Loading...
Agenda 06/11/2013 Item # 9A6/11/2013 9.A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to consider an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 03 -51, as amended, the Wentworth Estates Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD), by increasing the permissible number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,450; by amending Ordinance Number 2004 -41, the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 5.3± acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Wentworth Estates MPUD; by revising the Development Standards to make changes including an elimination of the medium height density residential use which allowed 90.0 feet in zoned building heights and an increase in building height for medium density residential from 45 feet zoned height to 50 feet zoned height; defining zoned height and actual height; providing for deletion of exhibits including Exhibit "A" Location Map, Exhibit "B" Boundary Sketch and Legal Description, Exhibit "C" Existing Conditions Map, Exhibit "D" Topographic Map, Exhibit "E" Area Wide Community Services Map, Exhibit "F" Aerial Photograph, Exhibit "G" Preliminary Drainage Plans and Details, Exhibit "H" Preliminary Sewer Plans, Exhibit "I" Preliminary Water Plans, and Exhibit "K" Bald Eagle Management Plan; by amending the Master Plan; and adding Exhibit "A" Development Standards, Exhibit "B" MPUD Master Plan, Exhibit "C" Deviations, and Exhibit "D" Water Management Basins, and revising Developer Commitments. The property is located on the southwest side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) approximately 1 -1/4 miles southeast of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) in Sections 29, 30, 31, 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 5, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 1563.84± acres; and by providing an effective date. (PUDA- PL20120001126) 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 PUD amendment 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, Lennar Homes, LLC, is asking the BCC to consider an application for an amendment to the existing PUD zoned project known as the Wentworth Estates Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) which is being developed under the name of Treviso Bay. Lennar Homes, LLC owns undeveloped portions of the PUD as shown on the PUD Exhibit A. Other owners that are not participating in the PUD amendment include Treviso Bay Development LLC, Wentworth Estates Community Development District, Florida Power & Light, the State of Florida and over 50 private owners. The subject property is partially developed. Currently there are some single - family and multi- family residential units, a golf course and some amenities in place. According to the Master Plan, approximately 513 acres are in the Rookery Bay Conservation Area. The property has been the subject of several previous zoning actions. The combined subject site was originally rezoned from PUD to PUD as the Lely Lakes Golf Resort in Ordinance #98 -85. That ordinance repealed Ordinance #93 -32 for the previously named Lely Lakes PUD and Packet Page -63- 6/11/2013 9.A. Ordinance #86 -18 for the Naples R & D Park at Lely PUD. Ordinance 498 -85 was repealed in Ordinance #03 -51 on September 23, 2003. That is the ordinance that is currently in effect. The project is currently approved for 1,200 dwelling units, an 18 -hole golf course, and a maximum of 85,000 square feet of commercial uses on ten acres. The proposed changes are summarized below (taken from the application material): • Increase number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,450 (increase of 250 units) Reason for request: Wentworth Estates was originally planned as a project aimed at the upper tier of the market in terms of both pricing and square footage. The revised plan calls for a broader cross section of product offerings to appeal to a greater proportion of the market. Along with this, Lennar is maintaining, and in many cases, improving upon the amenity offerings that were originally planned for Treviso Bay. The increase in density will help keep the fees associated with the maintenance and operation of these amenity offerings affordable by having a larger number of residents share in the cost. • Remove Tract references Reason for request: Elimination of artificial tract boundaries to provide flexibility to meet changing market conditions. • Add and rezone 5.35 acre parcel (former FP &L site) to include in PUD • Update ownership entity to reflect Lermar Homes, LLC as an owner • Update LDC references throughout • Remove conditions of approval that are already addressed in the LDC (redundant) • Remove extraneous exhibits that were attached to the original PUD • Remove "MHDR" residential category (medium high density residential), including the elimination of 90' high structures and in its place increase height for existing MDR residential category (medium density residential) from 3 stories or 45 feet to 4 stories or 50 feet • Update development standards table • Identify zoned height and actual height for all categories • Update list of deviations and add to list of requested deviations 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. The petitioner is seeking re- affirmation approval of nine deviations that were approved in Ordinance #03 -51 and is asking for approval of three additional deviations. All deviations are discussed in greater length in the staff report prepared for the Planning Commission. 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 Packet Page -64- 6/11/2013 9.A. 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 Coastal Fringe Subdistrict) as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. Relevant to this petition, the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict permits residential development (variety of unit types) at a base density of 4 DU /A. This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non - residential uses, including mixed -use developments such as Planned Unit Developments; parks, open space and recreational uses; and community facilities. Review of the Density Rating System deems this project is eligible for a base density of 4 DU /A and no density bonuses are applicable. The project is also located within the Coastal High Hazard Area, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map and described in the FLUE, so is subject to a 1 DU /A reduction. Therefore, this project is limited to a maximum density of 3 DU /A. Base Density 4 du /a Coastal High Hazard Area -I du/a Total Eligible Density 3 du/a The existing 1,558.49+ acre PUD is approved for 1,200 dwelling units or 0.77 units per acre, 10 acres of commercial development and the Resort/Village with limited commercial uses. The proposed PUD amendment increases the total dwelling unit count to 1,600 units [revised to 1,450 by the applicant at the CCPC], increases the total project acreage to 1,563.84+ acres and retains the 10 acres of commercial uses. The proposed PUD acreage of 1,563.84+ acres is reduced by the 10 -acre commercial portion of the PUD to 1,553.84 acres or 1.03 units per acre [revised by the applicant to 0.93 units per acre at the CCPC] for the density calculation. The proposed density is within the allowable density of 3 DU /A. Based on the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density for the subject site are consistent with the Future Land Use Element. Please refer to the staff report prepared for the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) for a complete analysis of GMP issues. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period. Therefore, the subject application can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). US -41 Impacts: The first concurrency link on US -41 that is impacted by this zoning amendment is Link 93.0, between Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Triangle Boulevard. The proposed amendment generates 18 additional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a Packet Page -65- 6/11/2013 9.A. 0.57% impact on US -41. This segment of US -41 currently has a remaining capacity of 466 trips, and is currently at LOS "D" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. No subsequent links of US -41 require analysis per the 2 % -2 % -3% criteria listed in the Transportation Element. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental staff has evaluated the amendment for consistency with the CCME. Environmental review staff has determined the petition may be found consistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and recommends approval. There are no proposed changes or proposed impacts to the previously approved preserve locations as shown on the PUD master plan. GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as requested in this proposed amendment. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A finding of consistency with the FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall finding that is required, and staff believes the petition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE as indicated previously in the GMP discussion. The proposed amendment is consistent with the GMP Transportation Element as previously discussed. Environmental staff also recommends that the petition be found consistent with the CCME. Therefore, zoning staff recommends that the petition be found consistent with the goals, objective and policies of the overall GMP. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPQ RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard this petition on April 18, 2013, and found that the criteria of Section 10.03.05.I and 10.02.1313.5 were met. By a unanimous vote (6 to 0) [Commissioner Strain abstained, and there are two vacant positions) with the motion made by Commissioner Brougham and seconded by Commissioner Klein, the CCPC recommended forwarding this petition to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval subject to the following changes to the PUD document: 1) The petitioner shall revise the table in the Statement of Compliance Item 8., Section 2.3 - -the Description of Project Plan and Proposed Land Use, and Section 2.4 -- Description of Project Density or Intensity of Land Use to correct the approved and proposed number of units and density information that reference the originally sought 1,600 units instead of the reduced request for 1,450 units; and 2) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document Section 2.5 to show the ten -year limit for each model home; and 3) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document to provide a minimum Type A landscape buffer along the west side of the F P & L easement. This appears in Section 2.81; and Packet Page -66- 6/11/2013 9.A. 4) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document to reflect changes put on the record for Section 2.13 -- Native Vegetation Retention Requirements, to add the following: The required native vegetation retention acres are 258.68 (1034.72 x 25 %). The MPUD master plan provides 291.94 acres of preserve or 28% native vegetation retention. 5) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document Section 2.15 to indicate that the development shall provide a 4 -foot wide bike lane and a five -foot sidewalk along the main spine road in all future development west of the FP &L easement; and 6) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document to reflect changes put on the record for Section 2.19- -Lake Setback and Excavation, to delete the following: Removal of fill and rock from the Wentworth Estates PUD shall be administratively permitted to an amount up to ten (1001o) percent per lake (20,000 cubic yards minimum), unless issued a commercial excavation permit. 7) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document to reflect changes put on the record for Section 7.6- -Water Management to reinstate previously numbered Section 7.6.C.9, renumbered to "C" relative to water quality monitoring. 8) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document to reflect changes put on the record for Deviation #10 (and Section 2.17.4) to revise references to water main connection between "LDR" and "MDR" areas to "between the two LDR areas," and add the cul -de -sac requirement as agreed upon by the applicant; and 9) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document Section 5.3 to add a requirement to begin the clubhouse construction by the Certification of Occupancy for the 800t' unit; and 10) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document Section 7.2 and 7.5 to reflect the revised number of units; and 11) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document to include the April 8, 2013 letter and its attachments from Lennar to the Treviso Bay Homeowners; and 12) The petitioner shall revise the PUD document Development Standards Table, Exhibit A to indicate that the LDR side yard setback shall be a minimum of 6 feet in width, except for the already platted parcels identified in footnote 44 as Picaere, Vercelli and Via Veneto. These revisions have been incorporated into the PUD document that is included in the draft ordinance. Letters and emails were sent to the county voicing opposition to the amendment, but many of those letters have been rescinded; during the CCPC hearing, however, several persons spoke in opposition to the petition. Therefore this petition cannot be placed on the Summary Agenda. Packet Page -67- 6/11/2013 9.A. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: [Quasi-judicial, Four -fifths vote for approval] This is a PUD amendment and a site specific rezone for a 5.3 acres parcel from a Rural Agricultural zoning district to a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district for a project known as the Wentworth MPUD. The burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposed rezone is consistent with all the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), should it consider denying the rezone, to determine that such denial would not be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. Criteria for MPUD Rezones Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval or not. 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. Consider: Conformity of the proposed MPUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. 4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development? 6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Consider: Conformity with MPUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications Packet Page -68- 6/11/2013 9.A. are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. 9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan? 10. Will the proposed MPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern? 11. Would the requested MPUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. 14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety? 16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? 19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations? 20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ( "reasonably ") be used in accordance with existing zoning? (a "core" question...) 22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county? 23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. Packet Page -69- 6/11/2013 9.A. 24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed MPUD rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as amended. 26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the MPUD rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? The 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. The proposed Ordinance was prepared by the County Attorney's Office. This item has been reviewed for legal sufficiency and is legally sufficient for Board action. An affirmative vote of four is necessary for Board approval. (HFAC) RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendations of the CCPC and further recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request subject to the attached PUD Ordinance that includes both the staff recommendation and the CCPC recommendation. Prepared by: Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner, Planning & Zoning Department, Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation Attachments: 1) Staff Report 2) Application Backup Information 3) TIS addendum 4) Ordinance Packet Page -70- 6/11/2013 9.A. COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: <item outline> Item Summary: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to consider an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 03 -51, as amended, the Wentworth Estates Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD), by increasing the permissible number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,450; by amending Ordinance Number 2004 -41, the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 5.3± acres of land zoned Rural Agricultural (A) to the Wentworth Estates MPUD; by revising the Development Standards to make changes including an elimination of the medium height density residential use which allowed 90.0 feet in zoned building heights and an increase in building height for medium density residential from 45 feet zoned height to 50 feet zoned height; defining zoned height and actual height; providing for deletion of exhibits including Exhibit "A" Location Map, Exhibit "B" Boundary Sketch and Legal Description, Exhibit "C" Existing Conditions Map, Exhibit "D" Topographic Map, Exhibit "E" Area Wide Community Services Map, Exhibit "F" Aerial Photograph, Exhibit "G" Preliminary Drainage Plans and Details, Exhibit "H" Preliminary Sewer Plans, Exhibit "I" Preliminary Water Plans, and Exhibit "K" Bald Eagle Management Plan; by amending the Master Plan; and adding Exhibit "A" Development Standards, Exhibit "B" MPUD Master Plan, Exhibit "C" Deviations, and Exhibit "D" Water Management Basins, and revising Developer Commitments. The property is located on the southwest side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) approximately 1 -1/4 miles southeast of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) in Sections 29, 30, 31, 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 5, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 1563.84± acres; and by providing an effective date. (PUDA- PL20120001126) Meeting Date: 6/11/13 Approved By Name: SheffieldMichael Title: Manager- Business Operations, CMO Date: 11:46:16 AM Packet Page -71- 6/11/2013 9.A. AGENDA ITEM 9 -A C) ev County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING SERVICES - -LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION -- PLANNING & REGULATION BEARING DATE: APRIL 18, 2013 SUBJECT: PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD PROPERTY OWNER & APPLICANT /AGENT: Owner /Applicant: Agents: Darin McMurray, Vice President Margaret Perry, AICP Lennar Homes, LLC WilsonMiller Stantec 10481 Ben C. Pratt Pkwy 3200 Bailey Ln Ste 200 Fort Myers, FL 33966 Naples, FL 34105 R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. Roetzel and Andress Trianon Centre, Third Floor 850 Park Shore Naples, FL 34103 NOTE: Lennar Homes, LLC owns undeveloped portions of the PUD as shown on the PUD Exhibit A. Other owners that are not participating in the PUD amendment include Treviso Bay Development LLC, Wentworth Estates Community Development District, the Florida Power & Light, the State of Florida and over 50 private owners. 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 Wentworth Estates Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) which is being developed under the name of Treviso Bay. For details about the project proposal, refer to "Purpose/Description of Project." GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of 1,563.84± acres, is located on the southwest side of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) approximately 1 -1/4 miles southeast of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US 41) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) in Sections 29, 30, 31, 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Section 5, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page) PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 1 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -72- _QL_ \"L' LBAL BAY 24 19 P SABAL BAY . ' .I .' .TORTOISE . . ABAL BAY / /� / / /,�/ �i_ _ •�. �' CRGA 6/11/2013 9.A. 0 2 t AC) L' ON/// ROOKERY BAY / ;� j!, . - , / / //• CypS LAE.jg \ I I I I CONSERVATION /,/ / // \ RMF-6 \ I I (502.7 t Ac) ROADWAY . / . .' .' •' .' .' . \ SF -3 W '�.�\ COMMON AREA/ EASEMENTS MYRTLE LANE ig FSF _ i/. 1 V - jj• -3 �' \ TOTAL: 1,563.84 AC / } 29 \ URBAN COASTAL FRINGE \ SUB- DISTRTCI' \ P ;Ill llli iiililt \ '� //j \ 1 1 1 1 I I I \ 1 I 1 i I- A j, TRAII. ACRES G4 I i 1 { I i Ii I i i - li i i I ` �• // / . � _ `\♦'r'T S/CnQ' " O'PT(C�. I(1 i I 1( 1 I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _IC RGoT ' -, .♦ CE \ T RSF IIII I Ililllll 11111 IIII _ _ ♦ h 1 1 1 1 i i l i lI l l l i\ i 11 1 1 ♦ ♦TRAIL ACRES CRGA�'�(., _ CLUBHOU$E.�''� "•'� -�`" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � •• '�•_.," A I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I! I I I I I I I I 1 I t I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 � CRG?1 - �' `• HITCHING POST MOBB.E HOME PARK N 1 111 I I I I I I I I l l l l l l i l l I'1 I IL /�j� /// AYlYJ1L� \\ •1 Z83� O 36 31 q � 6 5 6 I U I FA-ST - �1 14 a 0 URBAN COASTAL a SUB- DISTRICT & COE NSFERRIVNAGTIO i 1 AN COASTAL FRINGE A -ST l 1! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1{ SUB - DISTRICT l l l l l l l l i 77, I I I 771 I LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (LDR) COMMERCIAL AREA (CA) • SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 85,000 SOUARE FEET • SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED • ZERO LOT LINE COMMON /RECREATIONAL /GOLF • DUPLEX COURSE AREAS (CRGA) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (MDR & MDR -2) OPEN SPACE EA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED WATER MANAGEMENT AREAS • SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED GOLF COURSE • ZERO LOT LINE RECREATION FACILITIES • DUPLEX CLUBHOUSE • MULTI- FAMILY • PRO SHOP TOWNHOUSE NATURE PRESERVES • CLUSTER HOUSING BOARDWALKS, SMALL DOCKS, LTC. TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS • 1,600 EXHIBIT B: MPUD MASTER PLAN REVISED LIVID U� NO ACIWAGM 27 1 CM 43e u�n/ pEVSED TRAM a AND PARCEL. F LAND usES 1 e 13 CMW RCASM SEPT 1, 2012 FOR LEGONKL Y O eS . 17 9/12 CMW anlinLS.yaLYOKafn6aR/ W¢911.y4ler.Fa4114� REVE90N 06nVPIWN WTE oRA�K 9Y Packet Page -74- LENNAR HOMES, LLC WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED ..� USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT t a< t LAKE 19 20 ( lam. - -1 L (1324 t AC) -... - \30 29 FPL (31.3 f AC) \ i i ( PRESERVE G\ J (C (COMMERCIAL) / ( (10.0 t AC) URBAN RE9ID // ♦- SUB - DISTRICT C CRGA (166.0 m AC) j ® ® LDR i/ C-4 ( 10 ( \ 1 ` \ M ® ( MDR MICELI PUD \ ® (242.0 t AC) RAINTREE LANE M ® S MDR -2 �\ ® IN STORIES HEIGHT) L' ON/// ROOKERY BAY / ;� j!, . - , / / //• CypS LAE.jg \ I I I I CONSERVATION /,/ / // \ RMF-6 \ I I (502.7 t Ac) ROADWAY . / . .' .' •' .' .' . \ SF -3 W '�.�\ COMMON AREA/ EASEMENTS MYRTLE LANE ig FSF _ i/. 1 V - jj• -3 �' \ TOTAL: 1,563.84 AC / } 29 \ URBAN COASTAL FRINGE \ SUB- DISTRTCI' \ P ;Ill llli iiililt \ '� //j \ 1 1 1 1 I I I \ 1 I 1 i I- A j, TRAII. ACRES G4 I i 1 { I i Ii I i i - li i i I ` �• // / . � _ `\♦'r'T S/CnQ' " O'PT(C�. I(1 i I 1( 1 I 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _IC RGoT ' -, .♦ CE \ T RSF IIII I Ililllll 11111 IIII _ _ ♦ h 1 1 1 1 i i l i lI l l l i\ i 11 1 1 ♦ ♦TRAIL ACRES CRGA�'�(., _ CLUBHOU$E.�''� "•'� -�`" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � •• '�•_.," A I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I! I I I I I I I I 1 I t I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 � CRG?1 - �' `• HITCHING POST MOBB.E HOME PARK N 1 111 I I I I I I I I l l l l l l i l l I'1 I IL /�j� /// AYlYJ1L� \\ •1 Z83� O 36 31 q � 6 5 6 I U I FA-ST - �1 14 a 0 URBAN COASTAL a SUB- DISTRICT & COE NSFERRIVNAGTIO i 1 AN COASTAL FRINGE A -ST l 1! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1{ SUB - DISTRICT l l l l l l l l i 77, I I I 771 I LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (LDR) COMMERCIAL AREA (CA) • SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 85,000 SOUARE FEET • SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED • ZERO LOT LINE COMMON /RECREATIONAL /GOLF • DUPLEX COURSE AREAS (CRGA) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (MDR & MDR -2) OPEN SPACE EA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED WATER MANAGEMENT AREAS • SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED GOLF COURSE • ZERO LOT LINE RECREATION FACILITIES • DUPLEX CLUBHOUSE • MULTI- FAMILY • PRO SHOP TOWNHOUSE NATURE PRESERVES • CLUSTER HOUSING BOARDWALKS, SMALL DOCKS, LTC. TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS • 1,600 EXHIBIT B: MPUD MASTER PLAN REVISED LIVID U� NO ACIWAGM 27 1 CM 43e u�n/ pEVSED TRAM a AND PARCEL. F LAND usES 1 e 13 CMW RCASM SEPT 1, 2012 FOR LEGONKL Y O eS . 17 9/12 CMW anlinLS.yaLYOKafn6aR/ W¢911.y4ler.Fa4114� REVE90N 06nVPIWN WTE oRA�K 9Y Packet Page -74- LENNAR HOMES, LLC WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED ..� USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT t a< t EXHIBIT B: MPUD MASTER PLAN REVISED LIVID U� NO ACIWAGM 27 1 CM 43e u�n/ pEVSED TRAM a AND PARCEL. F LAND usES 1 e 13 CMW RCASM SEPT 1, 2012 FOR LEGONKL Y O eS . 17 9/12 CMW anlinLS.yaLYOKafn6aR/ W¢911.y4ler.Fa4114� REVE90N 06nVPIWN WTE oRA�K 9Y Packet Page -74- LENNAR HOMES, LLC WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED ..� USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT t a< t 6/11/2013 9.A. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property is partially developed. Currently there are some residential units, a golf course and some amenities. According to the Master Plan, approximately 513 acres are in the Rookery Bay Conservation Area. The property has been the subject of several previous zoning actions. The combined subject site was originally rezoned from PUD to PUD as the Lely Lakes Golf Resort in Ordinance #98 -85. That ordinance repealed Ordinance # 93 -32 for the previously named Lely Lakes PUD and Ordinance 486 -18 for the Naples R & D Park at Lely PUD. Ordinance #98 -85 was repealed in Ordinance #03 -51 on September 23, 2003. That is the ordinance that is currently in effect. The project is currently approved for 1,200 dwelling units, an 18 -hole golf course, and a maximum of 85,000 square feet of commercial uses on ten acres. The proposed changes are summarized below (taken from the application material): • Increase number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,600 (increase of 400 units) Reason for request: Wentworth was originally planned as a project aimed at the upper tier of the market in terms of both pricing and square footage. The revised plan calls for a broader cross section of product offerings to appeal to a greater proportion of the market. Along with this, Lennar is maintaining, and in many cases, improving upon the amenity offerings that were originally planned for Treviso Bay. The increase in density will help keep the fees associated with the maintenance and operation of these amenity offerings affordable by having a larger number of residents share in the cost. • Remove Tract references Reason for request: Elimination of artificial tract boundaries to provide flexibility to meeting changing market conditions. • Add and rezone 5.35 acre parcel (former FPL site) to include in PUD • Update ownership entity to reflect Lennar Homes, LLC as an owner • Update LDC references throughout • Remove conditions of approval that are already addressed in the LDC (redundant) • Remove extraneous exhibits that were attached to the original PUD • Remove "MHDR" residential category (medium high density residential), including the elimination of 90' high structures and in its place increase height for existing MDR residential category (medium density residential) from 3 stores or 45 feet to 4 stories or 50 feet • Update development standards table • Identify zoned height and actual height for all categories • Update list of deviations and add to list of requested deviations 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. The petitioner is seeking re- affirmation PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 2 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -75- 6/11/2013 9.A. approval of nine deviations that were approved in Ordinance #03 -51 and is asking for approval of three additional deviations. All deviations are discussed later in this report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: the developing Sabal Bay PUD, approved at an overall density of 0.85 units per acre, Rural Agricultural and RSF -4 zoned lands, which are partially developed East: A C-4 zoned tract that is used for roadway water management; the sunsetted and undeveloped Miceli PUD; RSF -4, RMF -6 lands that are developed along Raintree Lane, Maple Lane, Cypress Lane and Myrtle Lane; a nearly I/4 section of Rural Agricultural zoned undeveloped one acre ± tracts; Land's End Preserve, a residential PUD zoned project approved at an overall density of 2.75 units per acre South: Rural Agricultural and Agricultural with a Special Treatment Overlay (A -ST), undeveloped West: the developing Sabal Bay PUD, approved at an overall density of 0.85 units per acre, and Rural Agricultural and Agricultural with a Special Treatment Overlay (A -ST), undeveloped Aerial Photo (subject site depiction is approximate) PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -76- Page 3 of 23 6/11/2013 9.A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Urban (Urban - Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict) as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. Relevant to this petition, the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict permits residential development (variety of unit types) at a base density of 4 DU /A. This district is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non - residential uses, including mixed - use developments such as Planned Unit Developments; parks, open space and recreational uses; and community facilities. Review of the Density Rating System deems this project is eligible for a base density of 4 DU /A and no density bonuses are applicable. The project is also located within the Coastal High Hazard Area, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map and described in the FLUE, so is subject to a 1 DU /A reduction. Therefore, this project is limited to a maximum density of 3 DU /A. Base Density 4 du/a Coastal High Hazard Area -1 du/a Total Eligible Density 3 du/a The existing 1,558.49+ acre PUD is approved for 1,200 dwelling units or 0.77 units per acre, 10 acres of commercial development and the Resort/Village with limited commercial uses. The proposed PUD amendment increases the total dwelling unit count to 1,600 units, increases the total project acreage to 1563.84+ acres and retains the 10 acres of commercial uses. The proposed PUD acreage of 1563.84+ acres is reduced by the 10 -acre commercial portion of the PUD to 1553.84 acres or 1.03 units per acre for the density calculation. The proposed density is within the allowable density of 3 DU /A. The commercial portion of this PUD does not comply with criteria in the FLUE and therefore is not consistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section. However, review of FLUE Policy 5.1 provides that property zoned prior to the adoption of the Plan and found to be consistent through the Zoning Re- evaluation Program are consistent with the Growth Management Plan and designated on the Future Land Use Map series as properties Consistent by Policy. Zoning changes will be permitted to these properties, and to other properties deemed consistent with this Future Land Use Element via Policies 5.9 through 5.12, provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity commercial zoning district and the overall intensity of the development allowed by the new zoning district, except as allowed in Policy 5.11 is not increased. The 10 -acre commercial -tract in this PUD was previously found to be consistent with the FLUE via Policy 5.1 and 5.12. No change in uses is proposed to this commercial tract. The commercial (Resort/Village) component of the original PUD approval allowed for 10,000 square feet of independent retail/services. The square footage of the above referenced 10 -acre commercial tract was unspecified in the original PUD approval, but utilizing the 1994 buildout study figure of 8,500 square feet per acre yields 85,000 square feet for the commercial tract, plus the 10,000 square feet of commercial within the Resort/Village yields an estimated 95,000 PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 4 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3127/13 Packet Page -77- 6/11/2013 9.A. square feet for the total PUD. The PUD allows up to 85,000 square feet of commercial. No change in use is proposed to the commercial Resort/Village tract. Based on the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses and density for the subject site are consistent with the Future Land Use Element. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period. Therefore, the subject application can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). US -41 Impacts: The first concurrency link on US -41 that is impacted by this zoning amendment is Link 93.0, between Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Triangle Boulevard. The proposed amendment generates 17 additional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 0.57% impact on US -41. This segment of US -41 currently has a remaining capacity of 466 trips, and is currently at LOS "D" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. No subsequent links of US -41 require analysis per the 2 % -2 % -3% criteria listed in the Transportation Element. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental staff has evaluated the amendment for consistency with the CCME. Environmental review staff has determined the petition may be found consistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and recommends approval. There are no proposed changes or proposed impacts to the previously approved preserve locations as shown on the PUD master plan. GMP Conclusion: The GNP 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. A finding of consistency with the FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall fording that is required, and staff believes the petition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE as indicated previously in the GMP discussion. The proposed rezone is consistent with the GMT Transportation Element as previously discussed. Environmental staff also recommends that the petition be found consistent with the CCME. Therefore, zoning staff recommends that the petition be found consistent with the goals, objective and policies of the overall GMP. 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 10.03.05.I, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings "), which establish the legal bases to PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 5 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -78- 6/11/2013 9.A. support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the bases for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support its action on the rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning Services Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: There are no proposed changes or proposed impacts to the previously approved preserve locations as shown on the PUD master plan. Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document and Master Plan for right -of -way and access issues as well as roadway capacity, and recommends approval subject to the Developer /owner commitments as provided in the PUD ordinance. Utility Review: Utilities staff has reviewed the petition and recommends approval. Fire Review: It is understood that the proposed development outlined in the PUDA documents is conceptual in nature. And as there is not enough information at this time to offer specific comment regarding compliance with currently adopted Fire Codes, please note that as the site development progresses, all permits will be subject to compliance with all Fire Codes, Standards, Ordinances and local FCO Policy & Procedures adopted and in place at the time of the respective permit. This shall include, but not be limited to fire lane widths, turning radii and dead -end requirements, hydrant locations, fire flow requirements, etc. 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. To support that opinion staff offers the following analysis of this project. The development standards contained in Exhibit A of the PUD document show the following changes from the originally approved development standards. The Medium Height Density Residential Use has been removed entirely. A caveat has been added to the front yard setback to accommodate a 23 foot potential front loading garage setback. The side yard setback for Low Density Residential (LDR) uses has been reduced from 6 feet to 5 feet. Maximum heights have been revised. A footage measurement for both zoned height and average height of 45 feet and 50 feet respectively has been added to the Low Density Residential (LDR) product type. In the MDR product type the petitioner is increasing the height from 3 to 4 stories, and a footage measurement for both zoned height and average height of 50 feet and 55 feet PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 6 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -79- 6/11/2013 9.A. respectively has been added. The petitioner has added a clarification that the 3 stories /55 feet allowable height of the recreational facilities is for zoned height with 65 feet to be the maximum actual height. Several footnotes have been removed from the Exhibit as they are no longer applicable. The types of uses are not changing. This amendment removes the use type that could have been 90 feet tall; in the current amendment the tallest structures would be 65 feet (actual height). The Master Plan shows some use locations shifting on the site, with the MDR type units proposed to be allowed along the Sabal Bay PUD boundary. That portion of the Sabal Bay PUD should not be negatively affected as the abutting area is shown as preserve area on the Sabal Bay Master Plan. The surrounding area's zoning and land uses have not significantly changed since this project has been developing. The Surrounding Zoning and Land Use discussion on page 2 of the staff report and the Master Plan all reflect zoning and uses that were in effect in 2003. No new uses are proposed as part of this amendment. An increase in the density is proposed because 400 units are being added, however this project's density would remain less than any of the abutting properties. Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking re- affirmation of nine deviations from action in Ordinance #03 -51 and approval of three new deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are listed in PUD Exhibit C (previously approved Deviations 1 — 9 in accordance with Ordinance #03 -51 to still remain in effect). Deviations are a normal derivative of the PUD zoning process following the purpose and intent of the PUD zoning district as set forth in LDC Section 2.03.06 which says in part: It is further the purpose and intent of these PUD regulations to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design, and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership or control. PUDs .... may depart from the strict application of setback height, and minimum lot requirements of conventional zoning districts while maintaining minimum standards by which flexibility may be accomplished, and while protecting the public interest.... Deviation 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.0 to allow fences or walls to be permitted at maximum height: Seven feet (T). If the fence or wall is constructed on a landscaped berm, the wall shall not exceed six feet (6) in height from the top of berm elevation for berm elevations with an average side slope of 4:1 or less, and shall not exceed six feet (6) in height from the top of berm elevation for berms with an average side slope of greater than 4:1 (i.e. 3:1). Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 7 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -80- 6/1112013 9.A. This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation for security and aesthetic purposes and to maintain consistency with the partially developed project. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated especially in light of the fact that the site is already partially developed using this deviation's allowances. 