Agenda 04/24/2018 Item # 9A04/24/2018
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 9.A
Doc ID: 5159
Item Summary: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to
approve an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending
Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit Development
(CPUD), as amended, by adding outdoor recreation facilities as a general permitted use; by providing that
wellness centers associated with employees and hotel guests shall not count towards square footage
maximums in the business district and industrial commercial district; by allowing a 169 room hotel on
Tract 6 west of Goodlette Frank Road; by decreasing the allowable square footage in the industrial
commercial district by 6,900 square feet for a total of 709,100 square feet of floor area of
industrial/commerce uses; by decreasing the allowable square footage in the business district by 23,000
square feet to 269,000 square feet including a reduction from 242,000 square feet to 219,000 square feet
of office uses; by adding indoor and outdoor recreational facilities as a permitted accessory use in the
business district and industrial commercial district; by adding deviations to allow any use on Tracts 3 and
6 on the master plan to be eligible for the county’s architectural deviation process and a deviation to
permit existing street trees to satisfy the buffer tree requirements for Tract 5. The subject property i s
located south of Immokalee Road and both east and west of Goodlette Frank Road in Section 27,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 106 acres; and by providing an
effective date. [PL20170000425]
Meeting Date: 04/24/2018
Prepared by:
Title: Planner, Principal – Zoning
Name: Nancy Gundlach
03/20/2018 8:54 AM
Submitted by:
Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning
Name: Michael Bosi
03/20/2018 8:54 AM
Approved By:
Review:
Zoning Ray Bellows Additional Reviewer Completed 03/20/2018 6:11 PM
Growth Management Department Judy Puig Level 1 Reviewer Completed 03/21/2018 11:45 AM
Zoning Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Completed 03/26/2018 3:20 PM
Growth Management Department Thaddeus Cohen Department Head Review Completed 03/26/2018 4:41 PM
County Attorney's Office Heidi Ashton-Cicko Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 04/10/2018 4:47 PM
Growth Management Department James French Deputy Department Head Review Completed 04/13/2018 1:59 PM
County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 04/16/2018 7:48 AM
9.A
Packet Pg. 34
04/24/2018
Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 04/16/2018 8:21 AM
Budget and Management Office Mark Isackson Additional Reviewer Completed 04/16/2018 8:43 AM
County Manager's Office Nick Casalanguida Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 04/16/2018 11:33 AM
Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 04/24/2018 9:00 AM
9.A
Packet Pg. 35
AGENDA ITEM 9-C
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION - ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT - PLANNING &
REGULATION
HEARING DATE: MARCH 15, 2016
SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20170000425, CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD
(COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT)
APPLICANT: PROPERTYOWNERS:
Arthrex, Inc RES Florida 1284 Holdings LLC
1370 Creekside Boulevard Krisdan Management Inc., Manager
Naples, FL 34108 Reinhold Schmieding, Vice president
Erica Schmeiding, Vice president
Zeida Orbea, Assistant Treasurer and
Daniel Hall, Assistant Teasurer
Note: There are 12 other property owners within the subject PUD.
AGENTS:
D. Wayne Amold, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire
Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, p.A.
3800 Via Del Rey 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Naples, FL 34103
REOUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider amending
Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit Development
(CPUD), as amended, by adding outdoor recreation facilities as a general permitted use; by providing
that wellness centers associated with employees and hotel guests shall not count towards square
footage maximums in the Business District and IndustriaVCommerce District; by allowing a 169
room hotel on Tract 6 west of Goodlette-Frank Road; by decreasing the allowable square footage in
(continued to page 4)
CREEKSIOE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA.PL2O17OOOO425
March 2, 20'18
Page 'l of 1E
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
'n
SITE
LOCATION
Location Map
Petition Number: PL201 70000 425
Zoning Map
ffi m
\4ll_t
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside
3l
tl
;r
:r "ffiiiE .;E *!:*o.',*ffi,
TA'{D I,ISE S{.IMIIARY
VC - IndustrlaycomrneG =,09.9()r AcB - &dness
R ght oa WayL - L,ake
= 22.9Or Ac
= 9.25i Ac
= 7.19r k
^\<-: 1\-.}.,-**-.../
0B---6-_
/lll .
PW - Presen ed WetanG = 2.90r Ac
PU - Pr€ser\red Uplands = 4.10r Ac
Otpr (butrers, open sp8ce) = 9.84+ Ac
= 106.Gr Ac
@GIAI- rcTE
r. lI.B trrx a crrrcEaru& k t a .tBccE lttEY Att !a*gt(ErEL
^al a''rcra r!.
a llc alrFCa ElEratE!I mIEan{E! c.6,lc-t, }t} tltCt tor
FDOOCUIX? hlralrrH zia rl. it lrar rt EtcdED,
NOT A PART
OF THIS PUO t:.
I
TRACT
B
l!.. PUO !d. a!. ltfi 2)
TRACT 9
B iiiiri
ti
r lli1.,1I ,i!ilil
ffi
ERe
o
lr,tI
E
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside
the Industrial/Commercial District by 6,900 square feet for a total of 709,100 square feet of floor
area of Industrial/Commerce uses; by decreasing the allowable square footage in the Business
District by 23,000 square feet to 269,000 square feet including a reduction from square feet offloor
area of Industrial/Commerce uses; by decreasing the allowable square footage in the Business
District by 23,000 square feet to 269,000 square feet including a reduction from 242,000 square feet
to 219,000 square feet of Office uses; by adding indoor and outdoor recreational facilities as a
permitted accessory use in the Business District and Industrial/Commercial District; by adding
deviations to allow any use on Tracts 3 and 6 on the Master Plan to be eligible for the county's
architectural deviation process; and a deviation to permit existing street trees to satisfo the buffer
tree requirement for Tract 5.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject 106+ acre property is located south of Immokalee Road and both east and west of
Goodlette-Frank Road (CR 851) in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Coltier County,
Florida. (Please see the Location Map on page 2 of this StaffReport.)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The Creekside Commerce Park Planned Unit Development (PUD) was originally approved in
Ordinance Number 97-51 on October 21, 1997. There was a subsequent ordinance, Ordinance
Number 06-41, which was repealed along with Ordinance Number 97-51 with the adoption of
Ordinance Number: 06-50 on October 24, 2006. There have been three amendments to Ordinance
Number 06-50 since, Ordinance numbers 13-23,16-05 and 16-32. The petitioner is now proposing
the following changes with this amendment:
Increase the hotel/motel allowance fiom one to two, increase the number of rooms allowed
by 169 (from 180 to 349), add an allowance for one hotel/motel to be located west of
Goodlette-Frank Road, not to exceed 180 rooms, add a provision that the hotel on PUD Tract
6 (west of Goodlette-Frank Road) may not exceed 169 rooms;
In the Industrial/Commerce District, decrease the allowed floor area by 6,900 square feet
(from 716,000 square feet to 709,100 square feet);
In the Business District, decrease the total allowed floor area by 23,000 square feet (from
292,000 square feet to 269,000 square feet) and decrease the office use floor area by 23,000
square feet (from 242,000 square feet to 219,000 square feet);
Add outdoor recreation facilities as a general permitted use in the PUD;
o Add indoor and outdoor recreation facilities as an accessory use in both the
Industrial/Commerce District and Business District;
o Add provision that wellness centers as an accessory use do not count towards the square feet
caps in the PUD;
CREEKSIDE COMi/!ERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA-PL2O1 7OOOO425
March 2, 2018
Page 4 of 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
Add provision that the Land Development code (LDC) deviation process is allowed for all
buildings on PUD Tract 6 and the southem portion ofPUD Tract 3.
Add a deviation to permit exisring street trees to satisry the Type D landscape buffer tree
requirement for Tract 5.
The net effect ofuse changes is to decrease the allowed floor area by 29,900 s.f. and increase the
number of hotel/motel rooms by 169. The Master Plan has been revised to show the locations ofthe
architecture and landscape deviations.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Immokalee Road, then (Collier's Reserve), 506+ acres of mixed-use: 61.4+ acres
commercial, 385 residential units, with a zoning designation of Collier Tr act 22 PIJD; and a
611 acre professional center (North Collier Hospital), with a zoning designation of Collier
Health Center PUD
East: Collier County Utilities Division Water Plant, with a zoning designation of Industrial; a
17 .7 4+ acre commercial and medical park, with a zoning designation of Southwest
Professional Health Park PUD
South: Collier County Utilities Division Water Plant, with a zoning designation of Industrial; and
2,104+ acres of mixed-use: 80t acres commercial/industrial, 8,600 residential units, 4.26
units per acre, with a zoning designation of Pelican Marsh DRI (Development of Regional
Impact)
West: 35.24+ acre Business Park, with a zoning designation of The Naples Daily News BPUD (Business
Park PUD)
CREEKSiDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA-PL2O1 7OOOO425
March 2, 2018
Page 5 of 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
AERIAL PHOTO
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUD Amendment and has found it
consistent with the FufiIe Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. See attached Exhlbit B: FLUE
Consistency Review dated January 23, 2018.
Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staffreviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact
Statement (TIS) for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP) using the 2016 and 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR).
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states:
"The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SM designation applications,
conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE)
affecting the overall counwide density or intensity of permissible development, with
consideration of their impact on the overdll County transportation system, and shall not
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA-PL2O1 7OOOO425
March 2, 2018
Page 6 of 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
approve any petition or opplication that would directly access a deficient roadway segment
as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts on adjacent roadway segment that is deficient
as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or
adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below
an adopted Level of Service Stondard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless
specific mitigating stipulations ore also approved. A petition or application has significant
impacts if the trffic impact statement reveals that any of thefollowing occur;
a. For linl<s (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project trffic is equal
to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume;
b. For linl<s adjacent to linl<s directly accessed by the project where project trffic is equal to
or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and
c. For all other links the project trafic is considered to be significant up to the point where it
is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume.
Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and
submitted as part of the trffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant
impacts on all roadways."
The proposed PUD Amendment on the subject property was reviewed based on the then applicable
2016 AUIR Inventory Report. Staff also reviewed the petition using the now applicable 2017 AUIR
Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the proposed development
will generate approximately 1,983 PM peak hour adjusted trips, which is consistent with the
currently approved PUD. No additional trips are proposed for this development. Trips will occur
on the following roadway links:
Roadway Link 2076
AUIR
Existins
LOS
2017
AUIR
Existins
LOS
Current Peak Hour
Peak Direction
Service
Volume/Peak
Direction
201,6
Remaining
Caoacitv
2017
Remaining
Capacitv
lmmokalee
Road (CR
846)
TamiamiTrail
to Goodlette-
Frank Road (6
lane divided)
c e 3,100/West 1.084 1.,O49
lmmokalee
Road (CR
845)
Goodlette-
Frank to Airport
Road (5 lane
divided)
D a 3,100/East 504 489
lmmokalee
Road (CR
846)
Airport Road to
Livingston Road
(6 lane divided)
D D 3,100/West 286 305
Goodlette-
Frank Road
lmmokalee
Road to
Vanderbilt
D D 1,000/North 82 55
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA-PL2O17OOOO425
March 2, 2018
Page 7 of 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
Beach Road (2
lane undivided)
Airport
Road
lmmokalee
Road to
Vanderbilt
Beach Road (4
lane divided )
c C 2,200/North 927 950
Tamiami
Trail North
(us 41)
Wiggins Pass
Road to
lmmokalee
Road (6 lane
divided)
D D 3,100/N o rt h 485 1.7 3
Tamiami
Trail North
(us 41)
lmmokalee
Road to
Vanderbilt
Beach Road (5
lane divided)
C C 3, 1.00/ N o rt h 801 762
Based on the 2016 and 2017 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to
accommodate the proposed new trips for the amended project within the five-year planning period.
Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation
Element of the Growth Management Plan. This project is located within the Northwest
Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) boundary and is therefore subject to Policy
5.6 of the GMP. This policy requires any new development exceeding LOS levels within a TCMA
designated area must provide documentation that at least two Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) strategies are provided./used.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found
this project to be consistent with the CCME.
GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD Amendment may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of
the GMP
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon
which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC)
Subsection 10.02. I 3 8.5., Planning Commission Recommendatior (commonly referred to as the
"PUD Findings"), and Subsection 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission
Report (refened to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's
recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the
Board of Collier County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support their action
on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the
heading "Zoning and Land Development Review Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following
analysis:
CREEKSIDE COMIVIERCE PARK CPUD, PUOA.PL2Ol 7OOOO425
l\,larch 2,2018
Page 8 of '18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD
Document and Master Plan and is recommending approval.
Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD
Document and Master Plan and is recommending approval.
Utilitv Review: Utility staff has reviewed the petition, the PUD Document, and the Master plan and
is recommending approval.
Landscape Review: Landscape staffhas reviewed the petition, the PUD Document, and the Master
Plan and is recommending approval.
Architectural Review: Architecture staff has reviewed the petition, the PUD Document, and the
Master Plan and is recommending approval.
Zoning and Land Development Review. The Creekside Commerce Park CPUD is an established
commerce park, which has been substantially developed and approved for 716,000 square feet of
industrial/commercial uses, 292,000 square feet of business district uses, a 400 bed assisted living
lacility, and a I 80 room hotel.
The amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park CPUD proposes to add one additional hotel, to
increase the maximum number ofhotel rooms from 180 to 349, to add physicat fitness facilities as
an accessory use, and to request deviations to architecture and landscaping. These modifications are
made to both the Industrial/Commerce (l/C) and Business (B) Districts within the pUD. The
proposed additional 169 room hotel will be integrated into the Arthrex campus expansion and will
be located adjacent to the west side of Goodlette-Frank Road on Tract 6. (Refer to Master Plan on
page 3 of this Staff Report.) Development of the hotel will be consistent with the previously
approved zoned building height of 50 feet for parcels west of Goodlette-Frank Road. Wellness
centers associated with the employees and hotel guests within the PUD shall be deemed an
accessory use and shall not count towards the overall floor area of the PUD.
The impact of the increased number of hotel rooms will be offset by a corresponding reduction of
6,900 square feet of Industrial/Commerce District floor area and a reduction of23,000 square feet
of Business District floor area.
The Conceptual Master Plan has been revised to add a note on Tract 3 and 6 regarding an
architectural standards Deviation and a note on Tract 5 regarding a landscape buffer deviation.
Zoning stafffinds the proposed reallocated square lootage and proposed deviations to be compatible
with the existing Commercial,{Industrial District and Business District land uses and intensities. For
further information regarding the Deviations, please see the Deviations section ofthis StaffReport.
REZONE FINDINGS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon
which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 10.02.13 B.5.,
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA-PL2O,17OOOO425
March 2,2018
Page I oI 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and
Subsection 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as
"Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal bases to support the ccPC's recommendation. The
CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC, who in tum use
the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections
is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning and Land Development Review Analysis.,, In
addition, staff offers the following analysis:
l. Whether the proposed change will be consistenl h'ith lhe goals, objectives, and policies and
future land use map and the elements of the GMP.
The Comprehensive Planning staff has indicated that the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent
with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP.
2. The existing land use pafiern.
As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report and discussed in the
zoning review analysis, the neighborhood's existing land use pattem can be characterized as
residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional lands.
3. The possible creotion of an isolated distticl unrclaled to adjacenl and nearby districts.
At the time the subject property was rezoned to a CPUD, it was deemed to be of sufficient size and
did not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The proposed PUD
Amendment does not change this finding.
4. llhether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions
on lhe properly proposed for change.
The district boundaries are logically drawn as discussed in Items 2 and 3.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of lhe proposed amendment
necessdry.
The proposed change is not necessary; but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC
provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to add a hotel, add an accessory
wellness center and fitness facilities, add deviations, and change the change the square footage areas
of the Industrial Commercial District and Business District to offset the addition of the hotel.
6. ll/hether the proposed change will adversely influence living condilions in lhe
neighborhood.
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD Amendment, with the commitments made by the
applicant, can been deemed consistent with the County's land use policies upon adoption that are
reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Development in compliance with
the proposed PUD rezone should not adversely impact living conditions in the area.
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA.PL2Ol 7OOOO425
March 2, 2018
Page 10 of i8
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
7, llhether the proposed change will create ot excessively increase trafJic congestion or create
types of trafftc deemed incompatible h)ith sunounding land uses, because of peak volumes or
projected types of vehicular traflic, including activity during construction phases of the
development, or otherwise affecl public safety.
The roadway infiastructure has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project at this time. The
project is subject to the Transportation Commitments contained in the CPUD Ordinance, which
includes provisions to address public safety.
8. llhether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed PUD Amendment will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is
subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District.
9. Whelher the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacenl areas.
The proposed PUD Amendment will not reduce light and air to adjacent areas outside the PUD.
Furthermore, the PUD Document provides adequate property development regulations to ensure
light and air should not be seriously reduced to adjacent areas. The Master Plan further demonstrates
that the locations of proposed preserve and open space areas should further ensure light and air
should not be seriously reduced to adjacent areas.
10. Whelher the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area
Staff is of the opinion this PUD Amendment will not adversely impact property values.
11. Wether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjocent properly in accordance with existing regulations.
Properties around this property are already mostly developed. The basic premise underlying all of
the development standards in the Land Development Code is that their sound application, when
combined with the site development plan approval process and./or subdivision process, gives
reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or
development ofadjacent property. Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent
to the improvement of adjacent properties.
12. Ilhether the proposed change will constitule a grant of special privilege lo an individual
oh,ner as contrasted $,ith the public welfare.
The development complies with the GMP, which is a public policy statement supporting zoning
actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed
amendment 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.
CREEKSIDE COMIiIERCE PARK CPUD, PU DA'P120170000425
irarch 2,2018
Page '11 of '18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
13. |l/hether there are subsrantial reasons thy rhe prupe,ly cannot be used in accordance wilh
existing zoning.
The subject property could be developed within the parameters ofthe existing zoning designations;
however, the petitioner is seeking this PUD Amendment in compliance with LDC provisions. The
proposed amendment meets the intent of the PUD district, and the public interest will be maintained.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
counly.
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD Amendment is not out of scale with the needs of the
neighborhood or County.
15. Whether il is impossible to Jind other adequate sites in the county fot the proposed use in
districls already permilting such use.
There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is
not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness ofa zoning decision. The petition
was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staffdoes not review
other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
16. The physical characlerislics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be
required to make lhe property usable for any of the range ol potential uses under the proposed
zoning c lassiftcatio n.
Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and
this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development
regulations during the site development plan approval process and again later as part ofthe building
permit process.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services
consislent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as deJined and
implemented through the Collier Counly adequale public facilities ordinance.
The development will have to meet all applicable critena set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate
Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives ofthe
GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by County staffthat is
responsible for jurisdictional elements ofthe GMP as part ofthe rezoning process, and that staffhas
concluded that the developer has provided appropriate commrtments so that the impacts ofthe Level
of Service will be minimized.
18. Such other faclors, standards, or criteria that the Board of Counly Commissioners shall
deem importanl in the protection of the public heallh, safely and welfare.
To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing.
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PU DA-PL2O17OOOO425
March 2,2018
Page 12 of 1E
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
PUD FINDINGS:
LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the ccpc shall make
findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria.,'
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pafiern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, sunounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, htaler,
and olher utilities.
The Creekside Commerce Park is an established business park which has been developed with a
variety of light industrial, commercial, and office uses. The proposed hotel and accessory wellness
center uses are compatible with the existing development within the Creekside Commerce Park. The
project would also be required to comply with county regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water,
and other utilities. Therefore, the site is suitable for the proposed development.
2. Adequacy of evidence of uniJied conlrol and suitability of any proposed agreements, conttact,
or other instruments, or lor amendmenls in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to
afiongemenls or provisions lo be made for the conlinuing operalion and mainlenance of such
areas and facilities that are not lo be provided or maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control.
Additionally, the development will be required to gain platting and./or site development plan
approval. These processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of, continuing
operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies
of the GMP.
County staffhas reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis ofthe relevant goals, objectives,
and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staffreport. Based on that analysis, staff
is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP.
4. The inlernal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements,
The currently approved development, landscaping, and buffering standards were determined to be
compatible with the adjacent uses and with the use mixture within the project itself at the time the
PUD was approved. Staffbelieves that this amendment will not change the project's compatibility,
both intemally and extemally, with the proposed commercial and industrial land uses along with the
proposed deviations.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in exislence and as proposed lo serve the
developmenl.
The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC.
CREEKSIDE COMi/lERCE PARK CPUD, PU DA-PL2O17OOOO425
March 2, 20,l8
Page 13 of 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
6. The timing or sequence of development for ,he purpose of assuring rhe adequaqt of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation
Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development
order (SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate tuming movements
for all site access points. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable
concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any
plats and or site development plans, are sought.
7. The ability of lhe suhject propefi and of sunounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The area has adequate supporting infiastrucfure, including Collier County Water-Sewer District
potable water and wastewater mains, to accommodate this project. Furthermore, adequate public
facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought.
8. ConformiQ with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modiJications of such regulalions in the
particular case, based on determinalion lhat such modifications are justilied as meeting public
putposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application ofsuch regulations.
This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and
deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the
most similar conventional zoning district.
The petitioner is seeking one revised deviation and two 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.). Staffbelieves that the deviations proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance
with LDC Section 10.02.13 A.3., the petitioner has demonstrated that "the elements may be waived
without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section
10.02.13 B.5.h., the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviations is'Justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application ofsuch regulations."
Please, refer to the Deviation Discussion po(ion of the staff report below for a more extensive
examination olthe dev iations.
DEVIATION DISCUSSION:
The petitioner is seeking one revised deviation and two new deviations from the requirements of the
LDC. The deviations are found in PUD Section 3.5 "Development Deviations," and in PUD Section
4.5 "Development Deviations." The deviation locations are depicted on the Master Plan. The
petitioner's rationale and staff analysis/recommendation is outlined below.
Deviation #2: (Revised Deviation in Section 3.5. 2, applies to I/C District only; see underlined
text below for added language to the original deviation)
Deviation #2 seeks relief fiom LDC Section 5.05.08, Deviations and altemate compliance, which
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PU DA-PL2O17OOOO425
March 2,201E
Page 14 of 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
authorizes the County Manager or designee to administratively approve deviations from compliance
with Section 5.05.08 of the LDC for specific types ofbuildings, to allow general office and medical
office, hotel and physical fitness facilities that can be constructed on Tract 5 and 6 of the Master
Plan to be eligible for this deviation process.
Petitio ne r's J ustifi c atio n :
Creekside Commerce Park PUD contains provisions /or exceptions from the County's Architectural
and Site Design standards for industrial type buildings internal to the site.
The requested deviation from the Collier County Architectural and Site Design Standards applies
only to Tract 5, 6 and southern portion ofTract 3, which is internal to the site and more than 300'
from Immokalee Road and more thon 500'from the southern boundary of the PUD where abutting
the Bay Colony Golf Course. The applicant intends to constuct a new multi-story signature
building that will house engineering research and product development functions, and
administrative functions for Arthrex, which is a global medical equipment and supply manufacturer.
The Arthrex complex will also include a hotel and accessory physical fitness facility, which are
intended to be developed with a complimentary architectural design to the headquarter building.
The architectural standards found in the LDC do not adequately address a scenario in which a
modern signature multi-story headquarters building would be constructed. The required massing
and transitional elements that require numerous fagade off-sets and transitions is impractical for a
multi-story building of the type proposedfor the property.
The LDC does provide for the BCC to grant exceptions to the architectural standards where it is
demonstrated thal the exceplions are warranted for innovative design. The proposed signature
Arthrex building, hotel and accessory physical Jitness facility will be a custom architectural design,
which will express, through its architectural design, the unique nature ofthis international compony
and its corporate presence in medical reseorch and product development in Collier County.
Staff Analysis and Reco mmendalion:
Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends Approval finding that, in compliance
with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived
without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is 'lustified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations."
Deviation #3: (New Deviation in Section 3.5.3. applies to I/C District only)
Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.4.. Type D Buffer. which requires a 10' wide
buffer tree requirement ofthe eastern boundary ofTract 5.
P etitio ne r's J us tiJic ati on :
This buffer deviation is warranted due to the adjacent FPL and Collier County easements located
just west of Creel<side Street. Placement of required buffer trees is encumbered, requiring the use
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA-PL2O1 7OOOO425
March 2,2018
Page 15 of '18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
of smaller trees, limited in size per FPL, and tree locations to be shifted farther into the site due to
Collier utility easements. The existing mature trees are ideally located to provide an alternatiye to
the typical buffer requirement, provide for the Streetscape enhancement, and pose no conflict with
existing utilities, while meeting the intent ofthe landscape buffer requirement. Creeltide Street is
a private street and is owned and maintained by the Creekside Property Owner's Association.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation:
Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends Approval finding that, in compliance
with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived
without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is 'Justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application ofsuch regulations."
Deviation #3: (New Deviation in Section 4.5. 3. applies to B District only)
Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08. Deviations and alternate comoliance. which
ofthe Master Plan to be elieible for this deviation process.
P etiti one r's I us t ilicatio n :
Creel<side Commerce Park PUD contains provisions for exceptions from the County's Architectural
and Site Design standards for industrial type buildings internal to the site.
The requested deviation from the Collier County Architectural and Site Design Standards applies
only to Tract 5, 6 and southern portion ofTrqct 3, which is internal to the site and more than 300'
from Immokalee Road and more than 500'from the southern boundary of the PUD where abutting
the Bay Colony Golf Course. The applicant intends to construct a new multi-story signature
building that will house engineering research and product development functions, and
administrative functions for Arthrex, which is a global medical equipment and supply manufacturer.
The Arthrex complex will also include a hotel and accessory physical fitness facility, which are
intended to be developed with a complimentory architectural design to the headquarter building.
The architectural standards found in the LDC do not adequately address a scenario in which a
modern signature multi-story headquarters building would be constucted. The required massing
and transitional elements thal require numerous fagade off-sets and transitions is impractical for a
multistory building of the type proposedfor the property.
The LDC does provide for the BCC to grant exceptions to the architectural standords where it is
demonstrated that the exceptions are warranted for innovative design. The proposed signature
Arthrex building, hotel and accessory physicalfitness facility teill be a custom architecturol design,
whichwill express, through its architectural design, the unique nature of this international company
and its corporate presence in medical research and product development in Collier County.
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA.PL2O l7OOOO425
March 2,2018
Page 16 of 18
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING NIM):
The applicant conducted a NIM on November 13,2017 at Arthrex, Inc., located at 1370 Creekside
Boulevard, Naples, Florida. For further information, see attached Exhibit C: Transcript of
Neighbor hood Information Meeting.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attomey Office has reviewed the Staff Report for this petition on February 26,2018.
