io;159.
820,000
54
2500
350 Rooms
1850
315.000 S.F.
*315,000 SF of hotel commercial space is included
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
EXHIBIT C
2 -9
Packet Page -2679-
Words strdeli thfeu h are deleted;
Words underline are added
SECTION V
C -2 COrAMERCIALiYROr E SSIONA%
5.01 PURPOSE
7/7/2015 17.B.
The purpose of this sSection is to set forth the regulations for the areas designated on Revised Exhibit
`H', Master Land Use Plan RZ-49$, as `C -2'. The C -2 tract is intended to provide for the professional,
office, and business related needs of area residents, supplementing the retail nature of the adjacent C -1
tract.
5.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURE
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1) Business and professional offices; banks; financial institutions,
2) Churches and other places of worship; civic and cultural facilities; educational facilities.
3) Funeral homes.
4) Homes for the aged; hospitals; hospices and sanitoriums, hotels and motels.
5) Medical laboratories; medical clinics; medical offices; mortgage brokers; museums.
6) Parking garages and lots; private clubs.
7) Real estate offices; research design and development activities; restaurants; rest homes;
convalescent centers; and nursing homes.
8) Laboratories, provided that:
No odor, noise, etc., detectable to normal senses from off the premises are generated;
All work is done within enclosed structures; and
No product is manufactures or sold, except incidental to development activities.
9) Transportation, communication and utility offices — not including storage or equipment.
10) Water management facilities and essential services.
11) The C -2 parcel fronting U.S. 41 may be developed allowing C -2 and /or C -3 uses, as outlined in
Section V and Section VI of Ordinance 92 -15, as amended, and up to 175 residential dwelling
units to provide for a mixed -use project.
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
5 -1
EXHIBIT D
Packet Page -2680-
Words ``oogig="= are deleted;
Words underlined are added
7/7/2015 17.B
Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals or Hearing Examiner determines to be
compatible in the district.
B. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
5.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
1) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements for parcel boundaries: Thirty (30) feet
4) Maximum Height of Structures: Fifty (50) feet above the finished grade of the site, plus ten (10)
feet for under building parking.
5) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures:
One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on ground floor.
6) Minimum Distance Between Principal Structures: 30' or 1/2 the sum of the building heights,
whichever is greater.
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and landscaping shall conform with applicable
Collier County Regulations in effect at the time permits are sought.- or as approvedly a deviation
in Section XV of the M-D-
8) The area of the C -2 and C -3 uses referenced in Paragraph 5.02 A.l 1) above shall be limited to a
maximum of 100,000 square feet in the aggregate. This limitation does not apply to the 175
resic��enti l,_ well n� units - Wit? itL _f?art_q a mixed,eu�e 4_Je t,
stores. One (1) building containing C -2 or C -3 uses
9) The HFea ef eaeh, individual G 2 and G 3 uses r-efefefieed ifi 11,afagfaph 5.02 A.! 1 ) above shall bee
referencedyin Paragraph 5.02.A. 11 is allowed to Q 00 auare feet of gross floor area _All
other bu ldin9c 4_n_taining -Qnd Q-3_ uses__shall_b lizr� lid Q 20 OOQ $ u re eet.
4-0)M Any restaurant uses permitted by or associated with any use permitted by either the C -2 and C -3
land use designations of this Ordinance, only if those uses are located on the C -2 parcel fronting
U.S. 41, shall be subject to the following additional regulations:
a) No televisions shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas.
b) No amplified sounds, including music, shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas after 10:00
p.m.
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040 5 -2 Words stFuek thr- ^"a" are deleted;
Last Revised: June 12, 2015 Words unde _fined are added
Packet Page -2681-
7/7/2015 17.B.
c) No Iive entertainment shall be permitted in outdoor seating areas after 10:00 p.m.
d) All windows and doors shall be closed after 10:00 p.m.
44+LQ The 175 residential dwelling units and C -3 uses referenced in paragraph 5.02 A.11) above shall be
subject to the C -2, Commercial /Professional development standards set forth in this Paragraph
(Paragraph Section 5.03).