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. safetv 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 nublic nurnoses to a degree at least equivalent to literal annlication of such re ations." Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.0 and LDC Appendix B, in order to allow 50 feet of right -of -way for local roads rather than the required 60 -foot width (throughout). Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation as this reduction in right -of -way width allows the applicant to minimize impacts to potential wetland and upland preserves while maintaining safe access and consistency throughout the project. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. However, zoning staff reiterates the comments provided by the fire reviewer: .... there is not enough information at this time to offer specific comment regarding compliance with currently adopted Fire Codes, as the site development progresses, all permits will be subject to compliance with all Fire Codes, Standards, Ordinances and local FCO Policy & Procedures adopted and in place at the time of the respective permit. This shall include, but not be limited to fire lane widths, turning radii and dead -end requirements (including minimum cul -de -sac dimensions), hydrant locations, fire flow requirements, etc. The petitioner has not sought relief (nor can he) from any fire code requirements as part of this zoning action, thus it is understood that compliance would be required. 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, safetv 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 nublic numoses to a degree at least equivalent to literal annlicatinn of such regulations." PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 8 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -81- 6/11/2013 9.A. Deviation 3 seeks relief from the former LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.10, Section 2 -12 of the Collier County Code of Ordinances, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements for Subdivisions C.13.h. of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, to allow street intersection radii of twenty (20) feet (face of curb) for all internal project streets and thirty -five (35) feet for street intersections at project entrances. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation to maintain consistency with the existing project roadways that were designed, approved and constructed with these radii standards in Wentworth Estates MPUD. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved as it is a re- affirmation of an allowance that was made in the 2003 ordinance. However, it is important to note that new deviations cannot be sought from this provision because the PUD deviation allowances in the LDC only allow deviation to be sought from provisions within the LDC itself. The requirement from which relief is sought in this deviation has been moved from the LDC to another document, the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, i.e., the Code of Laws and Ordinances. Since this project is already partially developed utilizing this provision, it seems appropriate for the CCPC to approve this deviation. 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 10.02.13.13.51, 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 the former LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.10, Section 2 -12 of the Collier County Code of Ordinances, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements for Subdivisions C.13 j of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, to allow reverse curves without tangents (throughout). Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation to maintain consistency with the existing project roadways that were designed, approved and constructed with reverse curves without tangents in Wentworth Estates MPUD. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved as it is a re- affirmation of an allowance that was made in the 2003 ordinance. However, this deviation is also seeking relief from the Code of Laws and Ordinances just like the situation in Deviation 43. To reiterate the situation, it is important to note that new deviations cannot be sought from this provision because the PUD deviation allowances in the LDC only allow deviation to be sought from provisions within the LDC itself. The requirement from which relief is sought in this deviation has been moved from the LDC to another document, the PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 9 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -82- 6/11/2013 9.A. Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, i.e., the Code of Laws and Ordinances. Since this project is already partially developed utilizing this provision, it seems appropriate for the CCPC to approve this deviation. 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 10.02.13.13.51, 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 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.02.04.F in the case of residential structures with a common architectural theme, required property development regulations of Exhibit B, Wentworth Estates MPUD Development Standards, may be waived or reduced provided a site plan demonstrating the common architectural theme and meeting the criteria of LDC Section 4.02.04.17 is approved by the Growth Management Department. This is a deviation of LDC Section 4.02.04.F which requires approval by the Collier County Planning Commission. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: This is a previously approved deviation and it relates to standards for cluster residential design. The LDC allows reduction of the development standards if approved by the CCPC. The applicant is requesting the retention of this deviation to allow a reduction of the development standards through administrative approval by staff through the SDP process. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The CCPC is authorized to grant relief from the strict property development regulations pursuant to LDC Section 4.02.041, provided below: Additional reduction to the development standards provided at sections 4.0-7.04 C. —E. may be approved by the Collier County Planning Commission for projects defined as common architectural theme projects. In determining whether or not a project qualifies as a common architectural theme project the BCC shall determine that all of the following design features are incorporated into the project: 1. The architectural style of the dwelling units /structures shall be similar in design and in the use of materials and color. 2. The residential project shall have a signature entranceway which serves to identify the development as having a common architectural theme. The entranceway design and improvement elements shall include some or all of the following: the use of landscape materials, gated structure, water features, sculpture, and ornamental pavement surfaces. 3. Street materials, signage, and lighting shall be complementary and the same throughout the project's accessways. On the next page is a comparison of Table 5 and the proposed PUD property development regulations. PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 10 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -83- 6/11/2013 9.A. Design Standard Table 5 * PUD Exhibit A LDR PUD Exhibit A MDR Minimum lot area per single- family unit 3,000 sq ft 6,500 sq ft (average) 2,400 sq ft (average) Minimum lot width Cul -de -sac lots 20 feet None None All other lots 40 feet None None Minimum setbacks Front yard 20 feet 15 feet 15 feet Front entry garage 10 feet 23 feet 23 feet Side entry garage 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet Side yard Zero lot line on one side 10 feet on remaining side N/A 10 feet on remaining side No Zero Lot Line 5 feet each side 5 feet each side N/A Rear Yard Principal structure 10 feet 10 feet 5 feet Accessory structure 3 feet 5 feet 5 feet * Table 5. Table of Design Standards for Cluster Development of LDC Section 4.02.04.0 It is interesting to note that the design standards for cluster development provided in Table 5 of LDC Section 4.02.04.0 are, in some instances, more restrictive than what is presented in Exhibit A of the PUD document. Staff finds the petitioner's deviation and rationale supportable for this project if the limitations set forth above in 1 -3 are included in the PUD document. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation with the stipulation that Items 1 -3 above are included in the PUD document. , 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 10.02.13.13.5.11, 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 4.05.04.1-1, parking for community center /clubhouse shall be one space per every two hundred (200) square feet of gross floor area which shall be considered inclusive of required golf course parking. Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation: This is a previously approved deviation. The LDC requires 4 parking spaces per golf hole plus one space per 200 square feet for off ce /lobby /pro shop /clubhouse. Experience with past golf course development has shown that providing parking at one space per 200 square feet is adequate for parking for golf course and associated uses. PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -84- Page 11 of 23 6/11/2013 9.A. Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated especially in light of the fact that the site is already partially developed using this deviation's allowances. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation. findin 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 re ations." Deviation 7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.3.e that requires a temporary use permit for a model home (occupied or unoccupied) that is issued initially for a period of three (3) years with extensions beyond that period requiring approval of a conditional use, to allow model homes to be permitted through a temporary use permit for the life of the project with no extension of the temporary use permit (or conditional use). The petitioner is not seeking to have more models that what is permitted by the LDC. Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation: This is a previously approved deviation and is common in most residential PUD's. A model home may be in place for several years while the project is developed and obtaining temporary use extensions is both time consuming and expensive. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Due to the size of the project, staff agrees that some allowance can be made to allow additional time for the model homes. However, staff also recognizes that markets change over time and consumers' wants also change, thus staff would suggest that the models be allowed to remain for a maximum of ten years rather than a potential forever. This same deviation for 10 years was approved in the recent Parklands PUD amendment (PUDA- PL20100001551). Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation with the stipulation that no model can remain for more than ten years without securing Conditional Use or its successor process approval, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.133.51, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal implication of such regulations." Deviation 8 seeks relief from 5.06.02.B.6, allowing sign face area of entrance signs to be 120 square feet. Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation: This is a previously approved deviation and is common in most residential PUD's. The LDC allows on premise signs in residential districts to be 64 square feet. The applicant requests the sign face area of entrance signs to be 120 square feet. PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 12 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3127/13 Packet Page -85- 6/11/2013 9.A. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated especially in light of the fact that the site is already partially developed using this deviation's allowances. 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 10.02.133.5.11, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is "iustified as meeting public p»rposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation 9 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.4, allowing construction entrance signs and employment signs to be a maximum of 20 square feet in size. Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation: This is a previously approved deviation and is common in many PUD's. The LDC allows construction entrance signs to be 12 square feet for projects that are 1 -10 acres in size (no building permit required) and 64 square feet for projects in excess of 10 acres in size (building permit required). The applicant requests the sign be permitted at a maximum of 20 square feet with no buildingpermit required. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated especially in light of the fact that the site is already partially developed using this deviation's allowances. 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." NEW DEVIATIONS: Deviation #10 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J. Street System Requirements, to allow cul -de -sacs in excess of 1,000' in length to a maximum of 2,500 feet long. The developer shall provide internal looping of water mains to the greatest extent possible, subject to review and approval by the Collier County Utilities staff. The developer shall provide a water main connection between the "LDR" and "MDR" at the north end of the property, through the FPL easement (north of the roadway (Treviso Bay Drive) shown on the MPUD Master Plan. Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification for this deviation the following: PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 13 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -86- 6/11/2013 9.A. The applicant requests approval of this deviation as pressure in the water main in the Wentworth Estates MPUD is sufficient so that water lines constructed down cul -de -sacs in excess of 1000 feet have sufficient pressure to meet or exceed required fire flow pressures. Also all cul -de -sacs are designed and constructed with the required radii for safe fire truck access. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved, however in recognition of past CCPC recommendations, staff suggests that the following stipulation should be added to this approval: The developer, or successors and assigns, shall provide a stabilized emergency vehicle turn - around, meeting local fire prevention code criteria, approximately midway along the cul -de -sac. Additionally, Utilities staff has reviewed this deviation and has agreed to the qualifying language provided in the request. However, zoning staff reiterates the comments provided by the fire reviewer: .... there is not enough information at this time to offer specific comment regarding compliance with currently adopted Fire Codes, as the site development progresses, all permits will be subject to compliance with all Fire Codes, Standards, Ordinances and local FCO Policy & Procedures adopted and in place at the time of the respective permit. This shall include, but not be limited to fire lane widths, turning radii and dead -end requirements (including minimum cul -de -sac dimensions), hydrant locations, fire flow requirements, etc. The petitioner has not sought relief (nor can he) from any fire code requirements as part of this zoning action, thus it is understood that compliance would be required. Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation with the stipulation that the developer, or successors and assigns, shall provide a stabilized emergency vehicle turn - around, meeting local fire prevention code criteria, approximately midway along the cul -de -sac, 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 10.02.13.13.51, 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 11 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.H., to allow parking for all multi - family units to be 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit plus 10% in lieu of the minimum LDC required 2 spaces per unit. Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation: An administrative parking reduction was approved by the Growth Management Division on November 8, 2011 for a project within the Wentworth Estates MPUD. The applicant PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 14 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -87- 6/11/2013 9.A. intends the remainder of the multi family portion of the project to be similar, if not the same, product previously approved for in the administrative parking reduction. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is accommodated especially in light of the fact that administrative approval has already been granted for a portion of the site as shown below as "Project Location" for the SDPA of Acqua Di Treviso (APR- PL2011- 2139). LOCATION MAP In that project, the parking reduction allowed the developer to provide 297 parking spaces instead of the required 360 parking spaces, based upon the proposed 180 units within that tract [ 180 units X 1.5 spaces + 10% = 297 parking spaces]. That is approximately a 17% reduction in the number of parking spaces for the multi - family homes in that tract. Zoniniz and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, findin 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 meetiniz public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Deviation 12 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02 which requires a Type B buffer between single family and multi - family uses. Specifically, the applicant requests that no buffer be required between these uses when a water body separates the two uses. PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 15 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -88- 6/11/2013 9.A. Petitioner's Rationale: The petitioner provided the following justification for this deviation: This is a commonly approved deviation in PUD's. There should be no buffer required between uses when there is a water body separating the two uses. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Staff sees no detrimental effect if this deviation request is approved. This same deviation was approved in the most recent Sabal Bay PUD amendment. In that petition the applicant provided the following justification: Requiring the installation of a buffer in these areas would inhibit the lake views for both single family and multi family residences 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 "iustified as meetina public uumoses to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." FINDINGS OF FACT: LDC Subsection 10.03.05.I.2 states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below. [Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in bold, non - italicized font]: PUD Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria" (Staff s responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the 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 as limited by staff. 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 PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 16 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -89- 6/11/2013 9.A. 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 undeveloped portions 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 GMT discussion and the attached report from 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 petition may 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 and screening requirements. Staff has provided a review of the proposed uses and believes that the project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The uses are not proposed to change as part of this amendment and the uses approved in the original PUD rezone were determined to be compatible. The petitioner is revising some property development regulations, but staff believes uses remain compatible given the proposed 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 PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 17 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3127/13 Packet Page -90- 6/11/2013 9.A. 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 re- affirmation of nine deviations that were approved in Ordinance #03 -51 and three new deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06.A). This criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. Staff has provided an analysis of the deviations in the Deviation Discussion portion of this staff report, and is recommending approval of the deviations with stipulations. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.03.05.1. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners ... shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable" (Staffs 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. 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 with the exception of a small tract of land that is surrounded by the petition that is being added (the FPL site). 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -91- Page 18 of 23 6/11/2013 9.A. 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 the 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 PUD ordinance regulations. 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 County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The project includes numerous restrictions and standards that are designed to address compatibility of the project. Development in compliance with the proposed PUD amendment should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 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 mitigation that will be provided by the developer. Staff believes the petition can be deemed consistent with all elements of the GMP if the mitigation is included in any recommendation of approval. 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; PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 19 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3127/13 Packet Page -92- 6/11/2013 9.A. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market conditions. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; The proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The proposed 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 staffs 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 majority of 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. PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 20 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -93- 6/11/2013 9.A. 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. 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 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 (N M): The applicant's agents conducted a duly noticed NIM on December 6, 2012, at the Sheppard of the Glades Church on Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Please see attached synopsis (Exhibit B). COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office reviewed the staff report for this petition on March 19, 2013. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review Services staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PUDZ- A- PL20120001126 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval subject to the following stipulations: 1. Approve Deviation #5 subject to the following limitations: 1. The architectural style of the dwelling units /structures shall be similar in design and in the use of materials and color. 2. The residential project shall have a signature entranceway which serves to identify the development as having a common architectural theme. The entranceway design and improvement elements shall include some or all of the following: the use PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD Page 21 of 23 April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3/27/13 Packet Page -94- 6/11/2013 9.A. of landscape materials, gated structure, water features, sculpture, and ornamental pavement surfaces. 3. Street materials, signage, and lighting shall be complementary and the same throughout the project's accessways. 2. Approve Deviation #7 with the following stipulation: No model can remain for more than ten years without securing Conditional Use, or its successor process approval. 3. Approve Deviation #10 subject to the following limitation: The developer, or successors and assigns, shall provide a stabilized emergency vehicle turn - around, meeting local fire prevention code criteria, approximately midway along the cul -de -sac. PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD April 18, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3127/13 Packet Page -95- Page 22 of 23 PREPARED BY: k" "'V� KAY SELEM, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING 9- 3313 1 RAYMOND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING MIKE BOSI, AICP, INTERIM DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING APPROVED BY: NICK CASALAP GROWTH MAN DIVISION It$" 1R; -[13 DATE -- - 7 DATE DATE DATE Tentatively scheduled for the June 11, 2013 Board of County Commissioners Meeting Attachments: Exhibit A — Ownership Exhibit Exhibit B —NTM Synopsis from Agent PUDA- PL20120001126: WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD April 13, 2013 CCPC Revised: 3122/13 Packet Page -96- 6/11/2013 9.A. Page 23 of 23 6/11/2013 9.A. US~ OWNERSW TF&'VW BAY DeWELUMM L= Mom MANTlTJV OF r LyGIy��W HM M) FTIA�GryV��I�OG/ AW\/M1�'1�1 M�N/p OTHM BULDM \ WENMOR BBTATEB C \ � COD \ STATE OF FLOFDA \ ,fp \ Exhibit A to CCPC Staff Report PER COLLER COLS N PFoPWff APPRMEM FECORDS AS OF a- ie -2o�s LENNAR OWNERSHIP EXHIBIT 03719/13 LENNAR HOMES, LLC �N.T.S Packet Page -97- WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED 215610972 -x17 'REV N0. REVISION DESCRIP110N OnTE DRAWN er _ USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 1 � 1 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates MPUD Amendment Neighborhood Information Meeting December 6, 2012 5:30 P.M. Hanson Hall at Shepherd of the Glades Lutheran Church 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples FL 34112 (provided by the applicant's agent) Meeting Summary Meeting began at 5:30 p.m. Members of the project team were present including Darin McMurray and Russell Smith with Lennar Homes, Bruce Anderson of Roetzel and Andress, Margaret Perry, David Wilkison, and Jeff Perry of WiIsonMiller Stantec. Kay Deselem, Collier County Principal Planner also attended. Members of the public were invited to sign the attendance sheet and to pick up a petition fact sheet. Four individuals registered on the sign -in sheet (attached); however, approximately 10 -12 individuals were in attendance. Margaret Perry of WilsonMiller Stantec welcomed those in attendance and provided an overview of the requested PUD amendment application. A portion of the project was originally approved in 1988 and it was known as Naples R &D Park at Lely. In 1998, the R &D Park PUD was incorporated into a new PUD known as Lely Lakes Golf Resort. In 2003, the PUD was rezoned to a new PUD known as Wentworth Estates. The site contains approximately 1,564 acres and approximately 514 of those acres are owned by the State of Florida as Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Ms. Perry summarized the proposed changes to the PUD: Increase number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,600 (increase of 400 units). Plan is for 310 single family and a maximum of 1,290 multi - family dwelling units. The number of single family units can be increased by a corresponding decrease in the number of multi- family units with a conversion factor of 2.48. That is, for traffic generation purposes, one single family unit is equal to 2.48 multi - family units. Reason for request: Wentworth was originally planned as a project aimed at the upper tier of the market in terms of both pricing and square footage. The revised plan calls for a broader cross section of product offerings to appeal to a greater proportion of the market. Along with this, Lennar is maintaining, and in many cases, improving upon the amenity offerings that were originally planned for Treviso Bay. The increase in density will help keep the fees associated with the maintenance and operation of these amenity offerings affordable by having a larger number of residents share in the cost. • No change to location, acreage or square footage of commercial —10 acres, 85,000 square feet. • Rezone 5.35 acre parcel (former FPL site) to be included within the PUD • Update ownership entity throughout the PUD document • Update LDC references throughout the PUD document • Remove redundant conditions of approval that are already addressed in the LDC • Remove extraneous exhibits that were attached to the original PUD Page 1 of 4 Exhibit B Packet Page -98- 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates MPUD Amendment Neighborhood Information Meeting • Remove "MHDR" residential category (medium height density residential), including the elimination of 90' high structures and in its place increase height for existing MDR residential category (medium density residential) from 3 stores or 45 feet to 4 stories or 50 feet zoned height • Update development standards table including the deletion of all references to the medium height density residential category • Identify zoned height and actual height for all categories in keeping with the requirements of the LDC • Update list of deviations and add to list of requested deviations Questions asked /issues raised: Why increase in units? Response: To meet market demand, provide a broader cross section of products, and allow product (dwelling unit) type flexibility for build out of the project. Where will the additional units be located? Response: The additional units will be located throughout the project in the previously identified developable areas. It is not known at this time exactly where they will go, but will be determined during the planning and layout of the individual development pods. Concern about mix of single family and multi - family units and the conversion factor. Response: The plan is for 310 single family units and a maximum of 1,290 multi - family units. The number of single family units can increase by a corresponding decrease in multi - family units. One single family units equals 2.48 multi - family units based on traffic generation. What are the new deviations? Response: There are nine existing /approved deviations in the PUD, although not listed in a separate "list of deviations" document. The three additional deviations requested include (1) allowing cul -de -sacs in excess of 1,000 feet, up to 2,500 feet; (2) allow parking for multi - family units to be 1.5 per unit plus 10% in lieu; and (3) no buffer required between single family and multi - family units when there is a water body separating the two uses. Why should cul -de -sacs be in excess of 1000 feet? Response: This is a common requested and approved deviation in PUD's where the site configuration is dictated by the natural landscape, e.g., preserve areas, etc. The developer has committed that the length of a cul -de- sac will not be longer than 2,500 feet. Adequate water flow must be proven at time of SDP review in order to approved by fire review. Concern about fire department access and ability to turn around on cul -de -sacs. Response: Appropriate turn radii will be provided as required by fire review. Concern about decrease in existing property values because of the new products offered compared to the existing developed houses. Response: Lennar is very proud of the variety of housing products they offer and the success of their existing communities in the County has shown that there product is in demand in the marketplace. There are many issues that are involved in property values and the economic downturn over the last several years have resulted in a decrease in property values in many areas. Page 2 of 4 Exhibit B Packet Page -99- 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates MPUD Amendment Neighborhood Information Meeting Concern about the use of Southwest Boulevard and construction traffic entering through the main project entrance on U.S. 41. Response: As a condition of approval of the Wentworth PUD (Section 7.5.A) construction access was specifically prohibited from using Southwest Boulevard. Residents of the project will be able to enter the project using Southwest Boulevard. Concern about traffic signal at main project entrance: Response: Providing a signal, when warranted is the obligation of the developer. A traffic signal is being installed by the developer at the Southwest Boulevard /US 41 intersection. Concern about maintenance of Southwest Boulevard and cars parked on the road damaging lawns and sprinkler heads. Response: Southwest Boulevard is a County -owned and maintained roadway. As outlined in the PUD, the developer was required to provide improvements to Southwest Boulevard and these improvements are complete. Concern about the 1.5 parking spaces per multi - family dwelling deviation: Response: Research has shown that in the Lennar lifestyle developments, 1.5 spaces per multi- family dwelling unit is more than sufficient to accommodate the parking demand of the residents and guests. Additionally, the 1.5 space per unit rate reduces the amount of paving and results in more landscaping and open space. Concern about presence of carports or uncovered parking areas. Response: Covered and uncovered parking areas are planned for some of the multi - family product. The covered parking areas existing on site are not intrusive and are architecturally acceptable. Landscaping is also provided as required by the LDC. Explanation of status of existing clubhouse. Response: An architect has been hired to design the golf clubhouse and the work is currently in the design phase. It is anticipated that the design chosen will make some use of the existing concrete structure presently existing on the clubhouse site. The square footage of the clubhouse will probably be somewhat less than the previous developer planned. What is the status of the fitness center and what amenities will be included? Will it be open to the residents only? Response: The SDP for the "Lifestyle Center" has been approved and construction is expected to begin in the near future. The center will include tennis courts, a bocce ball court, a pool and pool area, and a fitness area. The center will open for the use of residents and their guests. The golf course has a limited number of private memberships, but eventually, all recreational facilities will be turned over to the community association. Commitment was made by the developer at the NIM that single family only would be located on Parcel F (please see attached map). The area is currently labeled as "MDR" and will be revised to indicate "LDR." Concern about school busses going through the neighborhood. Response: There will probably be school -aged children in the development. The routing of school busses through this project or at this project's entrances is decided by the School District and not under the control of the developer. Concern about marketing toward seasonal residents and effect on local businesses when they are gone during the summer months. Response: There will, no doubt, be seasonal residents Page 3 of 4 Exhibit B Packet Page -100- 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates MPUD Amendment Neighborhood Information Meeting that purchase units in the project and the market will dictate the mix of seasonal versus permanent residents. The effect on local businesses when these residents are not in town is not part of a rezone process. Concern about renters and other potential community rule infractions. Response: The community has covenants that control or restrict certain activities and can /will be enforced. Concern about requirement in the PUD that requires membership of one resident on the CDD Board. Response: The existing PUD does not contain said requirement. Meeting concluded at approximately 7:15 p.m. Page 4 of 4 Exhibit B Packet Page -101- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ PLANNING AND REGULATION 6/11/2013 9.A. CQY CQVLYtty 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.colliergov.net APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEAR1NG FOR: ® AMENDMENT TO PUD (PUDA) ❑ PUD REZONE (PUDZ) ❑ PUD TO PUD REZONE (PUDZ -A) PETITION NO PROJECT NAME To be completed by staff DATE PROCESSED APPLICANT INFORMATION NAME OF APPLICANT(S) Lennar Homes, LLC; Darin McMurray, Vice President ADDRESS 10481 Ben C. Pratt Parkway CITY Fort Myers STATE Florida ZIP 33966 TELEPHONE # 239 - 225 -6978 CELL # FAX # 239 - 304 -2407 E -MAIL ADDRESS: russell.r.smith @lennar.com NAME OF AGENT R. Bruce Anderson Roetzel and Andress ADDRESS 850 Park Shore Drive: Trianon Centre 3d Floor CITY Naples STATE Florida ZIP 34103 TELEPHONE # 239 -649 -2708 CELL # FAX # 239 - 261 -3659 E -MAIL ADDRESS: banderson @ ralaw.com NAME OF AGENT Margaret Perry, WilsonMiller Stantec ADDRESS 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 CITY Naples STATE FL ZIP 34105 TELEPHONE # 649 -4040 CELL # FAX # 643 -5716 E -MAIL ADDRESS: margaret.perry @stantec.com BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. Packet Page -102- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ PLANNING AND REGULATION Goer County ASSOCIATIONS 6/11/2013 9.A. 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.colliergov.net Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner's website at http: / /www.colliergov.net /index.aspx ?page =774 NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: East Naples Civic Association, Inc. Att: Ted Beisler, President MAILING ADDRESS 4784 Inverness Club Drive CITY Na les STATE FL ZIP .34112 NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: Bayshore Gateway Triangle CRA MAILING ADDRESS 4069 Bayshore Drive CITY Naples STATE FL ZIP 34112 Disclosure of Interest Information a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address % of Ownership 2 Packet Page -103- 6/11/2013 9.A. CO MY COUnty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.coliieraov.net b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address % of Ownership Lennar Corporation is a public company. The officers of Lennar Corporation based on current annual report are: Stuart A. Miller, CEO Bruce E. Gross, Vice President, CFO Richard Beckwith, President Jonathan M. Jaffe, Vice President, COO Diane J. Bessette, Vice President, Treasurer Mark Sustana, Secretary and General Counsel David M. Collins, Controller Lennar Homes, LLC (100% owned by Lennar Corp.) U.S. Home Corporation, Managing Member; 700 NW 107" Avenue, Suite 400, Miami, FL 33172; Officers of U.S. Home Corporation based on current annual report are: 1 % Stuart A. Miller, CEO Bruce E. Gross, CFO Richard Beckwith, President Jonathan M. Jaffe, COO Diane J. Bessette, Vice President, Treasurer Mark Sustana, Vice President, Secretary Lennar Pacific Properties, Inc., 700 NW 107 Avenue, Suite 400, Miami, FL 33172, which is owned 100% by Lennar Pacific, Inc., which is owned 75% by Greystone Homes, Inc., which is owned 100% by U.S. Home Corporation, which is 100% owned by Lennar Corporation. The other 25% of Lennar Pacific, Inc. is owned by Lennar Southwest Holding Corporation, which is owned 100% by Lennar Homes Holdings, LLC, which is 100% owned by Lennar Corporation 99% C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address % of Ownership 3 Packet Page -104- 6/11/2013 9.A. Co er County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.colliergov.net d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and /or limited partners. Name and Address % of Ownership e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address % of Ownership Date of Contract: f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address g. Date subject property acquired ® leased ❑ Term of lease yrs. /mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Date of option: Date option terminates: , or Anticipated closing date h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. 