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA-
PL20170000425, Creekside Commerce Park CPUD to the BCC with a recommendation of approval.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Proposed PUD Ordinance
Attachment B: FLUE Consistency Review
Attachment C: Transcript of the Neighborhood Information Meeting
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD. PU DA-PL2O17OOOO425
l\,larch 2,2018
Page 17 of 1E
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
PREPARED BY:
/ryP4
MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR
ZONING DIVISION.ZONING SERVICES SECTION
APPROVED BY:
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD, PUDA-PL2O1 7OOOO425
March 2. 2018
N.z-o ' \ t
DATE
2-at - t0
DATE
3-t-/ g
DATE
ON-ZONINC SERVICES SECTION
REVIEWED BY:
ZONINC DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION
ES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
Page 18 of '18
ZONING MANAGER
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20170000425-Creekside Commerce Park CPUD (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2Packet Pg. 99Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2Packet Pg. 100Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
9.A.2Packet Pg. 102Attachment: Ordinance - 041018 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
Tamiami TRL NVanderbilt Beach RD
Immokalee RD111th AVE N
GOODLETTE-FRANK RD NÀ17À18À1X11À1À48
À9À52
À1À49 À19À51À8
À7À50
À1 À21À20
À6 À1À77À4À3À5
À2 X33À78
À1À1À79
À80
À21
À1À81
À10
À1 À1À1
À82
À20
À1
À3À8À13À13.1
À1
À2À1
À1
À1 À4À1
À7
À6
À2
À1
À1 À24
À1À1
À2
À2À18À23
À1À14
À1À2À3
À1
À13
X13
À19
À22 À1
À20
À33À34 À21
À16À1À5
X8
À4 À12À1 À1
À1À1À1
À35 À32
À11
À1
À1
À1
À1À1 X7.1À36À31
À14
À1
À9
À10À6À7À8
À1
À1À16 X23
X2 X7.1
À1
À78 À58 À59
À79
À80 À1À56
À65
À1
À61À64
À55
À63
À62
À54
À2
À1
À1
À2
À1
À1
À1À26
À25
À17
À2
X31
À1
X33
À1
À1
À1
À1
À1
À1.1
À1
À2
À1.2
À3
29 1715218309SEE48G.C.T. NO. 1PARCEL
51 8 19TRACT "O6"49 31 225072120TRACT P-2
64 225TRACT R3 BLOCK F278 211G.C.T. NO. 3 (LAKE)79 TRACT CSEE TRACT L-2TRACT DTRACT 0180SEEPARCELG.C.T. NO. 1
10
PARCEL
81
TRACT "O6"2082
ROYAL PALMBUILDINGCONDO
TRACTL-19(LAKE)
3
13.1
8TRACT B
TRACT "I"
T R A C T R
TRACT RTRACT
CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK
TRACT "O1"4
CENTER CONDO
P-1
11
7 56TRACTB-1
123
TRACT L1 14
15
TRACT B1
TRACT R
TRACT R13
TRACT O5 4
TRACT 02 TRACT B2
12
11
TRACT L2
TRACT R TRACT B3
TRACT B4
TRACT 03
9 10678
TRACT GC 178 58 595779
80 56 60TRACTA TRACT 3
55 61
64
625463
TRACT RTR 1TRACT GC9 TRACT GC4TR 1(SEE PELICAN MARSHGOLF C OU RSE PH TWOTRACT GC1 PAR CEL 1)
26TRACT GC 4TRACT B
25 TRACT GC 1B
TRACT GC 9 24 17 69
23
70
7118TRACT R22 TRACT C
19
34 33
20
1621
35 32 TRACT GC 1A 15TRACT 4
TRACT A3136 TR TRACT R14B
CREEKSIDE MEDI CAL
COMMER CIAL CO NDO
REM INGTON RESERVECONDO
(PH 2)
CREEKSIDE FLEX ICOMMERCIAL LANDCONDO
(PH 1)
CREEKWOOD LANDCOMMERCIAL CONDO
UNIT 1
UNIT 2
COCOHATCHEEMEDICAL CENTERCOMMERCIAL CONDO
RUBELLMEDICALCENTERCONDO
TRACT A
TRACT 5
TRACT 2
TRACTP-1TRACT 4TRACT 4B
TRACT 4A
TRACT P-3TRACT P-2TRACT P-1 TRACT 6FPL ESMT
TRACT 3
UNIT 1
UNIT 2
CREEKSIDEEASTLANDCONDO
CREEKSIDECORNERSLANDCONDO
COLLIER HEALTH PARKCONDOMINIUMDIMOCK LANEHEALTH PARK BLVD.MEDICALC O LL IE R S R E S E R V E D R IV E
BLVDCROSS POINTE DR
S. R. 846 IMMO KALEE RO AD
ARTHREX BLVDCREEKSIDE TRAILCREEK SIDE PARKWAY
CREEKSIDE STREETC-851S.W. HEALTH PARKWAYGOODLETTE ROAD EXTCREEK SIDE BOULEVARD
BENTGRASS BEND
MASHIECOURTNIBLICK LANEC-851B
RA
SS
I
E
B
ENDV
V
V, CU
V,CU
PU"b"
V
DRI
DRI
RSF-3
E
PUD
I
CPUD
PUD
P
PUD
CPUD
BPPUD
PUD
PUD
PUD
NORTH NAPLESMEDICAL
COLLIERHEALTHCENTER
CREEKSID ECOMMERCE CENTER
COLLIERTRACT 22
PELICAN MARSH
NAPLESDAILYNEWS
SOUTHHAMPTON
Location Map Zoning Map
Petition Number: PL20170000425
PROJEC TLOCATION
SITELOCATION
¹
9.A.3
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: SiteLocation Map (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
1
Growth Management Department
Zoning Division
Memorandum
To: Nancy Gundlach, RLA, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section
From: Comprehensive Planning Section
Date: January 23, 2018 (and minor revision February 9, 2018)
Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review
PETITION NUMBER: PUDA-PL20170000425 (REV 3)
PETITION NAME: Creekside Commerce Park PUD
REQUEST: An amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park PUD to: 1) increase the hotel/motel
allowance from one to two, increase the number of rooms allowed by 169 (from 180 to 349), add
allowance for one hotel/motel to be located west of Goodlette Road, add provision that no hotel
can exceed 180 rooms, add provision that hotel on PUD Tract 6 (west of Goodlette Rd.) cannot
exceed 169 rooms; 2) in the Industrial/Commerce District, decrease the allowed floor area by
6,900 (from 716,000 s.f. to 709,100 s.f.); 3) in the Business District, decrease the total allowed
floor area by 23,000 s.f. (from 292,000 s.f. to 269,000 s.f.) and decrease the office use floor area
by 23,000 s.f. (from 242,000 to 219,000 s.f.); 4) add outdoor recreation facilities as a general
permitted use in the PUD; 5) add indoor and outdoor recreation facilities as an accessory use in
both the Industrial/Commerce District and Business District; 6) add provision that fitness centers
as an accessory use do not count towards the square feet caps in the PUD; 7) add provision that
the LDC deviation process is allowed for all buildings on PUD Tract 6 and the southern portion of
PUD Tract 3; and, 8) request certain deviation(s). The net effect of use changes is to decrease
the allowed floor area by 29,900 s.f. and increase the number of hotel/motel rooms by 169.
LOCATION: The subject PUD, consisting of 106 acres, is located at the southwest and
southeast corners of Immokalee Road (C.R. 846) and Goodlette-Frank Road (C.R. 851), in
Section 27, Township 48 South, and Range 25 East.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Urban (Urban-
Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the
Growth Management Plan (GMP). The existing PUD, which allows a variety of commercial,
industrial and institutional uses, was approved in 1997 by Ordinance No. 97-51; FLUE
consistency for that approval is contained in the Statement of Compliance (most of the site was
previously zoned I, Industrial). The PUD was amended in 2006 by Ordinance No. 06-50 to
subtract +3.11 acres at the northwest corner of the PUD so that it could be incorporated into the
existing Naples Daily News Business Park PUD. The PUD was amended in 2013 to add
hotel/motel to the list of principal uses permitted within the Industrial/Commerce District and the
Business District of the PUD; and add assisted living facilities (ALF); independent living units;
skilled nursing units; continuing care retirement communities; and intermediat e care facilities, to
the list of restricted principal uses permitted within the Industrial/Commerce District and the
Business District of the PUD. Additionally, the amendment increased the maximum floor area
ratio (FAR) from .35 to .6 for the proposed new uses; eliminated the maximum FAR restriction to
9.A.4
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Consistency Review 2-9-18 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
2
individual parcels; added operational requirements for the proposed group housing uses; and,
increased the maximum building height to those parcels of the PUD located east of Goodlette-
Frank Road. No changes were made to the overall approved intensity (building square feet). The
PUD was amended in 2016 by Ord. No. 16-05 to: amend the Industrial/Commerce District to
reduce the allowed floor area by 70,000 s.f.; amend the Business District to add some uses from
the C-4, General Commercial zoning district, increase office uses floor area by 50,000 s.f,
increase retail floor area by 20,000 s.f., add allowance for group housing uses east of Goodlette
Road, add allowance for hotel/motel use at the southeast corner of Immokalee Road and
Goodlette Road, and revise certain development standards; the net effect of the floor changes
was neutral (increase 70,000 s.f. and decrease 70,000 s.f.). The PUD was amended again in
2016 by Ord. No. 16-32 to: amend the Industrial/Commerce District to increase the allowed floor
area by 166,000 s.f. and the acreage by 8.3 acres; amend the Business District to increase the
total allowed floor area by 32,000 s.f., increase the office uses floor area by 42,000 s.f., decrease
retail uses floor area by 10,000 s.f.; increase the overall floor area ratio from 0.35 to 0.45; revise
certain development standards; and, decrease the preserve area and allow a portion of the
preserve to be off-site; the net effect of the floor area changes was an increase of 198,000 s.f.
These amendments were deemed consistent with the FLUE based upon certain policies under
Objective 5, the provision allowing medical offices and other similar uses within ¼ mile of a major
medical facility such as North Collier Hospital, and the Urban designation allowance for group
housing uses.
This PUDA petition proposes several changes but the most significant are to add 169 hotel/motel
rooms; decrease uses in the Industrial/Commerce District by 6,900 s.f.; and, decrease office uses
in the Business District by 23,000 s.f. The net effect of use changes is to decrease the allowed
floor area by 29,900 s.f. and increase the number of hotel/motel rooms by 169. The added
outdoor recreation uses are allowed by the Urban designation, and the recreation uses added as
an accessory use are not addressed in the FLUE. The proposed hotel/motel use addition is not
allowed by the existing Future Land Use designation. However, the existing PUD was approved,
in part, based upon a prior FLUE provision and is now deemed, in part, consistent by FLUE Policy
5.14 (previously 5.12). Accordingly, FLUE Policy 5.3 (previously 5.1) is applicable in evaluating
the proposed hotel/motel use and shift in building floor area. It states, in relevant part:
“Policy 5.3:
All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For
properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation
Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with
the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the
following provisions apply:
b. For such industrially-zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed
provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial, or
commercial, zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the
overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district
is not exceeded in the new zoning district.”
*** *** text break *** *** ***
“e. Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a
comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district
and the proposed zoning district.”
FLUE Policy 5.3 contains a two-part test. Below is staff’s analysis and determination of each part.
Part 1 - In comparing zoning district intensity, it is necessary to determine the lowest intensity
zoning district(s) in the LDC allowing the existing uses in the PUD to the lowest intensity zoning
district in the LDC allowing the proposed commercial and industrial uses. The existing PUD allows
some uses only found in the C-5, Heavy Commercial, BP, Business Park, and I, Industrial, zoning
9.A.4
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Consistency Review 2-9-18 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
3
districts. The proposed hotel/motel use is allowed in the C-4 and C-5 zoning districts. Commercial
zoning districts in the LDC are viewed as increasing in intensity from C-1, Commercial
Professional and General Office, as lowest intensity to C-5, Heavy Commercial, as highest
intensity. Further, the “I” zoning district is viewed as higher intensity than the commercial zoning
districts.
Conclusion – part 1: The new zoning district (proposed uses in the PUD amendment) is the
same or a lower intensity industrial, or commercial, zoning district as the existing zoning district.
Part 2 - In comparing public facility impacts to determine overall intensity, it is necessary to have
a comparative analysis of impacts from uses allowed in the existing zoning district and the
proposed use upon facilities (usually viewed as category A public facilities) - arterial and
collector roads, potable water and sanitary sewer (wastewater), drainage, solid waste, and
parks and recreation facilities. The applicant prepared a comparative analysis of public facility
impacts using “medical office” as the representative existing use – notwithstanding that the PUD
allows other office uses besides medical office in the Business District and other industrial and
commercial uses besides medical office in the Industrial/Commerce District, and there is no
proposed PUD language that the square feet reduction is only applicable to medical office use
(and medical office use is consistent with the FLUE). That is, the existing use(s) comparison
reflects a reduction of 23,000 s.f. of medical office uses from the Business District – though the
PUD amendment proposes a 23,000 s.f. reduction in “office uses” generically in that District,
and a reduction of 6,900 s.f. of medical office uses from the Industrial/Commerce District –
though the PUD amendment proposes a 6,900 s.f. reduction in “industrial/commerce” uses
generically in that District.
Staff notes that FLUE Policy 5.3e. does not indicate (provides no guidance) whether each of the
public facility components are weighted equally or not; or whether all components must reflect a
neutral outcome or reduction or a simple majority must reflect a neutral outcome or reduction or
a weighted majority must reflect a neutral outcome or reduction. Staff observes that,
historically, transportation impacts have been of greatest concern to the County, whether
generally or in context of this policy. Staff acknowledges this is a “policy decision” for the Board
of County Commissioners as to how to implement this Policy 5.3, but is of the opinion that
increased impacts upon roads outweigh the reduced impacts of other facilities.
Conclusion – part 2: Based upon the petitioner’s comparative analysis, overall impacts upon
public facilities are not exceeded in the new zoning district.
FLUE Policy 5.6 requires new land uses to be compatible with the surrounding area.
Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to the Zoning Services Section’s staff as part
of the total review of the petition.
Regarding FLUE Policies 7.1-7.4, pertaining to access, interconnections, open space, and
walkable communities, no changes are proposed to PUD access, interconnection or sidewalk
provisions, and the PUD must comply with open space requirements of the LDC.
CONCLUSION:
Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed PUD
amendment consistent with the FLUE.
cc: Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager, Zoning Services Section
Michael Bosi, AICP, Director, Zoning Division
CD/FLUE File
PUDA-PL20170000425 Creekside Commerce Park R3a G:\CDES Planning Services\Consistency Reviews\2018\PUDA dw-mb/2-9-18
9.A.4
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Consistency Review 2-9-18 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
TRANSCRIPT OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
FOR CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD
NOVEMBER 13, 2017
Appearances:
RICHARD YOVANOVICH, ESQ.
WAYNE ARNOLD
DAVID BUMPOUS
NORMAN TREBILCOCK
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
MR. YOVANOVICH: Good evening. My name is
Rich Yovanovich. And we are here today for another
neighborhood information meeting for revisions to
the Creekside PUD. Many of you have heard
(indiscernible) Dave Bumpous is here from Arthrex
and Wayne Arnold is here from Grady Minor &
Associates. Norm Trebilcock, our transportation
engineer is here.
Nancy Gundlach from the county is here.
MS. GUNDLACH: Hello.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So they're reviewing the
proposed amendments.
And basically what we're proposing to do, and
I think you probably have read about it already in
the paper, is, and we talked to many of you one on
one already about what we're proposing to do, but
we're proposing to revise the Creekside PUD to the
west side of Goodlette-Frank Road to allow for an
additional hotel, not to exceed 169 units, and to
allow for a wellness center, workout facility as an
accessory use to Arthrex employees and guests of
the hotel.
The hotel is to serve Arthrex doctors and
people that come in for training, et cetera, for
the Arthrex products.
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
Like I said, there's going to be no changes to
the east side of Creekside, which (indiscernible)
Goodlette-Frank Road, which we're talking about.
What we're going to be doing, and David will
take you through a little bit greater detail, but
essentially hotel here. These existing buildings,
which are medical offices and offices, will be
razed, and that's kind of where the fitness center
will go and the wellness center.
We're making adjustments in the square footage
in the PUD, so we're transportation neutral for
what's existing today. So all the transportation
commitments will stay, all the traffic
(indiscernible) will stay the same.
I think most of you probably (indiscernible)
seen the architecture. That's kind of what David
is here to tell you about, but that's essentially
what we're doing. That's what we talked about in
our smaller group meetings, what you read about in
the paper.
And, again, the changes are really talking
about right in -- right in this area right here.
This is the -- when we were here last time, talking
about, you know, the office complex, that's tract
5. Tract 6 is what we're talking about and part of
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
tract 3.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Where is 3?
MR. YOVANOVICH: 3 is right here, the corner.
This is where the -- where I was pointing to, with
the medical offices, the existing buildings are.
Those will go away.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So that's what
started as the John R. Wood building?
MR. YOVANOVICH: John R. Wood building
(indiscernible). It's the corner building
(indiscernible) but just south of that corner
building, the one-story medical offices, those will
go away and be replaced with the fitness center.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And be the fitness
center?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Fitness center, yes, sir.
So that's what we're here to talk about.
We'll answer any questions you may have. I don't
know what the next slide is. I'm going to turn it
over to Mr. Bumpous.
MR. BUMPOUS: Thanks, Rich.
Thank you. Thank you all for coming tonight.
Appreciate it.
I'm happy to share with you some renderings we
have.
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
The hotel is currently still in design, so
we're obviously trying to make progress forward,
hoping that the PUD goes through successfully.
We've talked about this many times in our past
meetings, the volume of visitors that we see.
Right now, those visitors are staying in hotels all
around southwest Florida, from down on Fifth Avenue
up all the way to Estero, and then they're being
shuttled in and out every single day. It's in
excess of 12,000 visiting doctors each year.
In addition to those doctors, many times they
bring representatives with them or other guests.
So it's a significant number of people. It's a
significant amount of traffic as well that we're
hoping not only to alleviate, but we're hoping to
create more of a cohesive environment so that
they're literally able to get up each morning, walk
simply down the street, attend their classes all
day, have dinner, and return to the hotel as well.
So as you can see, we're trying to create
something that blends with the campus. And, you
know, I've used that term many times, the campus of
Arthrex, because that's what we want. We want the
area to kind of, you know, be cohesive and really
fit the environment, the area, lots of landscaping.
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
This is a view, basically, from the west and
south. This is what we're looking at here. We
change views -- this, of course, just being lobby
entry side.
We've named the hotel Innovation Hotel. It
will not be a flagged hotel such as a Marriott or a
Hilton or something along those lines.
And at the same time, we are not going to put
this hotel on Amazon or Orbitz or those types of
things. It's truly a business hotel for primarily
-- primarily, I should say, designed to fit the
needs of our visitors that are here throughout the
year, both domestic and International visitors.
At the same time, we look to partner with
other businesses in the area that are constantly
bringing guests into town.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Like what's an
example of that?
MR. BUMPOUS: Bank of America is a great
example. There are a lot of businesses like that
that have, you know, thousands of nights of stays
here in southwest Florida.
And one question that may cross your mind,
because I know the newspaper was certainly
interested, is what kind of a negative impact does
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
this have on the other hotels in the area.
Well, at 160 rooms and the volume that Arthrex
plans to put in this hotel, it really doesn't have
a negative impact. Plus, you have to take into
consideration the fact that we've been putting a
large portion of our guests in Estero up by Coconut
Point. So, in essence, there's really no negative
impact.
And that's what's driving this. We talked
about this in the last meeting, how five years ago,
there was plenty of hotel space. We were looked at
as a preferred customer in southwest Florida,
because we were year-around business. We're not
looked at, you know, in the same light now because
you have all these European guests in the summer
and all these other things that are driving up
demand.
Plus we have FDA and AvaMed restrictions. So
we can't put guests in the Ritz Carlton and other
resort levels.
So it really paints us into a corner many
times. So, again, you have doctors that are
getting on a bus at 5:30, 5:45 in the morning in
Estero to make the breakfast and class at 7 a.m.
This affords them the ability to walk two blocks, a
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
block and a half, and they're basically at their
class.
The next photo I want to share with you is
this is a -- this is a view from Goodlette-Frank
Road, so if you were driving up Goodlette-Frank,
looked off to the left. Obviously, there's still a
landscape barrier or buffer here.
But the thing I really wanted to point out is
we talked about this in the early stages, and many
of you visited with us back in the spring, because
most of our guests come in via shuttle from the
airport, the county has graciously worked with us
to allow us to put in much less parking than a
hotel would require this size.
And so our intent is to landscape heavily all
around the hotel and only have parking on the
perimeter. That's for the employees that work
there. And certainly, you know, we have employees
from around the world. So if we have a visitor
from California or a visitor from Germany,
obviously, we're going to want them to stay here
and not stay at the Hilton or the Hyatt or
somewhere else. So many times they will have a
rental car from the hotel.
So that's the intent of making sure that,
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
again, it blends in. It's four stories. It's
below the PUD height restriction that's imposed
now. We're not asking for any additional height at
all. And we're really hoping to make it something
that, as you drive by, you just simply say, wow,
it's a beautiful building, and it just kind of
blends into the environment, if you will.
The final slide you may have seen in the paper
or in other pictures. We're over here in the main
campus. We're actually in the cafeteria right
here. And this is the building we talked about
last year. And, of course, now we're talking about
a hotel and what would become the fitness center.
The fitness center is a little bit deceiving.
I had someone call me this morning and say 30 some
thousand square feet. I said, yes, but we're
designing it as a two-story building with a solid
atrium up through the middle. So you get natural
daylight that -- sorry -- natural daylight that
floods the entire facility .
So you'll have weights, treadmills, all the
basic things that you would see in a normal fitness
center. What this allows the employees to do is
those that are going to fitness centers now early
in the morning and then commuting here at 7:30 or
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
8:00, they'll just come here a 5:30 or 6. Those
that are going out at lunch -- and, by the way, we
allow people flexibility, so they can be gone an
hour, hour and a half, two hours at lunch sometimes
to work out. They don't have to leave the campus.
Same would be true in the evening. I work out
at 5. I go to the gym. I go home at 7:30, 7,
whatever time it may be.
So it really does support the campus, support
the activities.
The other piece of that is the surgeons who
visit us, these are high-end sports doctors. Many
of them played sports themselves. They're
generally very fit and very into fitness.
So we found, over time, that we've had to
shuttle or work with these surgeons at the hotels
they were at to either -- they would work out there
or they would want to go to a bigger, better gym in
the area. It will eliminate that need.
So when they're staying here, they walk across
the pathway, they work out, they come to class.
So we're, again, trying to create an
environment where the campus is compact,
self-sufficient and really meets the needs of our
employees and our guests.
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
And that's my last slide.
Do you have questions?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: All the buildings
that you've shown, those are all hotel buildings.
The fitness center is just in this one photograph
because you don't have a building -- you don't have
plans yet to show?
MR. BUMPOUS: No. In this -- in this photo,
this would be the hotel.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right.
MR. BUMPOUS: This is a fitness center.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right.
MR. BUMPOUS: This is an office building.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right.
MR. BUMPOUS: Tonight, we're talking about the
PUD amendment strictly for this parcel here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Rich or Dave, can
you comment -- I mean, the paper keeps referring to
a second hotel. The first hotel, so to speak, is
the one east of Goodlette-Frank that's been in the
PUD approval for three years or something like
that; is that right?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. On this -- I'm sorry.
On this side of the street is the existing 180
unit, not to exceed 180-unit hotel that's been in
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
the PUD for awhile. You're probably right, three
or four years.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: By some number
(indiscernible).
MR. YOVANOVICH: I can't remember how long
it's been in there. This is an additional hotel to
what's already in the PUD on the west side.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Do you now, by
coincidence, what the status of that hotel is on
the east side?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I know that, as of right now,
there is no hotel, but it doesn't mean there won't
be.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: All right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's no formal plans to
come out of the ground that I'm aware of anytime
soon.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sir?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. The earlier
rendering of the hotel, it looked like there was
some sort of a skylight --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- and a concave
skylight. How tall was that? Just give us a
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
little more detail.
MR. BUMPOUS: Yeah. Let me address that.
First of all, let me apologize. This is the
most current picture I have. This was the artist
rendering of creating a sweeping skylight over the
center of the hotel. It will have a skylight.
That's the plan. But it will be flat.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay.
MR. BUMPOUS: But even with this particular
drawing, it's below the PUD maximum height of 50
feet.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's a very
attractive design, I must say.
MR. BUMPOUS: This is just a difficult design
and it's expensive, so the flat foot tends to make
a lot more sense. And, quite frankly, no one is
going to see it except when you're underneath it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Any other questions?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And this is still
the hotel?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
MR. BUMPOUS: Yes, sir, this is the hotel.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And is it a similar
thing where you have an atrium in this fitness
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
center also?
MR. BUMPOUS: It is similar in that -- except
this atrium in the hotel would actually be open, so
you would see up through the glass into the sky, if
you will. It will allow us to air condition the
interior space and create a nice gathering space.
Where the difference is with the fitness
center, it would have more of a transom effect. So
it would have a roof, but you would have like three
feet of glass. So it, again, it allows sunlight to
really penetrate the building.
It's similar to what we've done on the
administration building. Each floor plate from the
window to the furthest wall is no more than 75
feet. What that does is it allows natural sunlight
to penetrate, which everybody wants natural
sunlight during the day, especially in the work
environment, and so that's something we've worked
really hard to create.
I mean, we have this beautiful weather, so we
want to make sure that everybody gets to enjoy it.
And then kind of to flip that around, we've
also worked with the engineering firms so that the
lighting fixtures in the administration building, I
know we're not talking about the administration
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
building tonight, but they're designed so that
they're indirect so you don't have light pollution
coming out of the building.
Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible)
there was the last building, your brand new
building, your administration building, and now
it's this.
Do you see them being built at the same time?
What is the time frame?
MR. BUMPOUS: Great question. As far as
timing, this building, ideally, will start in the
spring, the administration building. That's our
plan right now. In fact, we're already working
with the county on those plans and approvals and
everything.
And then sometime later next year we would
actually begin to work on these projects as well.
The goal for us is to have everything
completely done, buttoned up and beautiful by
December 2019, the end of 2019. That's our
objective.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Anything else? That's all we
have. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you.
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you all very much.
(Recording concluded.)