1) A,np115r,d_..o -utd oicomusic_isi?r il�ited � -2 a / �� use s(� �ze� titlun the C -2 arssJ
.-=JIWi �_..cess irar�t_. s ,_��hich__s]a ll_ bc_r Mated �n ��1si G_e h
1?�___ Tl»C- ��?�.Lfi�tllita>; ll.S. 41 shall�zr�Yisi� �.;;ix -foat t�11�'all /fence with.,f�lternati��e Tv�e `B„
plank= in— a.u- ord.anu � f said G 2 n_ the-
Qo-n ereia7_btiildin _r. ss � ] 5� �? 7 rca abitl _ isl w wi[1 extend from
Triant ie.31v_t1M__ia -a minimuttl o. 5 feet AZ L th_eALmintt5.4f anY boil z on this Parcel A d -lo
t}�e end of_..an r._. _ os�iiQnThi�_l?�aff�r is_not reo�ir��1..4n.ihe north�,sl�erlmei
arp .eel whcre�c.�taPrant uses.ahntlhe�.�i�ii.nt* 1_ a, 1e. .,.._Th�14_�tiin,g,_�.�k..5hs11 be on the commercial
interior side of the wall.
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
Packet Page -2682 -
5 -1
Words stttsk thfeugh are deleted;
Words underlined are added
SECTION VI
C -3 COYtYiERCiALiu+Ei"HBOI iiOO i
6.01 PURPOSE
7/7/2015 17.B.
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the regulations for the areas designated on $ viG d Exhibit `H',
Master Land Use Plan PZ, !98, as `C -3'. The C -3 tract's are intended to provide residents with
conveniently located commercial facilities and services that are typically required on a regular basis,
6.02 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
I ) Antique shops; appliance stores; art studios; art supplies; automobile parts stores; automobile
service stations.
2) Bakery shops; banks and financial institutions; barber and beauty shops; bath supply stores; blue
print shops; bicycle sales and services; book stores.
3) Carpet and floor covering sales (including storage and installation); child care centers; churches
and other places of worship; clothing stores; confectionary and candy stores.
4) Delicatessen, drug stores; dry cleaning shops; dry goods stores and department stores.
5) Electrical supply stores.
6) Fish stores; florist shops; food markets; furniture stores; furrier shops and fast food restaurants.
7) Gift shops; gourmet shops.
8) Hardware stores; health food stores; hobby supply stores; homes for the aged; hospitals and
hospices.
9) Ice cream stores; ice sales; interior decorating showrooms.
10) Jewelry stores.
11) Laundries — self - service; leather goods and luggage stores; locksmiths and liquor stores.
12) Meat market; medical office or clinic for human care; millinery shops; music stores.
13) Office (retail or professional); office supply stores.
14) Paint and wallpaper stores; pet shops; pet supply stores; photographic equipment stores; post
office.
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
EXHIBIT E
6 -1
Packet Page -2683-
Words stfusk th fa.,gh are deleted;
Words underlined are added
7/7/2015 17.B.
15) Radio and television sales and service; small appliance stores; shoe sales and repairs; restaurants.
16) Souvenir stores; stationary stores; supermarkets and sanitoriums.
17) Tailor shops; tobacco shops; toy shops; tropical fish stores.
18) Variety stores; veterinary offices and clinics (no outside kenneling).
19) Watch and precision instrument sales and repair.
20) Water management facilities and essential services.
21) ate._:�[�sL.1.�6QUtlawtsrta�i�f R�ttlesnall�alxtm��k Road andS�.rand, Lei
tata_Lie ve allowing CSC$, aS -in-Section VI �f Ordinance 5 �_meilded..
and /or residential dwelli,npts..
241 222 Any other commercial use or professional service which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Develepment ffeetef Board of Zonine Anneals or
Hearing Examiner determines to be compatible with the district.
B) Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
I ) Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the uses permitted in this district.
2) Caretaker's residence.
6.03 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
l) Minimum Site Area: As approved under Section 2.04
2) Minimum Site Width: As approved under Section 2.04
3) Minimum Yard Requirements from parcel boundaries:
Abutting non - residential areas: Twenty five (25) feet
Abutting residential areas: Thirty five (35) feet in which an appropriately designed and
landscaped buffer shall be provided, as determined under Section 2.14.