4 Packet Page -105- 6/11/2013 9.A. Co r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.collierciov.net PROPERTY LOCATION Detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page.) if request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre- application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section /Township /Range 29, 30, 31, 32 / 50 South / 26 East AND Section /Township /Range 5 / 51 South / 26 East Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: Please see folio numbers attached to addressing checklist included with this submittal Metes & Bounds Description: Please see Section 1.2 and Exhibit A, Legal Description, in the PUD document. Size of property ft. X ft. = Total Sq. Ft. Acres 1.563.84± Address /general location of subject property: South side Of U.S. 41 East, east of Sabal Bay PUD. PUD District (LDC 2.03.06): ❑ Residential ❑ Community Facilities ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial X Mixed Use (MPUD) 5 Packet Page -106- 6/11/2013 9.A. CJ Ter County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.colliergov.net ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Does the owner of the subject property own so, give complete legal description of entire attach on separate page). No. Section /Township /Range N/A Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: property contiguous to the subject property? If contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, Metes & Bounds Description: Please see Section 1.2, Legal Description in the PUD document. REZONE REQUEST This application is requesting a rezone from the PUD and A zoning district(s) to the MPUD zoning district(s). Note: Applicant is requesting a MPUDAmendment and rezone from A to PUD (5.35 acres). Present Use of the Property: Partially developed residential, golf course, and amenities Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Mixed Use PUD (residential /commercial) Original PUD Name: Wentworth Estates Ordinance No.: 03 -51 and 04 -76 (scrivener's error) EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the Packet Page -107- Zoning Land Use PUD (Saba) Bay) Vancant/undeveloped and U.S. 41 N A Vacant/undeveloped and residential RSF -4 Residential (single family) A, A -ST Vacant/undeveloped (Rookery Bay) S PUD Land's End Preserve /Artesia Residential and undeveloped C -4 DOT water management PUD (Miceli) Vacant/undeveloped RSF -4 Residential (single family) E RMF -6 Residential RSF -3 Residential A Vacant/undeveloped and residential PUD Land's End Preserve /Artesia Vacant/undeveloped and residential W PUD (Saba) Bay) Vacant/undeveloped A Vacant/undeveloped Does the owner of the subject property own so, give complete legal description of entire attach on separate page). No. Section /Township /Range N/A Lot: Block: Subdivision: Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: property contiguous to the subject property? If contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, Metes & Bounds Description: Please see Section 1.2, Legal Description in the PUD document. REZONE REQUEST This application is requesting a rezone from the PUD and A zoning district(s) to the MPUD zoning district(s). Note: Applicant is requesting a MPUDAmendment and rezone from A to PUD (5.35 acres). Present Use of the Property: Partially developed residential, golf course, and amenities Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Mixed Use PUD (residential /commercial) Original PUD Name: Wentworth Estates Ordinance No.: 03 -51 and 04 -76 (scrivener's error) EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the Packet Page -107- 6/11/2013 9.A. Co *r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.colliergov.net criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. PUD Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 10.02.13.6) 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 proposed MPUD amendment is consistent with the locational criteria set forth on the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Furthermore, it is consistent with all the applicable goals, objectives, and policies (GOPs) related to access, drainage, water, sewer, utilities, and so forth. The project site is suitable for the type and pattern of development proposed. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. The documentation submitted with this application provides evidence of unified control. 3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. (This is to include identifying what Sub - district, policy or other provision allows the requested uses /density, and fully explaining /addressing all criteria or conditions of that Sub - district, policy or other provision.) The proposed MPUD amendment conforms to the applicable GOPs of the GMP. The subject property is located in the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict as identified on the FLUM of the FLUE. The purpose of the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict is to provide for transitional densities between the Conservation designated areas and the remainder of the Urban designated area. Rezones are recommended to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development. See Statement of Compliance contained in the Wentworth Estates MPUD Document. An increase of 400 units is proposed for the project for a total of 1,600 units. The total acreage of the site is 1,563.84; deducting the acreage proposed for commercial development (10 acres); 1,553.84 acres are considered for the calculation of density. Therefore a density of 1.03 units per acre is proposed which is below the three (3) units per acre which is permitted in the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict. 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. Packet Page -108- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ PLANNING AND REGULATION 6/11/2013 9.A. Coo r C bunty 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.collieraov.net The proposed MPUD amendment does not present a change in the existing, approved uses. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside by this project exceeds the provisions of the Land Development Code. Preserves, lakes, golf course, recreation tracts, buffer areas, and open space areas within residential tracts within the MPUD will satisfy the 30 open space requirements for mixed use development. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The timing and sequence of the permitting of the proposed development coincides with the programming of the County's proposed capital improvements to meet concurrency requirements. Adequate improvements, utilities and other facilities can be provided. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. Ability, in this context, implies appropriate supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards; and sufficient road capacity to support demands from urban development. Relative to this MPUD amendment application, development of the subject property is timely because supporting infrastructure is available, or will be in place by the time permitting of the proposed improvements is complete. It should be noted that transportation concurrency for this project is vested and the developer is entitled to a Certificate of Public Facilities for Transportation for up to 1,000 dwelling units. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. The development standards in the proposed MPUD document are consistent with residential and commercial development standards from the land development code. Approved and proposed deviations from the LDC can be found in Exhibit D to the MPUD document. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous Land use petitions on the subject propert: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? ❑ Yes ® No Packet Page -109- 6/11/2013 9.A. Colter County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.coiliergov.net If so, what was the nature of that hearing? Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? ® Yes ❑ No If so, please provide copies. An Administrative Parking Reduction, APR- PL2011 -2139 for Acqua Di Treviso on November 8, 2011. NOTICE: This application will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency" has been made and the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered "closed" when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to continue processing or otherwise actively pursue the rezoning for a period of six (6) months. An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and an application "closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An application deemed "closed" may be re- opened by submitting a new application, repayment of all application fees and granting of a determination of "sufficiency ". Further review of the project will be subject to the then current code. (LDC Section 10.03.05.Q.) E Packet Page -110- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ PLANNING AND REGULATION 6/11/2013 9.A. Coo r County 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.colliergov.net PUD AMENDMENT (PUDA) - PUD REZONE (PUDZ) - PUD to PUD REZONE (PUDZ -A) APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W /COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION. NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. REQUIREMENTS # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRE STANDARD -REQUIREMENTS: 1 Additional set if located in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area) x 1 Additional set for School Board Review (if contains residential components) NOTE: Please see attached correspondence from School District 1 x Copies of detailed description of why amendment is necessary NOTE: Please see cover letter 20 ® ❑ Completed Application (download application from web for current form) 20 ® ❑ PUD Document & Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36" and One 8 1 /2" x 1 1 " copy 20 ® ❑ Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36 "and One 8 1/2" x 11 " copy ❑ 1 ❑ Original PUD doc /ord and Master Plan 24" x 36" — ONLY IF AMENDING THE PUD NOTE: 24 x 36 of existing master plan — 2 copies per pre -app meeting 20 Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru & underlined 20 ® ❑ Revised PUD document w /amended Title page w /ord #'s, LDC 10.02.13.A.2 ❑ ❑ Copies of the. following:. Deed NOTE: Of property affected per pre -app meeting 3 ® ❑ List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 2 ❑ Owner /Affidavit signed & notarized 2 ® ❑ Covenant of Unified Control 2 © ❑ Completed Addressing checklist 2 ® ❑ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and digital /electronic copy of EIS or exemption justification 2 ❑ Historical Survey or waiver request NOTE: can be previous version per pre -app meeting 4 ❑ Utility Provisions Statement w74es 4 ® ❑ Architectural rendering of proposed structures 4 ❑ Survey, signed & sealed NOTE: specific purpose survey per pre-app meeting 4 ® ❑ Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) with applicable fees. For TIS guidelines & procedures refer to httn:/ /www_cc)lliergov.net/Index.aspx' ?page =566 and CD containing TIS (3 required) 7 ® ❑ Recent Aerial Photograph (with habitat areas defined) min scaled 1" =400' NOTE: and eagle zones, preserve boundaries and gopher tortoise preserve location on FLUCCS map 5 ❑ Electronic copy of all documents in Word format and plans (CDRom or Diskette) 2 ❑ Justification /rationale for the deviations (must be on a separate sheet within the application material; DO NOT include it in the PUD document) 20 x 13 Packet Page -111- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ PLANNING AND REGULATION 6/11/2013 9.A. Co)-r County 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358 www.colliergov.net Copy of Official Interpretation and /or Zoning Verification NOTE: Not applicable for this application 2 ® ❑ School Impact Analysis Application — residential projects only 2 ® ❑ 1 set for School District (residential components) 1 ® ❑ If located in RFMU (Rural Frinae Mixed Use) , Receivina Land Areas - Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. Lacavera, State of Florida Division of Forestry @ 239 - 690 -3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan ", LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.o.(b)i.c. N/A If located within 1/2 mile of City of Naples, send copy of submittal package to: Robin Singer, Planning Director, City of Naples, 295 Riverside Circle, Naples, FL 34102 N A 14 Packet Page -112- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ PLANNING AND REGULATION (Zo e-Y County AFFIDAVIT 6/11/2013 9.A. 2300 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (230) 252 -2400 FAX (238) 252 -6353 www.coltiergov.net I, Darin McMurray, Vice President of Lennar Homes, LLC being first duty sworn, depose and say that I am the ow r of the property described in Exhibit A of the MPUD document and which is the subjec matter of the proposed hearing; that alt the answers to the questions in this application, ' cluding the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. I understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whethe((x computer generated or County printed shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be 'vertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information h4been submitted. As property own " I further authorize R. Bruce Anderson of Roetzet and Andress and Margaret Per o itsonMiller Stantec to act as my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. Signature of Property Owner Darin McMurray, Vice President Typed or Printed Name of Owner 10 Packet Page -113- 6/11/2013 9.A. CO 76r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6358 www.collierqov.net The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of C-1 L 1 1 2012, by Darin McMurray who is ersonally known tome or has produced as identification. State of Florida (Signature of Notary Public — State of County of Collier Florida) (Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned D NNA J FT Name of Notary Public) EP 11 Commission - D 90(7 0, 2 5-7019 11 Packet Page -114- 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates Summary of Major Proposed Changes to PUD • Increase number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,600 (increase of 400 units) Reason for request: Wentworth was originally planned as a project aimed at the upper tier of the market in terms of both pricing and square footage. The revised plan calls for a broader cross section of product offerings to appeal to a greater proportion of the market. Along with this, Lennar is maintaining, and in many cases, improving upon the amenity offerings that were originally planned for Treviso Bay. The increase in density will help keep the fees associated with the maintenance and operation of these amenity offerings affordable by having a larger number of residents share in the cost. • Remove Tract references Reason for request: Elimination of artificial tract boundaries to provide flexibility to meeting changing market conditions. • . Rezone 5.35 acre parcel (former FPL site) to include with PUD • Update ownership entity • Update LDC references throughout • Remove conditions of approval that are already addressed in the LDC (redundant) • Remove extraneous exhibits that were attached to the original PUD • Remove "MHDR" residential category (medium high density residential), including the elimination of 90' high structures and in its place increase height for existing MDR residential category (medium density residential) from 3 stores or 45 feet to 4 stories or 50 feet • Update development standards table • Identify zoned height and actual height for all categories • Update list of deviations and add to list of requested deviations Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- Pt 20120001126 10/22/12 Packet Page -115- 6/11/2013 9.A. WENTWORTH ESTATES PUD AMENDMENT TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT Prepared For: Lennar Homes, LLC 10481 Ben C. Pratt Pkwy Fort Myers, FL 33966 Prepared By: STANTEC CONSULTING Wilson Professional Center 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 June 29, 2012 wil,onmiller New Directions In Planning, Design & Engineering Packet Page -116- r I •i 6/11/2013 9.A. Table of Contents ■ Project Location & Description ........... ........................... ..............................1 • Trip Generation ....................._......._..._............................. .._............................ 2 • Site Access & Project Trip Distribution ....................... .....4 • Area of Influence & Analysis Year .................................. ..............................6 • Arterial Analysis .............................................................. ..............................6 • Conclusions & Recommendations ................................. ..............................7 • Appendix ............................................................................ ............................... 8 Packet Page -117- 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates PUD Amendment Traffic Impact Statement Project Location & Description Site Location - The Wentworth Estates PUD is an existing +/- 1,583 acre development known as Treviso Bay located on the East Tamiami Trail approximately 1 mile southeast of Rattlesnake Hammock Road/Thomasson Drive and 1.5 miles northwest of SR-951 (Collier Boulevard). A site location map is shown in Figure 1. N--k Rd J,' C.", 0,1 z . Wentworth Estates PUD (Treviso Say) J Figure 1 Project Location Packet Page -118- 6/11/2013 9.A. Project Description The Wentworth Estates PUD is currently approved for a mix of 1,200 dwelling units and 85,000 square feet of commercial space. The applicant proposes to increase the mix to a maximum of 1,600 dwelling units. No change in the amount of commercial floor area is proposed. The development is subject to a Developer's Contribution Agreement (DCA) that provides for the vesting of the 1,200 dwelling units subject to certain financial considerations, all of which have been fulfilled. Certificates of Public Facility Adequacy (COAs) for all 1,200 dwelling units and the 85, 000 square feet of retail floor are have been issued in perpetuity. Methodology Meeting A TIS Methodology Meeting was held with County review staff on June 4, 2012. At the time of the meeting, the TIS was determined to be a "Small Scale TIS ", provided the final analysis revealed that the net increase in external trips did not exceed 50 two -way peak hour trips. The analysis confirmed the amendment will generate 38 net new external two -way peak hour trips. During the meeting, agreement was reached on the level of effort required and all relevant analytical factors. A copy of the executed Initial Meeting Checklist is included in the Appendix. Trip Generation The ITE Trip Generation Report, 8th Ed. was used to estimate the number trips generated during the weekday p.m. peak period for the currently approved land uses (Table 1) and the "as- proposed" development (Table 2), with the difference of the two being the net increase in trips (Table 3). The ITE trip generation summaries are included in the Appendix. Internal Capture and Pass -by Capture When originally approved, the Wentworth PUD TIS included an analysis that yielded a potential internal capture of 23 %. During the Methodology Meeting, the applicant was asked to redo the original analysis with the proposed entitlements to ensure that the originally approved value was still applicable. The updated analysis, included in the Appendix, resulted in an internal capture rate of 18 %. Additionally, as seen in Tables 1 & 2, the default equation- generated ITE "pass - by" capture of 41% for the commercial land uses is also assumed in this analysis. This is the same rate assumed in the original analysis. Packet Page -119- C E Q E 0 E d CO T ❑ C1 0 O W+ i o w Q, � a 0 Q a= � N w 0 N d 7 C 0 U_ c L n J 4 O a G t4 C E E Q o N d 0 L � ❑ c ai m o C7 a M o •c a` F- Packet Page -120- d v 0 J 0 O a 0 a 6/11/2013 9.A. M 6/11/2013 9.A. Table 3 Net External Project Trips ITE Land Use Category Units Change in Development Size New External rips Total Enter Exit Single Family Housing - 210 Per Unit -186 -153 -97 -56 Condominium/Townhouse - 230 Per Unit 586 191 128 63 [Shopping Center - 820 Per 1,000 SF 85,000 0 0 0 38 31 7 The net change in external traffic has been calculated at 38 two -way p.m. peak hour trips, with 31 additional trips entering and 7 additional trips exiting. Site Access & Project Trip Distribution The project gains access to the arterial system (US 41) from two points, the main entrance and a secondary access at the terminus of Southwest Boulevard. figure 2 illustrates the projected distribution of project traffic identified from traffic data collected in January 2012 at US 41 and Southwest Boulevard as part of the analysis for the traffic signal. The data indicates that 54 % of the exiting project traffic will be distributed to the northwest and 46 %o will be distributed to the southeast. 56% of the entering traffic is expected to come from the northwest and 44% from the southeast. Trip distribution is illustrated in Table 4 and on Figures 2 & 3. Table 4 Net Project Trip Distribution Packet Page -121- 4 To /From NW To /From SE Total % Distrib Trips % Distrib Trips Entering Trips 31 56% 17 44% 14 Exiting Trips 7 54 % 4 46% 3 Packet Page -121- 4 6/11/2013 9.A. a..itlt.�aS! Ma+,m�x.:. FC' RJ!Uten.iil li }mmtxY RV' bba Fdtl CY!NrR HJmmexk pel � M VHF t�M1 YiI��nT.I) C�!t ib..h - 54% 56% ; ,s saw\ 44 %0 46% `C 9t ,,.... .. Jai. Figure 2 Project Traffic Distributions (Percentages) Packet Page -122- 5 6/11/2013 9.A. CIUb �y:ih+f la.r NdHaH Rd ;'w' 9.wk¢llam k A. gyA ?tb +.ruf ii<+t14uG 4 17 k' A 90 A'dil MSHdkf NAmH1ttC.i'.'T1d 951 .' 14 3 l �M `1 Figure 3 Project Trips Distribution (Number of Trips) Area of Influence & Analysis Year The area of influence was determined during the Methodology Meeting to include East Tamiami Trail (US 41), northwest to Rattlesnake- Hammock Road/Thomasson Drive and southeast of the development to SR /CR -951 (Collier Boulevard). At the Methodology meeting, 2022 was identified as the appropriate build -out analysis year and no interim year analyses were required. Arterial Analysis The arterial analysis is based upon the latest,2011 background traffic volumes and "trip bank" volumes from the 2011 AUIR. 2011 background volumes were assumed to increase to the 2022 horizon year based upon historical growth between 2006 and 2011. However, because the segment of US 41 had a negative annual average growth rate for the last five years, for the purposes of this analysis, an annual growth of 2% between 2411 and 2022 has been assumed. Table 5 reflects the background growth analysis for the road segments within the area of Packet Page -123- 6 6/11/2013 9.A. influence. Table 6 reflects an arterial analysis and includes US 41's existing service volume, existing peak hour directional volume, an estimate of net new p.m. peak hour weekday project trips in 2022, an estimate of total traffic in 2022, and the remaining capacity. To avoid double counting of future trips, the 2011 vested "trip bank" trips have been assumed to be included in the 2% growth. Additionally, the existing approved project has vested trips, a portion of which are in the trip bank, and therefore should also be considered as part of the background traffic estimate. Table 5 Background Traffic Growth PM Peak Hour Directional Weekday Volumes Table 6 Arterial Analysis PM Peak Hour Directional Weekday Volumes US 41 Rattlesnake- Hammock Rd. Triangle Blvd 6 3500 1 1926 1 2395 1 17 1 2412 1088 Intersections Analysis As a Small Scale TIS, no intersection analyses were required. The small net increase in traffic being generated by this project will be shared between the two access points and therefore will not create any measurable negative 'impact on the intersections. It should be noted that the development has previously fulfilled all of its conditions of approval regarding the construction of improvements related to the project's entrance main and secondary intersections. Additionally, the developer is currently fully funding the design and construction of the traffic signal and related turn -lane improvements for the secondary Southwest Boulevard access connection. Conclusions & Recommendations The analysis of the project traffic indicates that there are no significant impacts to the adjacent road segment, and the segments of US 41 within the area of influence are currently operating at an acceptable level of service, and are predicted to operate at acceptable levels in 2022. Packet Page -124- 7 U541 Rattlesnake- Hammock Rd. Triangle Blvd 1980 2118 2053 2038 1926 -0.7 1926 1783 1426 2395 Table 6 Arterial Analysis PM Peak Hour Directional Weekday Volumes US 41 Rattlesnake- Hammock Rd. Triangle Blvd 6 3500 1 1926 1 2395 1 17 1 2412 1088 Intersections Analysis As a Small Scale TIS, no intersection analyses were required. The small net increase in traffic being generated by this project will be shared between the two access points and therefore will not create any measurable negative 'impact on the intersections. It should be noted that the development has previously fulfilled all of its conditions of approval regarding the construction of improvements related to the project's entrance main and secondary intersections. Additionally, the developer is currently fully funding the design and construction of the traffic signal and related turn -lane improvements for the secondary Southwest Boulevard access connection. Conclusions & Recommendations The analysis of the project traffic indicates that there are no significant impacts to the adjacent road segment, and the segments of US 41 within the area of influence are currently operating at an acceptable level of service, and are predicted to operate at acceptable levels in 2022. Packet Page -124- 7 6/11/2013 9.A. APPENDIX Packet Page -125- 6/11/2013 9.A. APPENDIX A INITIAL MEETING CHECKLIST Suggestion: Use this Appendix as a worksheet to ensure that no important elements are overlooked. Cross out the items that do not app)y. Date: Nionday. June 4. 2012 Time: 10:00am Location: People Attending: ?dame, Organization, and Telephone Numbers 1) Jefi Perr Lp ICP. Stantec Consultin¢, Inc. 2) John Podezerwinsky 3) Reed Jarvi. P.EE... j t'e� t eS i c f o J �z-ti -1 l�� t t✓ 1{ t' ( .. . r Study Preparer; Preparer's Name a d Title: Jeff ferry AICP Senior Transportation_Planner Organization: Stantcc; Consu tins' Inc. Address & Telephone Numb ;r: 3209 Bailey Lr,nt;. Suite 200. ' T]e .FL "',9,649.4040 — Reviela er(s }: Revie�yer'sMaine & Title: John Podczer-NNjnskv C'ollier County •Transportation Planning Departinent Reviewer's Nwme & Title: Organization & Telephone Number: Applicant: Applicant's Name: i_ennar Homes. LLC Address: 10481 Ben C. Pratt Pkwv. Fort Nlvers. FL "Telephone Number: Proposed Development: Name: Treviso Bay (W nt yorth PCD Arncndrnent Location: US 41 East Land Use Type.: Mixed Use Residential &. C:omirmercial ITE Code �: 210 ,/2301820 Proposed number of development units: Increase from 1.200 approved I Us to 1,600 DUs' add 5 aces of a- uncultural zoned land. minor modifications to design standards Other: ?Minor changes to the land uses allowed within the commercial component are being considered; No change in the approved 85.000 Sq. Ft, retail component. 2' ixa•.. :vtr•r. " "'iw'.'3e- =J +•a.,artx. p'Gr _ ;;K �t:h 2n ., ; re7 .L_:' -,. .a f ..,_ ?:. a e ' _ r... r. Packet Page -126- Description: Annlieant nrnpnge; to amend] tNe P_UD_jo_iwa, e the, �lumbel or dwellins~ units from 1200 to 1600. increase the PUD area by 6acres and make minor changes to PIUD desism standards. Zonin Existing: PL?D & A Comprehensive plar. recommendation: NA Requested: ?CIA Findings of the Preliminary Study: Studv Type: Sma.11 Scale TIS }2' I7C) -\,V �pS � C) \ r- 1 1� Miner TIS ❑ Maior TIS ❑ 1'�;: rcc � ri CZ t Studv Area: Boundaries: Aclditioral intersec:ticros tca be aiialyzcd: 1-iorizon Year(s): 2022 Analysis Time Period, , Future Off -Site Developments: NA 6/11/2013 9.A. Ik Sc,urce of "I °rip Generation Pates: ITE `b V__ Reductions in Trip Genel-atian hates: ,. �`c None: Approved TIS used 231 o Internal Capture Pass -by trips 41% of Retail Trips (used in original TIS. and current IT._ EQ) Internal trips (PUD): 234!o Internal Capture Transit use: NAB+^' Other: Uri Horizon Year Roadway NeNvork Improvements: None ,MethodolojZy & Assumptions: Non -site traffic estimates: NA Site -trip generation: i\ei Increase from 1200 QU -based trip gen compared to 16QO lltj'- based Trip Generation. Net increase is 62 2-way PM Pk.Hr. trips without I/C. and an increase of 48 2 -way trips if the 23° o I-C is ant lied. Jt. :;E?ti t %.7 � ^.1 {�p?iur td?� •`,..t _t.n:.�xm ice, ,�u.,a ro,,:.�. - 7_....:P:iFe,..c ,.. .;:.r:, `!., .,6. ,:..�a7r - ncr- ori'r.,: C ^. Packet Page -127- 6/11/2013 9.A. Trip distribution method: Same as used in original TIS Traffic assipwiment method: Same as used in original TIS Traffic growth rate: Background growth at 2% per year Special. Features: (from preliminary study or prior experience) Accidents locations: NA Sight distance: NA Queuing: NA Access location & configuration: No Change Traffic control: NA Signal system location & progression needs: SigLialization of southern access road (Southwest Boulevard at LJS 411 is currently under r_ lesignipermittina On -site parking needs: NA Data Sources: NA Base maps: NA Prior study reports: Wentworth PUD TIS December 2002 Access policy and jurisdiction: NA Review process: Requirements: Miscellaneous: 11'roiect is suhiect to a DCA executed in February 200L concurrencv vested—for-J000 DUS: all prepayment obligations have been met. Small Scale Study -- No Fee Minor Study - S" �O.00 ; allor Study - S 1 500.00 Includes 2 m'ersections Additional Intersections - SS,00.00 each A11 fees will be agreed to during the ,Ilefhodolo p, inectitiy alzd must be paid to T'ransporrarion prior to oursign -offon the application. - — -------- - - - - -- SIGNATURES S tud t Prepa. Lr •C4icwers Packet Page -128- 6/11/2013 9.A. Treviso Bay (COAs Vested for 1,200 DUs + 85KSgFt Retai11200) Summary of Multi -Use Trip Generation Average Weekday Driveway Volumes June 27, 2012 .24 Hour AM Pk Hour PM Pk Hour Two -Way Land Use Size Volume Enter Exit Enter Exit Single Family Detached Housing 496 Dwelling Units 4537 89 266 280 164 Residential Condominium / Townhouse 704 Dwelling Units 3514 42 204 200 98 Shopping Center 8.5 Th.Sq.Ft. GLA 6110 65 55 280 291 Total Driveway Volume 14161 216 527 160 553 Total Peak Hour Pass -By Trips 0 0 115 i19 Total Peak Hour Vol. Added to Adjacent Streets 216 527 645 434 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY M7CROTRANS Packet Page -129- 6/11/2013 9.A. Treviso Bay (Proposed 1600 DUs + 85KSgFt Retail) Summary of M-aiti -Use Trip Generation Average Weekday Driveway Volumes May 31, 2012 24 Hour AM Pk Hour PM Pk Hour Two -Way Land Use Size Volume Enter Exit Enter Exit Sinale Family Detached Housing 310 Dwelling Units 2944 57 170 183 108 Residential Condominium % Townhouse 1290 Dwell-Ina Units 5951 68 331 3 28 161 Shopping Center 65 Th.Sq.Ft. GLA 6110 85 55 280 291 Total Driveway Volume 15005 210 556 781 560 Total Peak Hour Pass -By Trips 0 0 115 i19 Total Peak Hour Vol. Added to Adjacent_ Streets 210 556 676 441 Note: A Zero indicates no dater available. TRIP GENERATION BY NICROTRIANS Packet Page -130- Packet Page -131- 6/11/2013 9.A. O 0 E U 2 E L) 0 Lu J Lu Lu U) CD 0 0 U, 7' CD 6 08 ol o Co < m L) E L) E a) 2 o W LU Co d L) E C, 0 C < E < C; y 2 p 2 1-' ~ LU LU 76 76 76 W uj 0 m S -6 0 CV m R W, Lli LL, w LU Lu W > < 0 -Fo E L) CD ON. wo U5 a: L) U) M a- z ii off' 'o C D '0 L) C 0 0 C/) 0 9� E s f 9 E E E J~ tz 2 , 1 0 sasn Puei wom=i Packet Page -131- 6/11/2013 9.A. X QI E Packet Page -132- 6/11/2013 9.A. n E .2 E 2 E U) U) V lz 0 L) Cd 2 E E L) 0 -6 E o LL .0 < E m o E < U 0 E C) cm m 2 o 2 o Co 75 uj LU 7i m I W B a.0 z of U) w L5 CL fl: 0 C aw 0 I- t- 2 4 , O sash Pue -1 Wo Nq E Packet Page -132- 6/11/2013 9.A. 6/11/2013 9.A. List of Deviations - Justification (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEVIATIONS 1 — 9 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE 03 -51 TO STILL REMAIN IN EFFECT) Deviation 1: LDC Section 5.03.02.0 to allow fences or walls to be permitted at maximum height: Seven feet (7'). If the fence or wall is constructed on a landscaped berm, the wall shall not exceed six feet (6') in height from the top of berm elevation for berm elevations with an average side slope of 4:1 or less, and shall not exceed six feet (6) in height from the top of berm elevation for berms with an average side slope of greater than 4:1 (i.e. 3:1). Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation for security and aesthetic purposes and to maintain consistency with the partially developed project. Deviation 2: LDC Section 6.06.01.0 and LDC Appendix B, in order to allow 50 feet of right -of -way for local roads rather than the required 60 -foot width (throughout). Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation as this reduction in right -of -way width allows the applicant to minimize impacts to potential wetland and upland preserves while maintaining safe access and consistency throughout the project. Deviation 3: Formerly LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.10, Section 2 -12 of the Collier County Code of Ordinances, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements for Subdivisions C.13.h. of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, to allow street intersection radii of twenty (20) feet (face of curb) for all internal project streets and thirty -five (35) feet for street intersections at project entrances. Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation to maintain consistency with the existing project roadways that were designed, approved and constructed with these radii standards in Wentworth Estates MPUD. Deviation 4: Formerly LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.10, Section 2 -12 of the Collier County Code of Ordinances, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements for Subdivisions C.13.j of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, to allow reverse curves without tangents (throughout). Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and the applicant wishes to retain this deviation to maintain consistency with the existing project roadways that were designed, approved and constructed with reverse curves without tangents in Wentworth Estates MPUD. Deviation 5: LDC Section 4.02.04.F., in the case of residential structures with a common architectural theme, required property development regulations of Exhibit B, 1 Justification for Deviations — 12/05/12 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL201 20001 1 26 Packet Page -133- 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates MPUD Development Standards, may be waived or reduced provided a site plan demonstrating the common architectural theme and meeting the criteria of LDC Section 4.02.04.F is approved by the Growth Management Department. This is a deviation of LDC Section 4.02.04.17 which requires approval by the Collier County Planning Commission. Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and it relates to standards for cluster residential design. The LDC allows reduction of the development standards if approved by the CCPC. The applicant is requesting the retention of this deviation to allow a reduction of the development standards through administrative approval by staff through the SDP process. Deviation 6: LDC Section 4.05.04.H., parking for community center /clubhouse shall be one space per every two hundred (200) square feet of gross floor area which shall be considered inclusive of required golf course parking. Justification: This is a previously approved deviation. The LDC requires 4 parking spaces per golf hole plus one space per 200 square feet for office /lobby /pro shop /clubhouse. Experience with past golf course development has shown that providing parking at one space per 200 square feet is adequate for parking for golf course and associated uses. Deviation 7: LDC Section 5.04.04.B., allowing model homes to be permitted through a temporary use permit throughout the life of the project with no extension of the temporary use permit. Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and is common in most residential PUD's. A model home may be in place for several years while the project is developed and obtaining temporary use extensions is both time consuming and expensive. Deviation 8: LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6, allowing sign face area of entrance signs to be 120 square feet. Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and is common in most residential PUD's. The LDC allows on- premise signs in residential districts to be 64 square feet. The applicant requests the sign face area of entrance signs to be 120 square feet. Deviation 9: LDC Section 5.06.02.B.4, allowing construction entrance signs and employment signs to be a maximum of 20 square feet in size. Justification: This is a previously approved deviation and is common in many PUD's. The LDC allows construction entrance signs to be 12 square feet for projects that are 1 - 10 acres in size (no building permit required) and 64 square feet for projects in excess of 10 acres in size (building permit required). The applicant requests the sign be permitted at a maximum of 20 square feet with no building permit required. 