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, Joyce B. Howell, do hereby certify that:
1. The foregoing pages numbered 1 through 16
contain a full, true and correct transcript of
proceedings in the above-entitled matter, transcribed
by me to the best of my knowledge and ability from a
digital audio recording.
2. I am not counsel for, related to, or
employed by any of the parties in the above-entitled
cause.
3. I am not financially or otherwise
interested in the outcome of this case.
DATED: November 27, 2017
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED:
________________________
Joyce B. Howell
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
Prepared February 26, 2018
Creekside Commerce Park PUD
(PL20170000425)
Application and Supporting
Documents
March 15, 2018 CCPC Hearing
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375
3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com
July 26, 2017
Ms. Nancy Gundlach
Principal Planner
Collier County Growth Management Division
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
RE: Creekside Commerce Park CPUD Amendment – PL20170000425
Dear Ms. Gundlach:
On behalf of our client, Arthrex, Inc., we are submitting an application for an Amendment to a
PUD for the above referenced project.
The proposed amendment to the Creekside Commerce Park CPUD is being requested in order to
add 169 hotel/motel rooms to the PUD. A reduction in allowable medical office space in both
the I/C and B Districts of the PUD is also proposed. This 29,900 square foot reduction of medical
office use and addition of hotel/motel roo ms will be vehicular trip neutral.
The previously approved deviation permitting the alternative architectural review for the
building on Tract 5 is proposed to be expanded to include the proposed hotel on Tract 6 and an
accessory fitness facility on a portion of Tract 3. Approval of the deviation will allow the newer
buildings developed by Arthrex to maintain a consistent design theme.
Please contact either Richard Yovanovich at 435-3535 or me if you have any questions. We look
forward to working with you on this exciting industry expansion project.
Sincerely,
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP
Enclosures
Cc: David Bumpous
David Genson
Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq.,
GradyMinor File
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 1 of 16
Application for a Public Hearing for PUD Rezone, Amendment to PUD or
PUD to PUD Rezone
PETITION NO
PROJECT NAME
DATE PROCESSED
PUD Rezone (PUDZ): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F., Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code
Amendment to PUD (PUDA): LDC subsection 10.02.13 E. and Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative
Code
PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDR): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F.
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION
Name of Applicant(s): ___________________________________________________________
Address: _____________________________ City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______
Telephone: ___________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: ____________________
E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________
Name of Agent: ________________________________________________________________
Firm: _________________________________________________________________________
Address: _____________________________ City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______
Telephone: __________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: ____________________
E-Mail Address: ________________________________________________________________
Be aware that Collier County has lobbyist regulations. Guide yourself accordingly and ensure that
you are in compliance with these regulations.
To be completed by staff
Arthrex, Inc.
1370 Creekside Boulevard Naples FL 34108
(239) 598-4302
David.Bumpous@Arthrex.com
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP / Richard D. Yovanovich
Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. / Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs FL 34134
239.947.1144
warnold@gradyminor.com / ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 2 of 16
DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST INFORMATION
Please complete the following information, if space is inadequate use additional sheets and attach
to the completed application packet.
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:
Name and Address % of Ownership
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
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
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
RES Florida 1284 Holdings LLC 100
Krisdan Management Inc., Manager 0
Reinhold Schmieding, President, Chairman 100
Erika Schmieding, Vice President 0
Zeida Orbea, Assistant Treasurer and Daniel Hall, Assistant Treasurer 0
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 3 of 16
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 ____________ years /months
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.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 4 of 16
REZONE REQUEST
This application is requesting a rezone from: _________________________ Zoning district(s) to the
________________________________ zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property: _________________________________________________________
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: _________________________________________
Original PUD Name: ________________________________________________________________
Ordinance No.: ____________________________________________________________________
PROPERTY INFORMATION
On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a detailed legal description of the property
covered by the application:
x If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include a
separate legal description for property involved in each district;
x The applicant shall submit 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; and
x 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: / /
Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________
Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________
Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________
Size of Property: _______ ft. x _______ ft. = ________ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: _________
Address/ General Location of Subject Property: __________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
PUD District (refer to LDC subsection 2.03.06 C):
Commercial Residential Community Facilities Industrial
Mixed Use Other: ________________
CPUD
CPUD
Light Manufacturing, Retail, Commercial, Hotel/Motel, Assisted Living Facilities
Light Manufacturing, Retail, Commercial, Hotel/Motel, Assisted Living Facilities
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD
2016-32
27 48E 25E
11, 12 & 13 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO
34 44
29331193188, 29331193201, 29338000025 & 29338000041
6+/-
Southwest and Southeast quadrant of Immokalee Road and Goodlette Road
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 5 of 16
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Zoning Land Use
N
S
E
W
If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal
description of the entire contiguous property on a separate sheet attached to the application.
Section/Township/Range: / /
Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________
Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________
Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________
ASSOCIATIONS
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: _________________________________________________
Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______
Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________
Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______
Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________
Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______
Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________
Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______
Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________
Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______
Collier Health Center PUD and Collier Tract 22 PUD NCH Hospital, medical offices and single family residential
I and Pelican Marsh PUD Waste water treatment plant, golf course and single family residential
SW Professional Health Park and I Medical offices and Waste water treatment plant
Naples Daily News BPPUD Naples Daily News facility
27 48S 25E
14 & 15 Creekside Commerce Park West - Unit Two
35 44
29350000045 and 29350000029
Unit 1 & 2, Creekwood Land Condominium (OR4113 PG2617)
The Estates at Bay Colony Golf Club Neighborhood Association, Inc.
10495 Goodlette Road N Naples FL 34109
The Foundation of Pelican Marsh
1504 Pelican Marsh Boulevard Naples FL 34109
Collier's Reserve Association, Inc.
1715 Colliers Reserve Drive Naples FL 34110
Creekside Commerce Park Property Owners Association, Inc.
1370 Creekside Boulevard Naples FL 34108
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 6 of 16
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative Code,
staff’s analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission’s
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the
applicable criteria. On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a narrative statement
describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria below. Include any backup
materials and documentation in support of the request.
a. 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.
b. 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.
c. 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.)
d. 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.
e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
h. 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.
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.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 7 of 16
Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been
held on this property within the last year? 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.
PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 3 E.
of the Administrative Code and LDC section 10.03.06. Following the NIM, the applicant will submit a
written summary and any commitments that have been made at the meeting. Refer to Chapter 8 B.
of the Administrative Code for the NIM procedural requirements.
Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing
advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the
Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately.
RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (specify name) at their expense shall
record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments
or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of
the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the
Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the
recording requirements of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided
to the Collier County Planned Unit Development Monitoring staff within 15 days of recording of said
Memorandum or Notice.
LDC subsection 10.02.08 D
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,
amendment or change, for a period of 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 submission of a new application, repayment of
all application fees and the grant of a determination of “sufficiency”. Further review of the request
will be subject to the then current code.
March 22, 2016 - Ordinance 2016-05 and October 25, 2016 - Ordinance 2016-32
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 11 of 16
Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for:
PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code
Amendment to PUD- Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code
PUD to PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code
The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time
of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application
packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each
section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted.
REQUIREMENTS # OF
COPIES REQUIRED NOT
REQUIRED
Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of
why amendment is necessary
Completed Application with required attachments
Pre-application meeting notes
Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2
Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 2
Completed Addressing Checklist 2
Warranty Deed(s) 3
List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 2
Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 4
Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 4
Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with
project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included
on aerial.
5
Statement of Utility Provisions 4
Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 4
Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with
project planner at time of public hearings.
Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include
copies of previous surveys. 4
Traffic Impact Study 7
Historical Survey 4
School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 2
Electronic copy of all required documents 2
Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)+
List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this
document is separate from Exhibit E)
Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24” x 36”and One 8 ½” x 11” copy
Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24” x 36” – Only if
Amending the PUD
Checklist continued onto next page…
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 12 of 16
Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru & underlined
Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1
*If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal
requirement
+The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet:
Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 E. 1. of the Administrative Code
Exhibit D: Legal Description
Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each
Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments
If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas
Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239-
690-3500 for information regarding “Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan.”
PLANNERS – INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS:
School District (Residential Components): Amy
Lockheart Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan
Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Vicky Ahmad
Emergency Management: Dan Summers Immokalee Water/Sewer District:
City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other:
ASSOCIATED FEES FOR APPLICATION
Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00
PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
PUD to PUD Rezone: $8,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
PUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $2,250.00
Environmental Data Requirements-EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre-application
meeting): $2,500.00
Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00
Transportation Review Fees:
o Methodology Review: $500.00, to be paid directly to Transportation at the
Methodology Meeting*
*Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting.
o Minor Study Review: $750.00
o Major Study Review $1,500.00
Legal Advertising Fees:
o CCPC: $1,125.00
o BCC: $500.00
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358
2/21/2017 Page 13 of 16
School Concurrency Fee, if applicable:
o Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in
coordination with the County
Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set
forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood
Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. All
checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners.
As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this
checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary
submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition.
*Additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee.
___________________________________ _____________
Signature of Petitioner or Agent Date
July 26, 2017
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD – PL20170000425
Exhibit 1
Evaluation Criteria
July 26, 2017 Page 1 of 7
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative Code,
staff’s analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission’s
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of
the applicable criteria.
Narrative Statement Describing Request
The proposed amendments to the Creekside Commerce Park CPUD propose to add one
additional hotel on the west side of Goodlette-Frank road and increase the maximum number
of hotel rooms from 180 to 349. These modifications are made to both the I/C and B Districts
within the PUD. The maximum vehicular trip generation figure in Section 2.16.L remains the
same due to a corresponding reduction in medical office space by 29,900 square feet. A minor
change to the Conceptual PUD Master Plan is proposed to add a note on Tract 6 regarding the
Architectural Standards Deviation.
PUD Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 10.02.13.B)
a. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
The Creekside Commerce Park is an established commerce park, which has been
substantially developed and approved for a variety of light industrial, commercial, office,
assisted living, intermediate health care and hotel uses. Infrastructure is in place to serve
the existing and proposed uses. The addition of another hotel on the west side of
Goodlette-Frank Road is logical, and will provide an opportunity to be intergrated into the
Arthrex campus expansion. The new hotel will be developed on the PUD Master Plan Tract
6, which is adjacent to Goodlette-Frank Road. Development of the hotel will be consistent
with the previously approved zoned building height of 50 feet for parcels west of Goodlette -
Frank Road. Infrastructure is in place to service the hotel use.
b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract,
or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate
to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of
such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings
and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county
attorney.
The applicant controls developed and undeveloped land within the Creekside Commerce
Park PUD.
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD – PL20170000425
Exhibit 1
Evaluation Criteria
July 26, 2017 Page 2 of 7
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
c. 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 criter ia or conditions
of that Sub-district, policy or other provision.)
The Creekside Commerce Park is an existing PUD, which permits industrial, business/office,
research and development, and retail uses. Originally, the project was approved based on
a former Future Land Use Policy, which permitted expansion of Industrial Land Uses where
adjacent to existing industrial uses. This Land Use Policy has been eliminated from the
Comprehensive Plan, and Creekside has been subject to a new Comprehensive Plan Policy,
which limits project intensification.
A hotel use is already permitted in the PUD and has been determined to be compatible with
surrounding development. A Consistency Analysis in accordance with Policy 5.1 of the
Future Land Use Element has been prepared that demonstrates the increase in hotel units,
with a corresponding reduction in medical office space does not result in additional impacts
on Class A public facilities. As discussed in greater detail below, the Traffic Analysis
concludes that the overall vehicular trip generation for the PUD remains neutral .
The PUD amendment application contains an extensive analysis of traffic impacts
associated with the increased number of hotel rooms and corresponding decrease in the
medical office space by 29,900 square feet. Creekside Commerce Park is located within the
Northwest Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA). Established in Policy
5.6 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan, the TCMA encourages
compact urban development. The policy also encourages use of Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies such as inclusion of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, flex
work schedules, car parking, telecommuting, and subsidies for transit. Some or all of these
TDM strategies are currently utilized for industries located within the Creekside Commerce
Park and will be utilized for the expanded facilities within the Creekside Commerce Park.
Collier and Lee Counties currently operate an interconnected transit link that utili zes
Creekside Commerce Park as the transit hub for this interconnected bi-county transit route.
This is one example of the TDM strategies that are in place to facilitate expansion of the
target industries at this location, consistent with the Transportation Policies of the Growth
Management Plan.
d. 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.
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD – PL20170000425
Exhibit 1
Evaluation Criteria
July 26, 2017 Page 3 of 7
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
The proposed uses have been previously deemed compatible with uses existing and
permitted within the Creekside Commerce Park PUD, as well as uses that exist adjacent to
the project. No additional height is sought for the hotel use and it will be developed with
a zoned height of 50 feet, consistent with other structures west of Goodlette-Frank Road.
e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The Creekside Commerce Park PUD master plan identifies open space, which meets or
exceeds the LDC requirements for open space for commercial and industrial development.
Additionally, the PUD contains maximum building coverage requirements, which may
provide additional open space on each developable tract.
f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
The project is subject to concurrency and adequate infrastructure must be in place to
support future development on the site.
g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The Creekside Commerce Park PUD is an existing PUD, which is surrounded by zoned and
developed land. Expansion of the PUD boundary is not anticipated.
h. 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 regulat ions.
The PUD amendment proposes additional hotel units. The proposed regulations are
consistent with standards currently adopted in the PUD and which have been utilized in
other projects, and will result in a development pattern appropriate for the Creekside
Commerce Park.
LDC Section 10.02.08 F - Requirements for Amendments to the Official Zoning Atlas
F. Nature of requirements of Planning Commission report. When pertaining to the rezoning of
land, the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County
Commissioners required in LDC section 10.02.08 E shall show that the Planning Commission
has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following findings, when
applicable:
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD – PL20170000425
Exhibit 1
Evaluation Criteria
July 26, 2017 Page 4 of 7
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and
policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
The proposed addition of 169 hotel units with a corresponding reduction of 29,900
square feet of medical office uses is consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
A detailed discussion of Plan consistency is included in item C above, and is
supported with an evaluation of public facility impacts consistent with Policy 5.1 of
the Future Land Use Element.
2. The existing land use pattern.
The existing land use pattern is supportive of additional hotel units. The PUD was
amended in 2016 to provide for the expansion of Arthrex to develop their corporate
headquarters within the Creekside Commerce Park and the hotel will support the
corporate needs of Arthrex. The project is located at the intersection of two arterial
roadways and is located within ¼ mile of the North Naples Community Hospital.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The PUD is existing and the amendment will not create an isolated district.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
The proposed change does not affect the PUD boundary.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
Arthrex desires to construct a hotel that will be integrated into their campus
expansion on the west side of Goodlette-Frank Road. The current PUD does not
permit a hotel on the west side of Goodlette-Frank Road; therefore, the amendment
is necessary.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The proposed addition of hotel units will not adversely affect living conditions in the
neighborhood. The hotel will be developed at a height not to exceed the previously
approved zoned height of 50’ for parcels located west of Goodlette -Frank Road.
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD – PL20170000425
Exhibit 1
Evaluation Criteria
July 26, 2017 Page 5 of 7
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
There are not additional traffic impacts associated with the increased number of
hotel units due to the corresponding reduction of medical office square footage
within the PUD.
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 traffic analysis prepared in support of the PUD demonstrates that the proposed
PUD amendments are traffic neutral and that the previously approved trip cap will
remain as is.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
All proposed improvements will be required to be reviewed by the SFWMD as part
of an environmental resource permit, which includes a review of the surface water
management system to insure compliance with approved discharge rates for this
drainage basin.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
The changes will have no impact to light or air to adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area.
The proposed change should have no impact on property values on adjacent
property. All adjacent properties are zoned for commercial or industrial land use.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or
development of adjacent property in accordance with existing r egulations.
The proposed addition of hotel rooms within the PUD will not be a deterrent to the
improvement of adjacent property. The PUD contains many land uses which may
be developed on adjacent properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The applicant is a property owner within the PUD and has the authority to seek
amendments to their entitlements. Any property owner within the PUD has the
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD – PL20170000425
Exhibit 1
Evaluation Criteria
July 26, 2017 Page 6 of 7
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
authority to proposed amendments; therefore, there is no grant of special privilege
associated with the amendment.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in
accordance with existing zoning.
Arthrex is proposing to develop a hotel that will be incorporated into their corporate
campus at Creekside. Given the nature of their business operations, having a hotel
integrated into their campus will provide convenient access to hotel services for
corporate guests. Currently, the PUD does not permit a hotel on parcels located
west of Goodlette-Frank Road.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the county.
Arthrex has consistently increased their hotel room night stays in both Collier and
Lee Counties due to growth of the Company and the surgeons and suppliers
associated with the medical device manufacturing. The proposed number of hotel
rooms will provide the number of rooms that will significantly lessen the company’s
need to utilize non-local hotels to meet their corporate needs.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
While there are other sites located within Collier County that would permit
development of hotels, none are immediately adjacent to the new corporate
headquarters for Arthrex. Having the hotel integrated into the campus for Arthrex
will allow visiting surgeons and guests to be located within walking distance of the
training facilities located on campus, which will substantially reduce travel time and
lessen the reliance on shuttle services required for more remotely located hotels.
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.
The site has been previously cleared and filled and is suitable for the proposed hotel
use. The site currently permits a wide variety of commercial and industrial land
uses, many of which are more intense than the proposed hotel use.
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
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD – PL20170000425
Exhibit 1
Evaluation Criteria
July 26, 2017 Page 7 of 7
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 1 - Evaluation Criteria.docx
Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended.
A public facilities analysis has been prepared in support of this application. There
are no deficiencies anticipated with development of this use, and the PUD will
remain neutral with regard to transportation impacts.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners
shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare.
The PUD contains development standards and commitments, which will insure
the protection of the public health, safety and welfare.
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PUD
FLUE Policy 5.1 Consistency Analysis
July 7, 2017 Page 1 of 4
The property comprising a portion of the Creekside Commerce Park was formerly zoned
Industrial, and the Creekside PUD was deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan at
the time of rezoning via a Future Land Use Element policy permitting expansion of industrial
zoned property. Industrial zoning has historically been considered the most intense zoning
district from a land use perspective. Under the zoning re-evaluation program, the current
permitted uses on the property were deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan by
policy.
One of the proposed uses in the pending PUD amendment application is to add one additional
hotel/motel use. The Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict within the Growth
Management Plan and the Collier County Land Development Code do not permit a hotel/motel
use by right unless the property is within an activity center and is zoned C-4, zoned C-5 or is zoned
business park. A hotel/motel is allowed as a conditional use for on property zoned C-4 located
outside an activity center. However, Policy 5.1 of the Future Land Use Element provides for the
potential to revise existing commercial and/or industrial zoned properties to allow for a
hotel/motel use and be deemed consistent with the Growth Management Plan, provided that
the zoning district is the same or lower intensity commercial than currently exists, and the overall
intensity of development proposed does not exceed the intensity of existing uses.
The Collier County LDC has established a hierarchy of non-residential zoning districts based on
the intensities of land uses. The categories range from the lowest intensity professional office
(C-1) to heavy commercial (C-5) and industrial (I). Many of the heavy commercial and industrial
land uses permit various forms of manufacturing, fabrication, assembly and storage, which
because of their operational characteristics do have the potential to have greater impacts due to
noise, odor, and intensity.
With regard to zoning, the Creekside Commerce Park PUD is an existing project, which permits a
wide variety of general commercial, heavy commercial and industrial land uses. The proposed
hotel/motel use is a use that is permitted in both the C-4 (as a conditional use) and C-5
commercial zoning districts.
The Creekside PUD currently permits many uses that are also permitted in the C-4 and C-5 zoning
districts. Some of the uses more intense than those found in the C-4 zoning district and permitted
in Creekside include the following C-5 and Industrial land uses:
Building Construction-General Contractors and operative builder (1521-1542)
Concrete Work (1771)
Masonry, stonework, tile setting and plastering contractors (1741-1743)
Installation or erection of building equipment contractors (1796)
Fabricated metal products (3411-3479, 3491-3499)
Furniture and fixtures (2511-2599)
Leather and Leather products (3131-3199)
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PUD
FLUE Policy 5.1 Consistency Analysis
July 7, 2017 Page 2 of 4
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries (3911-3999, less certain specific industry sub-
groups)
Paper and allied products (2652-2657, 2673-2679
Plastic materials and synthetics (2833, 2834)
Printing, publishing and Allied Industries (2711-2791)
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products (3021, 3085, 3086, 3088, 3089)
Wholesale Trade Durable Goods (5021-5031, 5043-5049, 5063-5074, 5078, 5091)
Wholesale Trade Nondurable Goods (5111-5143, 5145, 5147-5149, 5192)
Medical laboratories and research and rehabilitative centers (8071-8092, 8099)
Based upon the current zoning allowing C-4 and C-5 type uses and the fact that C-4 zoning allows
a hotel as a conditional use and C-5 zoning allows a hotel/motel as a permitted use, the inclusion
of a hotel/motel is consistent with the intensity of uses cu rrently allowed under the Creekside
PUD. The Collier County Board of Commissioners previously determined that a hotel/motel use
is not a more intensive land use than those currently permitted in the PUD. Ordinance Number
2016-05 was approved, which added hotel/motel as a permitted use in the PUD and the County
Commissioners determined the use to be consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
The measure to determine if the requested use will impact the intensity of the project for prior
zoning actions has been a comparison of public facility impacts of the proposed use to that of
existing permitted land uses. To evaluate the impact of the proposed hotel/motel use on the
intensity of the project, we have prepared a comparison of the public facility impact s for the
proposed hotel/motel use based on the Class A public facilities, which include water/sewer, solid
waste, drainage, roads, and parks. The uses and square footages used for the comparative
analysis were based on estimated sizes of various permitted uses within the PUD, and generally
require a similar parcel size to accommodate the use. These uses also represent a comparable
or higher intensity user of public facilities.
Drainage
The surface water management system for the Creekside PUD has been designed, permitted and
constructed in accordance with criteria of the South Florida Water Management District based
on a 25 year, 3 day storm event. The project has been divided into separate water management
basins, which have specified discharge rates from the site based on assumed impervious
coverage ranging from 60% to 79% of an individual site. Any proposed land use within the
Creekside PUD will be required to meet these permit conditions. The potential construction of a
hotel/motel within the Creekside PUD will be required to meet these same existing permit
conditions. The amendment has no impact to drainage.
Roads
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PUD
FLUE Policy 5.1 Consistency Analysis
July 7, 2017 Page 3 of 4
An extensive Traffic Analysis has been prepared in support of the PUD amendment, which
concludes that with the corresponding reduction of medical office square footage within the
PUD, the addition of up to 169 hotel rooms will be traffic neutral, compared to the existing PUD.
Water/Sewer
Zoned Use: 29,900 sq. ft. Medical Office
Use rate: 0.62 gallons/day/sq. ft.
Daily water/sewer use: 29,900 sq. ft. x 0.62 = 18,538 gpd
Proposed Use: 169 Room Hotel/Motel
Use rate: 100 gallons/room/day
Daily water/sewer use: 169 rooms x 100 g/r/d = 16,900 gpd
Source: Maryland DEP 2005, Guidelines for Estimating water/wastewater flow
The proposed 169-room hotel/motel use addition generates less water and sewer demand than
a medical office use, which is a permitted use within the PUD.
Solid Waste
Zoned Use: 29,900 sq. ft. Medical Office
Use rate: 0.084 sq. ft. /day
Daily waste: 0.084 x 29,900 = 2,511 pounds/day
Proposed Use: 169 Room Hotel/Motel
Use rate: 2 pounds/room/day
Daily waste: 169 x 2 = 3338 pounds/day
Source: calrecycle.ca.gov
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PUD
FLUE Policy 5.1 Consistency Analysis
July 7, 2017 Page 4 of 4
Parks/Recreation
Zoned Use: Industrial, Office, Commercial
Use rate: None
Daily use: None
Proposed Use: 169 Room Hotel/Motel
Use Rate: $0 parks impact fees/room
Use payment: 169 x $0 = $0
Source: Collier County Impact Fee Schedule
The proposed hotel/motel does not create an impact on community and regional parks.
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD
Deviation Justifications
February 6, 2018 Page 1 of 2
CPUDA2017 Deviation Justifications-v1.docx
Deviation 1 (I/C and B Districts): Approved Ordinance 13-23
Deviation 2 (B District): Approved Ordinance 16-05
Deviation 2 (I/C District): Approved Ordinance 16-32
Revised 10-12-2017, see underlined text
Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.08, Deviations and alternate compliance, which
authorizes the County Manager or designee to administratively approve deviations from
compliance with Section 5.05.08 of the LDC for specific types of buildings, to allow
general office and medical office, hotel and physical fitness facilities that can be
constructed on Tract 5 and 6 of the Master Plan to be eligible for this deviation process.
Deviation 3 (I/C District):
New Deviation, see Section 3.5.3 of the PUD.
Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.4., Type D Buffer, which requires a
10’ wide Type D buffer adjacent to rights of way, with trees spaced no more than 30’ on
center, to permit the existing street trees planted along the west side of Creekside Street
to satisfy the minimum Type D buffer tree requirement of the eastern boundary of Tract
5.
Justification for Deviation 3 (I/C District):
This buffer deviation is warranted due to the adjacent FPL and Collier County easements
located just west of Creekside Street. Placement of required buffer trees is encumbered,
requiring the use of smaller trees, limited in size per FPL, and tree locations to be shifted
farther into the site due to Collier utility easements. The existing mature trees are ideally
located to provide an alternative to the typical buffer requirement, provide for the
Streetscape enhancement, and pose no conflict with existing utilities, while meeting the
intent of the landscape buffer requirement. Creekside Street is a private street and is
owned and maintained by the Creekside Property Owner’s Association.
Deviation 3 (B District):
Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08, Deviations and alternate compliance,
which authorizes the County Manager or designee to administratively approve deviations
from compliance with Section 5.05.08 of the LDC for specific types of buildings, to allow
general office and medical office, hotel and physical fitness facilities that can be
constructed on the southern portion of Tract 3 of the Master P lan to be eligible for this
deviation process.
Justification for Deviation 3 (I/C District and B District):
Creekside Commerce Park PUD contains provisions for exceptions from the County’s
Architectural and Site Design standards for industrial type buildings internal to the site.