4) Distance between principal structures: None, or a minimum five (5) feet with unobstructed passage
from front yard to rear yard.
5) Maximum Height of Structure: Fifty (50) feet above the finished grade of the site.
6) Minimum Floor Area of Principal Structures: One thousand (1,000) square feet per building on the
ground floor.
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
MON
Packet Page -2684-
Words stftiek thfouggh are deleted;
Words underlined arc added
7/7/2015 17.B
7) Minimum standards for signs, parking, lighting, and landscaping shall be in conformance with
applicable Collier County regulations in effect at the time permits are sought or as approved by a
dgviation-in Section XV of the PUD.
__Tttc resins�iaLd elLi� units x %r n �( zt7. _S_.� t n�i. ',.� ?_1.. boy:e SI L be_sul7'.e�t._ty h msid.e.ntial
1_.- t- e�ptiiatldcntal izuirzg
deyslsz nwni_standards_.sg.t %rflh-in
h��ht_ shalLb�lin�ii� .�.t�_:a.m.a�imta�uai' ff� f�Q?_%e114�tozi��.
pr id d_bet en shy � is ire l h s _Qi�__th__.s ushe eram tsr Qf 1 Q-3_r l--at wrQc5mlic
Hammock Road and Grand ULYLDrive
Lely Resort PUDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
Packet Page -2685-
Words s4uek4hfettgh are deleted;
Words underlined are added
In -I&FUi0an to
7/7/2015 17.B.
Deviation. 1: Deviation from LDC Qj L I iir C l Y,
yj,
zoned-ronerties up to 4�, -Lp in area or ' feet in hCj,ht, to allow a j,rnporary ii or banDcr un to
a-MaNimurn - f-3-2--a uare- r v indeT
PQr13-si �- n mr 0 q C d—ju in the LDC, I -h�
shall N limited -W- l4 day
durati --
.).D_,noLto exceed 28--days ner calend aL-ys-;tr,,... This -deviation ".,plies to the entire PUD. When-90-2�s
of the-dwQ11ing, units are--a)-Id within
b b -jq
_S-_u division jj ilizin his deviation que st. this deviation
terminates rind reverts,tp -fte �LaC for
such suhdimision,
Deviation 2- Deviation from LD , Sr
-ngeppiLtw�o2 round or wall suns
per
_entrance to the &3,.•ejopment NA,ijh a combined sign- area-Qf i4 smi, re feet-
or wall :LQIns at the entrance ..--
er sim and not in exceed he hei(,hi or length of the wall tin n w, ich it is located. This AeYiati-QD
a dies to_the- _entire KID.
Deviat' I Nd orn -See n �;.06. �Nj-&�]IXrmjts _D mg2jimurn sign
ion
-amily or single.
fQ-r-u, to 2 roundDj — signs at each entrance Io a multi -family devei
al]oN?,, a maximum iQ -=Rp
_jLftLof 10 fem, This deviaii-pan a i to the entire PUD.
—Deyiatjc�g from l
pursuant to LDC require maximum of two
an
ground of f more - than care feet I the
I'MAin entrance to intemal residential c imur�qv ameni1v facilities, to allo-,v for a maximurn of one (I
nraund car ��-a11 si,g�� fvt c.��eh ind�� dual amenit�� ti� +ithin the. Player's �J��t� at I_,el� Resort in addtic..�n tc?
--p j
the main amenity entrance sigas, ri7 exceed a.)L-
�qLd is
Lt e-suns._
Deviation 5: Deviation marker si2n at
each residential developncfllT.,Eolery ccymer Nvith a paNjmum-,5J,, -face area of 24 -squqE=e _ feet. to allow
for-one boundar-Tniarker
sign Nvith arnmimulll Sign face area Of 32 square feet at each prppertycomer
of the
--C-3 Imct at the sOuth"
deg izt Vin._ t �iltes sc�lc l� t� the 20 acre trace de�iytnated as 'C -3' on Rey ised_E�h>hit.__H_ Nlaster Land
tine 1'.l n <tnci located at the �cauth ;est corner of Rattlesnake Hamm)ijs, Road al.3d -Cirnand Lelv Drive
I'arcel No. �,3570100063- jOO')41 and 53570100�21�)
j�cv �mion 6: Deviation frOM LDC Section 5.06.04. F.1, whi nits additional I �Q nd sign
jLgou�
,jAdditi( I�p=
j,
g �ublj bined blic stregtftoMA99=0
for tiarcel�
lig
220 lineal feet, wherl- there is -.t minimum of a
separation
Lila inium of Ix.vo Q)jsi �,Rs un the tract d-on the
-1 is
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
EXHIBIT F
15-1
Packet Page -2686-
Words stfuek through are deleted;
Words undeTI ned, are added
7/7/2015 17.B.