2 Justification for Deviations — 12/05/12 Wentworth Estates MPUD P U DA- PL201 20001 1 26 Packet Page -134- 6/11/2013 9.A. NEW DEVIATIONS: Deviation 10: seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01(J) to allow cul -de -sacs in excess of 1,000 feet and up to 2,500 feet in the MPUD (throughout). The developer shall provide internal looping of water mains to the greatest extent possible, subject to review and approval by the Collier County Utilities staff. The developer shall provide a water main connection between the "LDR" and "MDR" at the north end of the property, through the FPL easement (north of the roadway (Treviso Bay Drive) shown on the MPUD Master Plan. Justification: The applicant requests approval of this deviation as pressure in the water main in the Wentworth Estates MPUD is sufficient so that water lines constructed down cul -de -sacs in excess of 1000 feet have sufficient pressure to meet or exceed required fire flow pressures. Also all cul -de -sacs are designed and constructed with the required radii for safe fire truck access. Deviation 11: seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.H., to allow parking for all multi- family units to be 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit plus 10% in lieu of the minimum LDC required 2 spaces per unit. Justification: An administrative parking reduction was approved by the Growth Management Division on November 8, 2011 for a project within the Wentworth Estates MPUD. The applicant intends the remainder of the multi - family portion of the project to be similar, if not the same, product previously approved for in the administrative parking reduction. Deviation 12: seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02 which requires a Type B buffer between single family and multi- family uses. Specifically, the applicant requests that no buffer be required between these uses when a water body separates the two uses. Justification: This is a commonly approved deviation in PUD's. There should be no buffer required between uses when there is a water body separating the two uses. Justification for Deviations — 12/05/12 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL201 20001 1 26 Packet Page -135- wilsWmiller 3200 Bailey Lane: Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 Tel: (239) 649 -4040 June 27, 2012 Subject: Wentworth Estates (Treviso Bay) MPUD Amendment To Whom it May Concern: 6/11/2013 9.A. f Stantec I am writing you on behalf of Lennar Homes, LLC. (property owner), to inform you that the property owner intends to submit an Application for Public Hearing for an amendment to the previously approved PUD document and master plan and the requisite associated documentation for the Wentworth Estates (Treviso Bay) development. The application is being prepared for submittal to Collier County Development Services for staff review, and ultimate approval by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners. Because you are an owner of record within this development, the property owner wanted to take the opportunity to explain the proposed changes to the zoning document. First of all, there are no changes proposed for the property under your ownership, and your existing entitlements and development standards will remain in place. The property owner plans to seek approval of the following: • Include 5.35 acres of property into the development that was the former site of the Florida Power and Light facility • Increase the permitted number of dwelling units by 400 (increase from 1.200 units to 1,600 units) • Eliminate the medium- height - density residential (MHDR) product which allowed a height of 90 feet, and limit units to low density residential (LDR) and medium density residential (MDR) Increase the permitted height in the medium residential category from three floors and 45 feet to four floors and 50 feet (zoned height) Decrease the side yard setback for low density residential (LDR) from 6 feet to 5 feet Parking for multi- family units proposed for 1.5 spaces per unit • Revise the PUD master plan • Provide a list of deviations to the Land Development Code There may be other minor changes to the zoning document as a result of the PUD amendment review process. You will be notified in the future of associated neighborhood meetings and /or public hearings. In the meantime, if you would like further information, please contact me at the number contained on this letter; Bruce Anderson, Esq. (Roetzel & Andress, 239- 649 - 2708); or Russell Smith (Lennar Homes, 239- 225- 6978). Sincerely, Margaret Perry, AICP WilsdnMiller Stantec Packet Page -136- Smooth Feed SheetsTM TIMOTHY &CHERYL BOTTS 7925 SILVER LAKE CT WESTERVILLE, OH 43082 CHRISTOPHER & MICHELLE EDELBROCK 31217 ADAMS DRIVE GIBRALTAR, MI 48173 JAMES & DIANE GAYES 4640 MOUNTHALL TER MINNETONKA, MN 55345 RICHARD KIERSTEAD 9292 VENETO PL NAPLES, FL 34113 JOSEPH NEWCOMB 9602 PAVIA CT NAPLES, FL 34113 CARLO & ANTONIA PASQUALINI 189 BEAVER DAM ROAD KATOONAH, NY 10536 REDUS FLORIDA LAND, LLC 301 SOUTH COLLEGE STREET CHARLOTTE, NC 28202 TAYLOR MORRISON OF FLORIDA, INC. 501 N. CATTLEMEN ROAD, STE. 100 SARASOTA, FL 34232 TIITF /ST OF FLORIDA 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD. TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399 VIA VENETO AT TREVISO BAY JGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, INC. 14895 BELLEZZA LN NAPLES, FL 34110 COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES SW, INC. 7995 MAHOGANY RUN LANE NAPLES, FL 34113 FRANK FLANAGAN 9284 VENETO PL NAPLES, FL 34113 EDWARD GRAFT P.O. BOX 517 ACME, MI 49610 PATRICK LIEBiG 9472 NAPOLI LANE NAPLES, FL 34113 NLP FINANCE, LLC 665 SIMONDS ROAD WILLIAMSTOWN, MA 01267 ROBERT & YVONNE PREVIDI 2 BUCKINGHAM CT MORRISTOWN, NJ 07960 MILAN & SHERYL REED P.O. BOX 490 LUDINGTON, MI 49431 TIB BANK 6435 NAPLES BLVD. NAPLES, FL 34109 TREVISO BAY DEVELOPMENT, LLC 19275 W. CAPITOL DRIVE SUITE 100 BROOKFIELD, WI 53045 VIA VENETO LOT 2, LLC P.O. BOX 70324 MARIETTA, GA 30007 u5' 6/11/2013 9.A. SALVATORE DI GREGORIO & FRANCE AGUECI 119 RICHARD LOVAT CT CANADA, ON LOJ1 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT P.O. BOX 14000 JUNO BEACH, FL 33408 JOHN H DOWELL TRUST 9308 VERCELLI COURT NAPLES, FL 34113 ANDREA L MOSEY REV. LIV. TRUST 1099 BOSTON TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD RICHMOND, IN 47374 MATTHEW PAKANOVSKY CAROL GANSER & LYNN GAVALEK 627 CLINTON LN HIGHLAND HEIGHT, OH 44143 R & D ITALIA, LLC 14802 BELLEZZA LN NAPLES, FL 34110 BRIAN P. REILLY & ANNE STAPLETON-RE ILLY 9464 NAPOLI LANE NAPLES, FL 34113 TIITF /REC & PARKS ROOKERYBAY 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD. TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399 VIA MAUTINO, LLC 6126 BAY HILL CIRCLE JAMESViLLE, NY 13078 WENTHWORTH ESTATES DEV. DISTR. WRATH ELL/HART /HLINT & ASSN. 6131 LYONS ROAD, STE. 100 COCONUT CREEK, FL 33073 Packet Page -137- %�� AVERY@ Address Labels Laser 51600 GARY LYTTON ENVIRONMENTAL ADMINISTRATOR ROOKERY BAY 300 TOWER ROAD NAPLES, FL 34113 Packet Page -138- 6/11/2013 9.A. 6/11/2013 9.A. Packet Page -139- 6/11/2013 9.A. 1`416 -r County Department of Land Development Services, Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation November 8, 2011 Mr. Russell Smith, Vice President Lennar Homes, LLC 10481 Ben C. Pratt, Six Mile Cypress Parkway Fort Myers, Fl 33966 RE: Administrative Parking Reduction APR- PL2011 -2139; for Acqua Di Treviso. The subject property is located in the Wentworth PUD, Treviso Bay Subdivision, Naples, Florida, Section 31, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, folio numbers 55751000168. Dear Mr. Smith: In your Administrative Parking Reduction (APR) application ARP- PL2011 -2139 you request a reduction in the number of parking spaces required for the proposed Acqua Di Treviso multi - family development to be located at the Treviso Bay Subdivision in the Wentworth PUD in accordance with the Land Development Code (LDC) Section 4.O5.04.F.2. This section of the LDC states that the County Manager or designee may determine the minimum parking requirements for a use which is not specifically referenced in that section or for which an applicant has provided evidence that a specific use is of such a unique nature that the applicable minimum parking ratio listed in the LDC should not be applied. The Zoning Services staff has reviewed your APR request. It is our understanding that the proposed development is requesting a revised required parking ratio of 1.5 spaces per unit plus ten percent in lieu of the minimum LDC required ratio of 2 spaces per unit. It is further our understanding that this is the same parking ratio previously utilized in the Phase 2A development in Heritage Bay which was constructed by your firm. This development was reviewed and approved for parking based on the approved Heritage Bay PUD development standards. Staff notes that our office has not received a parking complaint related to the Heritage Bay development which demonstrates that it is functioning at acceptable levels. As part of your application you have provided a Zoning Data Sheet and Tables exhibit which contains the layout of your Heritage Bay Phase 2 -A development as well as the preliminary layout of your proposed Acqua Di Treviso development. This exhibit provides APR- PL2011 -2139, Pagel oft Acqua Di Treviso. Packet Page -140- 6/11/2013 9.A. parking totals based on both the LDC and the proposed reduced ratio based on the Heritage Bay PUD standards. Based on your application you are requesting a reduction in the number of required parking spaces from the LDC required ratio of 2 spaces per unit resulting in a total of 350 spaces to a reduced ratio of 1.5 spaces per unit plus 10 percent resulting in a total of 297 spaces. It is staff's opinion that the proposed reduction in required parking requested is reasonable based on your previously approved companion Heritage Bay Phase 2A development which has demonstrated a acceptable level of required parking. For this reason the APR meets the requirements of LDC Section 4.05.04.F.4. Given the information you have provided which describes the unique conditions associated with the proposed development along with the parking analysis, I hereby approve a reduction in the parking ratio for Acqua Di Treviso development to the requested 1.5 spaces per unit plus ten percent under the following condition: A. Approval of this Administrative Parking Reduction is predicated on the infonnation outlined above and the evidence presented in the application request. B. Approval of this Administrative Parking Reduction is further predicated on the completion of all required site development plan approvals and associated building permits as applicable. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, William D. Lorenz Jr., P.E., Director Department of Land Development Services cc, Correspondence file Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Laurie Beard, PUD Monitoring Wentworth PUD file APR- PL2011 -2139, Page 2 of 2 Acqua Di Treviso. Packet Page -141- NAPLES DAILY NEWS Published Daily Naples, FL 34110 Affidavit of Publication State of Florida Counties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Lynn Schneider, who on oath says that she serves as Order Entry Data Specialist of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising, being a PUBLIC NOTICE in the matter of PUBLIC NOTICE was published in said newspaper 1 time in the issue on November 25th, 2012 6/11/2013 9.A. ing, which yvSavings that come fron al agency weeding out waste, fraw everything and abuse, which sound: try and na- good but are difficult t( food safety find, or rely on one- timtia, id weather sales of federal assetsnd should be treated with d for speci- suspicion. Deep cuts that take ef- ,nding for feet in the future, say of -- )ccurs au- ter Obama leaves office in counts for 2017, might be better than is offederal imposing them now and' • the fastest hurting an already weak the budget. economy by reducing y spending spending. led by past But delayed cuts also id, accord- open the door for Obarna's rtisan Con- successors and future Con- et Office, is gresses to roll them back.' falling be- Postponing the imple- size of the mentation of spending 12, the low- increases already sched -, st 50 years. uled to take effect, such as art to con- federal health insurance; res would subsidies under Obama'sj ments, the health -care overhaul; he govern- saves money upfront but t7 problem. hat envi- makes no permanent changes that would ease = retionary future spending pressures lxed Aff ant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper th published at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said wed I" to newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier via- County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, own each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post feted ��� office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of 1 year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor ation promised any person, firm or corporation any discount, rebate, ff. It commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for GODS EBUMPS. n be publication in the said newspap MSRP Our Price $14900 $3995 y~ $22 re of affiant) 8.00 $7995 loon (Signa $499100 $17995 $499.00 $19995 Sworn to and subscribed before me $899.00 $35995 T i 30 th day of ember; -2012 uon�e S n h 239-592-6006 twin �"� ----' 239- 948 -9000 � O� obtain (Signature of notary public) onlightirsg.com -- •., CAROL POLIDORA MY COMMISSION # EE 851758 � EXPIRES: November 28, 2014 EXPIRES: November Insurance 2014 Packet Page -142- 6/11/2013 9.A. N A P L E S DA I LY N E W 5 tf Sunday, November 25, 2012 ct 21A NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting held by Lennar Homes, LLC, represented by R. Bruce Anderson of Roetzel and Andress, LPA and Margaret Perry.of WilsonMiller Stantec on: Thursday, December 6, 2012; 5:30 p.m. At the Hanson Hall of Shepherd of the Glades Church 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, FL 34112 The property owner has filed an Application for Public Hearing to amend the Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) known as Wentworth Estates MPUD to pro- vide for: an increase in the number of dwelling units by 400; rezone a 5.35 acre parcel, formerly a Florida Power and Light out parcel, for inclusion in the MPUD; update the ownership entity; remove "medium height density residential" category which allowed units at 90 feet in height; increase height for existing "medium density residential" to four stories or 50 feet; update development standards table; and provide list of devia- tions to the Land Development Code. The currently zoned MPUD property known as Wentworth Estates contains approximately 1,563.8 acres in the above depicted location. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT Business and property owners and residents are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss the project with the owners' representatives and Collier County staff. If you are unable to attend this meeting, but have questions or comments, they can be directed to: Margaret Perry, AICP Stantec 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 (239) 649 -4040 margaret.perry@stantec.com R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. Roetzel and Andress 850 Park Shore Drive, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34103 (239) 649 -2708 banderson @ralaw.com — Please be advised — The information on this sheet is to contact you regarding this project and future public meetings. Under Florida law, e-mail addresses, phone numbers and certain home addresses are public records once received by a government agency. If you do not want your e-mail address, phone number or home address released if the county receives a public records request, you can refrain from including such information on this sheet. You have the option of checking with the county staff on your own to obtain updates on the project as well as checking the county Web site for additional information. No, 231185036 November 25, 2012 Packet Page -143- 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates MPUD Amendment Neighborhood Information Meeting December 6, 2012 5:30 P.M. Hanson Hall at Shepherd of the Glades Lutheran Church 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples FL 34112 Meeting Summary Meeting began at 5:30 p.m. Members of the project team were present including Darin McMurray and Russell Smith with Lennar Homes, Bruce Anderson of Roetzel and Andress, Margaret Perry, David Wilkison, and Jeff Perry of WilsonMiller Stantec. Kay Deselem, Collier County Principal Planner also attended. Members of the public were invited to sign the attendance sheet and to pick up a petition fact sheet. Four individuals registered on the sign -in sheet (attached); however, approximately 10 -12 individuals were in attendance. Margaret Perry of WilsonMiller Stantec welcomed those in attendance and provided an overview of the requested PUD amendment application. A portion of the project was originally approved in 1988 and it was known as Naples R &D Park at Lely. In 1998, the R &D Park PUD was incorporated into a new PUD known as Lely Lakes Golf Resort. In 2003, the PUD was rezoned to a new PUD known as Wentworth Estates. The site contains approximately 1,564 acres and approximately 514 of those acres are owned by the State of Florida as Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. Ms. Perry summarized the proposed changes to the PUD: Increase number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,600 (increase of 400 units). Plan is for 310 single family and a maximum of 1,290 multi - family dwelling units. The number of single family units can be increased by a corresponding decrease in the number of multi- family units with a conversion factor of 2.48. That is, for traffic generation purposes, one single family unit is equal to 2.48 multi - family units. Reason for request: Wentworth was originally planned as a project aimed at the upper tier of the market in terms of both pricing and square footage. The revised plan calls for a broader cross section of product offerings to appeal to a greater proportion of the market. Along with this, Lennar is maintaining, and in many cases, improving upon the amenity offerings that were originally planned for Treviso Bay. The increase in density will help keep the fees associated with the maintenance and operation of these amenity offerings affordable by having a larger number of residents share in the cost. • No change to location, acreage or square footage of commercial — 10 acres, 85,000 square feet. Rezone 5.35 acre parcel (former FPL site) to be included within the PUD • Update ownership entity throughout the PUD document • Update LDC references throughout the PUD document • Remove redundant conditions of approval that are already addressed in the LDC • Remove extraneous exhibits that were attached to the original PUD Packet Page -144- 6/11/2013 9.A. • Remove "MHDR" residential category (medium height density residential), including the elimination of 90' high structures and in its place increase height for existing MDR residential category (medium density residential) from 3 stores or 45 feet to 4 stories or 50 feet zoned height • Update development standards table including the deletion of all references to the medium height density residential category • Identify zoned height and actual height for all categories in keeping with the requirements of the LDC • Update list of deviations and add to list of requested deviations Questions asked/issues raised: Why increase in units? Response: To meet market demand, provide a broader cross section of products, and allow product (dwelling unit) type flexibility for build out of the project. Where will the additional units be located? Response: The additional units will be located throughout the project in the previously identified developable areas. It is not known at this time exactly where they will go, but will be determined during the planning and layout of the individual development pods. Concern about mix of single family and multi - family units and the conversion factor. Response: The plan is for 310 single family units and a maximum of 1,290 multi- family units. The number of single family units can increase by a corresponding decrease in multi- family units. One single family units equals 2.48 multi - family units based on traffic generation. What are the new deviations? Response: There are nine existing /approved deviations in the PUD, although not listed in a separate "list of deviations" document. The three additional deviations requested include (1) allowing cul -de -sacs in excess of 1,000 feet, up to 2,500 feet; (2) allow parking for multi - family units to be 1.5 per unit plus 10% in lieu; and (3) no buffer required between single family and multi - family units when there is a water body separating the two uses. Why should cul -de -sacs be in excess of 1000 feet? Response: This is a common requested and approved deviation in PUD's where the site configuration is dictated by the natural landscape, e.g., preserve areas, etc. The developer has committed that the length of a cul -de- sac will not be longer than 2,500 feet. Adequate water flow must be proven at time of SDP review in order to approved by fire review. Concern about fire department access and ability to turn around on cul -de -sacs. Response: Appropriate turn radii will be provided as required by fire review. Concern about decrease in existing property values because of the new products offered compared to the existing developed houses. Response: Lennar is very proud of the variety of housing products they offer and the success of their existing communities in the County has shown that there product is in demand in the marketplace. There are many issues that are involved in property values and the economic downturn over the last several years have resulted in a decrease in property values in many areas. 2 Packet Page -145- 6/11/2013 9.A. Concern about the use of Southwest Boulevard and construction traffic entering through the main project entrance on U.S. 41. Response: As a condition of approval of the Wentworth PUD (Section 7.5.A) construction access was specifically prohibited from using Southwest Boulevard. Residents of the project will be able to enter the project using Southwest Boulevard. Concern about traffic signal at main project entrance: Response: Providing a signal, when warranted is the obligation of the developer. A traffic signal is being installed by the developer at the Southwest Boulevard /US 41 intersection. Concern about maintenance of Southwest Boulevard and cars parked on the road damaging lawns and sprinkler heads. Response: Southwest Boulevard is a County -owned and maintained roadway. As outlined in the PUD, the developer was required to provide improvements to Southwest Boulevard and these improvements are complete. Concern about the 1.5 parking spaces per multi - family dwelling deviation: Response: Research has shown that in the Lennar lifestyle developments, 1.5 spaces per multi - family dwelling unit is more than sufficient to accommodate the parking demand of the residents and guests. Additionally, the 1.5 space per unit rate reduces the amount of paving and results in more landscaping and open space. Concern about presence of carports or uncovered parking areas. Response: Covered and uncovered parking areas are planned for some of the multi - family product. The covered parking areas existing on site are not intrusive and are architecturally acceptable. Landscaping is also provided as required by the LDC. Explanation of status of existing clubhouse. Response: An architect has been hired to design the golf clubhouse and the work is currently in the design phase. It is anticipated that the design chosen will make some use of the existing concrete structure presently existing on the clubhouse site. The square footage of the clubhouse will probably be somewhat less than the previous developer planned. What is the status of the fitness center and what amenities will be included? Will it be open to the residents only? Response: The SDP for the "Lifestyle Center" has been approved and construction is expected to begin in the near future. The center will include tennis courts, a bocce ball court, a pool and pool area, and a fitness area. The center will open for the use of residents and their guests. The golf course has a limited number of private memberships, but eventually, all recreational facilities will be turned over to the community association. Commitment was made by the developer at the NIM that single family only would be located on Parcel F (please see attached map). The area is currently labeled as "MDR" and will be revised to indicate "LDR." Concern about school busses going through the neighborhood. Response: There will probably be school -aged children in the development. The routing of school busses through this project or at this project's entrances is decided by the School District and not under the control of the developer. Concern about marketing toward seasonal residents and effect on local businesses when they are gone during the summer months. Response: There will, no doubt, be seasonal residents that purchase units in the project and the market will dictate the mix of seasonal versus permanent residents. The effect on local businesses when these residents are not in town is not part of a rezone process. Packet Page -146- 6/11/2013 9.A. Concern about renters and other potential community rule infractions. Response: The community has covenants that control or restrict certain activities and can /will be enforced. Concern about requirement in the PUD that requires membership of one resident on the CDD Board. Response: The existing PUD does not contain said requirement. Meeting concluded at approximately 7:15 p.m. M Packet Page -147- 6/11/2013 9.A. PUD PUIJ SABAL BAY SAB.AL BAY 19 20 24 19 0 29 AK 25'j0i ' LE . . . . �. _ '.TORTOISE \ FPL !,• - (� /, (31.25 i AC) Y' ' •1 ` s/ PRESERVE URBAN RESIDENTI (291.93 i AC) . ..•- .'.,./ e �f SUBDISTRICT CA (COMMERCIAL) Y/ • "•. - .• , / / ® ± AC) SABAL BAY r j/ i /� _ cl$fA' C4 (10.00 y! \ 7 CRGA (166.76 t AC) ArNTR ] PUD \ RA1T'TREE LANE �\ \ ® 199.98 t AC) MAPLE LANE Z \ \\ \ / /f /� �� /•, �/_ .1 \ \ MDR / d„r-' F1.'" to (299.06 t AC) ..f7'2,kSF �.� - _ � CYPRESS LANE � \ \\ < \\ I I 1 ROOKERY BAY I j�J JI CONSERVATION I /�� / • . "' . .: j/ . - it y^, ..d > 1513.77 x AC) ... _ : 1 RSF -3 \/\ ROADWAY MYRTLE LANE"' (37.85 t AC) RSF -3 \ TOTAL: 1,563.84 AC Ix 30129 Q C 31iI 3/ yr•r. ,.1 i \tit^, ". / ' J(�; Q I i• i i i '%• ` \�•� / I URBAN COASTAL FRINGE i \S \� \\\ ± SUB - DISTRICT \ \ ! C�ITSI;R� )brsh bS Z D � Z > �c I �z rr �o4 Q 36 31 U U 1 G wN Ir Q m J I i I I 1; 1 II I I 1�1 I I I ' I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 i I I 1 I 1 I 1 I i I I 1 i 1 1 1 I i 1 I 1 I il, I A -A /ST TRAIL ACRES .' � ! ✓ � \� � � • - , � . _ r�T ,�1,T' - OAT . OJ r ?JT 1 1 I j 7�M_1NCE �F- . I i CRGAJ�i} TRAIL ACRES h i i � CLU E ,0010ER jBA CON ERWIATI N Ll I i r 1 I I I 1 I I I URBAN COASTAL FRINGE SUB - DISTRICT 7 A -ST \ _.. r-S, AREA j I t/ I �• .CRGA � �� �% - - -�—� CRGA ,L,y -ra j MH HITCHING POST I / " MOBILE F ;HOME PARY . I _ J 3 _ 7, I G 5 A -S7 EA—ST I '1 '1 URBAN COASTAL FRINGE 1 1 I ) I SUB- DISTRICT Z: CONSERtiA� LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (LDR) COMMERCIAL AREA (CA) • SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 85,000 SQUARE FELT • SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED ZERO LOT LINE COMMON /RECREATIONAL /GOLF • DUPLEX COURSE AREAS (CRGA) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (MDR) COMMON AREA • SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED • OPEN SPACE • SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED WATER MANAGEMENT AREAS • ZERO LOT DNE GOLF COURSE • DUPLEX RECREATION FACILITIES • MULTI- FAMILY CLUBHOUSE • TOWNHOUSE PRO SHOP • CLUSTER HOUSING NATURE PRESERVES TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS BOARDWALKS, SMALL DOCKS, ETC. • 1,600 REVISED SEM i, 2D12 FOR LE09RUTY O 8.5 a 11 REVISION OFSCRIPRDN EXHIBIT B: MPUD MASTER PLAN Rn•e,w� .se. xsllw•, n>.Imum msn. .:uses.. rnwsrn Packet Page -148- - ii I i I t 1 I i 1 ; I l i 1 a I li i 1 1 I f II I h I h I I 1 I 11 I I 1 i I i i l 1 f I 7, 7, " 'aAY I:i I NL Si i i 1 1 .1 1 I i t i I 1 I I i I I t I I I 1 i 9 I 1 1 � lit I i 1 s LENNAR HOMES, LLC WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 1 a 1 WENTWORTH ESTATES PUD DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT No. 2004 - TR- 6/11/2013 9.A. i THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as "Agreement' is made and entered into this 24th day of February , 2004, by and between V.K. Development Corporation, a Wisconsin Corporation duly organized and authorized to conduct business in the State of Florida, hereinafter referred to herein as "Developer," whose address is 19275 W. Capital Drive, Brookfield, Wisconsin 54045, by and through Sanjay Kuttemperoor, its Executive Vice President, who has been duly authorized to execute this Agreement, and THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF COLLIER COUNTY, hereinafter referred to as "County." WHEREAS, pursuant ("PUD") Ordinance No. 03 -51, before the Board of County C undertaken to confirm cent racp fullv set forth below; and WHEREAS, De leial control over, or is t which lands improvemc Planned Unit Develo Development's attache development in the near RECITALS: to thS_—W�ent orth Estates Planned Unit Development "i��r rim a hearing held September 23, 2003 ers of n,, County and Developer have mitments with this ent, which commitments are e6,r nts'that Developer either has 1we en if I s Iribed in Exhibit "A" upon n atoh d as et fon the Wentworth Estates UD) Ordina a cre#� or referred to as "the and incorpo e7' y reference, which upon be subject to the i gsgnof road impact fees; and WHEREAS, the effect t�Yii r i ig8 made pursuant to Collier Counry Land Development Code Section 3M13_5hl.k>g to bind the parties pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy in order to insure that adequate public facilities for transportation concurrency requirements are available to serve the proposed entire Development concurrent with when the impacts of the Development occur on the public facilities. WHEREAS, Developer hereby warrants and represents to County that the owner of undeveloped property in the Lely A Resort Community PUD has relinquished and transferred to Developer the vested rights to construct 1,000 dwelling units as evidenced by the attached letter to the County attached hereto as Exhibit `B "; and WHEREAS, the parties acknowledge that the valuation of eligible anticipated construction to the County's transportation network is based upon professional opinions of total project probable costs certified by a professional architect or engineer attached hereto as Exhibit "C "; and Packet Page -149- a2� No No oC �o w° w w + °o w � O M V7 OO r-+ a� w t 8C °C3 aw o� 00 6/11/2013 9.A. . 10B WHEREAS, after reasoned consideration by the Board of Commissioners, the Board has authorized the County Attorney to prepare this Agreement upon the Board finding that: a. The subject Proposed Plan, defined below, is in conformity with the contemplated improvements and additions to the County's transportation system; b. Such Proposed Plan, viewed in conjunction with other existing or proposed plans, including those from other Developers, will not adversely impact the cash flow or liquidity of the County's Road Impact Fee Trust Account in such a way as to frustrate or interfere with other planned or ongoing growth necessitated capital improvements and additions to the County's transportation system; C. The Proposed Plan is consistent with the public interest; and d. The proposed consistent with program for the WHEREAS, the B,barc o. consistent with the County's exisaa WHEREAS , the 'T n4 a County Commissioners plan r Agreement ("Proposed is in conforrrury a additions to the County's ortation network I public for Developer to pre, f of estimated contribute certain off -site impr {fie d-as esibe composed of, among other things, development order or voluntarily made in connecttot :)n of the Proposed Plan is five -year capital improvement h: and that the Proposed Plan is :)r'aretp� ended to the Board of i a c on set forth in this th �c�tes]r► lated improvements and ^t°t`rvill be advantageous to the ro.,,kktpact fees and, to donate and [hi and in Exhibit "D" which are equued to be made pursuant to a with road impact construction. WHEREAS, the parties acknowledge that all construction plans, specifications and conveyances shall be in conformity with the road construction standards and procedures of the County and shall be first approved by the Collier County Transportation Administrator prior to commencement of construction; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Wentworth Estates PUD Ordinance, the County has authorized the Developer to cause the construction or installation of the subject contribution set forth in this Agreement within the public right -of -way and thereafter execute any and all documentation necessary to convey the contribution to the County in conformance with the County's transportation standards, procedures, ordinances and regulations; and WHEREAS, Developer has paid the Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) application for this Agreement; 1) Packet Page -150- w c.r F-+ r-� e3N w r.a 6/11/2013 9.A. ■ WITNESSETH: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration exchanged amongst the parties, and in consideration of the covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. All of the above recitals are true and correct and shall be fully incorporated herein and form a substantial part of the basis for this agreement. 2. The following commitments, set forth in Ordinance No. 03 -51, are hereby set forth and expressly made a part of this Agreement: A. The Wentworth Estates PUD shall not use Southwest Boulevard as a construction access. However, it will function as a secondary project ingress /egress point for the entire project. B. Specific roadway improvements have been identified, as needed, to address local co. These were identified in a report submitted in� 02la'Egtworth Estates — Transportation Impact S, the improvement t be,, made by the Developer are C. A � ria'1 lee t � �° g�� P�aIl development points of in es an e tai%f s ce at any active entrance prior tp • e n t e<,�first a etitJ certificate of occupancy D. Extema" ct entrance imprenscated at the US 41 /North ?? Entrance US 41 /Southwe o vard, such as turn lanes and w median moti • aunt �>way improvements will not be considered foi ts. All such project specific improvements needed to serve the development traffic at an acceptable � level of service shall be in place prior to the issuance of the fast CO. • - F-•i E. The following Transportation Impact Mitigation Plan will operate to W alleviate the Development's impact on the adjacent roadway network: 1. No later than within ten (10) days of the date of the execution of this Agreement, the Developer shall obtain certificates of public facility adequacy ( "Certificates' for roads for all development density and intensity authorized by the PUD by prepaying to the County one -half of the road impact fees estimated to be due for all authorized development. This pre - payment shall serve to mitigate the project's impacts, advance improvements to roadways expected to be impacted by the project and vest all of the project's development density and intensity for transportation concurrenry requirements. It is estimated that this prepayment ("Road Impact Fee Prepayment') will be at least $3,500,000 based on an estimate of half of the amount currently applicable for road impact fees for authorized residential I Packet Page -151- 6/11/2013 9.A. ■ and commercial uses. All impact fees shall be calculated based on the fee schedule in effect on the date first mentioned above. The impact fee prepayment funds may be utilized by the County outside of the Road Impact Fee District in which the Wentworth Estates PUD is located. 2. Prior to the issuance of the first CO, the Developer shall construct intersection improvements (turn lanes and median improvements) and, when warranted, install traffic signals at the intersections of US 41 /Southwest Boulevard and US 41 /North Entrance to the Wentworth Estates PUD. These improvements will be considered project related and will not be eligible for impact fee credits. 3. Additionally, and without impact fee credits, the Developer shall contribute the sum of $392,800 to construct southbound left and eastbound right turn lanes for the US 41 /Airport Road intersection (engineer's estimate of robable cost: $339,800), and a westbound left turn lane a1 snake - Hammock Road intersection (engmi ' s -k: $53,000). These payments shall be ma �e County withilt\" (60) days of receipt by the �.�:! De v opt of �e County's wl tten request for payment of co s do - ae, -gs.`` AI i7sag two s�eci improvements have been id nti e ersfands and agrees that the C un ] e QA ti protvements within the same T ans orltation o c et Ma a ment Area are more essential for th)�;,.;e£fibvft dPrrCttiotr --dF thcff ns' lion system than those id '` d above and may tktol usq Mile a funds to construct those alte � improvements. eE�a a improvements are to be made ivi the same Trans , t eton Concurrency Management w Area th e r a1`lie eveloper fully agrees to provide this level,.. ounty in the use of the above - a-s+ mentioned funds.""— b F. All points of ingress and /or egress as shown on any plan submittal are .—. conceptual in nature and subject to change as determined by Collier w County Transportation Staff. Collier County Transportation Staff reserves the right to modify, or close any ingress and /or egress location(s) determined to have an adverse effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the public. These include, but are not limited to, safety concerns, operational circulation issues, and roadway capacity problems. G. Any and all median opening locations will be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy, as amended, and Land Development Code, as amended. Median access and control will remain under the authority of Collier County. Collier County Transportation Staff reserves the right to modify or close any median opening determined to have an adverse effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the public. These effects may include, but are not limited to, safety concerns, operational circulation issues, and roadway capacity problems. Packet Page -152- 6/11/2013 9.A. 10B H. Nothing in any development order will vest the right of access over and above a right in /right out condition. Neither will the existence, or lack o£, a future median opening be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the Developer, its successor(s) in tide or assignee(s). I. The Development shall be designated to promote the safe travel of all users including pedestrians and bicyclists. Pedestrian travel ways shall be separated from vehicular traffic in accordance with recognized standards and safe practices. J. The Developer, its successor(s) in title, or assignee(s), will be responsible for the cost of any traffic signal at any development entrance when deemed warranted and approved by Collier County Transportation Staff. Traffic signals shall be owned, operated and maintained by Collier County. K. The Develo; lands un{&4' necess to , L. All ern' s Coutry rit the 9evel'pi M. Theo ,. 1 Collierl__ physicall��i the Develop in relocation 41. the oroiect. ing right -of -way from project ,all project specific turn lanes etc. not located within by an entity created by :(s). agrees to pr6�-, sha> CCess if, in the opinion of Planning and TAKS -ppp '.Q—i Staffs, such shared access is 'conomically feasible son the site plans submitted by fir, cent degel�prteCs, as long as this does not result ,r? at :IR-�roject's planned entrances onto US N. If a gate is proposed at any Development entrance it shall be designed so as not to cause vehicles to be backed -up onto any adjacent roadway or intersection affecting safe and efficient operations on County or State roadways. The minimum depth to the development key pad /phone box and turn - around area in front of any such gate shall be no less than 100 feet. Collier County reserves the right to impose a stricter requirement if site - specific conditions warrant. O. The Developer reserves the right to make modifications to the Typical Spine Road Sections to enhance the roadway and streetscape aesthetics and appeal of the development. Modifications will protect the quality and quantity of on -site wetlands, and may help to better display the natural areas. Modifications may also reduce overall traffic speeds and provide enhanced opportunities and experiences for pedestrians and bicyclists. All modifications that are made will be subject to Collier County Standards. 5 Packet Page -153- O w cn c.s+ b O .-r w cr. 6/11/2013 9.A. lOB 1. In areas adjacent to wetlands, the Developer reserves the tight to make modifications to the Typical Spine Road Section (within the 100 -foot right -of -way) to include the following. i. Changing the six -foot sidewalk on one or both sides of the roadway to an Moot multi -use path. ii. Allowing a variable width median that may vary between 10 feet and 40 feet. iii. Modifying the typical 4:1 slope at the edge of the right -of -way to other grading solutions as conditions permit. 2. In areas adjacent to uplands, the Developer reserves the right to make modifications to the Typical Spine Road Section to include the following: i. rjH'wvarilir ht -of -way that may vary between et and 150 feet ii../ ,Chug tha— di= fodlsidewalk oh, one or both sides of the t ;( 1 a R n f t pa 1 llo ajv wid e jthat may vary between 10 aim n3�9ff- ef' e = P. The D ` T: er shall improverav t�oulevard to include two 12- :h foot lanes,, - and — gutter urban : a8�my cross - section with enclosed w drainage, ai dtwalk on ea� .si f the road. These improvements H will be designe t e , f lj e -916ng roadway network and improve cs, area drainage. Improv Tnt7ffg`to Southwest Boulevard shall also include «p landscaping and lighting and shall improve the turning movement G� geometry at the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and US 41. These F ,, improvements shall be part of the Phase 1 construction plans and shall w be reviewed and approved by Collier County. A bench and /or bus eT shelter shall also be included in the construction plans with the design and Iocation coordinated by Collier County. Q. The Developer shall provide up to $250,000 to supplement the funding for the installation of street lighting by the County, along US 41 from Broward Street to Collier Boulevard. This payment shall be made to the County within sixty (60) days of receipt by the Developer of the County's written request for payment. R. The Developer shall provide the County with appropriate easements associated with the proposed Lely -Manor Western Outfall Canal and Lely -Manor Eastern Outfall Canal storm water management facilities, including the outfall spreader lake and storm water pumping station A Packet Page -154- 6/11/2013 9.A. components, in order for the County to properly access, operate, and maintain said facilities. The easements shall provide clear and uninterrupted access from U.S. 41. The easements shall be provided at no cost to the County within 120 days of either the Developer's construction of the Lely -Manor Western Outfall Canal and /or Lely- Manor Eastern Outfall Canal storm water management facilities, including the outfall spreader lake and storm water pumping station; the platting of the property; or the County's written request for the easement dedications, whichever occurs first. 3. The estimated Road Impact Fee Prepayment set forth in the Wentworth Estates PUD of $3,500,000.00 (one —half of the estimated Road Impact Fees) was based on the PUD application request for 1500 dwelling units, however, the request was reduced at the PUD hearing to 1200 dwelling units. Based on the reduced dwelling unit count of 1200 dwelling units approved in the PUD, the Road Impact Fee Prepayment (one —half of the estimated Road Impact Fees) to be paid by Developer is $2,836,419.25. The Road Impact Prepayment shall be allocated and Certificates issued for the following numbers and types of dwelling units together with 85,000 -f - commercial uses and an eighteen hole golf course and clubhouse:, --- ` ; "le Family Units"'(4,0 9 square feet) > Units iz jv /Multi- Family Units Current policy alldmu' �ie types of resident�eesj f6Xw14' h Certificares are issued to be changed to other types idential uses, anda �gree that Developer and its successors and assigns shall 1 66 r1 r�ht under this ri t t to make such changes even • • if the current policy is changed \ \ > \� ` ._ _ __ J }/� LXV 4. The failure of this Agre nC otof address any perrnit, condition, term, or .b restriction shall not relieve either the Developer or its successors of the necessity of G? complying with any law; ordinance, rule or regulation governing said permitting, M requirements, conditions, or terms of restrictions. e7% W v 5. This Agreement shall not be construed or characterized as a development agreement under the Florida Local Government Development Agreement Act. 6. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement shall only be modified or amended by the mutual written consent of the parties hereto or by their successors in interest. 7. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of the Agreement. shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement. 8. The performance and execution of this Agreement shall be carried out in conformance with the Risk Management Guidelines established by the County's Risk 7 Packet Page -155- 6/11/2013 9.A. 106 Management Department as more particularly described in Exhibit "F" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 9. This Agreement shall be recorded by the County in the Official Records of Collier County, Florida within fourteen (14) days after the County, by its duly authorized Chairman, executes this Agreement. A copy of the recorded document will be provided to Developer. 10. In the event of a dispute under this Agreement, the parties shall first use the County's Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure as described in Exhibit "G ". 11. Any party to this Agreement shall have the ability to file an action for injunctive relief in the Circuit Court of Collier County to enforce the terms of this Agreement, said remedy being cumulative within any and all other remedies available to the parties for enforcement of this agreement. 12. The credits for the identified herein shall run with the 1 by the entire amount of each thereon and each successive' ild credits are exhausted or et subsequent record titlehol rere'.- As obligation to notify the �o applied for. If a credit is aaila credits and Certificates s 44 described in Exhibit "A ". 13. The Agreement shall be used 12 Certificates of Public Facility A entire development density and Road Impact Fee Prepayment and the Certificates d to Exhibit "A" and shall be reduced the first building permit issued permit until thjact is either completed or the m longer available. It, \shall be Developer's or a . %a po o the PXopetty; i.e. lot /tract purchaser) A dis ' e 4ch time a building permit is it tiknaUei h 1ll ec j roam the available balance. All a ou Olt ¢lie .bands set forth in the area ( "Road Irt c Feefedits ") available under this payment of �q�a�Y4mpact Fees and to obtain Dx-yansno i 2 ncurrency requirements for the din -ZOrdznance No. 03 -51. 14. An annual review and audit of performance under this Agreement shall be performed by the County to determine whether or not there has been demonstrated good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement and to report the credit applied toward of Road Impact Fee Prepayments and the balance of available unused credit. If the Collier County Board of Commissioners finds, on the basis of substantial competent evidence, that there has been a failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement, this Agreement may be revoked or unilaterally modified by the County. 15. Not later than 90 days prior to the expiration of the three year period for such Certificates, the County shall notify the Developer via registered mail of the remaining balance due for the estimated transportation impact fees up to 50 percent, based on level of building permits already issued. The balance of the impact fees due will be calculated at the rate schedule then currently applicable. The Developer may elect to pay the balance of the estimated transportation impact fees for the entitlements for which the Certificates apply or modify the Certificates to a lesser entitlement and calculate the balance of the transportation impact fees on the revised entitlements. The Certificates shall be modified to include only the entitlements for which the estimated transportation impact fees are paid. Once the Packet Page -156- w v+ b r-+ m w ocs ; 6/11/2013 9.A. s balance of the estimated transportation impact fees are paid, those estimated fees are non- refundable. However, the Certificate runs continuously with the land in perpetuity after all estimated transportation impact fees have been paid. As building permits are drawn down on the entitlements, the estimated transportation impact fees already paid shall be debited at the rate of the impact fees in effect at the time of utilization. If the estimated transportation impact fee account becomes depleted prior to the buildout of the Development, the Developer shall pay the currently applicable transportation impact fee for each building permit in full prior to its issuance. In the event that upon build -out of the Development estimated transportation impact fees are still unspent, the remaining balance of such estimated fees may be transferred to another approved project within the same, or adjacent, transportation impact fee district, provided any vested entitlements associated with the unspent and transferred transportation impact fees are relinquished and the Certificates are modified to delete those cntitlements. 16. The off -site improvements, if any, shall exclude any access improvements. 17. The parties acknowledge—that—die donation and /or contribution are characterized as work done and pro tby a highway or road agency for the improvement of a road within the of t of way. 18. Any future future receipts by the Court until such time as all devi location that was subjec4 to made over a period of five,(.`. t. 19. The Road lit Impact Fee Prepayments, k network to accommodate gr Fee District where the road i for excess Fee Credit and C )es not include c ;knd which were credits shall come from nbursement shall be paid .on administrator, at the reimbursement shall be pted shall only be for Road made to the transportation the respective Road Impact �-A— C T / 20. The Road Impact Fee Cre� �3t vided in this Agreement for shall be a credit only against Road Impact Fees and that such Road Impact Fee Credits shall not offset, diminish or reduce any other charges, fees or other impact fees for which the Developer, its successors and assigns are responsible in connection with the development of their lands. 21. Developer shall keep or provide for retention of adequate records and supporting documentation which concern or reflect total project cost of construction or installation of any improvements to be contributed. This information shall be available to the County or its duly authorized agent or representative, for audit, inspection, or copying, for a minimum of five (5) years from the termination of this Agreement. 22. Except for any future reimbursement as provided in Paragraph 18 above, this Agreement shall terminate upon completion of the Development. 23. The burden of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefit of the Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties of this Agreement. n Packet Page -157- w cr. b t7 rn w w 6/11/2013 9.A. 100 24. The parties agree that the contribution of construction for Southwest Boulevard shall reach final completion by December 31, 2005. 25. This Agreement shall be modified or revoked as is necessary to comply with relevant state or federal laws, in the event state or federal laws are enacted after the execution of this Agreement, which are applicable to and preclude the party's compliance with the terms of this Agreement IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their appropriate officials, as of the date first above written. AS TO COUNTY: YAttest: Furrrr..,. Clerk p Print Name: Print Name. .t.,,,TU m —... n . �,e STATE OF COUNTY OF BOARD OF t 6 �3// tP F i L �r i 1 Bv: C, COMMISSIONERS it Chairman CORPORATION Vice President I- The foregoing Agreement was acknowledged before me this -r� day of Jd1Cl , 200, by Sanjay Kuttemperoor, as the Executive Vice President of V.K. Develo ent Corporation. He is [XJ personally known to me, or [ ]has produced drivers license no. as identification. NOTARY PUBLIC MICHELLE �t (SEAL) MCDONALD Name: l"l Chde- Alc Dona (Type or Print) '�'ofw�cc My Commission Expires: C.-30 04 Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: rn Packet Page -158- 0 7es w ts� tin b er .ss 0 A` R i1 Packet Page -159- 6/11/2013 9.A. w fled* /o,6 Apft Dayo Data Recd s w tr+ r+ c.r+ b ti .s�• 6/11/2013 9.A. 108 LIST OF EXHIBITS ATTACHED TO AGREEME NT Exhibit "A" Legal Description and graphic rendering of the Development. Exhibit `B" Letter to County regarding vested rights to construct One Thousand (1,000) dwelling units. Exhibit "C" Professional Engineer's Estimate of Probable Cost of Construction. Exhibit "D" A legal description and graphic rendering of donated Contribution of Construction. Exhibit "E" Intentionally Omitted Exhibit "F" A Copy of the Risk Management Guidelines applicable to this Agreement. Exhibit "G" Collier Coty�'st� e Resolution Procedure e �(7.1 12 Packet Page -160- 0 w b N Ql N 6/11/2013 9.A. Exhibit A 1 of 5 10B PARCEL 1 Description of Part of Sections 29, 30 and 31, Township 50 South, Range 26 Bast, Collier County, Florida Beginning at the northwest corner of said Section 30; thence along the north line of said Section 30, North 88'23'16" East, 2491.52 feet; thence continue along the north line of said Section 30 North 88'13129" East 1636.98 feet to the southwesterly right -of -way of Tamiami Trail (US 41) (200' right -of -way); thence along said right -of -way South 39'03142" East 2333.04 feet; thence leaving said right -of -way South 38'17.43" West 581.30 feet; thence North 89'34142" West 348.55 feet; thence South 02'48131" West 308.99 feet; thence South 88'28'28" West 30.00 feet to the east quarter corner of said Section 30; thence along the north line of those lands described in Official Records Book (OR Book) 105, pages 595 -597 and OR Book 105, Pages 592 -594, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, South 87'14'44' West 683.13 feet; thence along the west line of said land described in OR Book 105, pages 592 -594 South 00'20137" West 672.63 feet; thence along the south line of said lands North 87 °26141" East 654.42 feet to the west line of Myrtle Cove Acres Unit No. 1 as recorded in Plat Book 3, page 38, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence along the west line of said Unit No. 1 South 02'45'35" Nest 1919.99 feet to the southeast corner of said Section 30; thence along the east line of said Section 31, South 02'45'30" West 2335.35 feet; thence South 83'30'57" West 1549.05 feet; thence North 56'10137" West 816.27 feet; thence North 89'29119" Nest 558.68 feet; thence North 01'35100" East 1675.69 feet; thence North 89'27'15" Nest 508.31 feet; thence South 70'33122" West 1109.51 feet; thence due West 357.35 feet to the west line of said Section 31; thence along the west line of said Section 31, North 00'19155" East 412.36 feet to the northwest corner of a .sa¢tiom 31; thence along the west line of said Section 30, North 00'20137" Ea 8 5 Y the west quarter corner of said Section 30; thence continue alo�y�l /ts bN ection 30, North 00'22'18" East 2687.69 feet to the said Point LESS AND EXCEPTING THAT 5. 3X AW PARCEL OF LAND descrih'� in OR Book 192, page 514, Public Records of Collier o ngyk-- Pivrid}. Containing 730.962 acres` moze or ALSO INCLUDING THE PO I C., . PARCEL 2 � 1 Description of Part of S txt Towttehip uth,e %?id.!Fjast, Collier County, Florida: 0 Beginning at the southwest r of said Section 01. ong the west lice of said Section 32, North 02'48147^ 5t,.,2394.57 feet; thence k-1i g said west line North RW 59'56'01" East 2041.35 feet Cq ii"�ktoundary of the f rail Acres Unit 2, Plat Book 4, page 62, Collier County, F1 �,auce a s� t boundary South 39'03'07" East 9-" 1309.16 feet; thence continue alo ,sagla rth 50'55109" East 762.41 feet; thence leaving said plat boundary So`liGh 3��gg_ �0_ n t 430.46 feet; thence North 50'58121" East 199.96 feet to the boundary of the plat of Trail Acres Unit 3, Plat Book 3, page 94, Collier County, Florida; thence along said plat boundary South 39'01139" East 962.19 feet; thence continue along said plat boundary South 87'34119" East 1003.95 feet �..� to the east line of said Section 32; thence leaving said plat boundary and along said east line, South 02'32154" West 1912.12 feet to the southeast corner of said Section 32; thence along the south line of said Section 32, North 89'40129" West 2625.95 feet to the south quarter corner of said Section 32; thence continue along the south line of said Section 32, North 89'40'08" West 2625.60 feet to the said Point of Beginning; Containing 313.76 acres, more or less. Packet Page -161- 1G W M0: M� O 41� m �0 N � Z(� 0 m N K 7 WU' LL TT�� yp 6b °u� 2� m f o 6 O i�rols�Qens �ruae ivisr000 rivean 9 � I 11 111 a 6/11/2013 9.A. I �� � � DD D 9 Ono oli M �W R A �u ell C � on� AME / M. V �F �U Pnrlrct Oman _1 F7_ \t 6 R alliji LV z fy w W Ll Z w� W H z to a d .V No' W s �r+ a Ln o r! N di 00 Cd a w "W C7 a ark M 0 6/11/2013 9.A. YBCKei rage -lb5- AvE w 0 P4 a x W I.r7 A-i 6/11/2013 9.A. �gg5 108 Wf S � �tdi QF 9 a'E6� o � zE vtige.wzm LU W N v y �LL-I w z a LOU s U5 ~ 4 Y Q a _ w e E LLI � � m cum. m8 x m � • z �y$E�S � ?� �QEQ nL �RQ NOF- BfAiU� U� V YQ3. T� Og II W N O p LL W O � � WJ Z t n ° F• m } ---- W -- F C�i ii i z z /('� W W J ~" 20 ; °y0U :i W 6z W W¢ Z 6�OW WoW z'LL F�ouyiYi/ vy aO�ia w� o�zq �p W F 11 ow W W <O W gOO 288 LU < z i W ~ zt Uf SC,. } ���(((pppp�a w° f- i xwut ° Z x- W i Z ;g 4 Z 3 W- H Z Y. ��t�0 U `` U W y�.I /Fc `` 666 aa Z W W W _ S 7 K 7 K U D m W < p W a U3 O U3 4J f/1 K Z N /w ' /...`,•....,j W Z G W p O •] L7 W W LL 3 7 W 6W W j 2 Z �wa O C ~O ZO OJ J I� <W ap� LL! U m W U K OY7° N-WS tf� ! � f- F yf GJ 4� F7� W �U `� azW zJQ0 O� j` yy`��� g 92 u9j, w m N �w w'a, �r'Z uOiD ,1mU� LL m W Z iU QU O 'f- a�{���� Li� S W m �J m Uy W {- W K +C O t°L O W y >~ W W �+'7 -I. a N =J F7 V = q rtu�WWJJ��m oU V u� m U, ui SC > i wa rc w W z uj o zW �o` �uzi Z�~i 3 «�\�ir a Zo �'o� Wpo° J 1- IL 2` ` O WW N Ss 2 \� a. m C } C' < 2 U yI < W yO� �j '2 {�� �- m iG U J m tl 4 Z y fJ W v 7 �� W m VW ^` LL} y W W a W Z O tl013 LL ytl F _ J W KU ° wniIL ~�� o O LU TLLI U <�w 0Z ��aa g� <LLp u"i J < Oja�iO�Wr~i� ;mF�i (off �fy° 2 °C a < '4 S2 W wiG �L ' 7O vi U aC�O Ow <¢ a = 3 g m? K W¢ C W> a Z m< 4 m W W z LL 0 m m U y° ° y a a W F- O ? 7 Z y Q O G�O< a y�Oai 1Q- �-7 Zw =UO p09 a W zm r<n~ ¢gOol W Z LLI O1u 777�q W W 7UJ < UR �W di> y ZCZZ pZ < N��m�4�i�0fCc"xOFfO` -z LLK� pauz a °OOS <_ <25 LL W y� fpS QZO� W JO W 6F- O K W¢Uy oo�� F- W V W <W �WZ0702 ¢O> >ZO wzCa 2GFZO O Fw y. K q WO-2 FZmKUW Wj0¢t11 qOm F•O� a O K W m yUY K LL O y H LLW 2F- d 8U Q Qm 1`u Z Z 2 �c} U 7 0 O U. W m J J C7 m Z � Z wZQWW2-WZ r`�U<'�J4'72O UmK x� =I,2 �Z6y a0 y3 d LL Zz j pppZUO O L7 W a4Z W <• 300 y WU 7lL> W 3 J a 1K7 W'•''6Q �WZ �yQWY� W � O�i O W vi F-Q�Qa UZ� Fz FFx. �pa0 �F � V aN w j J WIJGy J� W>-o Z_LL W UOZ_� wK W yO W jn Om <LL t•ZZ F- d OFF= -w QQQF '� Lj }`-} W 6' m d y 7 tlf y y m Z J O Z 7 Z O JOJ F• W- w >}� 2 r ° < 3 tl 2 W Q� y U W I y w I N LL U m O v a U > W° 2 J U Z a 6U (9 p, 0 wFwz W Za7 2 W JU > �y >� � >LL W Z} <WO N N7a Z �, z a ZO w FS-.�p: Wy H d. W <, 0v' O9O ~� a T wmR2Z2 WR' �y�J7 F-wzzw °Ymy23- zpZ W Z O < zCWmy F• W W ZU �Z ~a. F- �cOi wOa po°1a QF7 imworc <w< p d za rcw Ld< of '0 w 00 W J W U O W K W z ;' W N O W r 7 O W Z O W y y w y J> O m p 6F'G• WpZO W I=-FT. a W O RO 700 U7 W Z ~OZy3w Z1 }> OwLL• m^ J U Q �iZ1 W? F iF Ny pp a < ZU K �ZZ U Om 00_U y1-UO Lj L� V F ya ¢O I O W zp ~ W ui $ Y04LL : Z a O Q OOziO'Z W N y 7D F• a W Za HIM Id O 0 J� OF- g WQ Z O g 7 W W. 2 Z_ ZF O X 2_ w LLK W F• Z p m W LL m< O 2 a U p < 7 F- JUm¢~ p�J F-O fly K° W <�ZpT°� aayW U TJZW =O W ~Z '� 2 H wz W ��Oa00LL ai��K Owl a�� OU' r wi6 °5 .i 60it w OC .man 6 I.: .e ei3� Packet Page -164- LO W O M N 00 Im a a x W L� I�0 V Qt �.n r� M C7 m ji I ( r ( .1 U-- �' p` o O ro 4 !f ry a U Q U mgmo w uiG n ON J LL° E a N Q W W e m r L 6 W 2 U @ ,� Oa O U ry m y aa W LU W 9 O S v Q �$ Y ¢ h <Zo� w Z p Ix N w�V w O12 q w� F- g `t.A O� ji I ( r ( .1 U-- �' p` Ix W a� p N O C m Z ZnA O �vc Oq� U W U O < U H 2 W L O u�v v Packet Page -165- 6/11/2013 9.A. s z `n w w E o y Ol W aw F e ,~L 9 111 illa llitl �m LD z H w W I W H Z iL 0 a w •A i y y W LL7 y y O ro 4 !f ry a W � mgmo w IL W W e m r U m O U ry m O IUD OI N N 4Y w Z H 00 Cl) w� F- g it O� +fy �_ r w Q N N r M A O W w r r f U U V U Q Ix W a� p N O C m Z ZnA O �vc Oq� U W U O < U H 2 W L O u�v v Packet Page -165- 6/11/2013 9.A. s z `n w w E o y Ol W aw F e ,~L 9 111 illa llitl �m LD z H w W I W H Z iL 0 a w •A i y y W LL7 y y N Saptcmbw 23, 2003 Collier County Board of Cmudy Cm ntasiamas t7nHter County Qoveamnat Complex 3301 EWO Tuda d Tug Nsploa, Florida 34112 Re: Ldy, a Resort ComnwNty PUD Daar Commiadiomas: 6/11/2013 9.A. 108 Exhibit B Thin iedw is gtv n 10 collier Copy by Stock Davelcpooant Caotporatiom, a Flacids cotpo ewn ("Stoalc Dew3ppmaoC7 hi rrlstiam to " do Ldy Lakes #"vklm Stock Tkvrlopment WM became du � dw scqftltion of various parnds p�opa ty Win 11�c of Ldy Resat and a writoan ag earot bdwm LdyDe�rlop� on and Stock The drMlopmeat Tiow County Ordk mo 92 -15 FLU). Section 2.06 of the PUD, tho developer n descdbed is CoUl -38 (tive'4 * Rand property dm:ibod in 3e umts. 8y thIs Coarapondmoe, geYa. a the r� �devdopar, Commits to a tbdadon in the maxdarom of dwelling units ` "�" from *0 10,150 ncdb aigiaslty au&odzc d under PM to 91150 des . provided, howrm. that the udu e8miaatcd aWell only units .-cc to reduct the ms:imoom t pemisw density for Lacy Resort _mss on Ire aurreba of ainglafamay nalm availsble for devdWment, ,taal of dwelling units may not a :read 9,150 units which slurp be allowed as 1.8 units and 7,300 mall -ftmUy amkL The allot a6m of units msq be adjusted as provided in Section 207 of the PUD- Tl& oom m d by Stock Davelopment L gtvan in connection vA the otWmd rexomng petttiaa for the Ldy Fakes subdivision and can be retied on by Collis Cow9 , provA -A bowavrr, ttut in the event the rezeoing pedtm for Lciy Lakos is not approved by the Board of Carroty Comsodsdown Ear any Mason or no rmwAA Ibis oonsent by Stock Dmdopearct dull he of no force or effe a. Stock Davoloptnart don not mm sp remsinhi& uadevdaped p vpadu within Ldy Ream IU patposo of this letter is to mady adhwwledga Stock Daedopmart's comM to a radmd m in dendty is Ldy Resort. Mdit masked hereon shall obliBaQo StockDavdopment to implem d the 1,000 dendty mdaotiom sol* on property that Stock Da vdapm a owai, but ta@ra such demity rodumon dvW bo an overall mduotiam of dainty wlthm Ledy Resort. 5692 $dome Colin. Sent 1 - Mawr. Naa04 &4110 - Phme. W!) M -7344 Packet Page -166- F"I (2391 M -7541 w v. N v� .a}s 00 � 6111/2013 9.A. 10B n com"tA , Al a Flaarida �►: Name: T�ifla iGW�l�gie.tl aewdetooMo�oo. ■r�lo�e�w4ardJoo . a I \ \ x �� tsa -zs C7% .A errrti n n• Packet Page -167- G r� C _ d E U w G .'C W O U Q O d m 0 O C M D 4 o Z N U o c 2 N L - U =3 E n j Z 0 V Q r CL � n CL C o •o U M n d > _ C C O "u y o C n `o m 3 c m C Li 07 �0 cn _ a� r O Cn � �O Y .- p O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O N O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 V v v Co NC* 0 0 Co O Lf)OOOOOMaN O O O O O r C 0 Ln pp Qpr�'rr CLi0000rO q S r O fH N d9M Oi r NM LA CA r O O CO rNMMfH O O0 �7 d! M di ER E9 EA f G& A 6 6 R iR ER 64 +�00000o0 c oLnLnoaomrnSogoor0o 0 00000 i.1 CO to to 40. 1HN N i N�iA000 �• 44 n 0 0 p C Or CV Or 0 = iR fA fA �A CA O O O 64 Cl iA C r d! N d! N to N 64 0 N N M 0 W v M!;riCD f• OprOhN :i C O M Cn r M r CO LC) C.- O N r d' r Lf) M r r r r L M C7 J E .n *1>41LL _j _j _j _!rn v M O dom 0 Mm N � CM O l9 c E��aao cc m m�'��r U U U= v �w E" 0m c CM mr N� Eo 0 CD 0 O 3: :tt @ N LL C{ G U y L CL E co d e w 0 c c m= N CG N N to an M N w i- yam' Ll J;. O.' z • }f� Packet Page -168- �IM11k '` a 6/11/2013 9.A. 10B 0 r a. 3.. K Rb:.HA N,•.P.E' w PF FL•OR 1)A it Regii6al6n No,VW9. f° I • y r ,'. C.77,n/�r� E71CL�CU U s.FL:34Ta2 - t' �90D642 .: C m E m L Q _ V w Q � L. C �U d a 0 i� m V--4 LC*) Lp r� T4; L['7 M � c m o M v 7 O N N � �U A E m Z to U O m n E C � O W C ` 02 n. rz U 3 D m 0. 2 O 05 00 0 Y r v� .c 3 c U N CD C 'O 0 a 2 D O O O O S M M S p O p O S O O O O O O O O d O O O 0 N 0 O 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 0 V OCpOCMC+�CpO 008S8A 000 COOttd Lq tN ��Opet�tCf-�DO0e9t1')OtA01�pp ai c�i of o> Cllf000CDW,v �t,tOt7 at07t00Cn to a tv N to 0 w t: tD N` 0 r t M 00 .- N d3Nto Olk V} tl�NO b9 Lj 64 fA N 3 fA Eli EA ER 04 di V9, IR o E/! N to 4! W r f` � U O w a O tj v3 "'' C OOOOOOOOOOOOIA00000000 OOOtn CO C N Otntf>000In0OtDOdr- E mN0)01*- w c c tn0 0 V0 000 O ,1ciNMMaV1-- HIfAaO6M9d9- o U - NC>CD DU -N U 0000 0 O fOR O t O 0 .- tH fAtl�NOfAfR01,M.0 N � A00 ti x. y v U9, OOMM X00 m 0000`0 tt 0 mo NT O — GOAOIOAO OHO rn N NlOO U m as p t��6 CL O Ln O d m 'O a M to TS S N fn m m _N 10 0 2 m Y otD °y Q mih LL 0 E `mdmda,E 0 € 0 E 0 E 0 E >0 0 U CD N g O U f C Cr, V Oo 0c .C.LLLL ~nHaHHrL F - N LL'� ;0.20 a Cr O > � m a � cnc 0'S:E n 0 � c _o °.Ct°WE�mU�cymf0 — m N C f0 m Y m t4 U O c_�00000c� CO C (q fn Cn p N 0 Cu O w c w 'CC m d a E d,OL CL CL m m c c 4) 10 c.yE V U Icon E `FEF t`0 U w O @ E E E y � -o¢ M— �aUUCncncnu'�F- .-. 0 0 0 O I 2 N t- H-i-oa N W w Packet Page -169- 6/11/2013 9.A. bm d a COOttd ai c�i of o> �NOt'7 at07t00Cn N u9 fAM N N !0 l0 3 H IR o W r X � U O w a O tj to CO C N E w c c c tm o U DU U 0 C d E m Q� C t a W O V H m a di 0 N 6C7 t� T% 6C'1 C"-.N a C> � C C'7 s to N O N y C L U O � E p Z m c D Ea � o E W C � W U C ? o C V O c Q CU » o Mo y U 3 A � o u E� CL m i O C o0 � 0 e r coOOO O O O O Q M MCiggC? M O O O O O qUl O O OOOO(COOOOo O O O O O O O O O V OppCt1� OcMChOOCNOhCCC Ot�CV 0000 g0 OON 0 N am Ln I-Mo 0 MO MC Vi to ohmMmoo o M 0 Mn O O er! N to oo N to O r 40 O O O to sA r 60� N �= N r 49 Y4 ff). fA V3 V3• MA w to "W 64 • C000LQgLQtgOOOtnO0(DO� O OO6 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000 MNMAOt�O 0 (� !" O OiR tY'ONC�OD0 dr9�0 I- " IN M1100rN�000O bTN O tR 69 ERM Lo d>O 0 E9 69 My9 O 6 6� 9 64 6M4 C � s w ..a rrr 0 0 Ln M r M r MO m p I yr ONM NO,Lo �- CrMMLLj Co M _. r N .t Q J�J000o Ilt WJJ -jCoCo JJ�.I J i 1 TI � r to N Co O U ca U lD :t m w 3t h m d M :E = � 3 LL O D U C) U U FoF L O d a N t�A N •N L m F a mMyH3 MMMM to &W7Co C`) C� 0 E o E o € o € 0 E 0 oU 0 U iE� C C CD f CD v 'C 7 m S M L t I- L Hl-H�? L L tV N -M 0 c o Nco,m -J F 4> o�j m� o� m0 r � `! �I- o CD 0 Cl C -Z. ��������m;m� a� w o a�����gcc W E 0 O -5-5,5 cc Zp N to 0 Cr, C C m c 7 U C o .O+ C� f!1 O VJ fn o C y m • Co m U m L m L =_ C 0 0 0 0,2 E O .0 c m 0A tm o CL CL z CL m ca. c c m� c H�C-FiE v m I Mu > E w .0wUi 0¢ �aUUU�Mn°v�u'�ttt-, I Packet Page -170- f- O N t.- m N r M t- M tt t- to 29 A 0 C N tr 44 4* ti 44 W F- 7 to Mu Mu U- r_ O Z° o `n O N C � IC6 N C Qm rn •� O U w w H H W C m C O i+ m w Y V O E O 2 m Y /0 C /n M�0 'Ms to C 0 w m w C r 0 CL m m w 3 0 N 6/11/2013 9.A. WITIN M w C C', 0 Co tv a U xx w w m W N U Q U 0 CV-10 tr La r� E L� CV"9 Q C �+ cw a •a �v N d CL 0 d d O M b � Z c7 � b 3 7 N p L Cu 0 E y 7 C Z U y c 'O O � E a ; A O W a n � E � T 0 O co 05 E o d Y r t C r W O (V 7 0 m C w O +• D o o 0 0 o 0 g o N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V l (DOOCOMO00 SS 0 -00 NCAONrtnO0000N Co CO .- "t Lq (= O CL CL r o u, QCANCArinO� rVyCyMNMMN�7"ef OOCDOODd�M rNMMCH Vi 69 M! Vi N tl9 N (A d3 N V3 O pp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O OCCI CV O CA�h00000N00 (O �b9NNNCMVi00000rOr 03, E9 CA 0 OOOOfH Od! C fA CV N CV O N N 4�1 M r r LO h O M M i ell r z>- > - U LL LL Pn+ j- to Cn J J J uj -j U 1 f i * E M O m O m O J r O m Cry J m CN o r EO�ana Cu m m U U W U WV o E x O C �[ N L �W N tn r N Il O mom 3L O r C m L C •U M 'C m� C '= m N N N d ¢JrnmCLCL 0Ui J�f15M N CNO N M N r H 2� A.X21. r]]]]]te Packet Page -171- 6/11/2013 9.A. 10B o,. a I JLI ;°yam. RD HACM.A.E" E OF FLORIDA m ,, firb5�ttt�il E 'near ,Rn Ny: 3g�4g m LU ZINC.~ "C" t1') %a f.r1 H c+7 fY.. O 6/11/2013 9.A. 10 o� day o U z I � G n w Q rc i a � M Z y°o O !7 0 Md N N N U Y S J �yZ �O OO m M 0] p CL o V1 = F-N p ui Z ? d U o (Q N Z ° _ p I Pn LU / F o w J d t-oA it Q U tl o zv UO � J � � % i IL CL F- [ D ° J C) -1 Z Z o W O W j W U F— 0 Z M �'1 O L` J U H p Fr- O m Z W a U a Lj NH U)�U7 �Li0 z W p L, Z w a LL. W -� < co D! O J O W �U wN <0 Q (n w i?`n �o Q ° ° C ) .._I w O CL Q �¢oaww _(r mo_ 0 i wo6l:OL - COOZ ' *Z 130 HKI (0894S) 6MP '0%lBMSOS \6MP \9C*CZ0 \9CiCZ0 \'S Packet Page -172- H Q Un c� w 3 > x w H a 0 0 wo6l:OL - COOZ ' *Z 130 HKI (0894S) 6MP '0%lBMSOS \6MP \9C*CZ0 \9CiCZ0 \'S Packet Page -172- i ViS 3NI-1 HOIVV4 t -11 i 0 m I 1 4;Da-j4s qlq .1 199-JIS 44L 11 t 6/11/2013 9.A. 499JIS PJ2 t L vis UJDL*:g — Cooz '*Z 100 JW (0--4S) 6mP-PAtG )$9OA4jnoS\QP.J-d NO Packet Page -173- z FA 9 -s-n -K u V --'--:-7 Z: mw > o Ci n z I A Z 0 N > Jz 75 O 14 m a. W W lgiM�` l p u z LLJ 1--q LLJ 499JIS PJ2 t L vis UJDL*:g — Cooz '*Z 100 JW (0--4S) 6mP-PAtG )$9OA4jnoS\QP.J-d NO Packet Page -173- z FA 9 6/11/2013 9.A. JOB i EXHIBIT "F" Risk Management Guidelines Developer shall maintain the required Commercial General Liability insurance in full force and effect, for the duration of all road construction set forth in this Agreement, until all improvements are accepted by the County pursuant to the terms set forth herein. The area insured must include the area set forth in Exhibit "C" to this Agreement. Developer shall maintain Commercial General Liability Insurance in limits of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence combined single limits. Coverage shall be written on an occurrence form. Developer shall name Collier County as an additional insured on said policy, or a current Phase I Environmental Study of the property. Packet Page -174- C-_A f-�a N9 W v+ b rn cr% N I 2 3. 6/11/2013 9.A. COLLIER COUNTY ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES INTRODUCTION: Florida law provides that written arbitration agreements are valid, irrevocable and enforceable. Unless otherwise provided for herein, the provisions of Florida Statutes, Chapter 682.01 et seq. shall be controlling. These provisions provide a mechanism to resolve claims or disputes that could potentially lead to litigation in construction contracts. The object is to attempt to settle claims by mutual agreement or to make a good faith effort to settle claims and disputes prior to litigation in court. The methods involve binding arbitration and pre-suit mrxli.ation , AAitration is a quasi-judicial approach in which a disputed^ of fact after presentations by opposing parties. Its p I e peed mical resolution of disputes. Arbitration is traditio ' ess formal process curt litigation. Mediation is a method used to ettle' sin an �mpartt peon who listens to presentation by bob si s ilitWs se dement t ego ations between the parties.''° Collier C nt w 11 u li t e W. t ictal dircuit Court Mediation and Arbitration 4rt Prd f'Hb facilitate these procedures. " DEFINITIONS: 2.1 Claim: A demandIb_"e ~P' a}�ir act for an equitable adjustment of payment under a Col ction contract. A claim should cover all unresolved disputes existing at the time of presentation to arbitration or mediation. 2.2 Evidence: Oral testimony, written or printed material or other things presented to the arbitrator[s] or mediator[s] as proof of the existence or nonexistence of a pertinent fact. JMSDICTION: 3.1 A claim that does not exceed $250,000.00, excluding interest claimed, shall be submitted to binding arbitration. The parties may, by mutual consent, agree to a one - person or single arbitrator panel. Aggregate claims may total more than $250,000.00 for binding arbitration, but no single claim may exceed that amount. Packet Page -175- ■ 0 cs. F-+ 4. 6/11/2013 9.A. 1 3.2 A claim in excess of $250,000.00 brought pursuant to a construction contract with the county shall be submitted to mediation or binding arbitration if voluntarily agreed to by all parties. All claims less than $250,000.00 and all non - monetary claims brought pursuant to a construction contract with the county must be submitted to binding arbitration. 3.3 Prior to the institution of any litigation in a circuit court against Collier County, this Dispute Resolution process must be initiated. 3.4 Once the dispute resolution procedure has been initiated, a court of law may not consider the issues involved in the claim(s) until the dispute resolution process has been completed. 3.5 The claim must be a dispute between the County and the prime contractor. 3.6 The claim must be related to issues in dispute, which have been previously submitted in good faith to .,he.- County�pursuant to this procedure and could not be resolved by neget'�ii �T 3.8 Pendency of a oraarbitration or m on,of a dispute shall not be a basis for delay of t co#tr#_ctor's appe under th\� contract. 4.1 Either party t (30) calendar' staff or no lat by claimant. institution of barred by the after a denial ofI e c forty -five (45) c ly, event, no claim s Tl arbitration within thirty �r negotiation by County her knowledge of a claim jade after the date when on such claims would be 4.2 Upon request, the County will make available to any party wishing to initiate arbitration or mediation, a procedural package containing the necessary forms. The forms shall include a Notice of Claim, a Request for Negotiation, a Request for Arbitration and a Request for Mediation. The County's Purchasing Department shall have these forms available and they will be included in the County's bid package. 4.3 Either party to the contract may initiate arbitration or mediation of a claim by submitting a Request for Arbitration or a Request for Mediation Claim Form to the Purchasing Department. The initiating party must indicate on the form whether or not they will be represented by counsel during the hearing and may indicate a desire to resolve the claim based solely on a submittal of documents by the parties with no hearing. 4.4 The Claim Form shall be accompanied by: 2 Packet Page -176- 0 w Lin c.a�. G] N CT cs+ co 5. 6/11/2013 9.A. 10B"' ^, a. A brief summary of the nature of the dispute involved in each part of the claim. b. The amount of compensation being requested for each part of the claim along with supporting information. c. Copies of additional written information, not previously submitted under Section 3 including exhibits, intended to be used during the hearing to support the claim, excluding the contract documents. It is suggested that information be assembled in a tabbed notebook for ease of reference. d. Contract Time analysis if a Release of Liquidated Damages is included in the claim. e. No new or different claim, other than a change in the amount claimed, will be allowed once the time And-date-for the hearing has been set. f. If the arbitration f �ance mediator deb �ti es that information known to a person not i a at the hearin ® t e mediation is essential to arriving at i���isxon-orfor the f ' exee o the mediation process, he or she may obriain``�a"tt,�affi aJat from, th a person and enter such statement into -. 77r 4;77 ` r; 5.1 The responde ``hll prepare a rebutta t1��eal'and furnish a copy to the �of it party requesting ation and to each -tide CeAbers of the panel so that is received at lea\si 4-4 (14) calens�r— gfrior to the date scheduled for --� the hearing. �`' 5.2 The County shall set a time and date for an arbitration hearing within 21 G7 calendar days after receipt of the Request. In scheduling the time allotted for a hearing for complex claims, consideration will be given to the need for a the greater amount of testimony or other information required in order for the �o arbitrators to gain a complete understanding of the issues, and if a party requests additional time, the arbitrators selected may continue the matter in 7- calendar day increments. A request for a continuance must be submitted to the arbitrators no later than 48 -hours prior to the commencement of the hearing. Once arbitration has begun, it may only be continued in 24 – hour increments. 5.3 The parties are expected to cooperate fully with each other in exchanging information prior to the hearing. In general, it is expected that the parties will have exchanged all documents relating to the claim during negotiations between them prior to arbitration being initiated. In any event, a full 3 Packet Page -177- _ R 7. 6/11/2013 9.A. exchange of documents shall be completed no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the date set for the hearing. Generally, introduction of documents will not be allowed during the hearing which have not been previously been revealed to the other party. 5.4 Depositions and interrogatories will not be allowed except upon an order from the arbitrators to take sworn testimony of an unavailable witness. INVOLVEMENT OF ATTORNEYS IN AN ARBITRATION HEARING: Counsel or another person who has sufficient authority to bind that party at any hearing may represent a party. A court reporter will be present, unless waived by both parties. a. The hearing will be informal and involvement of attorneys, if desired, is expected to be minimal. b. The parties shall have,t fer such evidence as is relevant and material to the c. Unnecessary e�tenfw--earatqinattonj�or crbas- examination or extensive argument of lrgal /pois Eby a eys presenting. the parties will not be permitted. T ' I t Q argument as they deem IV appropriate. CONDUCT OF EV,1D$NTIARY HEARDJQ IN P►R l ATION: 7.1 The County or ' Wit. porter if present al�.'m} ester an oath to all persons who are to testify ud% a hearing. 7.2 Documents will be accepted for the record. 7.3 Distinct and severable parts of a claim may be dealt with separately. 7.4 The order of proceeding will be for the party initiating arbitration to first present evidence to support their claim. At the beginning of their initial presentation, a party shall present a succinct statement of the issues and a position on each issue. Orderly discussion between the parties as evidence is presented will be allowed. 7.5 Reasonable attempts will be made to assure that all relevant evidence necessary to an understanding of the disputed issues and of value in resolving the claim is heard and that each party has the opportunity to adequately rebut all arguments and evidence submitted. The arbitration panel will be the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of evidence offered. n Packet Page -178- 0 B C.0-1b 91" ca, Gam'] c 6/11/2013 9.A. JOB 7.6 Conformance to legal rules of evidence shall not be necessary. 7.7 Members of the arbitration panel may ask questions of the parties for the purpose of clarification. 7.8 If substantial new information is submitted during a hearing, which the arbitration panel deems places the other party at a severe disadvantage because of inability to develop an adequate rebuttal, the panel may elect to extend the hearing to a later date as previously set forth herein. a. A stenographic record of any hearings by a Certified Court Reporter or any previously recorded testimony or document prepared under oath, such as an affidavit is admissible. b. Each party shall bear an equal share of the cost of the arbitration panel. c. Each party shall pay its o ri-cos '-,R C d. All arbitration concTt mediation s conducted pursuant to�he p%(kV+S4cros T Sec 8. ADMINISTRA' 8.1 The resporn furnish a copy to received at least mediation. arty requesting n n (14) calendar and attorney fees. 5.2 one -half (1/2) day and all \(1) day unless continued egarding the claim and e mediator so that it is date scheduled for the 8.2 The County shall ' "a ' Jfbr fe mediation within 21 calendar days after receipt of the Req u`Iing the time allotted for complex claims, consideration will be given to the need for a greater amount of information required in order for the mediator to gain a complete understanding of the issues, and if a party requests additional time, the mediator selected may continue the matter in 7- calendar day increments. A request for a continuance must be submitted to the mediator no later than 48 -hours prior to the commencement of the mediation. Once mediation has begun, it may only be continued in 24 — hour increments. 8.3 The parties are expected to cooperate fully with each other in exchanging information. In general, it is expected that the parties will have exchanged all documents relating to the claim during negotiations between them prior to mediation. In any event, full exchange of documents shall be completed no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the date set for the mediation. 8.4 Each party shall bear an equal share of the cost of the mediator. R Packet Page -179- 0 w c.s+ cs. b o� v, 6/11/2013 9.A. 8.5 Each party shall pay its own costs and attorney fees. 8.6 All mediation shall be conducted within one (1) day unless continued pursuant to the provisions of Section 5.2 herein. 8.7 If a party fails to appear at a duly noticed mediation without good cause it shall bear the costs of the mediator, attorneys' fees and other costs. The County or any other public entity required to conduct its business pursuant to Florida Statutes, chapter 286, that party shall be deemed to appear at a mediation conference by the physical presence of a representative with authority to negotiate on behalf of the entity and to recommend settlement to the appropriate decision - making body of the entity. 8.8 A party is deemed to appear if the party or its representative having full authority to settle without further consultation, the party's counsel or a representative of the insurance c 'er_ �-ho has full authority to settle up to the amount of the claimant's 14 . d+[o�q)q c limits, whichever is less, without further consultation. 8.9 The mediat r s , Mmes b in procedures to be fq lov`ehd edi do '. 8.10 Counsel the discretion of 8.11 The mediat F;y meet and their counsel, 8.12 If a partial or fin . signed by the parties an d their ce the mediation and the with their clients. In absence of counsel. any party or parties or It shall be reduced to writing and 8.13 If the parties do not reach an agreement as to any matter as a result of mediation, the mediator shall prepare and distribute to each party a report indicating the lack of an agreement without comment or recommendation. With the consent of the parties, the mediator's report may also identify the outstanding legal issues or other action by any party that, if resolved or completed, would facilitate the possibility of a settlement. 9. COMPENSATION OF THE ARBITRATION PANEL OR MEDIATOR: Arbitrators and Mediators shall be paid at the rate of $150.00 an hour, or the current rate for the Court program. An additional fee of 25% shall be payable to the Court Program for administration of any arbitration, but shall not be assessed for a mediation. The parties shall equally share all costs and shall remit all charges to the Court Program upon the conclusion of the ADR Process. 6 Packet Page -180- vo C.64 �-v v, N t, 6/11/2013 9.A. 10. MEMBERSHIP: 10.1 The Arbitration Panel will consist of one member selected by the County and one member selected by the Contractor, unless the parties agree to utilize the Court Program's arbitrators. The Court Program will select the third member of any panel and the third member will act as Chairman for all panel activities. Any single arbitrator will be selected through the Court Program. 10.2 All mediators and the Chair of any arbitration panel shall appear on the Court Program's list of persons approved to serve as mediators and arbitrators. 10.3 It is desirable that all arbitration panel members have experience with the type of construction involved in this project. 10.4 It is imperative th tration panel members show no partiality to either the (�`�' r o tr he �o�an� xd��yp�� .have any conflict of interest. ! �.! 10.5 The criterV araar+niitalions fo medi�ors and arbitration panel membership is as fbllowls: a. The pers n[s s r }ctt i yV ' ct �r indirect ownership or financial �rtt n ctor a the project, the CEI consultin fi* selected for the li 'ect, in yubcontractor or supplier of the pro ��� or in other pane . ch panel member shall provide a s t of no known con W �; b. No arbitrator or dr eati any prior involvement in the project of a nature tha Y o strued to compromise his/her ability to impartially resolve disputes. c. No arbitrator or mediator will be employed by the Contractor awarded the project, the CEI consulting firm selected for the project or by any subcontractor or supplier of the project during the life of the Contract, except as a panel member or mediator. d. The Florida Rules of Court Rules 10.200 et seq., Part H of the Rules for Mediators and Part 11 of the Rules for Court Appointed Arbitrators shall apply, except Rule 11.110 and Rules 10.870 through 10.900. e. Rules 1.720(c), (d), and (e) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure governing mediation are incorporated herein. 7 Packet Page -181- log w v+ c.r. b C2 rn o� w 11. NISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS: 6/11/2013 9.A. 106 a. Arbitrators and mediators shall be agents and employees of the County for purposes of tort immunity resulting from any actions taken while conducting the hearing[s] or the mediation as long as these procedures are followed. Such status shall not create a conflict of interest. 