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD
Deviation Justifications
February 6, 2018 Page 2 of 2
CPUDA2017 Deviation Justifications-v1.docx
The requested deviation from the Collier County Architectural and Site Design Standards
applies only to Tract 5, 6 and southern portion of Tract 3, which is internal to the site and
more than 300’ from Immokalee Road and more than 500’ from the southern boundary of
the PUD where abutting the Bay Colony Golf Course. The applicant intends to construct
a new multi-story signature building that will house engineering research and product
development functions, and administrative functions for Arthrex, which is a global medical
equipment and supply manufacturer. The Arthrex complex will also include a hotel and
accessory physical fitness facility, which are intended to be developed with a
complimentary architectural design to the headquarter building. The architectural
standards found in the LDC do not adequately address a scenario in which a modern
signature multi-story headquarters building would be constructed. The required massing
and transitional elements that require numerous façade off -sets and transitions is
impractical for a multi-story building of the type proposed for the property.
The LDC does provide for the BCC to grant exceptions to the architectural standards
where it is demonstrated that the exceptions are warranted for innovative design. The
proposed signature Arthrex building, hotel and accessory physical fitness facility will be a
custom architectural design, which will express, through its architectural design, the
unique nature of this international company and its corporate presence in medical
research and product development in Collier County.
GradyMinor Civil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCERT. OF AUTH. EB 0005151CERT. OF AUTH. LB 0005151BUSINESS LC 26000266Bonita Springs239.947.1144Fort Myers239.690.4380www.GradyMinor.com Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.IMMOKALEE ROADGOODLETTE-FRANK ROADTRACT 6I/C
Traffic Impact Analysis
Creekside Commerce Park
Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD)
Amendment
Collier County, FL
07/07/2017
Prepared for: Prepared by:
Barron Collier Companies Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA
2600 Golden Gate Parkway 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202
Naples, FL 34105 Naples, FL 34110
Phone: 239.262.2600 Phone: 239.566.9551
Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 2
Statement of Certification
I certify that this Traffic Impact Analysis has been prepared by me or under my immediate
supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation
Engineering.
Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E.
FL Registration No. 47116
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA
1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202
Naples, FL 34110
Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 3
Table of Contents
Project Description .............................................................................................................. 4
Trip Generation ................................................................................................................... 6
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 8
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan ................................................................................. 9
Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) ....................................... 11
Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition ............................................... 16
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 4
Project Description
The Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) project is
located in north Naples on the south side of Immokalee Road (CR 846), and straddles
Goodlette-Frank Road (CR 851). The project is approximately 106 acres in size.
Refer to Fig. 1 – Project Location Map, which follows. The proposed master site plan is
illustrated in Appendix A.
Fig. 1 – Project Location Map
Consistent with the approved Collier County Ordinance #16-32 the site is currently allowed to
be developed with up to 400 beds Assisted Living Facility; 180 rooms Hotel; 716,000sf of
Industrial/Commercial District uses and 292,000sf of Business District uses.
In addition, the approved ordinance establishes the maximum trip generation allowed by the
proposed uses, both primary and ancillary, may not exceed 2,045 PM Peak Hour, two-way
external trips, per approved TIS dated 09-16-2016.
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 5
A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on June
19, 2017 via email (refer to Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting).
The approved development program associated with these land uses is shown in Table 1A,
Existing Approved and Built Development.
Table 1A
Existing Approved and Built Development
ITE Land Use
(Zoning Designation)
ITE Land Use
Code Approved Size Built to Date
Size
Remaining to be Built Size
(and by % to be built)
Mini-Warehouse (I/C) 151 151,130 sf 151,130 sf 0 sf (0%)
Assisted Living (B) 254 400 beds 126 beds 274 beds (68.5%)
Hotel (B) 310 180 rooms 0 rooms 180 rooms (100%)
General Office Bldg. (B, I/C) 710 9,000 sf 8,976 sf 24 sf (0%)
Medical-Dental Office Bldg.
(B, I/C) 720 263,000 sf 119,402 sf 143,598 sf (54.60%)
Business Park (I/C) 770 535,000 sf 307,668 sf 227,332 sf (42.49%)
Shopping Center (B) 820 49,870 sf 47,803 sf 2,067 sf (4.14%)
Note: Zoning designations—B = Business; I/C = Industrial/Commercial as depicted on Master Site Plan.
Under the proposed Creekside Commerce Park PUD amendment, the development will
continue to be developed as a mixed-use project as shown in Table 1B, Proposed
Development Program.
Table 1B
Proposed Development Program
Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size
Mini-Warehouse (I/C) 151 151,130 sf
Assisted Living (B) 254 400 beds
Hotel (B) 310 349 rooms
General Office Bldg. (B, I/C) 710 9,000 sf
Medical-Dental Office Bldg. (B, I/C) 720 233,100 sf
Business Park (I/C) 770 535,000 sf
Shopping Center (B) 820 49,870sf
Note: Zoning designations – B = Business; I/C = Industrial/Commercial as depicted on Master Site
Plan
Accesses to the site are currently provided consistent with the proposed PUD Master Site Plan
as shown in Appendix A. No new PUD connections and no changes to the existing approved
accesses are requested as part of this rezone amendment application.
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 6
Trip Generation
The project provides the highest and best use scenario with respect to the project’s proposed
trip generation. The project’s site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, and the software program OTISS (Online
Traffic Impact Study Software, most current version). The ITE rates and equations are used for
the trip generation calculations, as applicable. The ITE – OTISS trip generation calculation
worksheets are provided in Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 9th Edition.
The estimated trip generation based on the approved ordinance conditions is shown in
Table 2A. The proposed PUD amendment projected traffic generation is illustrated in Table 2B.
The net new trip generation (Table 2C) shows total proposed conditions versus existing
allowed (the difference between Table 2B and Table 2A).
The internal capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction
between the multiple land uses in a site. Per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the
internal capture trips should be reasonable and should not exceed 20% of the total project
trips.
For this project, the software program OTISS is used to generate associated internal capture
trips. The OTISS process follows the trip balancing approach as recommended in the ITE Trip
Generation Manual, 9th Edition (Volume 1): User’s Guide and Handbook, Chapter 7 –
procedure for estimating multi-use trip generation internal capture, aka “triangle method”.
The resulting internal capture rates are below the county limits.
The pass-by trips account for traffic that is already on the external roadway network and stops
at the project on the way to a primary trip destination.
Per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the pass-by capture for shopping centers (LUC
820) should not exceed 25% for the peak hour. The daily capture rate is assumed to be 10%
lower than the peak hour rate.
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 7
Table 2A
Trip Generation (Approved PUD Conditions) – Average Weekday
Development
24 Hour
Two-Way
Volume
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
Unadjusted 23,768 1,331 365 1,696 772 1,581 2,353
Internal Capture 2,772 47 47 94 154 154 308
External Traffic 20,996 1,284 318 1,602 618 1,427 2,045
Pass-By Capture 478 10 6 16 28 34 62
Net External Traffic 20,518 1,274 312 1,586 590 1,393 1,983
Table 2B
Trip Generation (Proposed PUDA Conditions) – Average Weekday
Development
24 Hour
Two-Way
Volume
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
Unadjusted 24,195 1,340 397 1,737 800 1,564 2,364
Internal Capture 2,864 49 49 98 160 160 320
External Traffic 21,331 1,291 348 1,639 640 1,404 2,044
Pass-By Capture 478 10 6 16 28 33 61
Net External Traffic 20,853 1,281 342 1,623 612 1,371 1,983
In agreement with the Collier County TIS guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are
identified consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information
contained within the Collier County Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour
for adjacent roadway network is PM.
Table 2C
Trip Generation (New Net External Traffic) – Average Weekday
Development Net External Traffic – PM Peak Hour
Enter Exit Total
Proposed PUDA 612 1,371 1,983
Approved PUD 590 1,393 1,983
Approved PUDA Net New
Increase/(Decrease) 22 (-22) 0
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 8
In addition, projected trip generation for the existing built conditions is illustrated in Table 2D.
Table 2D
Trip Generation (Existing Built Conditions) – Average Weekday
Development
24 Hour
Two-Way
Volume
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total
Unadjusted 13,278 699 180 879 454 908 1,362
Internal Capture 1,122 30 30 60 89 89 178
External Traffic 12,156 669 150 819 365 819 1,184
Pass-By Capture 564 12 7 19 32 40 72
Net External Traffic 11,592 657 143 800 333 779 1,112
Conclusion
As illustrated in Table 2C, from a traffic stand point, the proposed rezone development scenario
does not exceed the maximum allowed traffic cap under current zoning conditions.
A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of site
development permitting/platting to determine operational requirements, as applicable.
Based on the results of this analysis, the development shall be limited to 2,045 two-way PM
weekday peak hour external trips, allowing for unforeseen impacts on the adjacent roadway
network. Please note that for the purposes of calculation of the weekday PM peak hour trip
generation of this project, the most current ITE Trip Generation Manual shall be utilized.
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 9
Appendix A: Project Master Site Plan
(1 Sheet)
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 10
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 11
Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist
(Methodology Meeting)
(4 Sheets)
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 12
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 13
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 14
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 15
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 16
Appendix C: Trip Generation Calculations
ITE 9th Edition
(39 Sheets)
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 17
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 18
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 19
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 20
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 21
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 22
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 23
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 24
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 25
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 26
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 27
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 28
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 29
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 30
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 31
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 32
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 33
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 34
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 35
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 36
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 37
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 38
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 39
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 40
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 41
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 42
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 43
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 44
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 45
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 46
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 47
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 48
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 49
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 50
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 51
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 52
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 53
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 54
Creekside Commerce Park – CPUD Amendment – Traffic Impact Analysis – July 2017
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 55
ORDINANCE NO. 16- 3 2
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 2006-50, THE CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK
COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD), AS
AMENDED, BY INCREASING THE ALLOWABLE SQUARE
FOOTAGE IN THE INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT BY
166,000 SQUARE FEET FOR A TOTAL OF 716,000 SQUARE FEET OF
GROSS FLOOR AREA OF INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE USES AND
INCREASING THE ACREAGE FROM 41.6 TO 49.90 NET ACRES; BY
AMENDING THE BUSINESS DISTRICT TO INCREASE THE
ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF FLOOR AREA FROM 260,000
SQUARE FEET TO 292,000 SQUARE FEET INCLUDING FROM
200,000 SQUARE FEET TO 242,000 SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE USES
AND FROM 60,000 TO 50,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL USES; BY
AMENDING THE INDUSTRIAL COMMERCE DISTRICT TO
ALLOW PARCELS WEST OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD TO
INCREASE THE ZONED HEIGHT FROM 35 FEET TO 50 FEET
EXCEPT FOR TRACT 5 ON THE MASTER PLAN WHICH SHALL
HAVE A ZONED HEIGHT OF 104 AND ACTUAL HEIGHT OF 122
FEET; BY AMENDING THE BUSINESS DISTRICT TO ALLOW
TRACT 9 ON THE MASTER PLAN EAST OF GOODLETTE FRANK
ROAD TO INCREASE THE ZONED HEIGHT TO 75 FEET AND
ACTUAL HEIGHT TO 85 FEET; BY INCREASING THE OVERALL
FLOOR AREA RATIO FROM .35 TO .45; BY REDUCING THE
PRESERVE REQUIREMENT AND BY ADDING A DEVIATION TO
ALLOW A PORTION OF THE PRESERVE TO BE OFF-SITE; BY
ADDING A DEVIATION TO ALLOW TRACT 5 ON THE MASTER
PLAN TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE COUNTY'S ARCHITECTURAL
DEVIATION PROCESS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED
SOUTH OF IMMOKALEE ROAD AND BOTH EAST AND WEST OF
GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD IN SECTION 27, TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CONSISTING OF 106 ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE. [PUDA-PL20160001865]
WHEREAS, on October 24, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners approved
Ordinance Number 06-50, the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit
Development(the "PUD"); and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners approved
Ordinance Number 13-23, which amended the PUD; and
16-CPS-01581] 155
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD 1 of 2
PUDA-PL20160001865—10/13/16
WHEREAS, on March 22, 2016, the Board of County Commissioners approved
Ordinance Number 16-05, which further amended the PUD; and
WHEREAS, Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.,
and D. Wayne Arnold of Q. Grady Minor& Associates representing Arthrex, Inc., petitioned the
Board of County Commissioners to amend the CPUD.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: Amendment to the CPUD Document of Ordinance No. 2006-50, as
amended
The CPUD Document attached as Exhibit"A" to Ordinance No. 2006-50, as amended, is
hereby amended to read as follows:
See Exhibit"A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this o1.
51f'
day of OCw be./ 2016.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DWIGH i E. BROCK'CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Attest asn)
rk DO A FIALA, Chairwoman
ppeApprov' e assts tin an legality:
A,
eidi Ashton-Cicko o° This ordinanco fikcl w h ti,
Managing Assistant County Attorney Secre ery of S at 's Office the
d ,y. of Oaf-, o'-O Oa
end acknowied ;:3-men rif thcit
Attachments: Exhibit A—CPUD Document filing received ; ; day
of 'OW• , dolb
16-CPS-01581] 155 g C2 L..,,,`t:
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD 2 of 2 OewN Cls;k
PUDA-PL20160001865-10/13/16
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK
A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
PREPARED FOR
BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK
A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
106± Acres Located in Section 27
Township 48 South, Range 25 East
Collier County, Florida
PREPARED FOR:
BARRON COLLIER PARTNERSHIP
2640 Golden Gate Parkway,Naples,FL 34105
PREPARED BY:
WILSON, MILLER, BARTON&PEEK, INC.
3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200,Naples, Florida 34105
YOUNG,VAN ASSENDERP &VARNADOE,P.A.
801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 300,Naples,Florida 34101
AMENDED DECEMBER 2005 BY:
Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Spring,Florida 34134
ROETZEL AND ANDRESS, L.P.A.
850 Park Shore Drive, 3rd Floor,Naples, Florida 34103
AMENDED MAY 2012 BY:
Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Spring, Florida 34134
COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH AND KOESTER, P.A.
Northern Trust Bank Building
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300,Naples, FL 34103
AMENDED AUGUST 2015 and JULY 2016 BY:
Q. GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Spring, Florida 34134
COLEMAN,YOVANOVICH AND KOESTER,P.A.
Northern Trust Bank Building
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300,Naples, FL 34103
Words struele-through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment October 27, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE AND SHORT TITLE
SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION,PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, & 1-1
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
SECTION II COMMERCE PARK DEVELOPMENT 2-1
2.1 Purpose
2.2 General Description Of The Park and Proposed Land Uses
2.3 Compliance With County Ordinances
2.4 Community Development District
2.5 Land Uses
2.6 Lake Siting
2.7 Fill Storage
2.8 Use Of Right-Of-Way
2.9 Sales Office and Construction Office
2.10 Changes and Amendments To PUD Document Or PUD Master Plan
2.11 Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phasing
2.12 Open Space and Native Vegetation Retention Requirements
2.13 Surface Water Management
2.14 Environmental
2.15 Utilities
2.16 Transportation
2.17 Common Area Maintenance
2.18 Design Guidelines and Standards
2.19 Landscape Buffers, Berms, Fences and Walls
2.20 Signage
2.21 General Permitted Uses
SECTION III INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE DISTRICT 3-1
SECTION IV BUSINESS DISTRICT 4-1
SECTION V PRESERVE AREA 5-1
EXHIBIT A AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH, LOCATION MAP
WMB&P File No. RZ-255A)
EXHIBIT B CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT B-1 CROSS SECTIONS (ENLARGED)
EXHIBIT C CONCEPTUAL BUILDING RENDERING
Words sf-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment i October 27, 2016
CN
c;
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
The purpose of this section is to express the intent of the Barron Collier Partnership, hereinafter
referred to as Barron Collier or the Developer, to create a Planned Unit Development (PUD) on
106± acres of land located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,
Florida. The name of this Planned Unit Development shall be Creekside Commerce Park. The
development of Creekside Commerce Park will be in substantial compliance with the planning
goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the Growth Management Plan. The
development will be consistent with the policies and land development regulations adopted
thereunder of the Growth Management Plan Future Land Use Element and other applicable
regulations for the following reasons:
1.The subject property is within the Urban Mixed Use District as identified on the Future Land
Use Map which allows certain industrial and commercial uses. The Urban designation also
allows support medical facilities, offices, clinics, treatment, research and rehabilitative
centers and pharmacies provided they are located within 1/4 mile of the property boundary
of an existing or approved hospital or medical center. The Creekside Commerce Park PUD
is located within '/4 mile of the North Collier Hospital. The 2016 petition request is to add
166,000 square feet to the I/C District and 32,000 square feet to the B District. All
additional square footage approved in the October 2016 Ordinance amendment will be
medical related uses, and will be on Tracts that are within or partially within 1/4 mile of the
North Collier Hospital property.
2.The existing Industrial zoning is considered consistent with the Future Land Use Element
FLUE) as provided for by Policy 5.9 and 5.11 of the FLUE.
3.The FLUE Urban-Industrial District allows for expansion of the industrial land use provided
the rezone is in the form of a PUD, the site is adjacent to existing land designated or zoned
industrial the land use is compatible with adjacent land uses and the necessary infrastructure
is provided or in place. Creekside Commerce Park has expanded the industrial land use
accordingly.
4.The FLUE Urban-Industrial District requires the uses along the boundaries of the project to
be transitional. Creekside Commerce Park has included transitional uses accordingly.
5.Creekside Commerce Park is compatible with and complementary to existing and future
surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the FLUE.
6.Improvements are planned to be in substantial compliance with applicable land development
regulations as set forth in Objective 3 of the FLUE.
7.The development of Creekside Commerce Park will result in an efficient and economical
extension of community facilities and services as required in Policies 3.1.H and L of the
FLUE.
Words k thr-eugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment ii October 27, 2016
CAC,
8.Creekside Commerce Park is a master planned, deed-restricted commerce park and is
planned to encourage ingenuity, innovation and imagination as set forth in the Collier
County Land Development Code (LDC), Planned Unit Development District.
9.This master planned park will incorporate elements from the existing Industrial, Business
Park and Industrial PUD sections of the LDC.
Words smuelfthrough are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment iii October 27, 2016
LC
SHORT TITLE
This ordinance shall be known and cited as the "CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE".
Words struekf-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment iv October 27, 2016
VAc
SECTION I
LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP, AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this section is to set forth the legal description and ownership of
Creekside Commerce Park, and to describe the existing condition of the property
proposed to be developed.
1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION
All that part of Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida
being more particularly described as follows;
COMMENCING at the northwest corner of said Section 27;
thence along the north line of said Section 27 South 89°45'21" East 1869.61 feet;
thence leaving said line South 00°14'39"West 125.00 feet to a point on the south right of
way line of Immokalee Road (S.R. 846) and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel
herein described;
thence along said right of way line in the following Six (6) described courses;
1) South 89°45'21" East 485.99 feet;
2) South 00°14'39"West 10.00 feet;
3) South 89°45'21" East 150.19 feet;
4) South 89°48'33" East 716.81 feet;
5)North 05°34'33"West 10.05 feet;
6) South 89°48'33" East 486.21 feet to a point on the west right of way line of Goodlette
Road as recorded in Plat Book 3, page 58, Public Records of Collier County, Florida;
thence along said line South 05°33'48" East 1767.02 feet;
thence leaving said line South 89°20'53"West 51.18 feet;
thence North 23°55'53" West 13.07 feet;
thence northwesterly, 30.71 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the
northeast, having a radius of 80.00 feet, through a central angle of 21°59'52" and being
subtended by a chord which bears North 12°55'57"West 30.53 feet;
thence North 05°00'53" West 31.56 feet;
thence North 36°19'20" West 32.02 feet;
thence North 56°04'35" West 35.11 feet;
thence North 80°39'15" West 32.53 feet;
thence North 88°39'12" West 97.78 feet;
thence North 86°04'40" West 45.79 feet;
thence North 89°49'48" West 132.77 feet;
thence North 69°40'10" West 37.23 feet;
thence South 89°20'53" West 142.47 feet;
thence South 84°59'26" West 24.66 feet;
thence South 74°56'50" West 121.32 feet;
thence South 79°49'59" West 45.93 feet;
thence westerly and northwesterly, 45.51 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to
the northeast, having a radius of 66.00 feet, through a central angle of 39°30'16" and
Words struck gh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 1-1 October 27, 2016
being subtended by a chord which bears North 80°24'53"West 44.61 feet to a point of
compound curvature;
thence northwesterly, 52.92 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the
southwest, having a radius of 150.00 feet, through a central angle of 20°12'57" and being
subtended by a chord which bears North 70°46'13" West 52.65 feet;
thence North 80°52'42" West 36.59 feet;
thence westerly and southwesterly, 46.18 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to
the southeast, having a radius of 80.00 feet, through a central angle of 33°04'14" and
being subtended by a chord which bears South 82°35'11"West 45.54 feet to a point of
compound curvature;
thence southwesterly and westerly, 38.16 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to
the northwest, having a radius of 60.00 feet, through a central angle of 36°26'19" and
being subtended by a chord which bears South 84°16'14" West 37.52 feet to a point of
compound curvature;
thence westerly and northwesterly, 68.85 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to
the southwest, having a radius of 305.00 feet, through a central angle of 12°55'59" and
being subtended by a chord which bears North 83°58'36"West 68.70 feet;
thence South 89°33'25" West 18.36 feet;
thence South 89°39'19" West 71.63 feet;
thence North 89°34'56" West 36.03 feet;
thence South 86°06'41"West 42.94 feet;
thence South 83°44'16" West 26.23 feet;
thence South 51°01'13" West 27.49 feet;
thence South 33°25'50" West 19.95 feet;
thence South 15°40'05" West 20.54 feet;
thence South 10°54'39" West 34.64 feet;
thence South 89°20'14" West 101.06 feet;
thence North 10°46'06" East 101.42 feet;
thence North 89°20'53" East 65.45 feet;
thence North 00°39'07" West 100.64 feet;
thence South 89°20'53" West 503.78 feet;
thence North 00°39'07" West 27.71 feet;
thence North 72°58'55" West 131.30 feet;
thence North 02°08'56" West 1473.29 feet to a point on the south right of way line of
said Immokalee Road (S.R. 846) and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel herein
described;
Containing 69.48 acres more or less;
Subject to easements and restrictions of record.
Bearings are assumed and based on the north line of said Section 27 being South
89°49'40" East.
All that part of Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida
being more particularly described as follows;
Commencing at the northeast corner of said Section 27;
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 1-2 October 27, 2016
thence along the east line of said Section 27, South 01°09'43" East 125.00 feet to a point
on the south right of way line of Immokalee Road (S.R. 846) and the POINT OF
BEGINNING of the parcel herein described;
thence continue along said east line South 01°09'43" East 1189.62 feet;
thence leaving said line South 89°48'50"West 677.35 feet;
thence South 05°35'39" East 886.02 feet;
thence South 89°48'50" West 400.00 feet to a point on the easterly right of way line of
Goodlette Frank Road as Recorded in Plat Book 13, page 58, Public records of Collier
County, Florida;
thence along said line North 05°35'39"West 2088.10 feet to a point of the south right of
way line of said Immokalee Road (S.R. 846);
thence along said line South 89°49'40" East 1168.55 feet;
thence continue along said line South 89°12'58" East 1.85 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING of the parcel herein described;
Containing 38.9 acres more or less;
Subject to easements and restrictions of record.
Bearings are assumed and based on the north line of said Section 27 being South
89°46'26" East.
LESS
A PORTION OF TRACTS "R" AND "L1" CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT
ONE AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 29 AT PAGES 57 THROUGH 58 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGIN AT THE NORTHWESTERLYMOST CORNER OF TRACT "R" (CREEKSIDE WAY)
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 29
AT PAGES 57 THROUGH 58 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89°45'00" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY
OF IMMOKALEE ROAD FOR A DISTANCE OF 249.45 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH
00°25'51" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 107.22 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 60°02'56"
EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 117.20 FEET; THENCE RUN SOUTH 82°32'14" EAST FOR A
DISTANCE OF 119.17 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF TRACT "L1" OF SAID
CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE, ALSO BEING THE WES LINE OF
LOT 3 OF SAID CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST-UNIT ONE; THENCE RUN
SOUTH 00°07'39" EAST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE FOR A DISTANCE OF 111.93 FEET
TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID TRACT "R"; THENCE RUN
NORTH 89°58'01" WEST, ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A DISTANCE OF
456.64 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY OF SAID TRACT "R";
THENCE RUN NORTH 02°19'57" WEST, ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A
DISTANCE OF 294.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; CONTAINING 2.32
ACRES,MORE OR LESS.
Words 547auek-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 1-3 October 27, 2016
1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
The subject property is currently under the equitable ownership or control of Barron
Collier Partnership, or its assigns, whose address is 2640 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples,
FL 34105.
1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
A. The project site is located in Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, and
is generally bordered on the west by Agriculturally zoned and developed
property; on the north, across Immokalee Road by office and medical (North
Collier Hospital) PUD zoned and developed property; on the east by Medical
Office Park currently under development, County Park and County Wastewater
Treatment Facility; and on the south by PUD and County Wastewater Treatment
Facility. The location of the site is shown on Exhibit A Aerial Photograph,
Location Map.
B. The zoning classification of the subject property at the time of PUD application is
I (Industrial) and A (Agricultural).
C. Elevations within the site are approximately 7.5 to 9 feet-NGVD. Per FEMA
Firm Map Panels No. 1200670193D, dated June 3, 1986, the Creekside
Commerce Park property is located within Zones "AE-11" of the FEMA flood
insurance rate. Topographic mapping is shown on Exhibit G.
D. The soil types on the site generally include Riviera limestone substratum,
Copeland fine sand, Pineda fine sand, Immokalee fine sand, Myakka fine sand,
Basinger fine sand, Riveria fine sand, Ft. Drum and Malabar fine sand, and
Satellite fine sand. a
Exhibit D.
E. Prior to development, vegetation on the site primarily consists of active croplands
and small amounts of pine flatwoods. An isolated wetland system is located
along the south side of Immokalee Road west of Goodlette-Frank Road. This
wetland consists primarily of Brazilian pepper that surrounds a small willow area.
The wetland on the east side of Goodlette-Frank Road consists primarily of
cabbage palms. A portion of the historic water course within this wetland has
been channelized. Brazilian pepper has infested the northern part of this wetland.
F. The project site is located within the Pine Ridge Canal and West Branch
Cocohatchee River sub-basins, as depicted within the Collier County Drainage
Atlas (July, 1995). The Conceptual Stormwater Management Master Plan is
shown on Exhibit H.
Words s k-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 1-4 October 27, 2016
1.5 DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT
Creekside Commerce Park does not meet the minimum thresholds for a Development of
Regional Impact (DRI), pursuant to Chapter 380.06, Florida Statutes, 44972016, in that it
is at or below 80% of all numerical thresholds in the guidelines and standards set forth
therein.