41 -fr_nnj4,,,,,LAad th l__Qn_jhc I Jan 1e Blvd fMnlnf,e, with
Cin 1 0 0Q feet. -n mi". le�cso.e V
on Reyi Exhibit 'H'. Xjf4cipr I ..q nd
Deviation jjnAomj-Q 4,F.I.c, �Yhich .pennits ?I n x] I I
of 8(2]c uare feet for a dole
Eound -sij,-n--An arterial r to allow fir amaimum si_
an the C -2 tract that frQDIS on U.S. 41, and on
D -Tb-L,;
the C-3 tract at the-,auIb-,—Ag5.1 Grand Lely rivy,-e-
deviation a nl�es solely to the 9 -acre tract i-e-Si Revised Exhibit 'J 'Master -Lam
Plan. and located at the northwest C=jr of _Am:amj Trail East s t—and T
riange�Blv 1�
Revised Exhibit Master Land I 1-e PI'm
and locate
535701 OOQ63, 535701 QQ2-41,-amt
Lely Resort PUDA-PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
Packet Page -2687-
Words are deleted;
Words un-d-erlined are added
7/7/2015 17.B. 1
I tiv .11
rJ3
PR t
PR
ps
u-
j r
r' * CC
�r o f 4 c1 R l_ [ ii tTai1S
ry EC
h
�+.
6C R
r
} t
GC `,./"� r v s
AK
J
tz "'.Co j R
i. -3, c' R R GC
f + w
'.,3a 1 1 •- G C i{ Fi� �-
47�:a1`
rIA "'',./ I P G3 !
L • I y L �f { • '4' ", J..l..
,
H1 tc:- ,7 .l `... sYi w
j R
t• 6 o h o � I � r GC � a.-.. � 1 -••- � .� �.r- .._. {�r'�,� � R s
—» cc R /GC R rpa
PR
C
LEGEND PR
II ry.
SYMP ITEM ACRES R ,� / C
A RESIDENTIAL .+-..w w....... 1166.0
CI GDMMERCIAL /COMMUNITY 38,0 /', t `'�`L �'•, %. �,
'.C2 COMMERCIAL /PROFESSIDNAL 16.0
CJ COMMERCIAL /NEIGHBORHO00 36 6
EC EDISOw O N�COLLEGE 44.0 �R ( ,..,/� --.�ax I.R. PR
nC S
CC CULTURAL CENTER 46,5
:RC
RESORT CENTER
49 0
�, GC ft,
OC
GOIf COURSE
495.0
I � _ ( ��.w.. /.i �1�� j,.y�'�- y'•,�i �
�J
�.� V 1 "1 ;' N;
CONSERVATION /OPEN SPACE
CYPRESS PRESERVE
233.0
171 5
-�`�'} ^ R f (,C
' �` 'R:f/ r ^1, "L 7co"v->
PE
PARK /SCHOOL
21 5
�., \ �-•^ �S I�!1�_ [� ('
f"
LAKE
MAJOR COLLECTOR
70.5
2
el. M
LS+C;
MINOR COLLECTOR
LOCAL, ROAD
f.4.0
26 5
/e
7..."''
ACREAGE
"I R O.W. RESERVE
Xx9 x
B
C1
TOTAL ACREAGE AREA
2692.0
TOTAL UNITS
TOTAL COMMERCIAL SO FT.