8 Packet Page -182- O t.. s ts� b G7 o% tT► .ts 6/11/2013 9.A. JOB i TIME CHART FOR ADR: Within the Following Time Periods Following the Notice of Claim or the Date of the Occurrence Underlying the CIaim, Whichever is First, the Following Matters Must Occur, [All days are Calendar Days]: Up to 14 days after occurrera4`"l ��tie� ,[whichever is first]: The matter must be negotiat ounty' Within 7 days of iptfo _f Cl ai taff ball repare a written rebuttal. i' Within 15 Days o N `-" T n >lput� with County staff must be complet t' Within 30 Days 4�" Nlegotiations wwith C 4ra�t , S�aiff1' or Within 45 days of the date of the occ " � e: a Request for !p�ediation Must be Filed. o After a Request for Arbitration, iation is Filed-,-,.. % w _ r v, Within 21 days: The Med at o� �, -- c�5� " 'h all be set includin g the names of �v the participants and all relevant claim documents forwarded to the Mediator or Arbitrators. o'+ No Later Than 14 days prior to date of Mediation: A written rebuttal to any claim must be served on opposing party and Mediator or Arbitrators. No Later Than 48 Hours Prior to the date of the Mediation or Arbitration: Any request for a continuance must be filed with the Arbitrators or Mediator with a copy to County Staff. Once Mediation or Arbitration begins it may be continued for only 24 hours at a time with the consent of the Arbitrators or Mediator. 0 Packet Page -183- 6/11/2013 9.A. 10B Within 14 days of conclusion of Arbitration or Mediation: Written decision must be issued indicating that a certain conclusion has been reached or an impasse entitling claimant to proceed to court litigation. Both parties must undertake all ADR proceedings in good faith. Mackie/Dispute Resolution Procodure /- /,�j - Pf ) �. 7-� 10 Packet Page -184- 3* 3* >1* O w at� s!� WENTWORTH ESTATES PUD AMENDMENT ADDENDUM TO TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT DATED JUNE 299 2012 Prepared For: Lennar Homes, LLC 10481 Ben C. Pratt Pkwy Fort Myers, FL 33966 Prepared By: STANTEC CONSULTING INCORPORTAED Wilson Professional Center 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34105 May 3, 2013 Packet Page -185- 6/11/2013 9.A. 6/11/2013 9.A. Wentworth Estates PUD Amendment May 3, 2013 Addendum to Traffic Impact Statement (June 29, 2012) Purpose The Wentworth Estates PUD is currently approved for a mix of 1,200 dwelling units and 85,000 square feet of commercial space, all of which are vested for transportation concurrency. The applicant's original amendment application proposed to increase the mix to a maximum of 1,600 dwelling units. No change in the amount of commercial floor area was proposed. In the original Traffic Impact Study, a mix of 310 single family and 1,290 multi - family dwelling units was analyzed, resulting in a net increase of 38 external trips over and above the currently entitled number of 888 net external trips resulting from 1,200 dwelling units. During the course of the presentation at the Collier County Planning Commission Public Hearing on April 18, 2013, the applicant agreed to reduce the request to a maximum of 1,450 dwelling units. Prior to the Collier County Planning Commission, Planning Staff requested that the "as analyzed" mix of single family and multi - family units be described in the PUD and an equivalency factor of 2.48 multi - family units for each single family unit was established based upon the traffic study as a means to convert multi - family units to additional single family units. By agreeing to reduce the number of units to 1,450 with a mix of 412 single family and 1038 multi - family units, a reanalysis of the external trips resulted in an additional 6 external trips, bringing the 38 trips previously identified to 44. This Addendum to the TIS recognizes the new external trip generation of 44 trips, and provides a reanalysis of the external impacts. All relevant tables have been revised and incorporated in this Addendum. Trip Generation The ITE Trip Generation Report, 9th Ed. was used to estimate the number trips generated during the weekday p.m. peak period for the currently approved land uses (Table 1) and the "as- proposed" development (Table 2), with the difference of the two being the net increase in trips (Table 3). The ITE trip generation summaries are included in the Appendix to the June 29, 2012 TIS. Packet Page -186- Q. 'E^ ' T V^I L 0 F m 0 d Q C Q, ai Q .0 m w m a a J d O CL CL a M /7 In w to N M 100 tlmD N N m i0 IA O P N m W� sue° i O O � V N N � r N rp�i Cm1 t0 i0 ~ N �E O m N N O N Vi tT N N N F0. .F oc M M M In a F e? a /T to a m v If M M O O M % X % o_L G G O O O I! U 11 F F f- C C C 77 O CD 9 O O Q t- Y1 W 1a. N j o a` `a a a � a 0 N _O N m 7 t N ' C N z � d T G C _ ' d U ti c S 2-111 . 1E M Q. N co d O y r � 0 p C.D CL Q 0 O N N M N M M N OI O O Ch IA N O O OD OD o e o e O O � R N N O N O M Npp N O CD (O N � � r N O 117 N lo r r N 100 N N N A A M V to o e o y M oM7 tp Q 0 o e O cMO � a Il) M M O O M f + + % 2 X G C F4 tq O o O II II II E � � C C C o N W M O O Lo LL co C C o > > o m d a a a 0 M O N N ID m p m = N C � T U C li F r N VJ �a N O 6/11/2013 9.A. Table 3 Net External Project Trips Single Family Housing - 210 Per Unit -84 -68 -43 -25 Condominium/Townhouse - 230 Per Unit 334 112 75 37 Shopping Center - 820 Per 1,000 SF 85,000 0 0 0 IF-44 32 12 The net change in external traffic, previously 38, has been recalculated at 44 two -way p.m. peak hour trips, with 32 additional trips entering and 12 additional trips exiting. Project Trip Distribution The project's trip distribution has been updated as illustrated in Table 4 and in Figure 3. Table 4 Net Project Trip Distribution Entering Trips 32 56% 18 44% 14 Exiting Trips 12 54% 1 7 46% 5 Packet Page -188- 3 no _. ` -, 4yttksnake Htmmoek Rd ,.,_ RotGmraake Hon a 6/11/2013 9.A. MAdl£r.AY DW .. .. .�ild1tlefnike.npddldn{X3L Rd '' 1NWSRLnI Y' " �wywm3.faNi: � el ti Figure 3 Project Trips Distribution (Number of Trips) Arterial Analysis S s a The arterial analysis originally included in the June 29, 2012 TIS has been revised as reflected in Table 6. Table 6 Arterial Analysis PM Peak Hour Directional Weekday Volumes Packet Page -189- 4 � • • `!' St A^d`"'a� "..C#aa5ics inuntry Ctdd ' % 7 18 �. "•m 6 iteF V Cc i 9! �! 4 v a wt Ltl{y RlSQ(i GOII &. +...•..� w ` •{" ..: r. dGr �C1P5 W ��''41Y:,a� c., -f... L1kY5 s`'4+r 'S:; fi+ =. 14 /F e At aAfar7ic` r. .xt 4 7 3u "uGb! -Rn ,T ,� VICsffrF ��. •.,,. Prue 3t ' IM LINt 'T R:- Btwer Eagta09ek GOYS a.iqa Form £ 'COrc1 vy CWk PM. Uf L�.aos Exec FxE5E eve. y9OdPa"EP' nE Figure 3 Project Trips Distribution (Number of Trips) Arterial Analysis S s a The arterial analysis originally included in the June 29, 2012 TIS has been revised as reflected in Table 6. Table 6 Arterial Analysis PM Peak Hour Directional Weekday Volumes Packet Page -189- 4 6/11/2013 9.A. Conclusions & Recommendations The analysis of the revised project traffic indicates that there are no significant impacts to the adjacent road segments, and the segments of US 41 within the area of influence are currently operating at an acceptable level of service, and are predicted to operate at acceptable levels in 2022. Packet Page -190- 5 6/11/2013 9.A. ORDINANCE NO. 13- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 03 -51, AS AMENDED, THE WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD), BY INCREASING THE PERMISSIBLE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 1,200 TO 1,450; BY AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AN ADDITIONAL 5.3t ACRES OF LAND ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) TO THE WENTWORTH ESTATES MPUD; BY REVISING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO MAKE CHANGES INCLUDING AN ELIMINATION OF THE MEDIUM HEIGHT DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE WHICH ALLOWED 90 FEET IN ZONED BUILDING HEIGHTS AND AN INCREASE IN BUILDING HEIGHT FOR MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FROM 45 FEET ZONED HEIGHT TO 50 FEET ZONED HEIGHT; DEFINING ZONED HEIGHT AND ACTUAL HEIGHT; PROVIDING FOR DELETION OF EXHIBITS INCLUDING EXHIBIT "A" LOCATION MAP, EXHIBIT "B" BOUNDARY SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION, EXHIBIT "C" EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP, EXHIBIT "D" TOPOGRAPHIC MAP, EXHIBIT "E" AREA WIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES MAP, EXHIBIT "F" AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, EXHIBIT "G" PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE PLANS AND DETAILS, EXHIBIT "H" PRELIMINARY SEWER PLANS, EXHIBIT "I" PRELIMINARY WATER PLANS AND EXHIBIT "K" BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT PLAN; BY AMENDING THE MASTER PLAN; AND ADDING EXHIBIT "A" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, EXHIBIT "B" MPUD MASTER PLAN, EXHIBIT "C" DEVIATIONS, AND EXHIBIT "D" WATER MANAGEMENT BASINS AND REVISING DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF TA.MIAMI TRAIL EAST (US 41) APPROXIMATELY 1 -1/4 MILES SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST (US 41) AND RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD (CR 864) IN SECTIONS 29, 30, 31, 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 1563.84± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (Petition #PUD A- PL201200011.26) WHEREAS, Developer, LENNAR HOMES LLC, represented by Margaret Perry, AICP of WilsonMiller Stantec, and R. Bruce Anderson, Esquire of Roetzel &:. Andress, LPA, petitioned Wentworth Estates MPUD Page] of 2 PUDA- PL20120001126 — Rev. 5/06.113 Packet Page -191- 6/11/2013 9.A. the Board of County Commissioners to amend the PUD and change the zoning classification of the additional herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: Zoning Classification. The zoning classification of approximately 5.3± acres of the herein described real property located in Section 30, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, is changed from a Rural Agricultural zoning district to the Wentworth Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) zoning district and when combined with the existing Wentworth RPUD provides for a 1,563.84± acre project in accordance with the revised PUD Document, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 04 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is /are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: 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 12013). ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK., CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By By: Deputy Clerk GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. Chairwoman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency Heidi Ashton -Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A - PUD Document CR;12- CPS - 01183177 Wentworth Estates MPUD Page 2 of 2 PUDA- PL20120001 126 — Rev. 5 /0613 Packet Page -192- 6/11/2013 9.A. WENTWORTH ESTATES A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND SUPPORTING MASTER PLAN GOVERNING THE WENTWORTH ESTATES PUD, A MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PREPARED BY: V.K. DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION TION 19275 A' GAP4TOL DRIVE 13Dl1OKFIELD [ITTSf"llNSW 53045 LENNAR HOMES, LLC. 10481 BEN C. PRATT SIX MILE CYPRESS PARKWAY FORT MYERS, FL 339.12 PREPARED BY: 2350 STANFORD GOURT NAPLES, FLOP44DA 34 H4 R. BRUCE ANDERSON ROETZEL & ANDRESS, L.P.A. 850 PARK SHORE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34103 MARGARET PERRY, AICP WILSON MILLER STANTEC 3200 BAILEY LANE, #200 NAPLES, FL 34105 DATE REVIEWED BY CCPC 4/18/13 DATE REVIEWED BY BCC ORDINANCE NUMBER AMENDMENTS AND REPEAL Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 1 of 51 Words stmek thmu are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -193- 6/11/2013 9.A. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS i LIST OF EXHIBITS ii LET OF TA13LES STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE iv -v SHORT TITLE vi SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP & DESCRIPTION I -1 through I -6 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS II -1 through II -4-716 SECTION III RESIDENTIAL AREAS III -1 through III -4 SECTION IV COMMERCIAL AREA IV -1 through IV -3 SECTION V COMM/RECREATIONAL/ GOLF COURSE AREAS V -1 through V -3 SECTION VI CONSERVATION/PRESERVE AREAS VI -1 SECTION VII DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS VII -1 through VII -11 i Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 2 of 51 Words stmek through are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -194- 6/11/2013 9.A. LIST OF EXHIBITS EXI-9 TTT B t2oundaFy QuAeh and Li EXHIBIT RA Development Standards EXHIBIT 3B MPUD Master Plan EXHIBIT C Deviations EXHIBIT K Bald Eagle Management ANN;- +kTl....ume«,t a— —m— EXHIBIT D Water Management Basins EXHIBIT E Letter from Darin McMurray of Lennar Homes to Treviso Bav Homeowners dated April 8, 2013, including attachments Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA•PL20120001126 Page 3 of 51 Words Lek Otmugh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -195- iii Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 4 of 51 Words stmek thFeag# are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -196- 6/11/2013 9.A. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The subject property consists of a total of 'z- 8.49-1.563.84+ acres of property in Collier County, Florida, and will be developed as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to be known as the Wentworth Estates PUD. The proposed development will be in compliance with the goals, objectives and policies of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan. This PUD, f 1' 1 as the T el J Takes R D in r`ou y Or- di,.mee No 98 95, includes preserve lands owned by the State of Florida which were part of the Lely Lakes PUD. The proposed PUD will consist of up to 85,000 square feet of commercial, up to 4-,2-00 1,450 residential units with an 18 -hole golf course and other amenities constructed in four phases. The proposed residential, commercial and recreational facilities will be consistent with the growth policies, land development regulations, and applicable comprehensive planning objectives of each of the elements of the Growth Management Plan for the following reasons: 1. The subject property is within the Urban Mixed -Use, Urban Coastal Fringe Sub- District as identified on the Future Land Use Map as required in Objective 1, Policy 5.1 and Policy 5.3 of the Future Land Use Element. 2. The proposed residential density of the Wentworth Estates PUD is G-.W 0.93 dwelling units per acre (DU /A), including State -owned PUD lands and 4.46 1.39 DU /A excluding State lands which in either case is less than the maximum density of 3 DU /A permitted by the Density Rating System and is therefore consistent with Future Land Use Element, Policy 5.1. 3. The subject property's location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and services permits the development's residential density as required in Objective 2 of the Future Land Use Element. 4. The project development is compatible and complimentary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the Future Land Use Element. 5. Project improvements are planned to be in compliance with applicable land development regulations as set forth in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element. 6. The project development will result in an efficient and economical extension of community facilities and services as required in Objective 3 of the Future Land Use Element and promotes the residential in -fill guidelines of the APA's Policies on Smart Growth. 7. The project development is planned to incorporate natural systems for water management in accordance with their natural functions and capabilities as may be required by Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub - Element of the Public Facilities Element. 8. The projected density G-.P 0.93 DU /A is in compliance with the Future Land Use Element of Growth Management Plan based on the following relationships to required criteria: iv Revised 05 /08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 5 of 51 Words stuek thmuo are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -197- 6/11/2013 9.A. Base Density 4.0 units per acre u..a. Traffic Congestion Area Deduction 1.0 u. .a. Permitted Density Based on FLUE 3.0 u.p.a. Density Rating System Wentworth Estates PUD Proposed Density Proposed Number of Units 4-,42-7 1,450 Total Acreage of Subject Property 4-,568-.491,563.84 Environmental Preserve (Rookery Bay) 513.77 Gross Acreage of Development Area 1,044.72-1,050.07 Pfopesed-Commercial acres 10.0 Net Residential Acreage 'T 034:;21.040.07 Proposed density (UP /A.) _ 4 -,-298 1,450 units/4-,034-.472 1,040.07 —acres = 44-6 1.39 without State lands. Proposed density (UP /A.) _ 41.450 units/4$43 1,553.84 acres = 0:4 0.93 with State lands 9. The ten (10) acres designated as "Commercial Tract" on the Wentworth Estates PUD Master Plan is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan pursuant to Policy 5.1 and 5.12. NOTE: The ten (10) acre Commercial Tract was previously part of a 64.8 +1 - acre light industrial and commercial PUD known as the Naples R &D Park at Lely PUD (Ordinance 88 -89). In 1998, the Naples R &D Park at Lely PUD property was incorporated into the Lely Lakes Golf Resort PUD (Ordinance 98 -85) and the ten (10) acre "Commercial Tract" property was deemed "Consistent by Policy" with the Growth Management Plan (Map FLUE -11). 10. The Wentworth Estates PUD is a residential golf course community with a commercial component, and is planned to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design and development of the project under unified ownership and control as set forth in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), Section 2. 2.03.06, Planned Unit Development Districts. 11. The Wentworth Estates PUD is consistent with Policy 5.5 of the Future Land Use Element in that it represents the use and development of existing land zoned for urban intensity uses within the urban designated lands and avoids opening up new areas to development. 12. All final Local department orders and/or permits for the proposed Wentworth Estates PUD are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. v Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 6 of 51 Words s6-uakthreo are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -198- This ord PLANN VI Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 7 of 51 Words stmek threu gl► are deletions, words underlined are k Packet Page -199- SECTION I PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND DESCRIPTION 1.1 PURPOSE 6/11/2013 9.A. The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership of the property, and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name of the Wentworth Estates PUD. here "G" 1,2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property being X8.491,563.84 + /- acres is described as: Description of Part of Sections 29, 30, 31, 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and part of Section 5, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida Beginning at the northwest corner of said Section 30; thence along the north line of said Section 30, North 88 °23'16" East 2491.52 feet; thence continue along the north line of said Section 30 North 88 013'29" East 1636.98 feet to the southwesterly right -of -way of Tamiami Trail (US 41) (200' right -of -way); thence along said right -of -way South 39 003'42" East 2333.04 feet; thence leaving said right -of -way South 38 °17'43" West 581.30 feet; thence North 89 °34'42" West 348.55 feet; thence South 02 °48'31" West 308.99 feet; thence South 88 028'28" West 30.00 feet to the east quarter corner of said Section 30; thence along the north line of those lands described in Official Records Book (OR Book) 105, pages 595 -597 and OR Book 105, 592 -594, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, South 87 °14'44" West 683.13 feet; thence along the west line of said land described in OR Book 105, pages 592 -594 South 00°20'37" West 672.63 feet; thence along the south line of said lands North 87 026'41" East 654.42 feet to the west line of Myrtle Cove Acres Unit No. 1 as recorded in Plat Book 3, page 38, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence along the west line of said Unit No. 1 South 02 °45'35" West 1919.99 feet to the southeast corner of said Section 30; thence along the east line of said Section 31, South 02'45'30" West 2609.56 feet to the east quarter comer; thence continue along said east line of said Section 31, South 02 °48'47" West 206.43 feet; thence leaving said east line North 59 °56'01" East 2041.35 feet to the boundary of the plat of Trail Acres Unit 2, Plat Book 4, page 62, Collier County, Florida; thence along said plat boundary South 39'03'07" East 1309.16 feet; thence continue along said plat boundary North 50 055'09" East 762.41 feet; thence leaving said plat boundary South 39 °04'51" East 430.46 feet; thence North 50 °58'21" East 199.96 feet to the boundary of the plat of Trail Acres Unit 3, Plat Book 3, page 94, Collier County, Florida; thence along said plat boundary South 39 °01'39" East 962.19 feet; thence continue along said plat boundary South 87 °34'19" East 1003.95 feet to the east line of said Section 32; thence leaving said plat boundary and along said east line, South02 132'54" West 1912.12 feet to the southeast corner of said Section 32; thence along the south line of said Section 32, North 89 °40'29" West 2625.95 feet to the south quarter corner of said Section 32; thence continuing along the south line of said Section 32, North 89 °40'08" West 2625.60 feet to the southwest corner of said Section 32; thence continue along the south line of said Section 31, North 89 °41'53" West 3792.19 feet to the boundary of that land described in OR Book 922 , pages 1710- 1712, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence leaving said South line and along said boundary North 00 °18'07" East 440.00 feet; thence continue along said boundary North 89 °41'53" West 346.42 feet to the intersection with the original meander line, resurveyed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in 1967, described in OR Book 1143, pages 1325 -1327, Public Records of Collier County, Florida; thence run along said meander line in the following seven described courses; I -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 8of51 Words stmek thpough are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -200- 6/11/2013 9.A. 1) North 18'09'29" East 565.94 feet; 2) North 14016'29" East 429.66 feet; 3) North 22 °33'29" East 599.28 feet; 4) North 00 009'29" East 428.34 feet; 5) North 21 °08'31" West 598.62 feet; 6) North 39 °26'31" West 456.72 feet; 7) North 81 °41'31" West 382.14 feet to the west line of said Section 31; thence along the west line of Said Section 31, North 00 °19'56" East 1515.12 feet to the northwest corner of said Section 31; thence along the west line of said Section 30, North 00 °20'37" East 2685.56 feet to the west quarter corner of said Section 30; thence continue along the west line of said Section 30, North 00 022'18" East 2687.69 feet to the Point of Beginning; Containing 1378.15 acres, more or less. .. �. .. . ALSO INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING The northwest quarter of the southeast quarter, and the south half of the north half of the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter; and the north half of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter, and the north half of the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter, and the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter, all in Section 5, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. ALSO INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING; The southwest one - quarter of the northeast one - quarter; and the northwest one - quarter of the northeast one - quarter of Section 5, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Containing 185.69 acres, more or less for a total net of 1558.49 acres more or less. Subject to easements and restrictions of record. Bearings are based on the south line of said Section 31 being North 89 °41'53" West, 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP Detailed ownership information is provided within the application for the Wentworth Estates PUD amendment project. The subject property is currently under the ewe ownership and control of the following entities: Naples, Fierid 2R 112__2.343 arA Lennar Homes, LLC 10481 Ben C. Pratt Six Mile Cvvress Parkway Fort Myers, FL 33912 1 -2 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 9 of 51 Words stmt are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -201- 6/11/2013 9.A. Fe a P*epei4ies Seuthwes4, Ine. —Owne Naples, Rer- da 341 13 334'7 and TIITF /State of Florida - Owner % Department of Natural Resources Douglas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -6575 and 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA A-. The project site is located in Sections 29, 30, 31 and 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East and Section 05, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Although the project covers several sections of land, the main project entrance is located on the southwest side of Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) approximately 1 1/4 miles southeast of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (C.R. 864). Access to the property will also be via Southwest Boulevard. " prep"' leeatien. ■ . . �■ 1.5 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION The site is generally bordered on the west by PUD zoned (Sabal Bay PUD) (£ -elhe DR4-), undeveloped property; on the north by U.S. 41; on the east by the Micelli PUD, platted and developed homesites, zoned RSF-4, RMF -6, and RSF -3, and agriculturally zoned and unplatted property; and on the south, undeveloped and environmentally sensitive lands, zoned A/ST. Portions of the site have been altered through past and current agricultural uses. Other portions of the site are environmentally sensitive. An updvAed Big has been submit4ed, pursuant te Divisien 3.8 of the Land Develepnwnt Cede, *44h the appheation for- site is F, Ems- ibis The subject property contains a variety of I -3 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 10 of 51 Words struek-t#retkgh are deletions, words underlined are & Packet Page -202- 6/11/2013 9.A. vegetative communities, including cropland and pastures, woodland pastures, pine flatwoods, coastal scrub, palmetto prairies, mangrove swamps, cypress, saltwater marsh and mangroves. A deWled - ,egetati,v; n eluded in the 'rr "",; a The soil types on the site generally include Basinger fine sand; Boca fine sand, Boca, Riviera, limestone substratum and Copeland fine sand, depressional; Immokalee fine sand; Jupiter Boca complex; Ochopee fine sand loam; Oldsmar fine sand, limestone substratum; Paola fine sand; Pennsucco soil; Chobee, Winder and Gator soils, depressional; Durbin and Wulfert Mucks; Ft. Drum and Malabar high, fine sand; Hilolo limestone substratum, Jupiter and Margate soils; Holopaw fine sand, limestone substratum; Pomello fine sand; Satellite fine sand; and Winder, Riviera, limestone substratum and Chobee soils, depressional. This information was derived from the Soil Survey of Collier County, Florida. Elevations within the site range from +1.0' NGVD to +15.5' NGVD. Per FEMA Firm Map Panels No. 120067 0603H 605 E and 615 E, dated August 3, 1992 May 16, 2012, the Wentworth Estates PUD is located within Zones "AE" (EL8EL6 and EL7 NAVD) of the FEMA flood insurance rate map. Topographic mapping is shown on Exhibit "D" attached hereto. The project site is located within the Naples Manor Drainage Basin, of the Collier County Water Management District No. 6, as depicted on the Collier County Drainage Atlas. Ea -. h of the r^ develepmeRt tr-aets, A, B, C, and D neted en the PUD Master- Plan 'Ail! have a The development area has been divided into seven separate major water management basins Each of the water management basins will provide water quality treatment to 150% of standard required by the South Florida Water Management District because of the project's discharge into an Outstanding Florida Water (Rookery Bay National Estuarine Preserve). This will be accommodated by collection and treatment of stormwater in wet detention lakes and other systems before discharge into the adjoining wetland preserves and/or outfall canals. These basins will be designed so as to provide water quality treatment and storm attenuation. Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as grassy swales, inlet inserts, detention inlets, etc. will also be used where appropriate to accomplish this. Stormwater will be collected through the use of open grass swales, curbs, gutters and inlets that will direct stormwater into water management areas. These will all be interconnected in each basin with multiple discharges at structures to distribute the flow to the adjoining wetlands and off -site canals. The water control structure sizes and flow rates will be coordinated with the environmental permitting agencies so as to provide flood protection and rehydrate wetland preserve areas throughout the project and off -site. The staging of the water management basins also will be set so as to prevent saltwater intrusion and will maintain the freshwater /saltwater zones in the area. The staging will be as follows: 16C. qzhe T-met A Basin will be staged m4th the highest weAer- eefAfel elevatien of 4=3.5 N TVD. Disehafges 4em this Basin A411 be. ifAe the eas! end of the eeff6W wet! d sleu& preserve and Tfaet A. Ther-e is a eentfal wetland preserve within this T-faet that -Mil be aeeefmnodated en thee I4 Revised 05/08113 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 11 of 51 Words streelg# are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -203- 6/11/2013 9.A. nefth side ef the. main beiiievaM. The wMef eentFel elevatien of +3.5 NG-VD is te fnakntain the Basins A and AA: Basin A will be staged with a control elevation of +4.0 NGVD Basin AA will be staged with the highest water control elevation of +4.0 NGVD Discharges from these Basins will be into the east end of the central wetland slough preserve and east end of the northwestern wetland slough reserve. These discharge locations will be located so as to maximize hydrology for the preserve areas and provide flood protection throughout both basins. There is a central wetland preserve that will be accommodated on the north side of the main boulevard. The water control elevations of +3.5 and +4.0 NGVD are to maintain the viability of this wetland preserve within the Basin Final discharge locations configurations and flows will be negotiated with the permitting agencies so as to improve the wetland preserve areas while maintaining flood protection. B. Basin B: The Tr-aet 13 Basin B will be staged with a water control elevation of +3.0 NGVD. Discharges from this Basin will be into the central wetland slough preserve and into the off -site canal along the western property line of the project. This will be managed so as to provide water to the wetland preserve during low flows and for maintaining the wetland preserve viability. High flows will be directed to the canal for on -site Trash -B flood protection. Lake control elevations are set to maintain the hydraulic gradient from north to south and east to west across the site. C. Basins C and CC: Basin C will be staged with a water control elevation of +3.0 NGVD. Basin CC will be staged with a water control elevation of +3.5 NGVD. Discharges from these Basins will be into the central wetland slough preserve and into the Rookery Bay wetlands along the southern property line of the proiect. This will be managed so as to provide water to the wetland preserve during low flows and for maintaining the wetland preserve viability. High flows will be directed to the south for on -site flood protection. Lake control elevations are set to maintain the hydraulic gradient from north to south and east to west across the site. - I -5 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 12 of 51 Words ugh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -204- 6/11/2013 9.A. flews and for- maintaining the wedwid preserve viability. High fiews will be dir-eeWd south for - on site D. Basins D and DD: Basin D will be staged with a water control elevation of +3.0 NGVD and Basin DD will be staged with a water control elevation of +3.5. Discharges from these basins will be into the Rookery Bay wetlands along the southem property line of the project This will be managed so as to provide water to the wetland preserve during low flows and for maintaining the wetland ,preserve viability. High flows will be directed to the south for on -site flood protection. Lake control elevations are set to maintain the hydraulic gradient from north. I -6 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 13 of 51 Words sumal� are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -205- SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE 6/11/2013 9.A. The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development for the Wentworth Estates PUD and its relationship to applicable County ordinances, the respective land uses of the areas tfests- included in the project, as well as other project relationships. 2.2 GENERAL A. Regulations for development of the Wentworth Estates PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Document, the PUD- Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County Land Development Code and Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of site development plan approval except for approved deviations in Exhibit C. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the County Land Development Code shall apply, B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of subdivision construction plan or site development plan approval, as appropriate. C. All conditions imposed and all graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the Wentworth Estates PUD shall become part of the regulations that govern the manner in which the PUD site may be developed. D. Unless modified, waived or excepted by this PUD the provisions of the Land Development Code remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land, which comprises this PUD. E. Development permitted by the approval of this petition will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Di;4sioa 3.15 Section 6.02.00. Adequate Public Facilities. II -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 14 of 51 Words stmek thFough are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -206- - - II -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 14 of 51 Words stmek thFough are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -206- 6/11/2013 9.A. A. The Wentworth Estates PUD will be developed as an upscale residential golf course community featuring up to '-N1,450 residential units, up to 85,000 square feet of commercial uses, and an 18 -hole golf course with associated amenities. The subject property consists of a total of 1,558.4-9 1,563.84+ acres, of which only 1,044X21.050.07+ acres will be impacted by the proposed development. The remaining 513.77+ acres have been set aside for conservation purposes (as described in more detail later in Section 2.4 of this Document) in addition to the required on -site conservation areas. See Section 7.2 of Section VII, Development Commitments for detail. The project Master Plan, including layout of streets and use of land for the various areas uaets, is illustrated graphically by Exhibit "3B ", PUD Master Plan (JE WM File No. 200234-36215610972). A Land Use Summary, Unit Phasing Schedule, and Density Breakdown are shown on the Plan. There sM!l be &e f" pr-eje �• addifien, fThe necessary water management lakes, open space, conservation lands, street rights -of -way, the general configuration which are also illustrated by Exhibit ";B" are also included within the project. The location, size and configuration of individual areas tracts and lots shall be determined at the time of final site development plan and/or preliminary subdivision plat approval. Minor adjustments may be made at the time of final plat approval in accordance with Sections 310.02.03 and 3-.34 10.02.04 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). There is also a ten (10) acre commercial area proposed within the project that will provide service and retail shopping opportunities for the residents of the Wentworth Estates PUD. This commercial area may also provide opportunities for other residents in the immediate area. This commercial area is a continuation of the commercial tract approved at the same location in the previously approved Lely Lakes Golf Resort PUD. The proposed development will meet all required open space and recreational requirements on site. Seetien 2.18 f this Deaument demeastfates the et - r �' r rr �' c DL l/V the erAir-e site, will be se4 aside. I1 -2 Revised 05/0 9/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 15 of 51 Words StM8kthFeag# are deletions, words undcrUnsd are ad Packet Page -207- 6/11/2013 9.A. B. Areas illustrated as lakes, on Exhibit " 3B ", shall be constructed as lakes or, upon approval, parts thereof may be constructed as shallow, intermittent wet and dry depressions for water retention purposes. These areas, i.e. lakes, intermittent wet and dry areas, may be in the same general configuration as shown by Exhibit " -SB ". Minor modification to all areas treets, lakes or other boundaries may be permitted at the time of preliminary subdivision plat or site development plan approval, subject to the provisions of Sections 3�?b10.02.03 and 2.7.3.510.02.04 respectively, of the Collier County Land Development Code, or as otherwise permitted by this PUD Document. C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit "JB ", such as easements, as necessary (utility, private, semi- public, etc.) shall be established within or along the various areas t-aets as may be necessary. 2.4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY OR INTENSITY OF LAND USE The proposed project consists of up to a maximum of 1;208 1,450 single and multi- family residential units, up to 85,000 square feet of commercial uses and an 18 -hole golf course with the associated amenities on approximately 1,044.72 1,050.07+ acres without State lands or 1,5 4 8.4 9 1,5 63.84+ acres with State lands. Residential There will be a mixture of single family and multi - family residential units located throughout the proposed development. The proposed product types may include standard single - family attached and detached, zero lot line, hemesites, two family duplexes, , town houseghemes, earriege homes, eeaeh home (and other similar styles of housing), and multi - family and cluster housingaad as many as twelve ( 2) mid rise eendefainium s*...,,.tufe not + emetaed on feet in height, Pursuant to the Density Rating System, this project is eligible for a base density of four (4) dwelling units per acre (DU /A). No density bonuses are applicable. The project is also located within a Traffic Congestion Area, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map and described in the Future Land Use Element. As such, the project is subject to a one (1) DU /A reduction from the base density of four (4) DU /A and is not eligible for any density bonuses. Therefore, this project is limited to a maximum of three (3) DU /A under the Density Rating System. The project is proposing the development of a maximum of-17200 1.450 residential dwelling units, consisting of single - and multi - family dwelling units, to be constructed ^„ f of tree . The gross project area, less acreage devoted to commercial purposes, is21,040.07+ without State lands or-t, {� ^49- 1,553.84 acres +_ with State lands. The proposed density for the residential potion of the project is 1.16 1.39 DU /A without State lands or -:977 0.93 DU /A with State lands. 