Words stFucle-through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 1-5 October 27, 2016
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to generally describe the plan of development for
Creekside Commerce Park (park), and to identify relationships to applicable County
ordinances, policies, and procedures.
2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PARK AND PROPOSED LAND USES
A. Creekside Commerce Park will consist of predominately industrial, warehouse,
wholesale, financial institutions, business and office uses, with limited amounts of
retail uses. Creekside Commerce Park shall establish project-wide guidelines and
standards to ensure a high and consistent level of quality for proposed features
and facilities.
B. The Master Plan is illustrated graphically on Exhibit B (WMB&P, Inc. File No.
RZ 225B). A Land Use Summary indicating approximate land use acreages is
shown on the Master plan. The location, size, and configuration of individual
tracts shall be determined at the time of Preliminary Subdivision Plat approval
with minor adjustments at the time of Final Plat approval, in accordance with
Section 3.2.7.2. of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC).
2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES
A. Regulations for development of Creekside Commerce Park shall be in accordance
with the contents of this PUD Ordinance, and to the extent they are not
inconsistent with this PUD Ordinance, applicable sections of the LDC and Collier
County Growth Management Plan which are in effect at the time of issuance of
any development order. Where this PUD Ordinance does not provide
developmental standards, then the provisions of the specific section of the LDC
that is otherwise applicable shall apply to which said regulations relate.
B. Unless otherwise defined herein, or as necessarily implied by context, the
definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in
effect at the time of development order application.
C. Development permitted by the approval of this PUD will be subject to the
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, Division 3.15 of the LDC.
D. All conditions imposed herein or as represented on the Creekside Commerce Park
Master Plan are part of the regulations which govern the manner in which the land
may be developed.
Words Laugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPDD Amendment 2-1 October 27, 2016
E. The Site Development Plans Division of the LDC (Article 3, Division 3.3) shall
apply to Creekside Commerce Park, except where an exemption is set forth herein
or otherwise granted pursuant to LDC Section 3.3.4.
F. The Developer shall submit to the County an annual PUD monitoring report in
accordance with LDC Section 2.7.3.6.
2.4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
A. The Developer may elect to establish a Community Development District (CDD)
pursuant to Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, 1997, to provide and maintain
infrastructure and community facilities needed to serve the park. A CDD would
constitute a timely, efficient, effective, responsive and economic way to ensure
the provision of facilities and infrastructure for the proposed development. Such
infrastructure as may be constructed, managed and financed by the CDD shall be
subject to, and shall not be inconsistent with, the Collier County Growth
Management Plan and all applicable ordinances dealing with planning and
permitting of Creekside Commerce Park.
B. The land area is amenable to infrastructure provision by a district that has the
powers set forth in the charter of a Community Development District under
Section 190.006 through 190.041, Florida Statutes. Such a district is a legitimate
alternative available both to the County and to the landowner for the timely and
sustained provision of quality infrastructure under the terms and conditions of
County development approval.
2.5 LAND USES
A. The location of land uses are shown on the PUD Master Plan, Exhibit B. Changes
and variations in building tracts, location and acreage of these uses shall be
permitted at preliminary subdivision plat approval, preliminary site development
plan approval and final site development plan approval to accommodate utilities,
topography, vegetation, and other site and market conditions, subject to the
provisions of Section 2.7.3.5. of the Collier County LDC. The specific location
and size of individual tracts and the assignment of square footage or units shall be
determined at the time of site development plan approval.
B. Roads and other infrastructure may be either public, private or a combination of
public and private, depending on location, design and purpose. The request for a
road to be public shall be made by the Developer at the time of final subdivision
plat approval. The Developer or its assignees shall be responsible for maintaining
the roads, streets, drainage, common areas, water and sewer improvements where
such systems are not dedicated to the County. Standards for roads shall be in
compliance with the applicable provisions of the County Code regulating
subdivisions, unless otherwise approved during subdivision approval. The
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-2 October 27, 2016
10,
Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to Code design standards in
accordance with Section 3.2.7.2. of the LDC.
2.6 LAKE SITING
A. As depicted on the PUD Master Plan, lakes have been preliminary sited. The goal
of this Master Plan is to achieve an overall aesthetic character for the park, to
permit optimum use of the land, and to increase the efficiency of the water
management network. Fill material from lakes is planned to be utilized within the
park; however, excess fill material may be utilized off-site. The volume of
material to be removed shall be limited to ten percent of the calculated excavation
volume to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards. If the applicant wishes to take more
off-site, a commercial excavation permit will be required. Final lake area
determination shall be in accordance with the South Florida Water Management
District stormwater criteria and Section 3.5.7. of the LDC.
1.Setbacks: Excavations shall be located so that the control elevation shall
adhere to the following minimum setback requirements, subject to
approval of County staff at time of final construction plan approval:
a) Twenty feet (20') from right-of-way of internal roads. The roads
will be designed to (AASHTO) road standards and shall
incorporate such factors as road alignment, travel speed, bank
slope, road cross sections, and need for barriers.
b) Forty feet (40') from Immokalee Road or Goodlette-Frank Road
rights-of-way. Perimeter property lines will have a setback of
twenty feet (20'). The roads will be designed to (AASHTO) road
standards and shall incorporate such factors as road alignment,
travel speed, bank slope, road cross sections and need for barriers.
2.7 FILL STORAGE
A. Fill storage is generally permitted as a principal use throughout the Creekside
Commerce Park PUD. Fill material generated from properties owned or leased by
the Developer may be transported and stockpiled within areas which have been
disturbed. Prior to stockpiling in these locations, the Developer shall notify the
Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator per Section
3.2.8.3.6. of the LDC. The following standards shall apply:
1.Stockpile maximum height: Thirty-five feet (35')
2.Fill storage areas in excess of five feet (5') in height shall be separated
from developed areas by fencing, excavated water bodies or other physical
barriers if the side slope of the stockpile is steeper than 4 to 1 (i.e. 3 to 1).
Words k-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-3 October 27, 2016
a)Soil erosion control shall be provided in accordance with LDC
Division 3.7.
2.8 USE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY
Utilization of lands within all park rights-of-way for landscaping, decorative entrance
ways, and signage shall be allowed subject to review and administrative approval by the
Developer and the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator
for engineering and safety considerations during the development review process.
2.9 SALES OFFICE AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICE
Sales offices, construction offices, and other uses and structures related to the promotion
and sale of real estate such as, but not limited to, pavilions, parking areas, and signs, shall
be permitted principal uses throughout Creekside Commerce Park. These uses may be
either wet or dry facilities. These uses shall be subject to the requirements of Section
2.6.33.4., Section 3.2.6.3.6. and Division 3.3 of the LDC, with the exception that the
temporary use permit shall be valid through the life of the project with no extension of
the temporary use required. These uses may use septic tanks or holding tanks for waste
disposal subject to permitting under F.A.C. 10D-6 and may use potable water or
irrigation wells.
2.10 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD MASTER
PLAN
A. Changes and amendments may be made to this PUD Ordinance or PUD Master
Plan as provided in Section 2.7.3.5. of the LDC. Minor changes and refinements
as described herein may be made by the Developer in connection with any type of
development or permit application required by the LDC.
B. The Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator shall be
authorized to approve minor changes and refinements to the Creekside Commerce
Park Master Plan upon written request of the Developer or his assignee.
C. The following limitations shall apply to such requests:
1) The minor change or refinement shall be consistent with the Collier
County Growth Management Plan and the Creekside Commerce Park
PUD document.
2) The minor change or refinement shall not constitute a substantial change
pursuant to Section 2.7.3.5.1. of the LDC.
3) The minor change or refinement shall be compatible with external
adjacent land uses and shall not create detrimental impacts to abutting land
Words lk- reugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-4 October 27, 2016
uses, water management facilities, and conservation areas within or
external to the PUD.
D. The following shall be deemed minor changes or refinements:
1) Reconfiguration of lakes, ponds, canals, or other water management
facilities where such changes are consistent with the criteria of the South
Florida Water Management District and Collier County.
2) Internal realignment of rights-of-ways.
3) Reconfiguration of parcels per Section 5.5 of this PUD.
E. Minor changes and refinements as described above shall be reviewed by
appropriate Collier County staff to ensure that said changes and refinements are
otherwise in compliance with all applicable County Ordinances and regulations
prior to the Community Development and Environmental Services
Administrator's consideration for approval.
F. Approval by the Community Development and Environmental Services
Administrator of a minor change or refinement may occur independently from
and prior to any application for Subdivision or Site Development Plan approval,
however such approval shall not constitute an authorization for development or
implementation of the minor change or refinement without first obtaining all other
necessary County permits and approvals.
2.11 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT PHASING
Submission, review, and approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plats for the park may be
accomplished in phases to correspond with the planned development of the property.
2.12 OPEN SPACE AND NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS
The PUD will fully comply with all sections of the LDC and meet the requirements of the
Growth Management Plan relating to open space and retention of native vegetation.
2.13 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District
SFWMD), Chapters 40E-4 and 4-E-40, this project shall be designed for a storm event
of 3-day duration and 25-year return frequency. The lake originally approved as Lake L-
1, Creekside Unit I Plat, shall continue to be operated and maintained in accordance with
the approved plat and approved South Florida Water Management District Permit.
Words struelk-tib are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-5 October 27, 2016
2.14 ENVIRONMENTAL
Resource Permitting (ERP) Rules, and shall further be subject to review and approval by
Collier County Planning Services Department Environmental Review Staff
Vegetation shall be retained in accordance with the criteria established in the
Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the GMP and Section 3.05.00 of the
LDC.
2.15 UTILITIES
A. All necessary easements, dedications, or other instruments shall be granted to
insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in
compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time approvals are
requested.
B. The owner shall convey to Collier County a County Utility Easement (CUE) no
less than 15 feet in width for construction of an irrigation quality (IQ) main
through the PUD west of Goodlette-Frank from the North County Water
Reclamation Facility to the existing IQ main on Immokalee Road. The requested
CUE shall be provided in a mutually agreeable location, deemed acceptable by
both the Owner and the Public Utilities Planning and Project Management
Division, prior to approval of the next development order west of Goodlette-Frank
Road. The CUE shall be conveyed to Collier County and the Collier County
Water Sewer District at no cost to County, free and clear of all liens and
encumbrances.
2.16 TRANSPORTATION
A. The Developer shall provide appropriate left and/or right turn lanes on Immokalee
Road and Goodlette-Frank Road at the main park entrances. Such turn lanes shall
be in place prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy for a use that
utilizes the perspective/associated entrance.
B. There shall be a full access intersection at the park's southern entrance on
Goodlette Frank Road. When justified by traffic warrants, this intersection shall
be signalized, notwithstanding its proximity to Immokalee Road.
C. Future access points to Immokalee and Goodlette-Frank Roads are those shown
on the Creekside Commerce Park Master Plan.
D. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided by the Developer at the park's main
entrance in conjunction with the development of this entrance.
E. Road impact fees shall be paid in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance
92-22, as amended.
Words sk—through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-6 October 27, 2016
F. The Developer shall provide the appropriate easements or reserve right of way so
that the southerly access road west of Goodlette Frank Road may be
interconnected to the properties to the west of Creekside Commerce Park.
G. The Developer shall provide a fair share contribution toward the capital cost of
traffic signals at any project access when deemed warranted by Collier County.
The signal shall be owned, operated and maintained by Collier County.
H. The Developer agrees to complete construction of the segment of internal
roadway that connects Goodlette-Frank Road to the I/C parcel (herein called
southern parcel") that is west of Goodlette Road and abuts Pelican Marsh prior
to the first of the following to occur:
1) The issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the "southern parcel";
2) The issuance of a certificate of occupancy on the second business parcel to
be developed west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement;
3) Within 3 years of approval of this PUD; or
4) Within 9 months of obtaining "grant" money or other funds for
construction of such infrastructure from an outside source.
The I/C parcels west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement and immediately north
of the south road shall connect for service and employee access at the time that
the south road is extended to a point that they may connect.
J.The Developer agrees to provide the County with an update of the Transportation
Impact Statement (TIS) at the time of submittal of a Preliminary Subdivision Plat
or Site Development Plan.
K. The Goodlette-Frank Road southernmost access to the I/C parcel east of
Goodlette-Frank Road shall be limited to a right-in/right-out access.
L. The maximum trip generation allowed by the proposed uses both primary and
ancillary may not exceed 17542,045 (external to the PUD, per TIS dated
09/16/2016) PM Peak Hour, two-way trips.
M. The owner, its successors, or assigns, shall construct a 5-foot wide sidewalk
within the Florida Power & Light (FPL) easement, subject to approval by FPL on
the west side of Creekside Street and the south side of Creekside Parkway
along/within folio # 29331193049 to connect to the existing sidewalk along
Creekside Parkway. The construction plans for the sidewalk and the letter request
to FPL shall be completed and mailed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the proposed Arthrex Headquarters building redevelopment on
Wordsstruck h-rough are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-7 October 27, 2016
Tract 5 of the Master Plan. The construction of the sidewalk shall be completed
no later than one year following FPL's approval.
N. Due to the removal of a portion of the Creekside Boulevard minor collector
roadway and re-routing of traffic, the owner, its successors, or assigns, shall
design and construct the re-routed roadway to adequately accommodate AASHTO
Interstate Semitrailer (WB-62) standards and provide access to existing postal
service truck traffic prior to the removal of a portion of Creekside Boulevard. The
design and construction shall be at no cost to Collier County. Any additional
right-of-way easements required by County for a public road pursuant to County
standards shall be dedicated to the County, free and clear of all liens and
encumbrances without County maintenance responsibility. Such dedication shall
occur prior to the issuance of the Certification of Occupancy for the proposed
Arthrex Headquarters building redevelopment on Tract 5 of the Master Plan and
prior to the removal of a portion of Creekside Boulevard. The owner, its
successor, or assigns, shall also accept ownership of the entire length of Creekside
Boulevard with all maintenance responsibilities.
2.17 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE
Most common area maintenance will be provided by the CDD or by a Property Owner's
Association (POA). The CDD or the POA, as applicable, shall be responsible for the
operation, maintenance, and management of the surface water and stormwater
management systems and reserves serving Creekside Commerce Park, in accordance with
any applicable permits from the South Florida Water Management District.
2.18 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS
A. The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage
ingenuity, innovation and imagination in the planning, design and development or
redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership as set
forth in the LDC, Section 2.2.20.
B. Creekside Commerce Park is planned as a functionally interrelated business park
under unified control. The Developer will establish community-wide guidelines
and standards to ensure a high level of quality for both the common areas and the
individual parcel developments.
C. These guidelines will serve as a control for individual parcel development, and be
referred to as The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions for
Creekside Commerce Park. The level of quality defined in this document is
directed towards the creation of an attractive business environment, and these
standards are the basis for evaluation of projects submitted for review to the
Property Association's Architectural and Landscaping Committee, referred to as
the ALC. The standards in this document will include criteria for site planning,
architectural design, lighting, landscaping, and graphics and signage.
Words struelc-tirough are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-8 October 27, 2016
Y„
6'
D. The specific design guidelines will act as supplemental standards to the
requirements of this Planned Unit Development Ordinance, and other County
codes, but in no way supersede them.
1.Common Areas
The master design of the park's entries and signage, streetscapes, and open space
areas will form a harmonious framework that visually links the entire park
together. This unified appearance will enhance the image of the entire
community. Internal roadways will provide efficient vehicular circulation with
streetscapes that create pleasant neighborhood environments. Streetscape plans
will be designed to establish a hierarchy of landscape improvements appropriate
in scale and character with the function of the street and adjacent land uses. Along
these streetscapes a pedestrian walkway system will be established to link each
project with the overall community.
2.Individual Projects
A. Site Planning: Each individual parcel project will provide a visually
appealing, articulated, identifiable path of entry for pedestrians and
vehicles from the street to the site and from the site to the buildings
themselves. The orientation of a building or structure upon a site
will not only reflect the project's functional need, but will also be
responsive to the individual parcel's characteristics and be sensitive
to adjacent land uses and the surrounding community.
B. Architectural standards: The objective of the architectural standards
will be to promote the creation of an attractive, value-apparent
business environment. Design elements throughout a project must
be consistent with the nature of the chosen style and building
materials selected. Project design should endeavor to adhere to the
classical principles of design and avoid clichés, overly complex or
garish motifs, while seeking to invoke a"timeless" quality.
C. Lighting: The guidelines for lighting will establish a continuity of
design for all lighting in the park which is consistent with the overall
visual impression of the park.
D. Landscaping: The purpose of landscape design guidelines within
individual projects is to guide development toward harmonious and
visually pleasing landscape that is cohesive with the overall master
landscape plan. The Creekside landscape concept will have a
naturalistic theme. Similar to the overall project's plant palette,
individual sites will be dominated with plants that are native, xeric,
or naturalized within Southwest Florida. Landscape designs will
Words steilc—hreugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-9 October 27, 2016
create a coherent theme which emphasizes plant material as a
primary unifying element.
1. Landscape elements along public R.O.W.s will be
complimentary to streetscape landscaping. Parcel entries will
be designed to harmonize with adjacent streetscape
landscaping, and clearly accentuate, the parcel entry.
2. Individual parking lots will be screened from the roadways as
much as possible, without obscuring views of the building
entrances. In addition, plant materials used around main
entrances of buildings will visually cue visitors to—their
location.
E. Graphics/signage: The guidelines serve to provide continuity of
design for all signage in the park which is consistent with the overall
visual impression of the park. Parcel signage serves the
identification needs of the individual tenants and user.
2.19 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERMS, FENCES AND WALLS
Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use
throughout Creekside Commerce Park. Required buffer treatments shall terminate at
entrances to accommodate entrance treatments and at lakes to accommodate views into
the park. The following standards shall apply:
A. Landscape buffers contiguous to Immokalee Road R.O.W. will be installed at the
time of subdivision improvement per construction phase and will have the
following characteristics:
1) Minimum width of 20'-0", measured from the R.O.W.
2) Adjacent to Business District type uses within the Business District, trees will
be native, xeric, or naturalized canopy trees, spaced at 25' on center (O.C.),
planted at an initial height of 13'-14' overall (O.A.) with a 6' spread. In
addition, a continuous 24" high shrub hedge shall be provided within the 20'
buffer.
B. Landscape buffers contiguous to Goodlette-Frank Road R.O.W. will be installed
at the time of subdivision improvement per development phase and will have the
following characteristics:
1) Minimum width of 20'-0", measured from the R.O.W.
2) Adjacent to Business District type uses within the Business and
Industrial/Commerce (I/C) Districts, trees will be native, xeric, or naturalized
Words struck-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-10 October 27, 2016
r,A
canopy trees, spaced at 25' O.C., planted at an initial height of 12' O.A., with
a 6' spread. At the time of individual lot improvements, hedges will be placed
at parking lot edges to satisfy the requirements of LDC Section 2.4.7.4.
3) Adjacent to industrial type uses within the Industrial/Commerce District, trees
will be native, xeric or naturalized canopy trees, spaced at 25' O.C., planted at
an initial height of 12' O.A, with a 6' spread. Trees will be placed on a berm,
3 feet high and supplemented with a 5 foot high hedge consisting of but not
limited to the following plant material: coco plum, viburnam, Ficus. The
intent will be to obtain 80% opacity within one year of planting for travelers
on Goodlette-Frank Road.
C. Landscape buffers surrounding the perimeter of the park will be installed at the
time of subdivision improvement per construction phase. The buffers are
referenced on Exhibit B, and proceed in a clockwise direction from the northeast
corner of the project as follows:
1) The landscape buffer along the eastern most property boundary, north of the
preserve area, as depicted on Exhibit B, shall consist of an Alternative "A"
type buffer. Any preservation areas within this buffer may be credited toward
buffering requirements.
2) The preserve area along the balance of the eastern most property boundary
will serve as the buffer between uses.
3) The Developer will provide a five feet (5') wide Alternative "A" type buffer
with trees planted fifty feet (50') on center between the business use and the
preserve/lake area, as depicted on Exhibit B.
4) The Developer will provide a five feet (5') wide Alternative "A" type
landscape buffer with trees planted fifty feet (50') on center along the eastern
property boundary contiguous to the Collier County Sewage Treatment Plant.
5) The landscape buffer along the southern most property boundary, east of
Goodlette-Frank Road, shall be a five feet (5') wide Alternative "A" type
buffer with trees planted fifty feet (50') on center. An opaque hedge six feet
6') high will be planted to supplement the existing oak tree buffer planted by
the County at the Collier County Sewage Treatment Plant.
6) The existing landscape berm/buffer from Goodlette Frank Road to the west
side of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement will be supplemented as follows: a
type "A" buffer along the proposed lake; and the remaining area westward of
the lake will be supplemented to consist of 50 sabal palms, 8'-14' O.A. and 4
Ficus nitida 12'-13' O.A. and 6'-8' wide; locations to be coordinated with the
adjacent property owner.
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-11 October 27, 2016
CAC
7) The Developer will provide a ninety percent (90%) opaque landscape buffer
and berm between the I/C District and the Pelican Marsh PUD from the west
side of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement to the existing berm to the west,
that approximates the existing Pelican Marsh berm/buffer. This buffer will be
installed concurrent with any I/C construction west of the Pine Ridge
Drainage Easement. The buffer shall meet ninety percent (90%) opacity
within one (1) year of planting.
8) The Developer will supplement with additional trees the buffer along the
remaining portion of the southern property line westward to achieve a ninety
percent (90%) opaque buffer. This buffer will be installed concurrent with
any I/C construction west of the Pine Ridge Drainage Easement.
9) The landscape buffer between the I/C District and the adjacent Agricultural
District along the southern portion of the western property line will be an
Alternative "A"type buffer.
10)The landscape buffer between the R.O.W. and the adjacent Agricultural
District to the west will be an Alternative "A" type buffer and be incorporated
into the R.O.W.
D. Maximum fence or wall height internal to the PUD: Twelve feet (12').
E. Landscape buffers, berms, fences and walls will be constructed along the
perimeter of the Creekside Commerce Park PUD boundary concurrent with
subdivision and site development construction phase, except where noted in this
document.
F.Sidewalks, water management systems, drainage structures, and utilities may be
allowed in landscape buffers pursuant to review and approval of the Development
Services Administrator.
G. Landscape berms located within the Creekside Commerce Park PUD boundary
and contiguous to a property line and/or right-of-way line may be constructed
such that the toe of slope is located on the property line and/or encroaches into the
right-of-way line when approved by the applicable owner or agency.
2.20 SIGNAGE
A. GENERAL
1) Pursuant to Section 2.5.5.2.3.7. of the LDC, the following conditions provide
for the required comprehensive sign plan for the Creekside Commerce Park
2) Each platted parcel shall be considered a separate parcel of land.
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-12 October 27, 2016
3) Signs and decorative landscaped entrance features within a County dedicated
right-of-way, shall require a right-of way permit subject to the review and
approval of the County.
4) All signs shall be located so as not to cause sight line obstructions.
B. PARK ENTRY SIGNS
I) Major park entry signs shall be located as depicted on Exhibit B. Each sign
will not exceed 160 square feet in size on any side and signs will be no longer
than 25 feet in length and 8 feet in height.
2) Minor park entry signs shall be located as depicted Exhibit B. Each minor
monument sign will not exceed 100 square feet in size on any side. Minor
monument signs will be no larger than 20 feet in length and 8 feet in height.
C. INTERNAL SIGNS
1) Directional or identification signs are allowed within the business park. Such
signs may be used to identify the location or direction of approved uses such
as sales centers, information centers, etc. Individual signs may be a maximum
of 4 square feet per side in size, or signs maintaining a common architectural
theme may be combined to form a menu board with a maximum size of 25
square feet per side, and a maximum height of 8 feet. No building permit is
required unless such signs are combined to form a menu board.
2) Grand Opening signs: The Developer or parcel owner may display an on-site
grand opening sign not exceeding 32 square feet on a side, and not exceeding
64 square feet total. Banner signs shall be anchored and may be displayed on-
site for a period not exceeding 14 days within the first three months that the
Developer/occupant is open for business.
D. USER SIGNS
1) Wall, mansard, canopy or awning signs: One wall, mansard, canopy or
awning sign may be permitted for each single-occupancy facility, or for each
establishment in a multiple-occupancy facility. Corner units within multiple-
occupancy facilities, or multi-frontage single-occupancy facilities shall be
allowed two signs, but such signs shall not be combined for the purpose of
placing the combined area on one wall. However, the combined area of those
signs shall not exceed the maximum allowable display area for signs by this
ordinance.
a. The maximum allowable display area for signs may not be more than 15
percent of the total square footage of the visual facade of the building to
Words s.fruelf-ti's are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-13 October 27, 2016
which the sign will be attached and may not, in any case, exceed 200
square feet in area for any sign.
2) Monument and Pole signs: One (1) monument or pole sign is permitted for
each lot or parcel for each external and internal road frontage(s).
a. Internal road frontage setbacks: A minimum of fifteen feet (15') from the
edge of pavement. Signs may encroach within the right-of-way subject to
maintaining safe site distance triangles as per Section 2.4.4.16. of the LDC
and when approved by the Community Development and Environmental
Services Administrator and applicable utility.
b. External road frontage setbacks: Pole signs shall be setback from any
external right-of-way in accordance with the applicable section of the
LDC. Monument signs may be permitted closer to the right-of-way
subject to maintaining safe site distance triangles as per Section 2.4.4.16.
of the LDC and when approved by the Community Development and
Environmental Services Administrator and applicable utility.
c. Spot or floodlights may be permitted provided said light shines only on the
signs or landscaping and is shielded from motorists and adjacent residents.
d. Should the U.S. Postal Service purchase or lease land within Creekside
Commerce Park, in addition to the user signs as permitted herein, they will
be allowed one sign between Immokalee Road and the proposed lake
adjacent to the west entry.
E. TRAFFIC SIGNS
Traffic signs such as street name signs, stop signs, speed limit signs, etc. may be
designed to reflect a common architectural theme, in accordance with Section
3.2.8.3.19. of the LDC.
2. 21 GENERAL PERMITTED USES
A. Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Creekside
Commerce Park PUD except in the Preserve Area. General permitted uses are
those uses which generally serve the Developer and tenants of Creekside
Commerce Park and are typically part of the common infrastructure.
B. General Permitted Uses:
1.Essential services as set forth under LDC, Section 2.6.9.1.
2.Water management facilities and related structures.
Words lt#reugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-14 October 27, 2016
3.Temporary sewage treatment facilities.
4.Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural
bank treatments.