8.946
1,115.000
`
f
Lely Resort PIJDA- PL20140002040
Last Revised: June 12, 2015
exiimm H
Packet Page -2688-
Words str-uek through are deleted;
Words underlined are added
NN
E: g,
z �
T m
;u V)
m
-n
M'v
m M
:-I
0
> n C�
f 2 0
z
in >
> T T1
A m
n
m
I
I-Aplololkli-
1pom-p-.0-
;j
I-M
M
oil
Ilk
E: g,
z �
T m
;u V)
m
-n
M'v
m M
:-I
0
> n C�
f 2 0
z
in >
> T T1
A m
n
m
I
I-Aplololkli-
1pom-p-.0-
;j
L"
M
oil
Ilk
Packet Page -2689-
13-
7/7/2015 17.B.
r X
Z
>+<
U)
>
M,,
zn
+
J
154 WIDE
Packet Page -2689-
13-
7/7/2015 17.B.
22D )) Wednesday, June 17,2015 A NAPLES DAILY NEWS
I
rel 4 ,
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
Notice" is hereby given that on Tuesday, July 7, 2015, in the Board of County
Commissioner Meeting Room, 3rd Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami
Trail East, Naples; the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) will consider
the enactment of a County Ordinance. The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M.
The title of the proposed Ordinance is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 92 -15, AS AMENDED, WHICH
RE- ESTABLISHED LELY, A RESORT COMMUNITY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(PUD), BY REDUCING THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 10,150
TO 8,946; BY AMENDING SECTION 2.06 ENTITLED "PROJECT DENSITY" AND
SECTION 2.07 ENTITLED "PERMITTED VARIATIONS OF DWELLING UNITS "; BY
AMENDING THE MARKET ABSORPTION SCHEDULE; BY AMENDING SECTION 3.02
ENTITLED "MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS '; BY AMENDING SECTION V, C -2
COMMERCIAUPROFESSIONAL TO PROVIDE THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE
LIMITATION DOES NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED.AS
PART OF A MIXED USE PROJECT AND TO ALLOW ONE COMMERCIAL BUILDING UP
TO 60,000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA; AND BY AMENDING SECTION V1,
C -3 COMMERCIAUNEIGHBORHOOD'TO ALLOW C -3 USES AND ALL TYPES OF
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AS MIXED USE OR STAND ALONE FOR THE C -3
PARCEL AT THE CORNER OF RATTLESNAKE- HAMMOCK ROAD AND GRAND LELY
DRIVE; BY ADDING SECTION XV, DEVIATIONS, FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SIGNS AND THE SIZE OF SIGNS; AMENDING
EXHIBIT H, THE PUD MASTER PLAN TO MOVE A C -3 PARCEL TO THE EAST OF
GRAND LELY DRIVE AND ADJUST ACREAGES TO DECREASE RESIDENTIAL USES AND
INCREASE COMMERCIAL USES BY 64 ACRES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTS OF 2,892 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN U.S. 41
AND RATTLESNAKE- HAMMOCK ROAD WEST OF C.R. 951, IN SECTIONS 21, 22, 27,
28, 33 AND 34, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP
51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.[PUDA- PL201400020401
A copy of the proposed Ordinance is on file with the Clerk to the Board and Is
available for inspection. All interested parties are invited to attend and be heard.
NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must register with the
County Manager prior to presentation of the agenda item to be addressed.
Individual speakers will be limited to 3 minutes on any item. The selection of an
individual to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. If
recognized by the Chairman,
a spokesperson for a group or organization may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on
an item.
Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the Board agenda
packets must .submit said material a minimum of 3 weeks prior to the respective
Public hearing. In any case, written material intended to be considered by the
Board shall be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of seven days
prior to the public hearing. All material used in presentations before the Board will
become a permanent part of the record. ,
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Board will need a record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore, may need to ensure a verbatim
record of the Proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is based.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to
participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision
of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities "Management
Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #101, Building W, Naples, Florida
34112, (239) 252 -8380. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are
available in the County Commissioners' Office.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
TIM NANCE, CHAIRMAN
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
By: Ann Jennejohn, Deputy Clerk
(SEAL)
June 17. 2015
I,'- 20r,9�i 4i.
Packet Page -2690-
7/7/2015 17.B.