11 -3 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 16 of 51 Words stmek tkaugh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -208- 6/11/2013 9.A. The residential component of the proposed development will consist of low- density residential (LDR) featuring single family attached and detached, zero lot line and duplex units; and medium - density residential (MDR) featuring single- family attached and detached, zero lot line, duplex, multi — family, townhouse and intih family Yillas-, cluster homes ; (MHDR� fAmpwing as faffiW as twelve (12) mid rise eepAamiaium stameWr-es not to Commercial The proposed project will contain up to a maximum of 85,000 square feet of commercial uses on approximately ten (10) acres of the site as depicted on the PUD Master Plan, Exhibit "113". The PUD was originally approved in 1991 and amended in 1998, for 749 dwelling units and ten (10) acres of commercial development. Future Land Use Element Policy 5.1, provides that property zoned prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and found to be consistent through the Zoning Re- evaluation Program are consistent with the Growth Management Plan and designated on the Future Land Use Map series as properties "Consistent by Policy." Zoning changes will be permitted to these properties, and to other properties deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element via Policies 5.9 through 5.12, provided the number of dwelling units and overall intensity of the development allowed by the new zoning district, except as allowed in Policy 5.11, are not increased. The 10 -acre commercial teetarea in this PUD was previously found to be consistent with the Future Land Use via Policy 5.1 and 5.11. This PUD rezone does not increase the intensity of development on the 10 -acre tenet commercial area. Common/RecreationallGolf Course Areas (CRGA) The proposed development will meet all required open space and recreational requirements on -site. Included in the development are common areas, open space, water management areas, nature preserves, boardwalks, recreational facilities, and an 18 -hole golf course and associated clubhouse and pro shop. In addition to the on -site features, over 500 acres of the original PUD have been sold to the State of Florida to be managed as part of the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve ( RBNERR). The land sold to RBNERR includes 513+ acres located immediately south of the north parcel and west of the south parcel, including the lands between the two parcels. Currently, the land is being managed by RBNERR as part of its reserve. r . a • • w r • �Y.[� • r• II -4 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20 1 20001 1 26 Page 17 of 51 Words musk-t#reug# are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -209- 6/11/2013 9.A. 2.56 MODEL HOMES /SALES CENTERS /SALES OFFICES/ CONSTRUCTION OFFICES /CONSTRUCTION OFFICES FACILITIES Model homes, sales centers, sales offices, construction offices, and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, viewing platforms, docks, gazebos, parking areas, tents, and signs, shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Wentworth Estates PUD. These uses may be either "wet" or "dry" facilities and shall be subject to the requirements of Section ?z-6 -11 4Section 5.04.04 of the Land Development Code, with the exception that the temporary use permit shall be valid for ten years with no extension of the temporary use required. No model can remain for more than ten ,years without securing Conditional Use, or its successor process approval. This is a deviation to LDC section 5.04.04.B4. These uses may use septic tanks or holding tanks for waste disposal subject to permitting under Rule 10P 664E -6 of the Florida Administrative Code and may use potable or irrigation wells. A. Both "wet" and "dry" models may be constructed following plat approval, prior to recording of the plat. Location is limited to future, platted medium density residential, or low density residential lots or areas tFae�s. The project owner must apply for permits for all models. B. The models permitted as "dry models" shall obtain a conditional certificate of occupancy for model purposes only. The "wet" model may not be occupied until a permanent certificate of occupancy is issued. II -5 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 18 of 51 Words stf-uekthr-ough are deletions, words underlin are ad Packet Page -210- . .. . ...... 2.56 MODEL HOMES /SALES CENTERS /SALES OFFICES/ CONSTRUCTION OFFICES /CONSTRUCTION OFFICES FACILITIES Model homes, sales centers, sales offices, construction offices, and other uses and structures related to the promotion and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, viewing platforms, docks, gazebos, parking areas, tents, and signs, shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Wentworth Estates PUD. These uses may be either "wet" or "dry" facilities and shall be subject to the requirements of Section ?z-6 -11 4Section 5.04.04 of the Land Development Code, with the exception that the temporary use permit shall be valid for ten years with no extension of the temporary use required. No model can remain for more than ten ,years without securing Conditional Use, or its successor process approval. This is a deviation to LDC section 5.04.04.B4. These uses may use septic tanks or holding tanks for waste disposal subject to permitting under Rule 10P 664E -6 of the Florida Administrative Code and may use potable or irrigation wells. A. Both "wet" and "dry" models may be constructed following plat approval, prior to recording of the plat. Location is limited to future, platted medium density residential, or low density residential lots or areas tFae�s. The project owner must apply for permits for all models. B. The models permitted as "dry models" shall obtain a conditional certificate of occupancy for model purposes only. The "wet" model may not be occupied until a permanent certificate of occupancy is issued. II -5 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 18 of 51 Words stf-uekthr-ough are deletions, words underlin are ad Packet Page -210- 6/11/2013 9.A. C. The "wet" model may be served by a temporary utility system with ultimate connection to the central system. Interior fire protection facilities in accordance with NFPA requirements required unless a permanent water system is available. A water management plan shall be provided which accommodates the runoff from the model home, parking, access road/driveway and other impervious surfaces. The system shall be designed and constructed so that it is integrated with the master water management system for the entire development. D. All other regulations pertaining to model homes shall be consistent with Section 2.65.04.04 of the Land Development Code. 2.68 ASSOCIATION OF PROPERTY OWNERS FOR COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Whenever the developer elects to create land area and/or recreation amenities whose ownership and maintenance responsibility is a common interest of all of the subsequent purchasers of property within said development in which the common interest is located, that developer entity shall provide appropriate legal instruments for the establishment of a property owners' association and/or community development district whose function shall include provisions for the perpetual care and maintenance of all common facilities and open space subject further to the provisions of the Collier County Land Development Code, Section 2.''8.10.02.13.L- H -6 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 19 of 51 Words st-get through are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -211- 6/11/2013 9.A. Y. • M ► \ _ • • M ► \ _ • _ M ► \ _ 2.748 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Most common area maintenance will be provided by a property owners' association and/or community development district. The developer will create a property owners' association or associations and/or community development district whose functions shall include provision for the perpetual maintenance of common facilities and open spaces. The property owners' association and/or community development district shall be responsible for the operation, maintenance and management of the surface water systems and preserves serving the Wentworth Estates PUD in accordance with the provisions of Collier County Land Development Code together with any applicable permits from the South Florida Water Management District. 2.844-LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERMS, FENCES AND WALLS Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use throughout the Wentworth Estates PUD. The following standards shall apply: A. Landscape berms shall have the following maximum side slopes: I . Grassed berms shall be 4:1 II -7 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL201 20001 1 26 Page 20 of 51 Words stmek thFeugh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -212- 6/11/2013 9.A. 2. Ground covered berms shall be 3:1 3. Rip -rap berms shall be 1:1 and occupy no more than 30% of the buffer width. 4. Structural walled berms may be vertical if located at the edge furthest from the property edge of the landscape buffer. B. Fence or wall maximum height: Seven feet (T), This is a deviation from LDC Section 5.03.02.C. If the fence or wall is constructed on a landscaped berm, the wall shall not exceed six feet (6) in height from the top of berm elevation for berm elevations with an average side slope of 4:1 or less, and shall not exceed six feet (6D in height from the top of berm elevation for berms with an average side slope of greater than 4:1 (i.e. 3:1). C. Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls may be constructed along the perimeter of the Wentworth Estates PUD boundary prior to preliminary subdivision plat and site development plan submittal. All such areas shall be included in a landscape easement or tract depicted on the final plat, or identified in a separate recorded instrument. D. £:D. Pedestrian sidewalks and/or bike paths, water management systems, drainage structures, and utilities may be allowed in landscape buffers per T'ivisi '~ 2.4 Section 4.06.00 of the Land Development Code. R-E. Landscape berms located within the Wentworth Estates PUD boundary and contiguous to a property line and/or right -of -way line may be constructed such that the toe of slope is located five feet (5) from the property line and/or right -of -way line. In wetland areas, small water management berms may be exempt from this requirement in an effort to reduce wetland impacts. II -8 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 21 of 51 Words muok (Moog# are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -213- 6/11/2013 9.A. 2.913 FILL STORAGE Fill storage is generally allowed throughout the Wentworth Estates PUD. Fill material generated from other properties owned or leased by the developer may be transported and stockpiled within areas which have been disturbed/fanned. Prior to stockpiling in these locations, the developer shall notify the County M_ anager or his designee. The following standards shall apply: A. Stockpile maximum side slope: 2:1 B . Stockpile maximum height: Thirty feet (30') C. Fill storage areas in excess of six feet (6) in height shall be located no closer than one hundred feet (100') from any existing residential unit or residential unit under construction. This excludes fill storage areas associated with the Lely Basi LASIP drainage improvements. D. Soil erosion control shall be pmvided in accordance with Divisien 3.7-.the Excavation Ordinance. . • a IN. prqw • MWN • 2.101-4 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT PHASING Submission, review, and approval of preliminary subdivision plats for the project may be accomplished in phases to correspond with the planned development of the property. H -9 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 22 of 51 Words stmele thr-ou are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -214- 6/11/2013 9.A. 2.11.16 GENERAL PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses and structures throughout the Wentworth Estates PUD except in the Conservation Area. General permitted uses and structures are those uses which generally serve the developer and residents of the Wentworth Estates PUD and are typically part of the common infrastructure or are considered community facilities. A. General Permitted Uses and Structures: 1. Essential services as set forth under Section 2.6. 9.12.01.03, Land Development Code. 2. Water management facilities and related structures. 3. Temporary sewage treatment and disposal facilities. 4. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. 5. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures. 6. Community and neighborhood parks, recreational facilities. 7. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the developer and developer's authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses. 8. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.11 of this PUD. 9. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals. B. Development Standards: Unless otherwise set forth in Table 1 Exhibit "A" of this Document, the following development standards shall apply to structures: 1. Setback from back of curb of any roadway shall be a minimum of fifteen feet (15') except for guardhouses and access control structures which shall have no required setbacks. II-10 2. Sidewalks and bike paths may occur within County required buffers per Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 23 of 51 Words stmelE thfough are deletions, words underlined are ae Packet Page -215- 6/11/2013 9.A. Divisien 2. ;:Section 4.06.00 of the Land Development Code. 3. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein or within the adopted Wentworth Estates PUD design guidelines and standards, are to be in accordance with Land Development Code in effect at the time of site development plan approval. 2.12 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS The PUD Master Plan identifies Conservation Areas, golf course /open space, lakes, and buffers which are all permitted to be calculated as open space. These areas fully satisfy the 69%30% open space requirements of Section 2.6.2. 4.07.02.G. of the Land Development Code. 2.1318 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to Policy 6.4.6 of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, twenty -five percent (25 %) of the viable naturally functioning native vegetation on site shall be retained. The following tab! summa - the - aemage set - aside - a>y pr-esefve by tFae. These ameages - are a « and su jeet to ehange as the project is pla#ea. The required native vegetation retention acres is 258.68 (1034.72 x 25 %). The MPUD master plan provides 291.94 acres of preserve or 28% native vegetation retention. met Numbet- of Aer-es get Aside as, T+aet -A 2 Tfaet-B 119:86 49..83 met-14 4 -1-18 2.1419 SIGNAGE A. GENERAL 1. All Collier County sign regulations, pursuant to Divisien- 2:5Section 5.06.00, Signs, of the Land Development Code in force at the time of sign permit application shall apply unless such regulations are in conflict with the conditions set forth in this Section, in which case the PUD Document shall govern. 2. For the purpose of this PUD Document, each platted parcel shall be considered a separate parcel of land and shall be entitled to any sign as permitted herein. II -11 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 24 of 51 Words StFUOIE t gh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -216- 6/11/2013 9.A. 3. Signs shall be permitted in public or private rights -of -way subject to the approval of a Collier County right -of -way permit, where applicable. 4. All signs shall be located so as not to cause sight line obstructions. All internal project rights -of -way may be utilized for decorative landscaped entrance features and signage subject to review and approval of the Planning Services Department for consistency with the requirements set forth herein. All project and development signage adjacent to and/or visible from any dedicated County or State right -of -way shall be developed in accordance with the Land Development Code, Dirt 2.5Section 5.06.00, Signs. B. BOUNDARY MARKERS 1. One boundary marker or monument may be located at each property corner adjacent to the U.S. 41 right -of -way and one boundary marker or monument may be located at each property corner adjacent to Southwest Boulevard. The boundary marker may contain the name of the subdivision and the insignia or motto of the development. 2. The sign face area may not exceed 60 square feet in area and may not exceed the height or length of the monument upon which is located. If the sign is two - sided, each sign may not exceed 60 square feet in area. 3. Sign face square footage is calculated by total square footage of name, insignia, and motto only. 4. The setback from the U.S. 41 right -of -way and any perimeter property line shall be 10 feet. C. ENTRANCE SIGNS 1. Two (2) ground or wall - mounted entrance signs may be located at each entrance to the subdivision within the PUD. Such signs may contain the name of the subdivision and the insignia or motto of the development. 2. No sign face area may exceed -120 square feet and the total sign face area of entrance signs at each entrance may not exceed 240 square feet. If the sign is a single, two -sided sign, each sign face may not exceed 120 square feet in area. The sign face area shall not exceed the height or length of the wall or monument upon which it is located. This is a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.13.6 which allows 64 square feet total sign area. 3. The setback for the signs from the U.S. 41 right -of -way and any perimeter property line shall be 10 feet. II -12 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates WUD PUDA- PL20 12000 1 1 26 Page 25 of 51 Words stmek through are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -217- 6/11/2013 9.A. 4. Entrance signs may not exceed a height of 8 feet above the finished ground level of the sign site. For the purpose of this provision, finished grade shall be considered to be no greater than 18 inches above the highest crown elevation of the nearest road unless the wall or monument is constructed on a perimeter landscape berm. D. TEMPORARY SIGNS Two double -sided temporary signs may be permitted and may consist of the following types: project identification, boundary marker, real estate, sales center identification, and directional. 2. Each sign may not exceed 80 square feet in area. If the sign is two- sided, each sign face may not exceed 80 square feet in area. 3. The setback for temporary signs from U.S. 41 rights -of -way and any perimeter property line shall be 15 feet. 4. Temporary signs may not exceed 8 feet in height above the finished ground level of the centerline of the nearest road. 5. Temporary signs may remain in place simultaneously with permanent signage until the project reaches 90 5% build -out. E. CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SIGNS One sign, a maximum of 20 square feet in size, shall be permitted at each construction entrance to identify the entrance as such. No building permit is required. This is a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.13.4 which allows 12 square feet in size. 2. Employment signs a maximum of 20 square feet in size may be located at each construction entrance to advertise for construction trade employment. No building permit is required. This is a deviation from LDC Section 5.06.02.13.4 which allows 12 square feet in size. F. INTERNAL SIGNS 1. Residential directional or identification signs may be allowed internal to the development. Such signs may be used to identify the location or direction of approved uses such as, but not limited to, models or model sales centers, clubhouse, recreational areas. Individual signs may be a maximum of 4 square feet per side in size. Signs maintaining a common architectural theme may be combined to form a menu board with a maximum size of 24 square feet per side. All of these signs shall be a maximum height of 8 feet. 2. Real estate signs with a maximum size of 4 square feet per side may be permitted in residential districts. Such signs may advertise "For Sale ", "Sold To ", "Lot # ", or similar verbiage. No building permit is required. II -13 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 26 of 51 Words stfuslc threagh are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -218- 6/11/2013 9.A. 3. Special event signs not exceeding 32 square feet per side in size may be displayed to announce or advertise such temporary uses as open houses, community fairs, or programs or any charitable, or educational event. Special event signs shall be erected not more than 14 days preceding the event and shall be removed within 72 hours of completion of the event. Such signs shall be located no closer than 10 feet to any property line. No building permit is required. 4. Grand opening signs: The developer may display an on -site grand opening sign not exceeding 32 square feet on a side and not exceeding 64 square feet total. Any banner signs shall be anchored and may be displayed on -site for a period not exceeding 14 days within the first three months that the occupant is open for business. No building permit is required G. COMMERCIAL SIGNS Commercial signs within the commercial area shall be erected consistent with provision of the Collier County Land Development Code Division 2.5, Signs. The maximum allowable display area for signs may not be more than 20 percent of the total square footage of the visual fagade of the building to which the sign will be attached and may not, in any case, exceed the maximum square footage permitted in Subsee6e 2.5 5 'N- ."'Section 5.06.00 of the Land Development Code. H. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic signs, such as street signs, stop signs and speed limit signs, may be designed to reflect a common architectural theme. The placement and size of the signs will be in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code. 2.15-20 SIDEWALK/BIKE PATHS A. p ++ c t o 4 4 7 ef the Land$evelepment Cade .t,o We.,,t..91411 Estates D The developer, its successors and assigns, shall provide sidewalks/bike paths as follows: A sidewalk/bikepath/jogging/golf cart network will be integrated throughout the entire site including Residential, Golf Course /Open Space, and Conservation Districts. 2. An internal pedestrian lane or a combination of sidewalks, walking paths, boardwalks or cart paths will be provided throughout the project. 3 Construct a four foot (4') bike lane and a five foot (5') sidewalk along the main spine road for all future development west of the Florida Power and Light transmission line easement as shown on Exhibit B. II -14 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 27 of 51 Words AM& thMagh are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -219- 6/11/2013 9.A. B. The developer reserves the right to request substitutions to Land Development Code sidewalk/bikepath design standards in accordance with Section 6.06.02.A.4 ;.2.7.2 thereof. 2.1622 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT A. The developer hasffiay- e� established the Wentworth Estates Community Development District to provide and maintain infrastructure and community facilities needed to serve the project. The CDD wmy-constitutes a timely, efficient, effective, responsive and economic way to ensure the provision of facilities and infrastructure for the proposed development. Such infrastructure as may be constructed, managed and financed by the CDD shall be subject to, and shall not be inconsistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan and all applicable ordinances dealing with planning and permitting of the Wentworth Estates PUD. B. The land area is amenable to infrastructure provision by a district that has the powers set forth in the charter of a Community Development District pursuant to Sections 190.006 through 190.041, Florida Statutes. Such a district may be a legitimate alternative available both to the County and to the landowner for the timely and sustained provision of quality infrastructure under the terms and conditions of County development approval. 2.1723 ROADWAYS A. If the developer so elects, roadways within the Wentworth Estates PUD may be included as one of the CDD provided infrastructure improvements. Standards for roads shall be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the Land Development Code, unless otherwise modified, waived, or excepted by this PUD Document or approved during preliminary subdivision plat approval. The developer- the 6&� te request substitwiens 4e Land Developmem Cede design standards in aeeer-Elaaee with Seetien 3.2.7.2 there The developer retains the right to establish gates, guardhouses, and other access controls as may be deemed appropriate by the developer on all privately owned and maintained project roadways and roadways built and/or maintained by the Wentworth Estates CDD, if applicable. II -15 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 28 of 51 Words sEM& thMugh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -220- 6/11/2013 9.A. B. Roadways within the Wentworth Estates PUD shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Section 3-.2-.8 6.06.01 of the Collier County Land Development Code with the following substitutions. 1. Street right -of -way width: The minimum right -of -way width to be utilized for local streets within the Wentworth Estates PUD shall be fifty (50') feet. 3.2. Intersection radii: Street intersections shall be provided with a minimum of a twenty (20) foot radius (face of curb) for all internal project streets and a thirty-five (35) foot radius for intersections at project entrances. 4- 3 .— Reverse curves: Tangents shall not be required between reverse curves on any project streets. 4 Length of cut-de-sacs: allow cul-de -sacs in excess of 1,000 feet and up to 2500 feet in the MPUD (throughout) The developer shall provide internal looping of water mains subject to review and approval by the Collier County Utilities staff. The developer shall provide a water main connection between the two "LDR" areas at the north end of the property through the FPL easement (north of the roadway tTreviso Bay Drive) shown on the MPUD Master Plan. The developer or successors and assigns shall provide a stabilized emergency vehicle turn - around meeting local fire prevention code criteria, approximately midway along a cul-de-sac that is over 1,000 feet in len h. 2.1824 USE OF RIGHT -OF -WAY Utilization of lands within all project rights -of -way for landscaping, decorative entrance ways and signage shall be allowed subject to review and administrative approval by the developer and the Collier County Development Transportation Services Director for engineering and safety considerations during the development review process and prior to any installations. 2.192-5 LAKE SETBACK AND EXCAVATION The lake setback requirements described in the Excavation Ordinance Seetiien 3.57.1 of the Land Dee e1,,..mea4_ G94e —may be reduced with the administrative approval of the Collier County Planning Services Director. All lakes greater than two (2) acres may be excavated to the maximum commercial excavation depths set forth in the Excavation _Ordinance. Set '' ' of the Colliers eonty Land ' Mi .......... - ..A. - II -16 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20 12000 1 126 Page 29 of 51 Words stmek-t#eugh are deletions, words underlined are k Packet Page -221- 3.1 PURPOSE 3.2 6/11/2013 9.A. SECTION III RESIDENTIAL AREAS The purpose of this Section is to identify specific development standards for Residential Areas within the Wentworth Estates PUD designated on Exhibit "3 B" as 'ffie s " D r Rd .l. MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS Total 1,200 The PUD Master Plan, Exhibit " JB ", attached hereto, and this PUD Document provide a depiction of the Residential Tr- Areas. At the time of final subdivision plan approval for each phase, the exact location, type and number of the MDR and LDR units in each area will be determined by the developer. The areas depicted as MDR -2 on Exhibit B are limited to two stories in height. The M14DR units in all of the N4HDR Distfieis may, E�t the 3.3 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as residential on the Master Plan are designed to accommodate a full range of residential dwelling types, compatible non - residential uses, a full range of recreational facilities, essential services, and customary accessory uses. The approximate acreage of the area designated as residential is 1,03 - ^.7-2-1040.07+ acres. This acreage is based on conceptual designs and is approximate, Actual acreages of all development areas --will be provided at the time of site development plan or preliminary subdivision plat approvals in accordance with DiN4siea 3 .3, &ffa Divisi 34Sections 10.02.03 and 10.02.04 respectively, of the Land Development Code. Residential areas trae are designed to accommodate internal roadways, open spaces, and other similar uses found in residential areas. III -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 30 of 51 Words simek thfough are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -222- ,m� , . • z „�_ e Total 1,200 The PUD Master Plan, Exhibit " JB ", attached hereto, and this PUD Document provide a depiction of the Residential Tr- Areas. At the time of final subdivision plan approval for each phase, the exact location, type and number of the MDR and LDR units in each area will be determined by the developer. The areas depicted as MDR -2 on Exhibit B are limited to two stories in height. The M14DR units in all of the N4HDR Distfieis may, E�t the 3.3 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as residential on the Master Plan are designed to accommodate a full range of residential dwelling types, compatible non - residential uses, a full range of recreational facilities, essential services, and customary accessory uses. The approximate acreage of the area designated as residential is 1,03 - ^.7-2-1040.07+ acres. This acreage is based on conceptual designs and is approximate, Actual acreages of all development areas --will be provided at the time of site development plan or preliminary subdivision plat approvals in accordance with DiN4siea 3 .3, &ffa Divisi 34Sections 10.02.03 and 10.02.04 respectively, of the Land Development Code. Residential areas trae are designed to accommodate internal roadways, open spaces, and other similar uses found in residential areas. III -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 30 of 51 Words simek thfough are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -222- 6/11/2013 9.A. The residential component of the development will consist of low density residential (LDR);and medium density residential _)1. and medium height density resid r-iets. The LDR and MDR areas may include any of the principal uses listed below, . Provided that the maximum number of dwelling units approved is not exceeded, the developer may construct inters#ange the LDR dwelling unit types awo ft-in the LDR; and MDR-aftd MHR areasdist6ets. The development standards associated with the dwelling unit types allowed in LDR and MDR areasdis4iets, respectively, shall be applied when a dwelling unit type is transferred among the areasdistrfes. In the case where a dwelling unit type is allowed in both LDR and MDR areasdis#iets, the more restrictive development standards shall apply, if different. Dwelling unit types shall be the same within a development areatfaet with landscape buffers between areas— tFasts and in conformity with Diy4siea 2.4 Section 4.06.00 of the Land Development Code, except as provided for in the deviations attached hereto as Exhibit C. in 11 1\114D .i' +«; + Y +, to 1 . (12) mid e endem .,m n4v.,,.,t ffes net to a e 7 \ / ninety (90) feet in height shall be .. «m;++e.d 3.4 USES PERMITTED No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: i . Single family detached dwelling units. 2. Single family attached reuse- dwelling units. 3. Duplex dwelling units. A T.. family dwelling units_ 54. Zero lot line dwelling units. 5. Multi - family dwelling units ("ehed and - a4ftehea 1tft" T iaaua, } j, n 1+ homes, eaffiage houses. and as many as t -velvy e (1 2) Mid eendeminium stfaetufes-ae! te eia-sea-ed �_Q_ -f--.et in height and other- similar. � I TIeesing t) Yes�.- 6. Townhouse dwelling units. 7. Cluster housing: The clustering or grouping of housing structure types identified in Section 3.3 of this Document may be permitted on parcels of land under unified ownership, or as may be otherwise provided in Section 2.6.27 4.02.04. of the Collier County Land Development Code, subject further to the provisions o;_iyisien 3.3 Section 10.02.03 of the Collier County Land Development Code and Table I Exhibit "A" of this Document. 1II -2 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 31 of 51 Words stmek 4hr-eugh are deletions, words underlined are k Packet Page -223- 6/11/2013 9.A. 8. Family care facilities. 9. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals. B. Accessory Uses and Structures: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted in residential areasdists, including but not limited to recreational facilities designed to serve residents of the principal structure. 2. Recreational facilities that serve as an integral part of a residential development and have been designated, reviewed and approved on a site development plan or preliminary subdivision plat for that development. Recreational facilities may include, but are not limited to, golf course, clubhouse and maintenance facility, pools, community center building, tennis facilities, parks, playgrounds and play fields. 3. Any other accessory use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals. 3.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Exhibit "A" Table -1 sets forth the development standards for land uses with the Wentworth Estates PUD residential area. B. Site development standards for single - family, single - family attached, duplex, and zero lot line, twe family, and teA% he uses apply to individual residential lot boundaries. Multi - family, townhouse and cluster housing standards apply to platted parcel boundaries. C. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein or within the adopted Wentworth Estates PUD design guidelines and standards, are to be in accordance with Land Development Code in effect at the time of site development plan approval. Unless otherwise indicated, required yards, heights, and floor area standards apply to principal structures. D. Development standards for uses not specifically set forth in Exhibit "A" Table I shall be in accordance with the standards of the zoning district which is most similar to the proposed use. E. In the case of residential structures with a common architectural theme, required property development regulations of Table -I Exhibit "A" may be waived or reduced provided a site plan is approved by the Growth Management San4ees Dire to Administrator or his designee, in accordance with the criteria contained in Il1-3 Revised 05108(13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 32 of 51 Words stmek threegk are deletions, words underlined are k Packet Page -224- 6/11/2013 9.A. Section r 2.6.27.4.6.".02.04T. flueuo 2.6.27.4.6.3 of the Land Development Code. This is a deviation from Subsection 4.02.04.F 2.6.27.4.6 which requires approval by the Collier County Planning Commission. F. Where residential landscape buffers are located adjacent to a commercial property, clubhouse or community pool facility, a 10 -foot wide, Type A landscape buffer is required on the residentially zoned property, and a 15 -foot wide Type S landscape buffer is required along commercial, clubhouse or community pool property. III -4 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 33 of 51 Words stmek-through are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -225- 6/11/2013 9.A. SECTION IV COMMERCIAL AREA 4.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for the area identified within the Wentworth Estates PUD Master Plan as Commercial Area, 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as Commercial Area on the Wentworth Estates PUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate a full range of commercial, retail and office uses designed to serve residents of the Wentworth Estates PUD and the immediate vicinity. 4.3 USES PERMITTED Up to 85,000 square feet of gross floor area is permitted in total No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Automotive dealers and gasoline service stations (5511, 5531, 5541 with services and repairs as described in Section 2.6.28, of the Land Development Code 5571, 5599, new vehicles only. B. Home furniture, furnishings and equipment Stores (Groups 5712 -5736) C. Eating and drinking places, including drive - through (Groups 5812) D. Miscellaneous retail (Groups 5912, 5921, 5941, 5992 -5999) E. Depository and non - depository institutions (Groups 6021 -6062 and 6111 -6163) F. Security and commodity brokers (Group 6211 -6289) G. Insurance carriers (Groups 6311 -6399) H. Automotive rental and leasing (Groups 7514 -7515) I. Miscellaneous repair services (Groups 7622 -7699) J. Amusement and recreation services (7911, 7922, 7933, 7991) K. Health services (Groups 8011 -8099) L. Membership organizations (Groups 8611 -8661) M. Engineering, accounting, research and related services (Groups 8711 -8720, 87228748) IV -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 34 of 51 Words stmak thfsugh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -226- 6/11/2013 9.A. N. Legal services (8111) O. Child/adult day care services (835 1) P. Sales /welcome center 4.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Minimum Yard Requirements: 1. Front Yard: Twenty -five feet (25') minimum or one -half the building height whichever is greater. 2. Side Yard: Fifteen feet (15') 3. Rear Yard: Fifteen feet (15') 4. Preserve Setbacks: i. Principal structures: Twenty five feet (25') ii. Accessory structures: Ten feet (10') 5. Setbacks from a lake for all principal and accessory uses may be zero(0) feet provided architectural bank treatment is incorporated into the design. 6. Where residential landscape buffers are located adjacent to a commercial property, clubhouse or community pool facility, a 10 -foot' wide Type A landscape buffer is required on the residentially zoned property and a 15- foot wide Type B landscape buffer is required along commercial, clubhouse or community pool property. B. Exterior lighting shall be arranged in a manner which will protect roadways and residential properties from direct glare or unreasonable interference. C. Maximum height of structures — Sixty feet (60') Zoned height. Seventy feet L70') Actual height. D. Minimum distance between all other principal structures — Twenty feet (20'). E. Minimum distance between all other accessory structures (excluding drive - through facilities) --- Ten feet (10'). F. Minimum floor area — Seven hundred (700) square feet gross floor area on the ground floor. G. Minimum lot or parcel area — Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. H. Minimum lot width — Seventy -five feet (75'). N -2 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 35 of 51 Words stmelc-tltfeu are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -227- 6/11/2013 9.A. I. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein are to be in accordance with the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the time of site development plan approval. Unless otherwise indicated, required yards, heights, and floor area standards apply to principal structures. Architectural standards — All buildings shall maintain a consistent architectural theme along theme along each building facade as required by dic- Section 5.05.08 of the Collier County Code Land Development Code. N -3 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 36 of 51 Words fig# are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -228- 6/11/2013 9.A. SECTION V COMMON/RECREATIONAL /GOLF COURSE AREAS 5.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development plan and development standards for the area(s) designed as Common/Recreational/Golf Course Areas on the Wentworth Estates PUD Master Plan, Exhibit "JB ". The primary function and purpose of this Area Tfa�will be to provide aesthetically pleasing open areas, golf course and recreational facilities, except in areas to be used for water impoundment and principal or accessory use areas, all natural trees and other vegetation as practicable shall be protected and preserved. 5.2 USES PERMITTED No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Principal Uses: 1. Golf courses, golf facilities, golf teaching facilities, including classrooms and temporary golf clubhouses 2. Lakes 3. Open space /nature preserve /conservation area uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature trails, bikeways, landscape nurseries, gazebos, boat and canoe docks, fishing piers, picnic areas, fitness trails and shelters 4. Pedestrian and bicycle paths, or other similar facilities constructed for purposes of access to or passage through the commons areas 5. Small docks, piers or other such facilities, constructed for purposes of lake recreation for residents of the project 6. Shuffleboard courts, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other types of facilities intended for outdoor recreation 7. Community and neighborhood recreational facilities and structures for residents and their guests. 8. Project information and sales center 9. Tennis clubs, health spas, pools and other recreational clubs V -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 37 of 51 Packet Page -229 - Words svuek thfeagh are deletions, words underlined are ac b 6/11/2013 9.A. 10. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Clubhouse, pro -shop, practice driving range and other practice facilities, golf cart barns, rest rooms, shelters, snack bars, golf course maintenance facilities, essential services, irrigation water and effluent storage tanks and ponds, utilities, pumping facility, pump buildings, and maintenance staff offices. 2. Retail establishments accessory to the permitted uses of the District such as but not limited to, golf, and tennis. 3. Restaurants, cocktail lounges, and similar uses intended to serve club members and club guests. 4. ee '� ;ion+ t And , +e a .., .�:..:,:e -, ,, ,...+ , landseaping, net - limited te, these provided-her-eia shall elea* be ef stieh s . I .� -&A. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals, 5.3 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS A. Overall site design shall be harmonious in terms of landscaping, enclosure of structures, location of access streets and parking areas and location and treatment of buffer areas. B. Principal and accessory structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty -five (25) feet from abutting residential districts and PUD Boundaries. No structure greater than thirty -five (35) feet in height shall be within seventy -five (75) feet of the project property line. V -2 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 38 of 51 Words stm& threuo are deletions, words underlined are k Packet Page -230- landseaping, -&A. Any other use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, consistent with the permitted uses and purpose and intent statement of this PUD as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals, 5.3 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS A. Overall site design shall be harmonious in terms of landscaping, enclosure of structures, location of access streets and parking areas and location and treatment of buffer areas. B. Principal and accessory structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty -five (25) feet from abutting residential districts and PUD Boundaries. No structure greater than thirty -five (35) feet in height shall be within seventy -five (75) feet of the project property line. V -2 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 38 of 51 Words stm& threuo are deletions, words underlined are k Packet Page -230- 6/11/2013 9.A. C. Lighting facilities shall be arranged in a manner which will protect roadways and neighboring properties from direct glare or other interference. D. MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 1. Principal structure – Fifty-five 55 feet) Zoned height. Sixty -five (65') Actual height. 2. Accessory structure –Fi -five 55 feet) Zoned height. Sixty -five (65') Actual height. E. MINIMUM OFF - STREET PARKING AND LOADING As required by DMsien 2.3 Section 4.05.00 of the Land Development Code in effect at time of building permit application. F. Minimum distance between principal or accessory structure, which are a part of an architecturally unified grouping — Ten feet (10'). G. Minimum distance between all other principal structures — Twenty feet (20'). H. Minimum distance between all other accessory structures — Ten feet (10'). I. Minimum floor area — None required. J. Minimum lot or parcel area — None required. K. Principal and accessory structures setbacks from Preserve Area: 1. Principal structure Twenty -five feet (25') 2. Accessory structure Ten feet (10') L. Parking for the community center /clubhouse shall be one space per every two hundred (200) square feet of gross floor area which shall be considered inclusive of required golf course parking. M The developer, its successors and assigns shall commence construction of the golf v -3 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 39 of 51 Words stmek thFOlao are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -231- SECTION VI CONSERVATION/PRESERVE AREAS 6.1 PURPOSE 6/11/2013 9.A. The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for the areas within the Wentworth Estates PUD designated on the PUD Master Plan as Conservation/Preserve Areas. The goal of this Section is to preserve and protect native vegetation, and naturally functioning habitat such as wetlands in their natural state. 6.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as Conservation Areas on the Wentworth Estates PUD Master Plan are designated to accentuate conservation and limited water management uses and functions. 6.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following, subject to regional, state and federal permits when required: A. Principal Uses: 1. Open spaces /nature preserve /wildlife habitats. 2. Boardwalks and nature trails 3. Water management structures:, the installation of the water management structures will not result in a decrease below minimum preserve requirements. 4. Mitigation activities including exotic vegetation removal and planting of native vegetation. 6.4 STATE LANDS Lands within the PUD lying with in the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve are separated by designation on the Master PUD Plan, Exhibit " 3B", and are governed by the Conservation Zoning District (CON) standards as set forth in Section 272.03.09.B of the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at the date of adoption of this PUD Ordinance. VI -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 40 of 51 Words stmegh are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -232- SECTION VII DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 7.1 PURPOSE 6/11/2013 9.A. The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development commitments for the Wentworth Estates PUD, 7.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with final site development plans, final subdivision plans and State and local laws, codes, and regulations applicable to this PUD. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise, the standards and specifications of Division 3.2 Section 10.02.04 of the Land Development Code shall apply to this project even if the land within the PUD is not to be platted. The developer, his successor and assigns, shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this Document. The developer, his successor or assignee shall agree to follow the Master Plan and the regulations of the PUD Document as adopted, and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition, the developer will agree to convey to any successor or assignee of the developer is bound by in title any commitments within this Document. A maximum of 1450 dwelling units and 85,000 square feet of commercial are permitted Developer intends to construct a minimum of 310 single family units. One entity (hereinafter the Managing_ Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close -out of the PUD and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close -out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is Lennar Homes LLC Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity. but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed - out then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. VII -1 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 41 of 51 Words sumekthxeugh are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -233- 6/11/2013 9.A. 7.3 PUD MASTER PLAN Exhibit 3 B, the Wentworth Estates PUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development. Proposed area tmet, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as final platting or site development plan application. Subject to the provisions of Section 27 3 4 10.02.13.E. of the Land Development Code, amendments may be made from time to time. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities and all common areas in the proj ect. 7.4 DEVELOPMENT PHASING SCHEDULE SUNSET PROVISION AND MONITORING REPORT A. This PUD shall be subject to the Sunset Provisions of Section 2.7- 3.410.02.13.D of the Land Development Code, B. Monitoring Report: An Annual PUD monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Section 2.7.3.6 10.02.13.F. of the Land Development Code. The monitoring report shall be accompanied by an affidavit stating that representations contained therein are true and correct. 7.5 TRANSPORTATION This PUD shall be limited to 932 adjusted two -way, PM peak hour trips (correspondent to the highest trip generation scenario of those proposed in the Traffic Impact Statement Addendum dated May 3, 2013 prepared by Stantec Consulting, Inc. For purposes of calculation of the weekday PM peak hour trip generation for this PUD, the lesser of the weekday PM peak hour trigs as calculated in the Institute of Traffic Engineer's ITE) Report, titled Trip Generation, 9th Edition or the trip generation as calculated in then current ITE Trip Generation Report shall be utilized. The following commitments are made as necessary elements of the proposed project and as mitigation for the transportation impacts associated with the project. Each of these commitments are made as a result of a detailed traffic impact analysis conducted for the project using a methodology approved by Collier County Transportation Planning Staff, negotiated mitigation plan elements, and other commitments made by the developer regarding site access improvements. These commitments shall be confirmed with a Developer Contribution Agreement (DCA). VII-2 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 42 of 51 Words s#ask through are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -234- 6/11/2013 9.A. A. The Wentworth Estates PUD shall not use Southwest Boulevard as a construction access. However, it will function as a secondary project ingress /egress point for the entire project. B. Specific roadway improvements have been identified, as needed, to address local concurrency standards. These were identified in a report submitted in December 2002 titled "Wentworth Estates — Transportation Impact Study ". The improvements to be made by the developer are described below. G. Ai4efial level stmet fightiag shall be pfevided at all deve4opment j-e ints ef .,.17" o., a Y the US 4 14eu4hwest Boulevard, seMee shall be in p1we prior- 4e the issumee of the first GO. E. C.The following Transportation Impact Plan will operate to alleviate the development's impact on the adjacent roadway network: 1. by this PUD by pr-epaying ta the CewAy one half of the read irapaet �P� estiini;ed to be-due fe - all authorized development This pro _..+tee„+ s shall sen,e + mitigate r the j r ee, 's mp + a&aaee impfevemetAs to roadways empeeted W be- impaeted by the prejee4 and ves! all of thee pffojeet's s. it is estimated that this pr-ep"meFA v411 be at leas e uses All + fees shall be ealeialaW based on fee sehed,.le ia FF + on the date fi St � enea -Ah- A-ve. The impao fee r«nr»zn++o «+ Amds may be uOlized by the Geufft�- etAside of the read impae4 4e distFiet in wM ,, the Wentw A Esuft PUD is leemed. The developer has completed construction of intersection improvements (turn lanes and median improvements) at the intersections of US 41 /Southwest Boulevard and US 41/North Entrance to the Wentworth Estates PUD. The developer has also installed a traffic signal at the intersection of US 41 /Southwest Boulevard, and when warranted the developer shall install a traffic signal at the US 41/North Entrance to the PUD. These improvements are site - related and not eligible for impact fee credits. VII -3 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 43 of 51 Words struskthret+gll are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -235- 6/11/2013 9.A. 3-2. Additionally, and without impact fee credits, the developer 4iall- contributed the sum of $392,800 to construct southbound left and eastbound right turn lanes for the US 41 /Airport Road intersection (eagineef's estimate of probable $339,890), and a westbound left turn lane at the US 41/Rattlesnake-Hammock Road intersection $53,000). These paym shall be made to the GeuMy YA4hia simty (60) days of r-eeeipt by the developer- e of reval of "s Or d�tt1a te...r.s of +t,e mer-e essential for- the effieiea4 Opefagen of the 4faweftafien system than these identified abe ma ffmy ele..t 49 use the Rlad—q tom. st fuet the alte ,te i � 1. �_ — �•3.�y •_ • _ — — 3-2. Additionally, and without impact fee credits, the developer 4iall- contributed the sum of $392,800 to construct southbound left and eastbound right turn lanes for the US 41 /Airport Road intersection (eagineef's estimate of probable $339,890), and a westbound left turn lane at the US 41/Rattlesnake-Hammock Road intersection $53,000). These paym shall be made to the GeuMy YA4hia simty (60) days of r-eeeipt by the developer- e of reval of "s Or d�tt1a te...r.s of +t,e mer-e essential for- the effieiea4 Opefagen of the 4faweftafien system than these identified abe ma ffmy ele..t 49 use the Rlad—q tom. st fuet the alte ,te a i � • PO IM. Y. i a i � • PO IM. i S 7 s basis fef any Ai4ve eause ef aefien for- damages against the Cetmly by the develeper(s),-49 sueeesser-(s) in title e assignee(s). VII4 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 44 of 51 Words s"&&eu g1a are deletions, words underlined area( Packet Page -236- 6/11/2013 9.A. J. D.The developer(s), its successor(s) in title, or assignee(s), will be responsible for the cost of any traffic signal at any development entrance when deemed warranted and approved by Collier County Transportation Staff. Traffic signals shall be owned, operated and maintained by Collier County. K= The— develepff 9WI -- provide-- eempeasatiag r-ight -e€ way 4 pfei eet Wnd . def +,,e 6. E. All internal access(es), drive aisle(s), sidewalk(s), etc. not located within County right -of- way will be privately maintained by an entity created by the developer(s), its successor(s) in title, or assignee(s). Pr low- M.F.T.TMOMMMM"M . . ......... ........ . ; M;z FORUM ML iii. Medifying the V VII -5 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001I26 Page 45 of 51 Words stfaek threa are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -237- Man- Pr low- M.F.T.TMOMMMM"M . . ......... ........ . ; M;z FORUM ML iii. Medifying the V VII -5 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001I26 Page 45 of 51 Words stfaek threa are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -237- 6/11/2013 9.A. F. PL. The developer shall inVmve has improved Southwest Boulevard to include two 12 -foot lanes, a curb - and -gutter urban roadway cross - section with enclosed drainage, and a sidewalk on each side of the road. Improvements to Southwest Boulevard sly —also include landscaping and lighting and shall improvements to the turning movement geometry at the intersection of Southwest Boulevard and US 41. These improvements shall be paA o the -Phase ' aeastmetien A bench and/or bus shelter was shall- else -be included in the construction plans with the design and location coordinated by Collier County. G. Q. The developer - shall - eve paid to the County up-t& $250,000 to supplement the funding for the installation of street lighting by the County, along US 41 from Broward Street to Collier Boulevard. This p ° ^t shall be made in ,,..dane° • ntl, 7.6 WATER MANAGEMENT A. In accordance with the rules of the South Florida Water Management District, the Wentworth Estates PUD project shall be designed for a storm event of a 3- day duration and 25 year storm return frequency. B. An excavation permit will be required for the proposed lakes in accordance with Division 3.5 °r Ordinance 2004 -55 the Collier County Excavation Ordinance All lake dimensions will be approved at the time of excavation permit approval. Q The she,A% an Exhibit "G" s PFel P. T1 ge Plans Details (JE1 file No 28823436). r-iner- - edges- er- mo4extiens te- Rmhibit "0" shall be authefized Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 46 of 51 Words sa�akthr-eu gh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -238- 6/11/2013 9.A. VII -7 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 47 of 51 Words are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -239- _ ON, ....... _ Y Y. MMIM - • -_ - _ IN VII -7 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 47 of 51 Words are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -239- _ ON, ....... _ Y Y. • • _ VII -7 Revised 05108/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 47 of 51 Words are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -239- 9-. C. The developer shall commit to a water quality monitoring program for the project that is in compliance with the South Florida Water Management District Environmental Resource Permit, which provides monitoring criteria and enforceable limitations. This water quality monitoring program will be developed in conjunction with and will meet the requirements of the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve and the Conservancy of Southwest Florida Staffs. 7.7 UTILITIES . . ....... . ..... G. AA1 etisteffiefs eenneeting to the potable wwear- and sanitat:)r sewff system sha4l be Deceit. A. Irrigation for the residential and golf course will be through groundwater withdrawal permitted by the South Florida Water Management District. 7.8 ENGINEERING Except as noted herein, all project development will occur consistent withDivisions 3.2 and 3.3Sections 10.02.03 and 10.02.04, respectively, of the Land Development Code. 7.9 ENVIRONMENTAL VII -8 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 48 of 51 Words stmek thfeugh are deletions, words underlined are ad Packet Page -240- 6/11/2013 9.A. A. The homeowners' association documents for Wentworth Estates PUD that shall govern future operations of the association shall provide an educational program component to advise and instruct all future residents of the importance of the adjacent Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve to the local ecosystem. Educational literature shall also be provided to future residents on the proper lawn and garden maintenance requirements associated with living next to the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. In particular, proper methods of exotic vegetation removal, mowing, pruning, burning, trapping, and pesticide /insecticide spraying, will be defined. VII -9 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 49 of 51 Words stmek threegh are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -241- MK Mr.w. — Mom elm MILN Mr. M F-91111 _ r • Mom A. The homeowners' association documents for Wentworth Estates PUD that shall govern future operations of the association shall provide an educational program component to advise and instruct all future residents of the importance of the adjacent Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve to the local ecosystem. Educational literature shall also be provided to future residents on the proper lawn and garden maintenance requirements associated with living next to the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. In particular, proper methods of exotic vegetation removal, mowing, pruning, burning, trapping, and pesticide /insecticide spraying, will be defined. VII -9 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 49 of 51 Words stmek threegh are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -241- 6/11/2013 9.A. J_. B. The developer shall construct wildlife- crossings across roads in appropriate areas within the PUD after consultation with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 7.10 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Accessory structures shall be constructed simultaneously with, or following the construction of, the principal structure except for a construction site office and model unit. 7.11 SIGNS Unless otherwise provided herein, all signs shall be in accordance with Divisie n 24Section 5.06.00 of the Land Development Code. 7.12 LANDSCAPING FOR OFF STREET PARKING AREAS All landscaping for off - street parking areas shall be in accordance with the Division Section 4.06.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code in effect at -the time of building permit application. 7.13 POLLING PLACES Pursuant to Section 2.6.30 4.07.06 of the Land Development Code, provision shall be made for the future use of building space within common areas for the purposes of accommodating the function of an electoral polling place. An agreement shall be recorded in the official records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County: which agreement shall be binding upon any and all successors in interest that acquire ownership of such common areas including, but not limited to, condominium associations, homeowners' associations, or tenants' associations. This agreement shall provide for the Golf Course Clubhouse or Enrichment Center, or similar common facility, to be used for a polling place, if determined to be necessary by the Supervisor of Elections. VII -10 72042135 Revised 05/08/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 50 of 51 Words °'m^U thwagh are deletions, words underlined are ac Packet Page -242- 6/11/2013 9.A. TEA BLFAExhibit "A" Wentworth Estates MPUD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS *The, minimum setbaek fer nid rose struettim she!! be no 1 ban the disla-- one half the height ..f the .al_stp..� -orb 4 e-he ate i"Alaximem height limit is as defi dd --'U- She-Ofi-Am ;-.2.F. of the PUD Doeume- ,b �r .c n o..� y not less than the distanee noted in Table 1 or one half the height of the prineipal strueture, whiehever is greater, * * ** Front lead' -ages she'! have a minimum front yard setbaek of 23 —feed 1 Front loading garages shall have a minimum front Yard setback of 23 feet. 2 Except MDR -2 areas depicted on the MPUD Master Plan are limited to two (2) habitable floors or 45' ZH. 50' AH 3 The minimum distance between principal structures over two stories shall be no less ten feet (10') or one -half the height of the principal structure, whichever is greater. Except for lots located in existing and approved plats for Picaere. Vercelli, and Via Veneto. ZH = Zoned Height; AH — Actual Height VII -11 Revised 04/30/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 51 of 51 Packet Page -243 - Words struck through are deletions, words underlined are ad.,.... (LDR) (MDR& MDR -2) ROMA) Recreational Low MEDIUM MEDiulH Facilities DENSITY DENSITY HEIGHT (Clubhouse, - RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL Community Center RESEDENTi Building, etc.) Minimum Average Lot Area 6500 sf 2400 sf 10,000 sf N/A Front Yard Setback i5' * * ** :5' * * ** 25' 15i1 15" Front Yard Setback for 10, N/A Side Entry Garage 10' Rear Yard Setback (Principal) 10' 5' 29' *•* 25' Rear Yard Setback 57 4-0, (Accessory) 5' 25' Preserve Setback - 251 25' 25= 25' Primary Structure Preserve Setback - Accessory 10' 10, 4— 10' Structure 0' -10' with `Side Yard Setback 61 minimum 10' 25' between structures3 Three (3) Three @) Four 4 Habitable Floors Habitable Three (3) Floors or Maximum Height * —* or Floors or a 55' ZH. 65 AH 45 ZH • 50' AH 4550' ZH, 55 AHD Min. Floor Area 750 sf 750 sf :75e sf N/A Min. Distance Between , Principal Structures 10' 10''- See Note 10' Min. Distance Between 10, Principal and Accessory 10' 5' Structures *The, minimum setbaek fer nid rose struettim she!! be no 1 ban the disla-- one half the height ..f the .al_stp..� -orb 4 e-he ate i"Alaximem height limit is as defi dd --'U- She-Ofi-Am ;-.2.F. of the PUD Doeume- ,b �r .c n o..� y not less than the distanee noted in Table 1 or one half the height of the prineipal strueture, whiehever is greater, * * ** Front lead' -ages she'! have a minimum front yard setbaek of 23 —feed 1 Front loading garages shall have a minimum front Yard setback of 23 feet. 2 Except MDR -2 areas depicted on the MPUD Master Plan are limited to two (2) habitable floors or 45' ZH. 50' AH 3 The minimum distance between principal structures over two stories shall be no less ten feet (10') or one -half the height of the principal structure, whichever is greater. Except for lots located in existing and approved plats for Picaere. Vercelli, and Via Veneto. ZH = Zoned Height; AH — Actual Height VII -11 Revised 04/30/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Page 51 of 51 Packet Page -243 - Words struck through are deletions, words underlined are ad.,.... Pu SA13ALBAY ., 24 19 Pll SABAL BAY .T(TRTOISE .PRERv IX run SABAL BAY C CAA k z :5 rr J pi zW C I / I I / ; _ iiI N iI l, %. 6/11/20' AC) COMMERCIAL AREA (CA) L LAKE 19 Z0 ZERO LO1 LINE (132.36 z AC) DUPLEX COURSE AREAS (CRGA) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (MDR & MDR -2) (10.00 t AC) \C-4\ OPEN SPACE CRCA WATER MANAGEMENT AREAS � �• � ® SUB - DISTRICT \ � I iii fl I 1 Iil -k`] ~\ �.• \ \ tI I I t I I I 1I II I. 1I' %+ I i 1 jI I I iI lr4 W �m a ¢ ' `G L V U x r� - : I + • + • + O f/ �I ' lll l 1 ( I 1 36 31 ! 4 • A II1 I % III ' I S Y � I I I I .A s , S� A T Ri � . / t I ( R 1 S� I I F' 'I'-0 ♦ + i 11t•i 0 N� g_ ' �C r L .�I 4 E G ' � P 'T 4 �1 1 � •T ; - _ a _PRESERVE (312 t �1 '1 -jTRAIL ACR CRGA RSF TRAIL ACRS AREA- AH CROA HITCHI N C POST HOME PARK + 5 4 F, URRAN COASTAL FRINCiF R CONSERVATIO URBAN COASTAL FRINGE 3 Etm RtCF iii LOW DENSITY RESIDENTAU AREA (LDR) COMMERCIAL AREA (CA) L (291,04 2 AC) SINGLE FAMLY ATTACHED ZERO LO1 LINE CA COMMERCIA ) DUPLEX COURSE AREAS (CRGA) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (MDR & MDR -2) (10.00 t AC) \C-4\ OPEN SPACE CRCA WATER MANAGEMENT AREAS ZERO LOT LNE GOLF COURSE (165.64 t AC) RECREATION FACIUITES MULTI- FAMILY CLUBHOUSE LDR \ CLUSTER HOUSING NATURE PRESERVES (134,07 3 AC) \ \ M10ELl PLID \ . 1.450 �� f1LLLd (+t624: AL) RAINTRFE LANF. RSF-4 _ - MDR -2 (LIMITED TO 2 MAPLE LANE. H \ STORIES IN HEIGHT) \ (64.42 t AC) Ci9'RESS LANE W \ \ ROOKERY BAY CONSERVATION RMF 94 \ \ I I I I (513.77 f AC) < W \ \\ ROADWAY > 0 G\ (37.6t t AC) RSF -3 1;,1 \,P9 \ \i cowwoN AREA/ MYRTLE LANE EASEMENTS I"' SF -3 r (3t.29 t AC).. •TC TOTAL: 1,363.84 AC \ IN URBAN COASTAL FRINGE. \ \ \\\ I � �• � ® SUB - DISTRICT \ � I iii fl I 1 Iil -k`] ~\ �.• \ \ tI I I t I I I 1I II I. 1I' %+ I i 1 jI I I iI lr4 W �m a ¢ ' `G L V U x r� - : I + • + • + O f/ �I ' lll l 1 ( I 1 36 31 ! 4 • A II1 I % III ' I S Y � I I I I .A s , S� A T Ri � . / t I ( R 1 S� I I F' 'I'-0 ♦ + i 11t•i 0 N� g_ ' �C r L .�I 4 E G ' � P 'T 4 �1 1 � •T ; - _ a _PRESERVE (312 t �1 '1 -jTRAIL ACR CRGA RSF TRAIL ACRS AREA- AH CROA HITCHI N C POST HOME PARK + 5 4 F, URRAN COASTAL FRINCiF R CONSERVATIO URBAN COASTAL FRINGE 3 Etm RtCF iii LOW DENSITY RESIDENTAU AREA (LDR) COMMERCIAL AREA (CA) SINGLE FAMILY OETACHEO 85.000 SOUARE FEET SINGLE FAMLY ATTACHED ZERO LO1 LINE COMMON /RECREATIONAL /GOLF DUPLEX COURSE AREAS (CRGA) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREA (MDR & MDR -2) COMSION AREA SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED OPEN SPACE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED WATER MANAGEMENT AREAS ZERO LOT LNE GOLF COURSE DUPLEY RECREATION FACIUITES MULTI- FAMILY CLUBHOUSE TOWNHOUSE PRO SHOP CLUSTER HOUSING NATURE PRESERVES TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS BOARDWALKS, SMALL DOCKS, ETC. . 1.450 I 1 I I101Em UK 1. 3012 FOR UMOLITY • e.5 • 11 1 9/121 ow I EXHIBIT B: MPUD MASTER PLAN Packet Page -244- I i 1 I I 1 i II I n I`I + I I,I III I I II I 1� I I 1JI I I I I I I i t i F , I � li i JJJJ Ili IIII.II LENNAR HOMES, LLC ,.aato.A NTS WENTWCIRTH ESTATES MIXED 21610972 USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 1 . T 13 9.A. 6/11/2013 9.A. Exhibit "C" List of Deviations (PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEVIATIONS 1 — 9 IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE 03 -51 TO STILL REMAIN M EFFECT) Deviation 1: LDC Section 5.03.02.0 to allow fences or walls to be permitted at maximum height: Seven feet (T) If the fence or wall is constructed on a landscaped berm the wall shall not exceed six feet (6') in height from the top of berm elevation for berm elevations with an average side slope of 4.1 or less and shall not exceed six feet (6') in height from the top of berm elevation for berms with an average side slope of greater than 4:1 (i.e.3:1). Deviation 2: LDC Section 6.06.01.0 and LDC Appendix B, in order to allow 50 feet of right -of -way for local roads rather than the required 60 -foot width (throughout). Deviation 3• Formerly LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.10 Section 2 -12 of the Collier County Code of Ordinances Exhibit °A" Design Requirements for Subdivisions C.13.h. of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, to allow street intersection radii of twenty (20) feet (face of curb) for all internal project streets and thirty -five (35) feet for street intersections at proiect entrances. Deviation 4: Formerly LDC Section 3.2.8.4.16.10 Section 2-12-of the Collier County Code of Ordinances Exhibit "A" Design Requirements for Subdivisions C.13.i of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual, to allow reverse curves without tangents (throughout). Deviation 5: LDC Section 4.02.04,F. , in the case of residential structures with a common architectural theme required property development regulations of Exhibit A, Wentworth Estates MPUD Development Standards, may be waived or reduced provided a site plan demonstrating the common architectural theme and meeting the criteria of LDC Section 4 02 04 F is approved by the Growth Management Department. This is a deviation of LDC Section 4 02 04 F which requires approval by the Collier County Planning Commission. The architectural style of the dwelling units /structures shall be similar in design and in the use of materials and color. • The residential project shall have a signature entranceway which serves to identify the development has having a common architectural theme. The entranceway design and improvement elements shall include some or all of the following: the use of landscape materials gated structure, water jeatures, sculpture and ornamental pavement surfaces. • Street materials signage and lighting shall be complementary and the same throughout the project's accessways. List of Deviations — 04/30/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Packet Page -245- 6/11/2013 9.A. Deviation 6: LDC Section 4.05.04.H., parking for community center /clubhouse shall be one space per every two hundred (200) square feet of gross floor area which shall be considered inclusive of required golf course parking Deviation 7: LDC Section 5.04.04.B., allowing model homes to be permitted through a temporary use permit valid for ten years with no extension of the temporary use permit required. No model can remain for more than ten years without securing Conditional Use, or its successor process approval. Deviation 8: LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6, allowing sign face area of entrance signs to be 120 square feet. Deviation 9: LDC Section 5.06.02.B.4, allowing construction entrance signs and employment signs to be a maximum of 20 square feet in size. NEW DEVIATIONS: Deviation 10: seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01(J) to allow cul -de -sacs in excess of 1,000 feet and up to 2,500 feet in the MPUD (throughout). The developer shall provide internal loopinq of water mains, subiect to review and approval by the Collier County Utilities staff. The developer shall provide a water main connection between the two "LDR" areas at the north end of the property, through the FPL easement (north of the roadway, Treviso Bay Drive) shown on the MPUD Master Plan. The developer, or successors and assigns, shall provide a stabilized emergency vehicle turn - around. meeting local fire prevention code criteria, approximately midway along a cul -de -sac that is over 1,000 feet in length. Deviation 11: seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.H., to allow parking for all multi- family units to be 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit plus 10% in lieu of the minimum LDC required 2 spaces per unit. Deviation 12: seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02 which requires a Type B buffer between single family and multi- family uses. Specifically, the applicant requests that no buffer be required between these uses when a water bodv separates the two uses. 7204227 1 2 List of Deviations — 04/30/13 Wentworth Estates MPUD PUDA- PL20120001126 Packet Page -246- 24 19 15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6/11/2013 9.A. (37.84 * AC) 00MVON AREA/ . . . tASEMEWS i 2 \ U.- . . . . . . . . . . (34.29 t AC) /� / t `\,\ TOTAL I'983.64 AC 25 36 Jill :1:1' ii A IIrrCIIING, MOHILL 1106IF PARK 4 D04191T D. WATER MA NCEMENT BASINS Packet Page -247- 0i LENNAR HOMES, LLC N.7-1 WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED 215510972 - USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ["I r I � (132.36 t Az) mi (31.25 1 AC) 19 20 30 29- (291-94, & AC) CA (C 0 ERMAL ) o 1(01.0"o t AC) CRrA (m Up (11M.07 .1 AC) 11 (148.24 1 AC) .1111-2 (UW7ED TO Z STORIES W HEIGW* (04.42 ± AC) ROOKERY BAY CORSE—TION (513.77 * AC) ROADWAY (37.84 * AC) 00MVON AREA/ . . . tASEMEWS i 2 \ U.- . . . . . . . . . . (34.29 t AC) /� / t `\,\ TOTAL I'983.64 AC 25 36 Jill :1:1' ii A IIrrCIIING, MOHILL 1106IF PARK 4 D04191T D. WATER MA NCEMENT BASINS Packet Page -247- 0i LENNAR HOMES, LLC N.7-1 WENTWORTH ESTATES MIXED 215510972 - USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ["I r I - 6/11/2013 9.A. LE% NAm Exhibit E April 8, 2013 RE: Wentworth Estates (Treviso Bay) Zoning Amendment Dear Treviso Bay Homeowner: You may have received a letter from Collier County referencing Lennar's pending zoning application which would amend the Wentworth !states PUD (the zoning document which governs Treviso Bay) to increase the maximum allowable number of dwelling units from 1,200 to 1,600. Since that amendment was filed, we have had a publicly advertised neighborhood information meeting, several informal meetings with interested residents, and numerous conversations with individuals who have provided helpful comments and suggestions about how they would like to see Treviso Bay continue to successfully move forward. In response to these discussions, if our zoning amendment is approved, we have agreed to include the following stipulations. The tract references below can be found on the attached exhibit labeled °LENNAR AGREED STIPULATIONS IF APPROVED FOR 1,450 UNITS : " • Reduce the number of maximum allowable dwelling units to 1,450. • Parcel 'A' will remain Coach Homes, as currently planned and approved. • Parcel 'B' (Vercelli) will remain 60' +/- wide single family lots. • Parcel'C' (Via Veneto) will remain 50' +/- wide single family lots. • Parcel'D' (Piacere) will remain 50' +/- wide single family lots. • Parcel 'E' (Italia) will remain 75'+/- wide single family lots. • Parcel'F' (Bella Firenze) will be developed as 75' +1- wide single family lots. • Parcel'G' (Pavia) will remain 1S0' +/- wide single family lots. • Parcel 'H' (Lipari) will remain 100' + /- wide single family lots. Parcel 'I' (Aqua) will remain six 4 -story condominiums as currently planned and approved. • Parcei'J' The most intense use of Tract J will be six 4 -story condominiums. • Parcel'K' will remain 2 -story condominiums as currently planned and approved. • Parcel'L'The most intense use of Tract L will be 75'+/- wide single family lots. • Parcel 'M' The most intense use of Tract M will be 75' +/- wide single family lots. You may also refer to the attached Master Plan which is part of our PUD submittal. There are three land use categories depicted on that plan: LDR — which includes single family detached, and duplex units; MDR — 2 which allows for the LDR uses and multi - family units of no more than two habitable stories with a maximum of 45' in zoned height; and MDR which allows for the LDR and MDR -2 uses as well as multi - family of no more than four habitable stories and SO' in zoned height. The PUD amendment eliminates the previous °MHDR" category, which provided for the ability to build residential buildings up to a height of 90 feet I understand some of you may still have questions about this proposed change, and I would like to make myself available to answer as many of those questions as possible. To that end, I will be on -site Thursday, April 11, from 11:30 — 2:30 at the sales office to meet with interested residents and try to answer any questions. 10481 Six Nli Ie Cyprris Parkway • Frn Myers, F1. 3396!, • Pnnce: 239 -218 -1177 • Fax: 233.2'8 -139* LEh1MAR.C©M I o� 3 Packet Page -248- 6/11/2013 9.A. - I am very grateful to all of our residents, very proud of the progress we've made thus far in X Treviso Bay, and couldn't be more excited about the future of our great community. As always, if ',Wou need anything, don't hesitate to contact us. rely, I 1 \Darin M cMurray Division President Lennar Homes, LLC 10481 Six tunic Cypress Parkway . Tort Myers. N. 33960 • Phutie. 235+ -278 -1177 • FUN, 239.275 -1196 LEMWAR_COM z of 3 Packet Page -249- 6/11/2013 9.A. • Reduce the number of maximum allowable dwelling units to 1,450. • PARCEL'A' will remain Coach Homes, as currently planned and approved. • PARCEL 'B' (Vercelli) will remain 60' +/- wide single family lots. • PARCEL'C' (Via Veneto) will remain 50' +/- wide single family lots. • PARCEL D' (Piacere) will remain 50' +/- wide single family lots. • PARCEL 'E' (Italia) will remain 75' +/- wide single family lots. • PARCEL 'F' (Bella Firenze) will be developed as 75' +1- wide single family lots. • PARCEL 'G' (Pavia) will remain 150' + /- wide single family lots. • PARCEL'H' (Lipari) will remain 100' + /- wide single family lots. • PARCEL'I' (Aqua) will remain six 4 -story condominiums as currently planned and approved. • PARCEL 'J' The most intense use of PARCEL J will be six 4 -story condominiums. • PARCEL 'K' will remain 2 -story condominiums as currently planned and approved. • PARCEL 'L' The most intense use of PARCEL L will be 75' +/- wide single family lots. • PARCEL 'M' The most intense use of PARCEL M will be 75' +/- wide single family lots. t * ALL OF THE STIPULATIONS DEPICTED ON THIS DRAWING ARE EXPRESSLY CONTINGENT ON LENNAR'S RECEIVING APPROVAL FOR 1,450 UNITS. * THIS PLAN IS AN ARTISTS CONCEPTION AND NOT INTENDEI Packet Page -25(]- AIL C - J 6/11/2013 9.A. 24D ,1 Wednesday, May 2'2,2013 NAPLES DAILY NEW S NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ORDINANCE Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, June 11, 2013, in the Boardroom, 3rd Floor, Administration Building, Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, Florida, the Board of County Commissioners 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 WENTWORTHRIESTATES E MIXED OPLANNED UNITBDEVELOPMENT- (MPUD), BY INCREASING THE PERMISSIBLE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS FROM 1,200 TO 1,450; BY AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE -BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AN ADDITIONAL 5.3 ACRES OF LAND ZONED RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) TO THE WENTWORTH ESTATES NCLUDING AN IEVIIING E IM NATIION OF THE MEDIUM HEIGHT DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USE WHICH ALLOWED 90.0 FEET IN.ZONED BUILDING HEIGHTS AND AN INCREASE IN BUILDING HEIGHT FOR MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FROM 45 FEET ZONED HEGHT TO 50 FEET ZONED HEIGHT; DEFINING ZONED HEIGHT AND ACTUAL HEIGHT; PROVIDING FOR DELETION OF. EXHIBITS .INCLUDING EXHIBIT "A" LOCATION MAP, EXHIBIT "B" BOUNDARY SKETCH AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION, EXHIBIT "C" EXISTING CONDITIONS MAP, EXHIBIT "D" TOPOGRAPHIC MAP, EXHIBIT "E" AREA WIDE COMMUNITY SERVICES MAP, EXHIBIT "F ". AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, EXHIBIT "G" PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE PLANS AND DETAILS, EXHIBIT "H" PRELIMINARY SEWER PLANS, EXHIBIT "I" PRELIMINARY WATER PLANS, AND EXHIBIT "K" BALD EAGLE MANAGEMENT PLAN; BY AMENDING THE "B" MASTER PLAN; AND ADDING EXHIBIT "A" DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, EXHIBIT MPUD MASTER PLAN, EXHIBIT "C" DEVIATIONS, AND EXHIBIT "D" WATER MANAGEMENT BASINS, AND REVISING DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST (US 41) APPDX RIMATELY 1 -1/4 MILES SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST (US 41) AND RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD (CR 864) IN SECTIONS' 29: 31, 32, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 1563.84 +/- ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (PUDA- PL20120001126) Copies of the proposed Ordinance are on file with the Clerk to the Board and are 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 administrator 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 materials 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 that 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 Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, 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 GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ., CHAIRWOMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK i By: Martha Vergara, Deputy Clerk (SEAL) May 22. 2013 No 199011194 Packet Page -251-