5.Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures.
6.Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for the
Developer and Developer's authorized contractors and consultants,
including necessary access ways, parking areas and related uses.
7.Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers, berms,
fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.11 of this
PUD.
8.Fill storage subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.7 of this PUD.
Site filling and grading as set forth in Section 2.7 of this PUD.
9.Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and
which the Community Development and Environmental Services
Administrator determines to be compatible.
10. Sidewalks may occur within County required buffers if approved by the
Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator.
11. Standards for parking, landscaping, signs and other land uses where such
standards are not specified herein are to be in accordance with the LDC
provision in effect at the time of Site Development Plan Approval.
12. Creckside Commerce Park shall be permitted to develop with a maximum
of 10 percent commercial uses. Commercial uses are defined as offices,
health services, medical clinics, financial institutions, fitness centers,
childcare centers, restaurants and retail sales in accordance with Section
3.3. C.2. hereof.
2. 22 MISCELLANEOUS
A. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any
rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency
and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the
permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations
imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a
violation of state or federal law.
B. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before
commencement of the development.
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 2-15 October 27, 2016
SECTION III
INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE DISTRICT
3.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for
areas within Creekside Commerce Park designated on the Master Plan as "I/C".
3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Areas designated as "I/C" on the PUD Master Plan are intended to provide a maximum of
5-58716,000 square feet of gross floor area of industrial/commerce uses on 4-1-649.90.±
net acres. Intermediate care (SIC Code 8052), parking garages, and group housing and
hotel/motel uses (SIC Code 7011) are in addition to the IC gross square footage figures.
The overall floor area ratio (FAR) for the IC designated areas may exceed .35. Individual
and intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052) shall not exceed .6. (Refer to Section
3.5, Deviations); however, the overall FAR for the PUD for IC and. B District areas will
not exceed .35.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the United States Postal Service parcel may use any
available square footage in the I/C District (excluding the 166,000 square feet added by
the October 2016 amendment) and the Business District up to a FAR of.35 on the United
States Postal Service Parcel until all available square footages are used up in the PUD.
3.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in
whole or part, for other than the following:
A. The permitted principal uses and structures will generally consist of light
manufacturing, wholesale, warehouse, processing and packaging, laboratories and
clinics, research, design and product development, business services and
corporate offices and headquarters.
1.Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment (Group 3728)
2.Apparel and Other Finished Products (Groups 2311-2399)
3.Building Contractors (Groups 1521-1542), except for general contractors
for mobile home repair on site, modular housing and premanufactured
housing assembled on site, dry cleaning plant construction,paper pulp mill
construction, and truck and automobile assembly plant construction.
Words kae are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-1 October 27, 2016
4.Business Services (Groups 7311-7313, 7319, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338,
7352, 7359-7389 except for industrial truck rental and leasing; plants, live:
rental and leasing; toilets, portable: rental and leasing; employment
agencies, except theatrical and motion picture; labor contractors
employment agencies) model registries; labor pools; manpower pools;
modeling service; dogs, rental of: for protective service; automobile
recovery service; automobile repossession service; bartering services for
businesses; bondspersons; bottle exchanges; check validation service;
contractors disbursement control; filling pressure containers (aerosol) with
hair spray, insecticides, etc.; fire extinguishers, service of gas systems,
contract conversion from manufactured to natural gas; metal slitting and
shearing on a contract or fee basis produce weighing service, not
connected with transportation; scrap steel cutting on a contract or fee
basis; solvents recovery service on a contract or fee basis; tobacco
sheeting service on a contract or fee basis)
5.Child Day Care Services (Group 8351)
6.Communications (Groups 4812-4899 not including major communications
towers related to cellular phone service, radio broadcasting, television
broadcasting, radar or telephone service)
7.Computer and Office Equipment (Groups 3571-3579)
8.Construction; Special Trade Contractors (Groups 1711-1799 except for
boiler erection and installation contractors; drainage system installations,
cesspool and septic tank contractors; fuel oil burner installation and
servicing contractors; gasoline hookup contractors; sewer hookups and
connection for buildings contractors; epoxy application contractors;
fireproofing buildings contractors; gasoline pump installation contractors;
lead burning contractors; and mobile home site setup and tie down
contractors)
9.Depository and Non-Depository Institutions (Groups 6011-6163)
10. Drugs and Medicines (Groups 2833-2836, except for adrenal derivatives:
bulk, uncompounded; barbituric acid and derivatives: bulk,
uncompounded; cocaine and derivatives; codeine and derivatives; gland
derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; mercury chlorides, U.S.P; mercury
compounds, medicinal: organic and inorganic; morphine and derivatives;
opium derivatives)
11. Educational Services (Groups 8249-8299 except construction equipment
operation schools; truck driving schools; automobile driving instruction;
survival schools; vocational counseling)
Words le-ti'ireugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-2 October 27, 2016
F,f
12. Electronics and Other Electrical Equipment Manufacturing (Groups 3612,
3613, 3624, 3625, 3631, 3641-3676, 3678, 3679, 3694, 3695, 3699, except
for airport lighting transformers, autotransformers, electric (power
transformers) distribution transformers, electric; electric furnace
transformers; lighting transformers, street and airport; transformers,
reactor; atom smashers (particle accelerators; electron beam metal cutting,
forming, and welding machines; electron linear accelerators; electrostatic
particle accelerators))
13. Engineering, Accounting, Research, Management and Related Services
Groups 8711-8748 except chemical laboratories, commercial research;
automobile proving and testing grounds; metallurgical testing laboratories;
pollution testing, except automotive emissions testing; radiation dosimetry
laboratories; seed testing laboratories; veterinary testing laboratories)
14. Fabricated Metal Products (Groups 3411-3432, 3442, 3444, 3446, 3452,
3469, 3492, 3495, 3496, production of metal is prohibited)
15. Furniture and Fixtures Manufacturing (Groups 2511-2599)
16. Government Offices/Buildings (Groups 9111-9199, 9221, 9222, 9224-
9229, 9311, 9451, 9511-9532, 9611, 9631-9661)
17. Hotels /Motels (Group 7011), not to exceed a maximum of 180 rooms for
the entire PUD. Only 1 Hotel/Motel is permitted within the PUD and it
must be located east of Goodlette-Frank Road and subject to specific
development standards and setbacks in Section 3.4.
18. Industrial and Commercial Machinery (Groups 3524, 3546, 3553-3556,
3559, 3562, 3564-3566, 3581-3599 except for bronzing and dusting
machines for printing trades; foundry type for printing; presses, printing -
slugs printers'; ammunition and explosives loading machinery; brick
making machines; cement making machinery; chemical kilns; control rod
drive mechanisms for use on nuclear reactors; foundry machinery and
equipment; frame straighteners, automotive (garage equipment); fur
sewing machines; ginning machines, cotton; metal finishing equipment for
plating, except rolling mill lines; metal pickling equipment, except rolling
mill lines)
19. Leather and Leather Products (Groups 3131-3199)
20. Measuring, Analyzing, and Controlling Instruments; Photographic,
Medical and Optical Goods: Watches and Clocks Manufacturing (Groups
3812-3843, 3845-3873)
21. Membership Organizations (Groups 8611-8631)
Words s.ti-ue1 are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-3 October 27, 2016
22. Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries (Groups 3911-3999 except for
dressing of furs: bleaching, blending, curring, scraping, and tanning;
feathers: curling, dyeing, and renovating - for the trade; fur stripping; furs
dressed: bleached, curried, scraped, tanned, and dyed; pelts: scraping,
curring, tanning, bleaching and dyeing; plumes, feather; tear gas devices
and equipment; veils made of hair)
23. Motion Picture Production (Groups 7812-7819)
24. Motor Freight Transportation (Groups 4214, 4215)
25. Packing and Crating (Group 4783)
26. Paper and Allied Products (Groups 2652-2657, 2673-2679)
27. Personal Services (Groups 7213, 7216, 7219, 7221)
28. Physical Fitness Facilities (Group 7991)
29. Plastic Materials and Synthetics (Groups 2833,2834)
30. Printing, Publishing and Allied Industries (Groups 2711-2791)
31. Professional Offices: including but not limited to, Travel Agencies
Group 4724); Insurance Agencies (Group 6411); Insurance Carriers
Groups 6311-6399); Real Estate (Groups 6512, 6514, 6517, 6519, 6531,
6541, 6552,)
32. Rubber and Miscellaneous Plastic Products (Groups 3021, 3085, 3086,
3088, 3089)
33. Transportation Equipment (Group 3732, except for boats, fiberglass:
building and repairing; boats: motorboats, sailboats, rowboats, and canoes
building and repairing; houseboats, building and repairing; motorboats,
inboard and outboard: building and repairing)
34. United States Postal Service (Group 4311)
35. Warehousing and Storage (Group 4225, 4226, 5014 except oil and gas
storage, petroleum and chemical bulk stations and automobile dead
storage) only one (1) self-storage use allowed to be located adjacent to the
Collier County Sewage Treatment Plant.
36. Wholesale Trade-Durable Goods (Groups 5021-5031, 5043-5049, 5063-
5074, 5078, 5091, 5092, 5094-5099 except for fencing, wood-wholesale;
lumber: rough, dressed, and finished-wholesale; batteries, except
automotive-wholesale; storage batteries, industrial-wholesale; unit
substations-wholesale; boilers, power: industrial-wholesale; boilers, steam
and hot water heating-wholesale; burners, fuel oil and distillate oil-
wholesale; oil burners-wholesale)
Words lf-through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-4 October 27, 2016
37. Wholesale Trade-Nondurable Goods (Groups 5111-5143, 5145, 5147-
5149, 5192, 5199 except for cats-wholesale; charcoal-wholesale; dogs-
wholesale; fish, tropical-wholesale; furs, dressed-wholesale; greases,
animal and vegetable-wholesale; ice, manufactured or natural-wholesale,
leather and cut stock-wholesale; linseed oil-wholesale; oils, except
cooking: animal and vegetable-wholesale; oilseed cake and meal-
wholesale; rubber, crude-wholesale; sawdust-wholesale; vegetable cake
and meal-wholesale; wigs-wholesale; worms-wholesale)
38. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose
statement of the District and which the Community Development and
Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this
District.
B. Restricted Principal Uses
The following medical related uses must be located within a 1/4 mile radius of the
hospital property boundary.
1.Group housing for the elderly limited to Assisted living facilities,
independent living units, skilled nursing units and continuing care
retirement communities. A maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be
permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.B.1, 3.3.B.2, 4.3.B.1 and
4.3.B.3. These uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank
Road.
2.Health Services, medical clinics and offices (Groups 8011-8049, 8052), a
maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in
Sections 3.3.B.1, 3.3.B.2, 4.3.B.1 and 4.3.B.3. SIC Code 8052 land uses
are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road.
3.Medical Laboratories and research and Rehabilitative Centers (Groups
8071-8092, 8099)
4.Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose
statement of the District and which the Community Development and
Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this
District.
C. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures:
1.Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in
this district.
Words k threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-5 October 27, 2016
2.Retail and wholesale sales and/or display areas as accessory to the
principal use, not to exceed an area greater than forty percent (40%) of the
gross floor area of the permitted principal use.
D. Operational Requirements for Group Housing
Group housing uses described in Section 3.2.B.1 shall provide the following
services and/or be subject to the following operational standards:
1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older.
2. There shall be on-site dining for the residents.
3. Group transportation services shall be provided for residents for the
purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual
transportation services may be provided for the residents' individualized
needs including but not limited to medical office visits.
4. There shall be an on-site manager/activities coordinator to assist
residents with their individual needs. The manager/coordinator shall also
be responsible for arranging trips to off-site events as well as planning
for lectures, movies, music and other entertainment for the residents at
the on-site clubhouse.
5. A wellness center shall be provided on-site. Exercise and other fitness
programs shall be provided for the residents.
6. Each unit shall be equipped to notify emergency service providers in the
event of medical or other emergency.
7. Each unit shall be designed to accommodate residents with physical
impairments (handicaps) as required by the applicable building codes
and federal law and regulation.
3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 S.F.
B. Minimum Lot Width: 100 FT.
C. Minimum Yard Requirements:
1.Front Yard, adjacent to Immokalee Road or Goodlette-Frank Road: Fifty
feet (50'). For parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road, see
additional setback requirements in Section 3.4.C.7.a.
Words k-through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-6 October 27, 2016
2.Front Yard, Internal: Thirty feet (30')
3.Side Yard: Ten feet(10')
Five feet (5') to internal property line along Pine Ridge canal
drainage easement and FP&L easement
4.Waterfront: Zero feet (0') to bulkhead or rip-rap at top of bank, otherwise
twenty feet (20')
5.Rear Yard: Twenty-five feet (25')
6.Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD: Fifty feet
50')
7.Minimum Building Setback from Existing Goodlette-Frank Road Right-
of-Way East of Goodlette-Frank Road:
a) Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum of fifty feet (50'), except as
provided as follows:
i)For group housing for elderly and intermediate care use:
a) If the zoned height of any structure exceeds 50 feet,
the minimum setback is 75 feet plus for any portion
of a building exceeding fifty feet in zoned height an
increased setback at a 1:2 ratio (i.e., for one vertical
foot of height, setback is increased by two
horizontal feet) for that portion of the building over
50 feet of height.
ii) For hotel/motel use:
a) Minimum setback of 75 feet regardless of height
plus for any portion of a building exceeding fifty
feet in zoned height an increased setback at a 1:2
ratio (i.e., for one vertical foot of height, setback is
increased by two horizontal feet) for that portion of
the building over 50 feet of height.
D. Maximum Height (Zoned): For parcels west of Goodlette-Frank Road: th -
iefifty feet (35'50'), including silos, storage tanks, elevator towers, satellite
dishes, antennas, etc. Facilities located on Tract 5 on the Master Plan shall have a
maximum zoned height of one-hundred four (104') feet and a maximum actual
height of one-hundred twenty two (122') feet, For parcels east of Goodlette-
Frank Road: the Hotel, group housing for the elderly, and the intermediate care
facility shall have a zoned height seventy-five feet (75'), actual height eight-five
Words struek-thr-eugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-7 October 27, 2016
feet (85'). All other uses permitted east of Goodlette-Frank Road pursuant to
Section III shall have a zoned height of fifty feet (50') and an actual height of
sixty feet (60').
E. Outside storage or display shall be permitted and shall be screened from all
internal and external public roadways with a fence or landscaping equivalent or
combination thereof. Said fence, wall or landscaped screen shall be opaque in
design. All manufacturing operations and equipment, including accessory process
equipment such as compressors and air handlers shall be contained in an enclosed
structure.
F. All industrial I/C buildings • •
park shall have the appearance of a concrete material, such as, but not limited to,
block, brick, tilt up concrete panels, stucco on lathe systems, etc. Corrugated steel
on any building west of Goodlette Frank Road.shall meet the requirements of
Section 5.05.08 of the LDC, except for buildings located on Tract 5 on the Master
Plan, which shall be subject to the deviation process in Section 5.05.08 of the
LDC (see Section 3.5.2, Development Deviations, of this PUD Ordinance). The
building located on Tract 5 shall be similar in architectural style to the conceptual
building rendering in Exhibit C.
G. Business District type uses located within the I/C District along Goodlette-Frank
Road will meet the Collier County Architectural Guidelines in Division 2.8. of the
LDC.
H. Industrial type uses abutting Goodlette-Frank Road shall meet the requirements of
Section 2.19.B.3 hereof, alternatively, said uses shall have the option of utilizing
the landscaped buffer applicable to business uses fronting Goodlette-Frank Road,
provided the portion of the building facing Goodlette-Frank Road meets the
following Architectural Guideline Sections of the LDC, therefore satisfying the
intent of the building design section of the Architectural Guidelines in the opinion
of the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator:
1.Section 2.8.3.5.1., Purpose and Intent
2.Section 2.8.3.5.4., Facade Standard
3.Section 2.8.3.5.6., Project Standards
4.Section 2.8.3.5.7., Detail Features except for 2.8.3.5.7.2.
5.Section 2.8.3.5.12.
Loading Areas: Buildings west of the Pine Ridge canal and adjacent to the Pelican
Marsh boundary shall orient loading docks to the north, east or west.
Words si.truelf-threugh are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-8 October 27, 2016
J.Noise: Uses within the I/C District shall not exceed 65 dBA between the hours of
7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and 60 dBA after 10 p.m. to 6:59
a.m. and all of Sundays, as measured at the property boundary of the land use
from which the sound emanates.
K. Odor: No business shall cause or allow the emission of odorous air from any
single source such as to result in odors which are detectable outside the parcel
boundaries. Best practical treatment, maintenance, and control currently available
shall be utilized in order to maintain the lowest possible emission of odorous air.
L. Lighting: Lighting shall be located so that no light is aimed directly toward a
property designated residential if lighting is located within 200 feet of residential
property. Light fixtures within parking areas shall not exceed 25 feet in height.
M. Emissions: All sources of air emissions shall comply with rules set forth by the
Environmental Protection Agency (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40) and the
Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (Florida Administrative Code,
Chapter 17-2). No person shall operate a regulated source of air emissions
without a valid operation permit issued by the Department of Environmental
Regulation.
3.5 DEVELOPMENT DEVIATIONS
1.Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 which establishes a .45 floor area ratio
FAR) for group housing uses, to permit an FAR of .6 for group housing uses,
including the intermediate care facilities.
2.Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.08, Deviations and alternate compliance, which
authorizes the County Manager or designee to administratively approve
deviations from compliance with Section 5.05.08 of the LDC for specific types of
buildings, to allow general office and medical office that can be constructed on
Tract 5 of the Master Plan to be eligible for this deviation process.
3.6 LANDSCAPE BUFFER RESTRICTIONS
The use of bald cypress trees to meet the landscape buffer requirements in section
2.19.B.2. Land B.3) are prohibited
Words st-ruelf-through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 3-9 October 27, 2016
it
SECTION IV
BUSINESS DISTRICT
4.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for
areas within Creekside Commerce Park designated on the Master Plan as "B".
4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Areas designated as "B" on the PUD Master Plan are intended to provide a maximum of
2-60292,000 square feet of floor area, including approximately 200242,000 square feet of
office uses and€4)50,000 square feet of retail uses on 19.122.90± net acres. Intermediate
care facilities (SIC Code 8052), parking garages, and group housing and hotel/motel uses
SIC Code 7011) are in addition to the B District gross square footage figures. The
overall floor area ratio (FAR) for the B designated areas may exceed .35.Individual
parcels may be developed at ahigher FAR and the FAR for hotel/'motel, group housing
and intermediate care facilities (SIC Code 8052) shall not exceed .6. (Refer to Section
1.5, Deviations); however, the overall FAR for the PUD for IC and B District areas will
not exceed .35.
4.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in
whole or part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures:
1.Apparel and Accessory Stores (Groups 5611-5699)
2.Breweries (Group 2082)
3.Building Contractors (Groups 1521-1542), except for general contractors
for mobile home repair on site, modular housing and premanufactured
housing assembled on site, dry cleaning plant construction, paper pulp mill
construction, and truck and automobile assembly plant construction.
4.Business Services (Groups 7311-7313, 7319, 7322, 7323, 7331-7338,
7352, 7359-7389 except for industrial truck rental and leasing; plants, live:
rental and leasing; toilets, portable: rental and leasing; employment
agencies, except theatrical and motion picture; labor contractors
employment agencies) model registries; labor pools; manpower pools;
modeling service; dogs, rental of: for protective service; automobile
recovery service; automobile repossession service; bartering services for
businesses; bondspersons; bottle exchanges; check validation service;
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
Amended PUD 2016(rev6 BCC)10-27-2016.docx 4-1 October 27, 2016
contractors disbursement control; filling pressure containers (aerosol) with
hair spray, insecticides, etc.; fire extinguishers, service of gas systems,
contract conversion from manufactured to natural gas; metal slitting and
shearing on a contract or fee basis produce weighing service, not
connected with transportation; scrap steel cutting on a contract or fee
basis; solvents recovery service on a contract or fee basis; tobacco
sheeting service on a contract or fee basis)
5.Child Day Care Services (Group 8351)
6.Convenience Store, food market (Group 5411) only two (2) allowed
within the PUD and Gasoline Filling Station (Group 5541) only one (1)
allowed within the PUD.
7.Communications (Groups 4812-4899), not including major
communication towers related to cellular phone service, radio
broadcasting, television broadcasting, radar or telephone service.
8. Dance and Martial Arts Studios (Groups 7911 and 7999, including only
gymnastics and martial arts instruction)
9.Depository and Non-Depository Institutions (Groups 6011-6163)
including automatic teller machines
10. Drugs and Medicines (Groups 2833-2836 except for adrenal derivatives:
bulk, uncompounded; barbituric acid and derivatives: bulk,
uncompounded; cocaine and derivatives; codeine and derivatives; gland
derivatives: bulk, uncompounded; mercury chlorides, U.S.P; mercury
compounds, medicinal: organic and inorganic; morphine and derivatives;
opium derivatives)
11. Eating Places (Group 5812) not including stand alone drive-thru
restaurants.
12. Educational Services (Groups 8249-8299 except construction equipment
operation schools; truck driving schools; automobile driving instruction;
survival schools; vocational counseling)
13. Engineering, Accounting, Research, Management and Related Services
Groups 8711-8748 except chemical laboratories, commercial research;
automobile proving and testing grounds; metallurgical testing laboratories;
pollution testing, except automotive emissions testing; radiation dosimetry
laboratories; seed testing laboratories; veterinary testing laboratories)
14. Government Offices/Buildings (Groups 9111-9199, 9221, 9222, 9224-
9229, 9311, 9451, 9511-9532, 9611, 9631-9661)
Words lough are deleted; words underlined are added.
Amended PUD 2016(rev6 BCC)10-27-2016.docx 4-2 October 27, 2016
15. Hardware Stores (Group 5251)
16. Home Furniture, Furnishings and Equipment Stores (Groups 5712-5736)
17. Hotels / Motels (Group 7011); not to exceed a maximum of 180 rooms for
the entire PUD. Only 1 hotel/motel is permitted within the PUD and it
must be located east of Goodlette-Frank Road and subject to additional
building development standards and setbacks identified in Section
4.4.Miscellaneous Food Stores (Group 5499)
18. Miscellaneous General Merchandise Stores (Group 5399)
19. Miscellaneous Retail (Groups 5912-5949 and 5992-5999, excluding used
merchandise stores, fireworks, gravestones, tombstones and monuments,
ice dealers, sales barns, and swimming pools; retail)
20. Paint/Glass and Wallpaper(Group 5231)
21. Personal Services (Groups 7215, excluding self-service or coin laundries,
7221-7251, 7291 and 7299, including only clothing rental, costume rental,
tanning salons and hair services)
22. Professional Offices: Travel Agencies (Group 4724); Insurance Agencies
Group 6411); Insurance Carriers (Groups 6311-6399); Real Estate
Groups 6512-6515, 6517, 6519, 6531, 6541, 6552, 6553); Holding and
Other Investment Offices (Groups 6712-6799); Attorneys (Group 8111)
23. Physical Fitness Facilities (Group 7991)
24. Retail Bakeries (Group 5461)
25. Security and Commodity Brokers (Groups 6211-6289)
26. Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose
statement of the District and which the Community Development and
Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this
District.
B. Restricted Principal Uses
The following medical related uses must be located within 1/4 mile radius of the
hospital property boundary.
1.Group housing for the elderly limited to assisted living facilities,
independent living units, skilled nursing units and continuing care
retirement communities. A maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be
Words k through are deleted; words underlined are added.
Amended PUD 2016(rev6 BCC)10-27-2016.docx 4-3 October 27, 2016
permitted for the uses listed in Sections 3.3.B.1, 3.3.B.2, 4.3.B.1 and
4.3.B.3. These uses are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank
Road.
2.Drug Stores and Proprietary Stores (Group 5912) only one (1) drug store
allowed.
3.Health Services, Medical Clinics and Offices (Groups 8011-8049, 8052), a
maximum of 400 aggregate beds shall be permitted for the uses listed in
Sections 3.3.B.1, 3.3.B.2, 4.3.B.1 and 4.3.B.3. SIC Code 8052 land uses
are limited to parcels located east of Goodlette-Frank Road.
4.Medical Laboratories and research and Rehabilitative Centers (Groups
8071-8099)
5.Any other use or service which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
uses and is otherwise clearly consistent with the intent and purpose
statement of the District and which the Community Development and
Environmental Services Administrator determines to be compatible in this
District.
C. Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures
1.Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses
permitted in this district.
2.Retail and wholesale sales and/or display areas as accessory to the
principal use, not to exceed an area greater than forty percent (40%) of the
gross floor area of the permitted principal use.
D. Operational Requirements for Group Housing
Group housing uses described in Section 4.2.B.1 shall provide the following
services and/or be subject to the following operational standards:
1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older.
2. There shall be on-site dining for the residents.
3. Group transportation services shall be provided for residents for the
purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual
transportation services may be provided for the residents' individualized
needs including but not limited to medical office visits.
4. There shall be an on-site manager/activities coordinator to assist
residents with their individual needs. The manager/coordinator shall also
be responsible for arranging trips to off-site events as well as planning
Words 5tmek--threfigh are deleted; words underlined are added.
Amended PUD 2016(rev6 BCC)10-27-2016.docx 4-4 October 27, 2016
for lectures, movies, music and other entertainment for the residents at
the on-site clubhouse.
5. A wellness center shall be provided on-site. Exercise and other fitness
programs shall be provided for the residents.
6. Each unit shall be equipped to notify emergency service providers in the
event of medical or other emergency.
7. Each unit shall be designed to accommodate residents with physical
impairments (handicaps) as required by the applicable building codes
and federal law and regulation.
4.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Minimum Lot Area: 20,000 S.F.
B. Minimum Lot Width: 100 FT.
C. Minimum Yard Requirements:
1.Front Yard, Immokalee and Goodlette-Frank Roads: Fifty feet (50')
2.Front Yard, Internal Roads: Thirty feet (30')
3.Side Yard: Ten feet (10')
Five feet (5') to internal property line along the Pine Ridge canal drainage
easement and FP&L easement
4.Waterfront: Zero feet (0') to bulkhead or rip-rap at top of bank, otherwise
twenty feet (20')
5.Rear Yard: Twenty-five feet (25')
6.Minimum Building Setback from Perimeter Boundary of PUD for
Properties West of Goodlette-Frank Road:
a) Fifty feet (50') for buildings up to thirty five feet (35') in height.
b) Three additional feet (3') for every one foot of building height over
thirty five feet (35') adjoining residential districts.
7.For Properties East of Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum Building Setback
from Perimeter Boundary of PUD and from Public Roadways:
Words s k-through are deleted; words underlined are added.
Amended PUD 2016(rev6 BCC)10-27-2016.docx 4-5 October 27, 2016
a) Immokalee Road: Minimum of fifty feet (50') plus for any portion
of a building exceeding a zoned height of fifty feet (50'), that
portion of the building shall have its building setback increased at
a 1:3 ratio (i.e. one (1') vertical foot of height for every three (3')
horizontal feet); or
For any portion of a hotel that may be constructed on the B
designated tract at the southeast corner of Goodlette-Frank Road
and Immokalee Road, a minimum three hundred fifty foot (350')
building setback from Immokalee Road.
b) Goodlette-Frank Road: Minimum of fifty feet (50') and for any
portion of a building exceeding a zoned height of fifty feet (50'),
that portion of the building shall have the setback increased at a 1:2
ratio (i.e. one (1') vertical foot of height for every two (2')
horizontal feet); or
For any portion of a hotel on the B designated tract on the
southeast corner of Immokalee Road and Goodlette-Frank Road,
the minimum setback from Goodlette-Frank Road shall be
seventy-five (75') regardless of height.
D. Maximum Height (Zoned): For parcels west of Goodlette-Frank Road, three
stories over parking to a maximum of fifty feet (50') except that no structure shall
be greater than thirty-five feet (35'), on property west of the Pine Ridge Drainage
Easement.
For Properties East of Goodlette-Frank Road:
a) The group housing for the elderly and intermediate care facilities
constructed on the B designated tract located at the southeast quadrant of
the Goodlette-Frank Road and Immokalee Road intersection shall have a
zoned height of sixty feet (60') and an actual height of seventy feet (70'),
except that a hotel building or structure associated with this use may not
exceed a zoned height of seventy five feet (75') and an actual height of
eighty five (85'). All other uses on Tract 9 on the Master Plan shall be
permitted to have a zoned height of seventy five feet (75') and an actual
height of eighty five (85')
b) The group housing for the elderly and intermediate care facilities
constructed on the easternmost B designated tract adjacent to Immokalee
Road, as shown on the Master Plan, shall have a zoned height of sixty feet
60') and an actual height of seventy feet (70').
c) All other uses permitted pursuant to Section IV shall be limited to a
maximum zoned height of fifty(50') and an actual height of sixty(60').
Words ilk-through are deleted; words underlined are added.
Amended PUD 2016(rev6 BCC)10-27-2016.docx 4-6 October 27, 2016
E. Commercial design guidelines for facilities in the Business District shall be
subject to the provisions of Division 2.8. Architectural and Site Design Standards
and Site Design Standards for commercial buildings and projects.
F. Outside storage or display shall be permitted and shall be screened from all
internal and external public roadways with a fence at least seven feet in height
above ground level, or landscaping equivalent or combination thereof. Said
fence, wall or landscaped screen shall be opaque in design.
4.5 DEVELOPMENT DEVIATIONS
1.Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 which establishes a .45 floor area ratio
FAR) for group housing uses, to permit an FAR of .6 for group housing uses,
including the intermediate care facility.
2.Deviation from LDC Section 5.06.04.F.3 Directory signs, which authorizes one
1) directory sign to be located at the project entrance, to permit installation of the
directory sign on Immokalee Road east of Goodlette-Frank Road, not at the
project entry, but rather at a location between the project entry and Goodlette-
Frank Road.
4.6 LANDSCAPE BUFFER RESTRICTIONS
The use of bald cypress trees to meet the landscape buffer requirements in section
2.19.A.2 Land B.2)are prohibited.
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
Amended PUD 2016(rev6 BCC)10-27-2016.docx 4-7 October 27, 2016
SECTION V
PRESERVE AREA
5.1 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for
the area within Creekside Commerce Park, designated on the Master Plan, as Preserve
Area.
5.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Areas designated as Preserve Area on the Master Plan are designed to accommodate
natural systems existing or created as preserves and limited water management uses and
functions.
5.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land or water
used, in whole or in part, for other than the following:
A. Permitted Uses and Structures
1.Boardwalks and nature trails (excluding asphalt paved trails).
2.Water management structures.
3.Any other preserve and related open space activity or use which is
comparable in nature with the foregoing uses, permitted in accordance
with the LDC and which the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) or Hearing
Examiner determines to be compatible in the Preserve Area.
5.4 PRESERVE DISTRICT PRESERVATION EASEMENT
A non-exclusive preservation easement or tract is required by LDC Section 3.2.8.4.7.3.
for preservation lands included in the Preserve Area. The Developer, its successor or
assign shall be responsible for the control and maintenance of lands within the Preserve
Area. Exact location/boundary of the Preserve Area will be determined during the
development permitting process with the South Florida Water Management District,
Army Corps of Engineers, and Collier County.
Words struck-thr- are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 5-1 October 27, 2016
5.5 PRESERVE AREA ADJUSTMENTS
The proposed native vegetation retention areas, depicted on the Creekside Commerce
Park Master Plan, are intended for meeting the native vegetation requirements of the
Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County LDC. Adjustments
may be made to the location of the preservations areas at the time of preliminary plat or
site development_plan approval. If adjustments are needed, per the Collier County LDC
the Developer will have the option to increase the preservation in another area, enhance
and preserve another area, or provide increased native landscape per the Collier County
LDC. The proposed preservation areas, including acres of wetlands and 4.1 acres of
uplands, depicted on the Creekside Commerce Park master plan, are areas where the
native vegetation requirements may be met on-site as set forth in the Collier County
LDC.
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
2016 CPUD Amendment 5-2 October 27, 2016
2 ormosi
nA
Z1! JJI!s! 1 ,1 m -III , FRoavnano9XaaHiatizU tr _.....,p_. .\111 pil....; ,,,. .,, 2. it 1 iro c:::
A f
1 ,...; _ IHIi
0 z-
d
m a
VI X H
f n m c
p
@i 7 C 'a13QfSN3B 3
3 5 ry
o
I. \
Iv-
no T
o N< N
O mID j I•
7'') - ' _ ,,,Z}
PINE.RIDGE CANAI'D E„r-Ai•LME
n/\
AVN
QED
m
O C
m. FEEL EASEMENT
yg3211S 3QFi._J y`.J F.
T+9
D
11
r i w
w
t r 2 ! f x w . 9
rn I
r
FRANK ROAD y . y
GOO44ETiH Fe
z
o
e
tnl..
P....r
LP-]
pzp
TT
v NC p 't rte.
E
it i c T i 0 N T to M 6 I r 11 7
yyZI
is _- TmEI 1 iA — O ^t2S3
r
w AO
o I r
n.'S r n
I
m -W
Nm
n
m
15
Oa
TTyyn4
T
R 0 mDwb j j
v
y 9S
1 pP'
I j o ' r
p
I
n
7N r+ z~ ti,.1
v M R a N F J rt`3 GA'18 301S13Ba0; I SI.
Ci m D m
c *
f" coQ1
n
i'y r
T co A (TPj I I I I S m y i I 1
hzmxiL-6y
O rtr
f_`D lDNTTIVnt0
D m N rr to O c f n W 0
0 z m f" ^ G O l!1 C 'n
E.-'
0 +
g.
con _" (fl Jr, 3 co
m
D d 7 IP
m m H t0 Q c oma C — '"
z v cn n r m
W
A
v
D Z-'
O
mS
m; IIp
m
z11C
m r Im o m$Tl- DC D; Oy
T1ACpm< F 4P t'n in n1m
Z yy -
1
yy y TtO nA A
II II II II II II I II 111111 4
MmM
4. { r O A N V tO N A w 1 9$m
Cl D r. O O N 10 i-+ IV N lD o o1>
8-'- r Oo -P 0 0,0 lJi LD iO m 0
vT Co H FF FF FFFhH. µ
III m D n n n n n n na
o n
410x40 RESZIUMEELISITa mo r, f.RERKSlDX f.DMMFJIG!PARK
E1e..Et.7, K.
m.,. GradY'tinn4 EXHIBIT e
zeoo
p.,r
wrz
NI 1 o ,,
Am,. w CONCEPTEAt MASTER PLANREVISED10/24/2016 N E 1,a
y y
w.. u. C...'I h w'Ye i .tM' '^'
vovt i. .w.,..... n,r.«av xa,...
j,SM9p Eott Wim,
4HMnn 11uf1il¢.9 o. i
EXHIBIT BI
CROSS SECTIONS (ENLARGED)
INTERNAL PARCEL PARKING STREET LIGHT
HEDGE
CANOPY TREE CANOPY TREE
PARCEL ENTRANCE MONUMENT SIDEWALK
err
HEDGE
INTERNAL PARCEL
PARKING
Affi
16 Nam Al NNW Ai
t2' 4'
SIDE-
n
WALK
TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTION
N.T.8
INTERNAL PARCEL PARKING STREET LIGHT
HEDGE
CANOPY TREE
777
CANOPY TREE
PARCEL ENTRANCE MONUMENT SIDEWALK
cer HEDGE
INTERNAL PARCEL
PARKING
mowAmmo
12' 12' 10" 12' 12' ¢.Y
It SIDE-WALK
g,1111111111111111111
11111111111111111111108.
1DO`
TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTION
MT.'S
INTERNAL PARCEL PARKING STREET LIGHT
HEDGE
CANOPY TREE CANOPY TREE
PARCEL ENTRANCE MONUMENT SIDEWALK
HEDGE
INTERNAL PARCEL
PARKING
11;.MUM j
i 1;' 122 5'.
SIDE- SIDE-
vatic MY
64.
TYPICAL STREET CROSS SECTION
N.T.B
y0 41A -
ef.
A
UC
s
t
44
r
1,,4
tilt
i t
R`
1
i f
k
1i p
l'
wlilli
mj
ii,
I
s
3.
it
isco. ...,._ ,,,
I. r
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT Of STATE
RICK SCOTT KEN DETZNER
Governor Secretary of State
November 2, 2016
Honorable Dwight E. Brock
Clerk of the Circuit Court
Collier County
Post Office Box 413044
Naples,Florida 34101-3044
Attention: Teresa Cannon, BMR Senior Clerk
Dear Mr. Brock:
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes,this will acknowledge receipt of your
electronic copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 16-32,which was filed in this office on November 2,
2016.
Sincerely,
Ernest L. Reddick
Program Administrator
ELR/lb
R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250
Telephone: (850) 245-6270
www.dos.state.fl.us
Creekside Commerce Park CPUDA (PL20170000425)
Exhibit 2
Statement of Utility Provisions
November 30, 2017 Page 1 of 2
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 2 - Statement Utility Provisions-v2.docx
Total Population to Be Served
349 Room Hotel
400 Bed ALF and Acute Care (intermediate care)
151,000 s.f. Mini Warehouse
9,000 s.f. General Office
233,100 s.f. Medical Office
535,000 s.f. Business Park
50,000 s.f. Retail
Average and Peak Daily Demands – Water
349 Room Hotel = 100 gpd/room
349 x 100 = 34,900 gpd
400 Bed ALF and Acute Care (intermediate care) = 100gpd/bed
400 x 100 = 40,000 gpd
3 x 5 GPD per meal served x 400 beds = 6,000 gpd
151,000 s.f. Mini Warehouse= 0.15 gpd
151,000 x 0.15 = 22,650 gpd
9,000 s.f. General Office = 0.15 gpd
9,000 x 0.15 = 1,350 gpd
233,100 s.f. Medical Office = .15 gpd
233,100 x 0.15 = 34,965 gpd
535,000 s.f. Business Park= 0.15 gpd
535,000 x 0.15 = 80,250 gpd
50,000 s.f. Retail = 0.1gpd/s.f.
50,000 x 0.1 = 5,000 gpd
Total Daily Water = 315,161 gpd (225,115 x 1.4 (water over sewer factor))
Total Peak Water = 315,161 gpd x 1.35 = 425,467 gpd
Average and Peak Daily Demands – Sewer
349 Room Hotel = 100 gpd/room
349 x 100 = 34,900 gpd
Creekside Commerce Park CPUDA (PL20170000425)
Exhibit 2
Statement of Utility Provisions
November 30, 2017 Page 2 of 2
CPUDA2017 - Exhibit 2 - Statement Utility Provisions-v2.docx
400 Bed ALF and Acute Care (intermediate care) = 100gpd/bed
400 x 100 = 40,000 gpd
3 x 5 GPD per meal served x 400 beds = 6,000 gpd
151,000 s.f. Mini Warehouse= 0.15 gpd
151,000 x 0.15 = 22,650 gpd
9,000 s.f. General Office = 0.15 gpd
9,000 x 0.15 = 1,350 gpd
233,100 s.f. Medical Office = .15 gpd
233,100 x 0.15 = 34,965 gpd
535,000 s.f. Business Park= 0.15 gpd
535,000 x 0.15 = 80,250 gpd
50,000 s.f. Retail = 0.1gpd/s.f.
50,000 x 0.1 = 5,000 gpd
Total Daily Sewer = 225,115 gpd
Total Peak Sewer = 225,115 gpd x 1.35 = 303,905 gpd
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375
3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com
October 24, 2017
RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM)
PUDA-PL20170000425, Creekside Commerce Park Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Dear Sir or Madam:
A formal application has been submitted to Collier County, seeking approval of a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) Amendment, by Arthrex, Inc., represented by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q.
Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. of Coleman, Yovanovich and
Koester, P.A., for the following described property:
The subject property is comprised of approximately 106± acres, located on the Southwest and
Southeast quadrant of Immokalee Road and Goodlette-Frank Road in Section 27, Township 48
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
Arthrex, Inc. is asking the County to approve this application, which proposes to add one
additional hotel on the west side of Goodlette-Frank Road and increase the maximum number
of hotel rooms from 180 to 349. These modifications are made to both the I/C and B Districts
within the PUD. The maximum vehicular trip generation figure in Section 2.16.L remains the
same due to a corresponding reduction in medical office space. A minor change to the
Conceptual PUD Master Plan is proposed to add a note on Tract 6 and southern portion of Tract
3 regarding the Architectural Standards Deviation. The PUD amendment also makes provisions
for recreational facilities associated with permitted uses in the PUD.
You are invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting hosted by the applicant to
inform nearby property owners, neighbors and the public of the proposed PUD amendment for
the subject property. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes
only, it is not a public hearing, and will be held on Monday, November 13, 2017, 5:30 pm at
Arthrex Inc., 1370 Creekside Blvd., Naples, Florida 34108.
If you have questions or comments, they can be directed by e-mail, phone, fax or mail to:
sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375, Q. Grady Minor and
Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134. Project information is
posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning.
Sincerely,
Sharon Umpenhour
Senior Planning Technician
Project Location Map
PL20170000425
500' External Only plus Legals
8/31/2017
Page 1 of 2
RECKEY NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 LEGAL LOTUNIT SECT TWP RANGE
29334000045 1336 CREEKSIDE FLEX LLP 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 CREEKSIDE FLEX I A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2 2 27 48 25
64280000400 1726 MEDICAL BUILDING I LLC % JAMES VACCARO 12601 HENSEL RD HUNTLEY, IL 60142---0000 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK LOT 1 LESS ORDER OF TAKING 04- 3779 DESC IN OR 3697 PG 260 1 22 48 25
64280000426 A K S SW FLORIDA LLC 743 BENTWATER CIR APT 201 NAPLES, FL 34108---6735 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK LOT 2 2 22 48 25
69229000725 ARTHUR J WARBURTON REV TRUST MARGARET MARY EILEEN WARBURTON REVOCABLE TRUST 1395 REMINGTON CT #9202 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 904 904 22 48 25
69229000505 BARBOT TR, IVONNE MARTINEZ IVONNE MARTINEZ BARBOT TRUST 1375 REMINGTON CT APT 7101 NAPLES, FL 34110---0942 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 701 701 22 48 25
69229000686 BERECZKI, CSABA F 16 SONNY ST MAPLE, ON CANADA L6A 1C1 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 902 902 22 48 25
69229000806 BONNEY K LETT REV TRUST 1340 REMINGTON WAY APT 10202 NAPLES, FL 34110---0938 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1004 1004 22 48 25
69229000589 BOTSKO JR, JOHN 1385 REMINGTON CT APT 8101 NAPLES, FL 34110---0943 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 801 801 22 48 25
69229000563 BRONSNICK, DEANNA D 50 STERLING DR CHATHAM, NJ 07928---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 704 704 22 48 25
69229000767 BRUNO BAGGIANI REV LIV TRUST 243 ASHWORTH STREET WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33405---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1002 1002 22 48 25
48501000189 C TURTLE OF NAPLES INC 5455 JAEGER RD STE A NAPLES, FL 34109---5805 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3-A A 26 48 25
74445100504 CBYW NAPLES PROPCO LLC % WELLTOWER INC 4500 DORR STREET TOLEDO, OH 43615---0000 SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK TRACT A 1 26 48 25
74445101325 CBYW NAPLES PROPCO LLC % WELLTOWER INC 4500 DORR STREET TOLEDO, OH 43615---0000 SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK TRACT P 1 26 48 25
69229000084 CHERYL P SACHS TRUST 1315 REMINGTON WAY UNIT 1202 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 104 104 22 48 25
27167500400 COLLIER CNTY 3301 TAMIAMIA TRL E NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 PORTION OF TR B OF COLLIER HEALTH PARK DESC IN OR 3690 PG 3601 3 22 48 25
166840007 COLLIER CNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3301 TAMIAMI TRL E NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 26 48 25 SW1/4 OF NW1/4 LESS E 30FT & E 60FT OF N 60FT 39.05 AC OR 11O6 PG 1648 26 48 25
168040009 COLLIER CNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 3301 TAMIAMI TRL E BLDG F NAPLES, FL 34112---4902 27 48 25 COMM SE CNR SEC W 100.04FT, N 2637.85FT, CONT N 1315.14FT, E 100.01FT, S 1314.70FT, CONT S 2640.71FT 1 27 48 25
167720100 COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 26 48 25 COM AT N1/4 CNR SEC 26, S 100' & POB, S 89 DEG W 146.02', S 50', N 89 DEG E 146.5', N 50' TO POB AND COMM 26 48 25
34500000107 COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 FRANK BOULEVARD (FRANK BOULEVARD C-851) & THAT PORTION ADDED FOR ROAD WIDEN- ING AS DESC IN OR 3057 PG 3387 1 10 49 25
27167550214 COLLIER HEALTH CARE INC PO BOX 413029 NAPLES, FL 34101---3029 COLLIER HEALTH PARK THAT PORT OF TRACT "C" DESC AS: COM SW CNR LOT 7 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK, S 31'17"W 5.39FT, N 89 2 22 48 25
64280000523 COLLIER HEALTH CARE INC PO BOX 413029 NAPLES, FL 34101---3029 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK LOT 7 7 22 48 25
27167550405 COLLIER HEALTH PARK OWNERS' ASSOCIATION INC 560 DELAWARE AVE #300 BUFFALO, NY 14202---0000 COLLIER HEALTH PARK TRACT D, LESS THAT PORTION VACATED ON RES # 91-634 OR 1650 PG 1686 1 22 48 25
27185003756 COLLIER'S RESERVE ASSOC INC 11715 COLLIERS RESERVE DR NAPLES, FL 34110---0909 COLLIER'S RESERVE TRACT 01-06 LESS THAT PART LYING E OF TR R DESC IN OR 3659 PG 3087 1 22 48 25
27185003251 COLLIER'S RESERVE ASSOC INC C/O DONALD A CROWE 11711 COLLIERS RESERVE DR NAPLES, FL 34110---0909 COLLIER'S RESERVE TRACT "R", LESS THAT PORTION DESC IN OR 2476 PG 1125 REF AS CROSSPOINTE DR, LESS THAT 1 22 48 25
69229000042 COOLCHANGE LAND TRUST 1315 REMINGTON WAY UNIT 1102 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 102 102 22 48 25
167840006 COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UTILITY DIVISION COLLIER COUNTY COURTHOUSE 3301 TAMIAMI TRL E BLDG F NAPLES, FL 34112---4902 27 48 25 COM SE CNR, W 100FT, N 1500FT TO POB CONT N 2455.41FT, WLY 577.2FT, SLY 886.02FT, WLY 400FT, SLY 27 48 25
29331190521 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT ONE TRACT L1 LESS OR 3661 PG 2087 1 27 48 25
29331190660 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT ONE TRACT R 1 27 48 25
29331193023 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO TRACT R LESS THAT PART DESC IN OR 3926 PG 2925 1 27 48 25
29331193065 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC INC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34105---3227 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO TRACT 03 1 27 48 25
29331181145 CREEKSIDE EAST INC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY NAPLES, FL 34103---0000 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK EAST TRACT P-2 1 27 48 25
69229000343 CUMMINGS JR, PAUL A BARBARA M CUMMINGS 12029 COLLIERS RESERVE DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 501 501 22 48 25
71360000041 D & B CRANDALL FAM LIM PRTNRSH 777 WEDGE DR NAPLES, FL 34103---4447 ROYAL PALM BUILDING A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 101 101 22 48 25
69229000288 D'ALESSANDRO, JOSEPH A CYNTHIA A D'ALESSANDRO 300 LUZERNE AVE WEST PITTSTON, PA 18643---2234 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 402 402 22 48 25
69229000644 DONLEY, DAVID S 8351 MEADOWMOORE PL PICKERINGTON, OH 43147---7918 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 804 804 22 48 25
69229000204 DONLEY, MICHAEL D 7600 FARMSBURY DR REYNOLDSBURG, OH 43068---3150 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 302 302 22 48 25
69229000369 DUGAN, M KEVIN & MARGARET M 11611 USEPPA CT NAPLES, FL 34110---0925 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 502 502 22 48 25
74445101341 ECKERTY TR, THOMAS G UNRECORDED LAND TRUST UTD 04/02/96 12734 KENWOOD LN STE 89 FORT MYERS, FL 33907---5638 SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK TRACT R 1 26 48 25
71360000122 ENCORE VENTURE LLC 8009 KILKENNY COURT NAPLES, FL 34112---0000 ROYAL PALM BUILDING A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 301 301 22 48 25
59934000020 ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB, THE 10495 GOODLETTE-FRANK RD N NAPLES, FL 34109---0000 MASHIE COURT AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB TRACT A 1 27 48 25
27167400021 FARLEY WHITE CHP LLC %FARLEY WHITE INTERESTS LLC 155 FEDERAL STREET STE 1800 BOSTON, MA 02110---0000 COLLIER HEALTH PARK CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1 1 22 48 25
27167400047 FARLEY WHITE CHP LLC %FARLEY WHITE INTERESTS LLC 155 FEDERAL STREET STE 1800 BOSTON, MA 02110---0000 COLLIER HEALTH PARK CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2 2 22 48 25
69229000327 FELLOWS, GEORGE W & LINDA 927 BARCARMIL WAY NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 404 404 22 48 25
69229000466 FLOOD TR, THOMAS J THOMAS J FLOOD REV TRUST 620 14TH AVE S NAPLES, FL 34102---7116 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 603 603 22 48 25
71723900021 FLP 1750 LLC PO BOX 492 ALPENA, MI 49707---0000 RUBELL MEDICAL CENTER CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1 1 26 48 25
71723900047 FLP 1750 LLC PO BOX 492 ALPENA, MI 49707---0000 RUBELL MEDICAL CENTER CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2 2 26 48 25
71723900063 FLP 1750 LLC PO BOX 492 ALPENA, MI 49707---0000 RUBELL MEDICAL CENTER CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3 3 26 48 25
69229000149 GEORGIA K DANIS REV TRUST 11216 TAMIAMI TRL N # 207 NAPLES, FL 34110---1640 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 203 203 22 48 25
69229000945 GILBERT M MANCHESTER R/L TRUST 1320 REMINGTON WAY APT 12201 NAPLES, FL 34110---0933 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1203 1203 22 48 25
71360000106 HEITMANN TR, TERESA L PETERSEN TR, ROBERT A=& JUDY C TERESA L HEITMANN REV TRUST ROBERT A PETERSEN REV TRUST 1660 MEDICAL BLVD STE 300 NAPLES, FL 34110---1497 ROYAL PALM BUILDING A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 300 300 22 48 25
23932000443 HERTZOG JR, LEO J & JEAN E 350 SEDGWICK CT NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 BENTGRASS BEND AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB LOT 80 80 27 48 25
69229000385 HISH-UHRICK REVOCABLE TRUST 5590 RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD UNIT M105 NAPLES, FL 34113---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 503 503 22 48 25
59934000062 ISTOCK TR, JUDITH A JUDITH A ISTOCK TRUST 12/16/93 9659 MASHIE CT NAPLES, FL 34108---1997 MASHIE COURT AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB LOT 55 55 27 48 25
69229000408 J M DUNN REV TRUST 1355 REMINGTON WAY APT 5202 NAPLES, FL 34110---0940 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 504 504 22 48 25
48501000024 JENSING INC 5550 HERON POINT DR #1102 NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1-A A 26 48 25
64280000442 JG PROPERTIES OF NAPLES LLC 3180 FORT CHARLES DR NAPLES, FL 34102---7923 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK LOT 3 3 22 48 25
69229000903 JOHN L KOSTELLO LIVING TRUST 1208 IMPERIAL DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1201 1201 22 48 25
59934000127 JONES, MICHAEL A & JANET E 9671 MASHIE CT NAPLES, FL 34108---1997 MASHIE COURT AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB LOT 58 58 27 48 25
48501000105 JSS PROPERTIES INC 5822 SPANISH OAKS LN NAPLES, FL 34119---1154 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2-A A 26 48 25
48501000121 JSS PROPERTIES INC 5822 SPANISH OAKS LN NAPLES, FL 34119---1154 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2-B B 26 48 25
48501000150 JSS PROPERTIES INC 5822 SPANISH OAKS LN NAPLES, FL 34119---1154 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2-D D 26 48 25
69229000741 KARP, CLAUDIA 12285 SW 1ST ST CORAL SPRINGS, FL 33071---8059 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1001 1001 22 48 25
69229000123 KOTSCHEVAR, GLORIA L 1325 REMINGTON WAY APT 2102 NAPLES, FL 34110---0934 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 202 202 22 48 25
48501000040 KSSK LLC 15187 BROLIO WAY NAPLES, FL 34110---2719 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1-B B 26 48 25
48501000066 KSSK LLC 15187 BROLIO WAY NAPLES, FL 34110---2719 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1-C C 26 48 25
23932000401 L GEORGE KLAUS TRUST 9759 BENTGRASS BND NAPLES, FL 34108---1933 BENTGRASS BEND AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB LOT 78 78 27 48 25
69229000262 LIVINGSTON, LINDA C 1345 REMINGTON WAY #401 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 401 401 22 48 25
27167550489 LJZ PROPERTIES LTD 1435 IMMOKALEE RD NAPLES, FL 34110---1401 COLLIER HEALTH PARK REPLAT OF TRACT B-1 1 22 48 25
69229000107 LUKAS, HENRY A 8749 N CLEAR LAKE RD MILTON, WI 53563---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 201 201 22 48 25
23932000427 LUND, THOMAS C & CAROL A 5150 TAMIAMI TRL N #300 NAPLES, FL 34103---0000 BENTGRASS BEND AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB LOT 79 79 27 48 25
74445100821 M T V L LLC 1713 SW HEALTH PKWY STE 1 NAPLES, FL 34109---0502 SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK THAT PORTION OF TRACT B1 DESC AS: COM NW CNR TRACT B1, N 89DEG 55'29"E 238.82FT TO A 2 26 48 25
69229000783 MARTIN, NANCEE J 285 GRANDE WAY #403 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1003 1003 22 48 25
69229000709 MCCONNELL, BRUCE T EMILY J WOLFE 36980 FOX RUN FARMINGTON HILLS, MI 48331---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 903 903 22 48 25
69229000547 MCELROY, WALTER R PAMELA J MCELROY 1375 REMINGTON CT #7201 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 703 703 22 48 25
69229000521 MELONE, MARLENE ANN EDWARD DALE MELONE 1375 REMINGTON CT # 702 NAPLES, FL 34110---0942 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 702 702 22 48 25
69229000929 MERCER, THOMAS A & GAIL T 904 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE BOWLING GREEN, OH 43402---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1202 1202 22 48 25
59934000143 MEYER JR, ANDREW C & KATHLEEN 240 FAIRHAVEN HILL RD CONCORD, MA 01742---0000 MASHIE COURT AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB LOTS 59 AND 60 59 27 48 25
74445100805 MPG HEALTH PARKWAY LLC 6321 DANIEL PWKY #200 FORT MYERS, FL 33912---0000 SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK TRACT B1, LESS THAT PORTION DESC IN OR 2598 PG 1508 1 26 48 25
69229000440 NAPE, DAVID J & CYNTHIA J 60 PINECONE LN SHAVERTOWN, PA 18708---9543 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 602 602 22 48 25
26090000023 NAPLES 9 LLC 12763 STARK RD STE 101 LIVONIA, MI 48150---1535 CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 100 100 22 48 25
26090000081 NAPLES 9 LLC 12763 STARK RD STE 101 LIVONIA, MI 48150---1535 CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 200 200 22 48 25
26090000104 NAPLES 9 LLC 12763 STARK RD STE 101 LIVONIA, MI 48150---1535 CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 210 210 22 48 25
26090000120 NAPLES 9 LLC 12763 STARK RD STE 101 LIVONIA, MI 48150---1535 CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 300 300 22 48 25
48501000163 NAPLES CHIROPRACTIC CENTER INC C/O WHITE HERON WELLNESS CTR 1775 ARLINGTON ST STE 2 SARASOTA, FL 34239---0000 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2-E E 26 48 25
27167550201 NAPLES COMMUNITY HOSPITAL INC 350 7TH ST N NAPLES, FL 34102---5754 COLLIER HEALTH PARK TRACT C, LESS THAT PORTION DESC IN OR 2445 PG 2177 1 22 48 25
64280000507 NAPLES COMMUNITY HOSPITAL INC PO BOX 413029 NAPLES, FL 34101---3029 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK LOT 6 6 22 48 25
69229000301 NAPLES, ROBERT F & FRANCES L 1345 REMINGTON WAY #4201 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 403 403 22 48 25
74445101105 NATIONWIDE HLTH PROPERTIES INC % ALTUS GROUP US INC 21001 N TATUM BLVD #1630-630 PHOENIX, AZ 85050---0000 SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK TRACT B3 1 26 48 25
64280000468 NCHMD INC 350 7TH STREET N NAPLES, FL 34102---0000 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK LOTS 4 AND 5 4 22 48 25
69229000822 NEWTON JR, ROBERT D & KIM M 1330 REMINGTON WAY #11101 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1101 1101 22 48 25
26090000049 NICI & COX LLC 1185 IMMOKALEE RD STE 110 NAPLES, FL 34110---4806 CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 110 110 22 48 25
48501000095 NMP OF NAPLES LLC 1890 SW HEALTH PKWY STE 100 NAPLES, FL 34109---0473 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1-E E 26 48 25
64280000387 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK OWNERS ASSOCIATION PO BOX 413029 NAPLES, FL 34101---3029 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK TRACT R 1 22 48 25
64280000060 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC PO BOX 413029 NAPLES, FL 34101---3029 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK TRACT P-1 1 22 48 25
64280000361 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC PO BOX 413029 NAPLES, FL 34101---3029 NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK TRACT P-2 1 22 48 25
71360000067 NOVAK, MICHAEL A & BRIDGETTE A 1660 MEDICAL BLVD STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34110---1416 ROYAL PALM BUILDING A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 200 200 22 48 25
71360000083 NOVAK, MICHAEL A & BRIDGETTE A 1660 MEDICAL BLVD STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34110---1416 ROYAL PALM BUILDING A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 201 201 22 48 25
69229000220 OLSON, JAY & KATHLYN 1335 REMINGTON WAY APT 3201 NAPLES, FL 34110---0937 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 303 303 22 48 25
71360000025 PALM 100 LLC 1660 MEDICAL BLVD SUITE 100 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 ROYAL PALM BUILDING A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 100 100 22 48 25
27167400063 PATTON AVENUE HOLDINGS L L C 8787 BAY COLONY DRIVE #206 NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 COLLIER HEALTH PARK CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3 3 22 48 25
27167400089 PATTON AVENUE HOLDINGS L L C 8787 BAY COLONY DRIVE #206 NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 COLLIER HEALTH PARK CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 4 4 22 48 25
PL20170000425
500' External Only plus Legals
8/31/2017
Page 2 of 2
59934000088 PIKE, JOSEPH D & CHAN POYNER 9663 MASHIE COURT NAPLES, FL 34108---1997 MASHIE COURT AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB LOT 56 AND LOT 57 56 27 48 25
69229000165 POTIER, MICHEL & PATRICIA 1325 REMINGTON WAY APT 2202 NAPLES, FL 34110---0934 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 204 204 22 48 25
69229000424 PRATT, KRISTIN LEIGH 1365 REMINGTON WAY #6101 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 601 601 22 48 25
69229000864 PROPERTIES OF OLDE NAPLES LLC 500 5TH AVE S STE 506 NAPLES, FL 34102---6615 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1103 1103 22 48 25
69229000628 QUATRO LLC 363 NEPTUNES BIGHT NAPLES, FL 34103---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 803 803 22 48 25
69229000246 QUILLIN TR, ANDREW D MICHELLE C QUILLIN TR 4635 ABERDEEN AVE DUBLIN, OH 43016---9529 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 304 304 22 48 25
29331190725 RANI INVESTMENTS LLC 425 DOCKSIDE DR # 602 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT ONE LOT 3, LESS OR 3662 PG 1812, LESS E 32.84FT OF LOT 3 3 27 48 25
69586500447 REFERENCE ONLY CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER A CONDOMINIUM RIVERCHASE COMMONS LOT 10 AND 11 NKA CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER CONDO AS DESC IN OR 3134 PG 1379 10 22 48 25
27167500206 REFERENCE ONLY COLLIER HEALTH PARK CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM COLLIER HEALTH PARK, THAT PORTION OF TRACT B AS DESC IN OR 5244 PG 1526 NKA COLLIER HEALTH PARK CONDO-1 22 48 25
29331193162 REFERENCE ONLY CREEKSIDE FLEX I A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO LOT 10 AND A PORTION OF LOT 9 NKS CREEKSIDE FLEX I COMMERCIAL LAND CONDO AS DESC 10 27 48 25
29331193243 REFERENCE ONLY CREEKWOOD LAND CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO LOT 14 AND 15 AND THAT PART OF TR R AS DESC IN OR 3926 PG 2925 (RES 06-73)14 27 48 25
74445101309 REFERENCE ONLY GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK TRACT B4 NKA GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER CONDO AS DESC IN OR 2644 PG 551 & OR 1 26 48 25
23932000045 REFERENCE ONLY NOW SEE PELICAN MARSH GOLF COURSE PH TWO TR GC1 PAR 1 FOLIO# 66679351250 BENTGRASS BEND AT THE ESTATES AT BAY COLONY GOLF CLUB TRACT B 1 27 48 25
66679360759 REFERENCE ONLY NOW SEE PELICAN MARSH GOLF COURSE PH TWO TR GC1 PAR 1 FOLIO# 66679351250 PELICAN MARSH GOLF COURSE PHASE THREE TRACT 3, LESS THAT PORTION DESC IN OR 2139 PG 646 1 27 48 25
66679361363 REFERENCE ONLY NOW SEE PELICAN MARSH GOLF COURSE PH TWO TRACT GC-1 PCL 1 FOLIO 66679351250 PELICAN MARSH GOLF COURSE PHASE THREE TRACT GC1 B 1 27 48 25
66679361321 REFERENCE ONLY NOW SEE PELICAN MARSH GOLF COURSE PH TWO TRACT GC-1 PCL-1 FOLIO# 66679351250 PELICAN MARSH GOLF COURSE PHASE THREE THAT PORTION OF TR GC1 AS DESC IN OR 2147 PG 712 (PORTION OF BAY COLONY GOLF 1 27 48 25
27185002605 REFERENCE ONLY REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM COLLIER'S RESERVE THAT PORTION OF TR "I" NKA REMINGTON RESERVE CONDO (PH 1) AS DESC IN OR 4093 PG 1474 AS 2 22 48 25
64280000549 REFERENCE ONLY ROYAL PALM BUILDING A CONDOMINIUM NORTH NAPLES MEDICAL PARK LOT 8 & 9 N/K/A ROYAL PALM BUILDING CONDO AS DESC IN OR 2396 PG 2708 8 22 48 25
74445101008 REFERENCE ONLY RUBELL MEDICAL CENTER CONDO A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM SOUTHWEST PROFESSIONAL HEALTH PARK TRACT B2, NKA RUBELL MEDICAL CENTER CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM 1 26 48 25
29350000029 RES FLORIDA 1265 HOLDINGS LLC ATTN JOHN SCHMIEDING 1370 CREEKSIDE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108---1945 CREEKWOOD LAND CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL CONDO UNIT 1 1 27 48 25
29350000045 RES FLORIDA 1265 HOLDINGS LLC ATTN JOHN SCHMIEDING 1370 CREEKSIDE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108---1945 CREEKWOOD LAND CONDOMINIUM A COMMERCIAL CONDO UNIT 2 2 27 48 25
22435011024 RES FLORIDA 1370 HOLDINGS LLC 1370 CREEKSIDE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108---0000 ARTHREX AT CREEKSIDE-TRACT"A" TRACT A 1 27 48 25
29331193081 RES FLORIDA 1370 HOLDINGS LLC 1370 CREEKSIDE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108---1945 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO LOT 6, LESS ARTHREX AT CREEK SIDE TRACT A 6 27 48 25
29331193120 RES FLORIDA 1370 HOLDINGS LLC 1370 CREEKSIDE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108---1945 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO LOT 8 8 27 48 25
29331193146 RES FLORIDA 1370 HOLDINGS LLC 1370 CREEKSIDE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108---1945 CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK WEST UNIT TWO LOT 9, LESS THAT PART OF 9 NKA CREEKSIDE FLEX I COMMERCIAL LAND CONDO AS DESC 9 27 48 25
29334000029 RES FLORIDA 1370 HOLDINGS LLC 1370 CREEKSIDE BLVD NAPLES, FL 34108---1945 CREEKSIDE FLEX I A COMMERCIAL LAND CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1 1 27 48 25
69586500065 RIVERCHASE COMMONS OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC PO BOX 8537 NAPLES, FL 34101---8537 RIVERCHASE COMMONS TRACT J 1 22 48 25
69229000660 ROBERT A MCCONNELL REV TRUST 1395 REMINGTON CT #901 NAPLES, FL 34110---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 901 901 22 48 25
48501000147 S J M J LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 1901 WISHWOOD DR PO BOX 1423 WASHINGTON, MO 63090---0000 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2-C C 26 48 25
69229000181 SCHAFER, HENRY W & JUDITH M 18049 S SHORE LN W EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55346---3412 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 301 301 22 48 25
168040601 SCRIPPS NP OPERATING LLC % GANNETT TAX DEPT 7950 JONES BRANCH DR MCLEAN, VA 22102---0000 27 48 25 FROM NW CNR SEC 27, S 125.02 FT, N 45 DEG E 35.08FT, S 89 DEG E 573.46 FT, S 86 DEG E 500.61 FT, S 89 DEG E 147.09 27 48 25
168048001 SCRIPPS NP OPERATING LLC % GANNETT TAX DEPT 7950 JONES BRANCH DR MCLEAN, VA 22102---0000 27 48 25 COMM NW CNR SEC 27, S 125.02FT, N 44DEG E 34.99FT, S 89DEG E 573.45FT, S 89DEG E 500.61FT, S 89DEG E 768.26FT, 27 48 25
69229000848 SIEKIERSKI, WILLIAM 104 - 11 DURHAM PRIVATE OTTAWA, ON CANADA K1M 2H6 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1102 1102 22 48 25
48501000082 SINGER, MARK A 5550 HERON POINT DR NAPLES, FL 34108---2868 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1-D D 26 48 25
26090000065 SMARG, RICHARD M 1185 IMMOKALEE RD STE 120 NAPLES, FL 34110---4806 CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 120 120 22 48 25
48501000202 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WOMEN'S GROUP AND BUILDING CO LLC 1890 SW HEALTH PKWY STE 303 NAPLES, FL 34109---0473 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3-B B 26 48 25
48501000228 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WOMEN'S GROUP BUILDING CO LLC 1890 SW HEALTH PKWY STE 303 NAPLES, FL 34109---0473 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3-C C 26 48 25
48501000260 SW FLA WOMENS GROUP COM LLC 1890 SW HEALTH PKWY STE 303 NAPLES, FL 34109---0473 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3-E E 26 48 25
69229000880 SWAMP LLC 3860 PEMBROOKE LANE VESTAL, NY 13850---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1104 1104 22 48 25
69229000602 TAKOUSHIAN, KAREN 19864 N 68 DRIVE GLENDALE, AZ 85308---0000 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 802 802 22 48 25
48501000244 TORRENS LLC 1890 SW HEALTH PKWY #302 NAPLES, FL 34109---0000 GULFCOAST MEDICAL ARTS CENTER A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3-D D 26 48 25
168040106 TRAIL BOULEVARD LLLP %PARADIGM TAX GROUP RE: EXTRA SPACE STORAGE 34405 W 12 MILE RD, SUITE 215 FARMINGTON HILLS, MI 48331---0000 27 48 25 THAT PORTION LYING S OF IMMOKALEE RD AND ELY OF GOODLETTE FRANK RD AS FURTHER DESC IN OR 4522 PG 381 0 27 48 25
69229000068 TRONCO, FERNANDO & MICHELA 1315 REMINGTON WAY APT 1101 NAPLES, FL 34110---0932 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 103 103 22 48 25
69229000026 TRONCO, FERNANDO & MICHELA 4N025 WOOD DALE RD ADDISON, IL 60101---2963 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 101 101 22 48 25
69229000482 VOTH, PETER H & JEANNETTE A 1365 REMINGTON WAY APT 6202 NAPLES, FL 34110---0941 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 604 604 22 48 25
69229000961 ZAPFEL, RICHARD JOHN 1220 POCANTICO LN NAPLES, FL 34110---0923 REMINGTON RESERVE A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1204 1204 22 48 25
CREEKSIDE WEST INC
% RYAN LLC
13155 NOEL RD STE 100
DALLAS TX 75240-5050
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
COCO RIVER BRANCH
1130 CREEKSIDE PKWY
NAPLES FL 34108-1929
1336 CREEKSIDE FLEX LLP
1336 CREEKSIDE BLVD
NAPLES FL 34108-1931
WHITE OAKS REAL ESTATE
1285 CREEKSIDE BLVD E
NAPLES FL 34109-0590
EXTRA SPACE STORAGE
10550 GOODLETTE ROAD N
NAPLES FL 34109-1410
BAYSHORE NAPLES MEMORY CARE
1260 CREEKSIDE BLVD E
NAPLES FL 34109-0579
THE FOUNDATION OF PELICAN MARSH
1504 PELICAN MARSH BLVD
NAPLES, FL 34109-0315
PROOF O.K.BY:_____________________________O.K.WITH CORRECTIONS BY:___________________________
PLEASE READ CAREFULLY •SUBMIT CORRECTIONS ONLINE
ADVERTISER:Q.GRADY MINOR &ASSOCIA PROOF CREATED AT :10/16/2017 11:00 AM
SALES PERSON:Ivonne Gori PROOF DUE:-
PUBLICATION:ND-DAILY NEXT RUN DATE:10/24/17
SIZE:3 col X 9.25 in
ND-1791200.INDD
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
Petition PUDA-PL20170000425,Creekside Commerce Park Planned Unit
Development (PUD)
The public is invited to attend a neighborhood meeting held by D.Wayne Arnold,
AICP,of Q.Grady Minor and Associates,P.A.and Richard D.Yo vanovich,Esq.
of Coleman,Yo vanovich and Koester,P.A.,representing Arthrex,Inc.on:
Monday,November 13,2017,5:30 pm
at
Arthrex Inc.,1370 Creekside Blvd.,Naples,Florida 34108
Arthrex,Inc.is asking the County to approve an Amendment to a Planned Unit
Development (PUD)application,which proposes to add one additional hotel
on the west side of Goodlette-Frank Road and increase the maximum number
of hotel rooms from 180 to 349.These modifications are made to both the
I/C and B Districts within the PUD.The maximum vehicular trip generation
figure in Section 2.16.L remains the same due to a corresponding reduction in
medical office space.A minor change to the Conceptual PUD Master Plan is
proposed to add a note on Tr act 6 and southern portion of Tr act 3 regarding the
Architectural Standards Deviation.The PUD amendment also makes provisions
for recreational facilities associated with permitted uses in the PUD.
The subject property is comprised of approximately 106±acres and is located
on the Southwest and Southeast quadrant of Immokalee Road and Goodlette-
Frank Road in Section 27,To wnship 48 South,Range 25 East,Collier County,
Florida.
Business and property owners,residents and visitors are welcome to attend
the presentation.The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational
purposes only,it is not a public hearing.Project information is posted online at
www.gradyminor.com/planning.If you have questions or comments,they can
be directed by mail,phone,fax or e-mail to:
Sharon Umpenhour,Senior Planning Te chnician
Q.Grady Minor and Associates,P.A.,3800 Via Del Rey,Bonita Springs,Florida 34134
Phone:239.947.1144 Fax:239.947.0375 sumpenhour@gradyminor.com
October 24,2017 ND-1791200
TRANSCRIPT OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING
FOR CREEKSIDE COMMERCE PARK CPUD
NOVEMBER 13, 2017
Appearances:
RICHARD YOVANOVICH, ESQ.
WAYNE ARNOLD
DAVID BUMPOUS
NORMAN TREBILCOCK
MR. YOVANOVICH: Good evening. My name is
Rich Yovanovich. And we are here today for another
neighborhood information meeting for revisions to
the Creekside PUD. Many of you have heard
(indiscernible) Dave Bumpous is here from Arthrex
and Wayne Arnold is here from Grady Minor &
Associates. Norm Trebilcock, our transportation
engineer is here.
Nancy Gundlach from the county is here.
MS. GUNDLACH: Hello.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So they're reviewing the
proposed amendments.
And basically what we're proposing to do, and
I think you probably have read about it already in
the paper, is, and we talked to many of you one on
one already about what we're proposing to do, but
we're proposing to revise the Creekside PUD to the
west side of Goodlette-Frank Road to allow for an
additional hotel, not to exceed 169 units, and to
allow for a wellness center, workout facility as an
accessory use to Arthrex employees and guests of
the hotel.
The hotel is to serve Arthrex doctors and
people that come in for training, et cetera, for
the Arthrex products.
Like I said, there's going to be no changes to
the east side of Creekside, which (indiscernible)
Goodlette-Frank Road, which we're talking about.
What we're going to be doing, and David will
take you through a little bit greater detail, but
essentially hotel here. These existing buildings,
which are medical offices and offices, will be
razed, and that's kind of where the fitness center
will go and the wellness center.
We're making adjustments in the square footage
in the PUD, so we're transportation neutral for
what's existing today. So all the transportation
commitments will stay, all the traffic
(indiscernible) will stay the same.
I think most of you probably (indiscernible)
seen the architecture. That's kind of what David
is here to tell you about, but that's essentially
what we're doing. That's what we talked about in
our smaller group meetings, what you read about in
the paper.
And, again, the changes are really talking
about right in -- right in this area right here.
This is the -- when we were here last time, talking
about, you know, the office complex, that's tract
5. Tract 6 is what we're talking about and part of
tract 3.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Where is 3?
MR. YOVANOVICH: 3 is right here, the corner.
This is where the -- where I was pointing to, with
the medical offices, the existing buildings are.
Those will go away.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: So that's what
started as the John R. Wood building?
MR. YOVANOVICH: John R. Wood building
(indiscernible). It's the corner building
(indiscernible) but just south of that corner
building, the one-story medical offices, those will
go away and be replaced with the fitness center.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And be the fitness
center?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Fitness center, yes, sir.
So that's what we're here to talk about.
We'll answer any questions you may have. I don't
know what the next slide is. I'm going to turn it
over to Mr. Bumpous.
MR. BUMPOUS: Thanks, Rich.
Thank you. Thank you all for coming tonight.
Appreciate it.
I'm happy to share with you some renderings we
have.
The hotel is currently still in design, so
we're obviously trying to make progress forward,
hoping that the PUD goes through successfully.
We've talked about this many times in our past
meetings, the volume of visitors that we see.
Right now, those visitors are staying in hotels all
around southwest Florida, from down on Fifth Avenue
up all the way to Estero, and then they're being
shuttled in and out every single day. It's in
excess of 12,000 visiting doctors each year.
In addition to those doctors, many times they
bring representatives with them or other guests.
So it's a significant number of people. It's a
significant amount of traffic as well that we're
hoping not only to alleviate, but we're hoping to
create more of a cohesive environment so that
they're literally able to get up each morning, walk
simply down the street, attend their classes all
day, have dinner, and return to the hotel as well.
So as you can see, we're trying to create
something that blends with the campus. And, you
know, I've used that term many times, the campus of
Arthrex, because that's what we want. We want the
area to kind of, you know, be cohesive and really
fit the environment, the area, lots of landscaping.
This is a view, basically, from the west and
south. This is what we're looking at here. We
change views -- this, of course, just being lobby
entry side.
We've named the hotel Innovation Hotel. It
will not be a flagged hotel such as a Marriott or a
Hilton or something along those lines.
And at the same time, we are not going to put
this hotel on Amazon or Orbitz or those types of
things. It's truly a business hotel for primarily
-- primarily, I should say, designed to fit the
needs of our visitors that are here throughout the
year, both domestic and International visitors.
At the same time, we look to partner with
other businesses in the area that are constantly
bringing guests into town.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Like what's an
example of that?
MR. BUMPOUS: Bank of America is a great
example. There are a lot of businesses like that
that have, you know, thousands of nights of stays
here in southwest Florida.
And one question that may cross your mind,
because I know the newspaper was certainly
interested, is what kind of a negative impact does
this have on the other hotels in the area.
Well, at 160 rooms and the volume that Arthrex
plans to put in this hotel, it really doesn't have
a negative impact. Plus, you have to take into
consideration the fact that we've been putting a
large portion of our guests in Estero up by Coconut
Point. So, in essence, there's really no negative
impact.
And that's what's driving this. We talked
about this in the last meeting, how five years ago,
there was plenty of hotel space. We were looked at
as a preferred customer in southwest Florida,
because we were year-around business. We're not
looked at, you know, in the same light now because
you have all these European guests in the summer
and all these other things that are driving up
demand.
Plus we have FDA and AvaMed restrictions. So
we can't put guests in the Ritz Carlton and other
resort levels.
So it really paints us into a corner many
times. So, again, you have doctors that are
getting on a bus at 5:30, 5:45 in the morning in
Estero to make the breakfast and class at 7 a.m.
This affords them the ability to walk two blocks, a
block and a half, and they're basically at their
class.
The next photo I want to share with you is
this is a -- this is a view from Goodlette-Frank
Road, so if you were driving up Goodlette-Frank,
looked off to the left. Obviously, there's still a
landscape barrier or buffer here.
But the thing I really wanted to point out is
we talked about this in the early stages, and many
of you visited with us back in the spring, because
most of our guests come in via shuttle from the
airport, the county has graciously worked with us
to allow us to put in much less parking than a
hotel would require this size.
And so our intent is to landscape heavily all
around the hotel and only have parking on the
perimeter. That's for the employees that work
there. And certainly, you know, we have employees
from around the world. So if we have a visitor
from California or a visitor from Germany,
obviously, we're going to want them to stay here
and not stay at the Hilton or the Hyatt or
somewhere else. So many times they will have a
rental car from the hotel.
So that's the intent of making sure that,
again, it blends in. It's four stories. It's
below the PUD height restriction that's imposed
now. We're not asking for any additional height at
all. And we're really hoping to make it something
that, as you drive by, you just simply say, wow,
it's a beautiful building, and it just kind of
blends into the environment, if you will.
The final slide you may have seen in the paper
or in other pictures. We're over here in the main
campus. We're actually in the cafeteria right
here. And this is the building we talked about
last year. And, of course, now we're talking about
a hotel and what would become the fitness center.
The fitness center is a little bit deceiving.
I had someone call me this morning and say 30 some
thousand square feet. I said, yes, but we're
designing it as a two-story building with a solid
atrium up through the middle. So you get natural
daylight that -- sorry -- natural daylight that
floods the entire facility .
So you'll have weights, treadmills, all the
basic things that you would see in a normal fitness
center. What this allows the employees to do is
those that are going to fitness centers now early
in the morning and then commuting here at 7:30 or
8:00, they'll just come here a 5:30 or 6. Those
that are going out at lunch -- and, by the way, we
allow people flexibility, so they can be gone an
hour, hour and a half, two hours at lunch sometimes
to work out. They don't have to leave the campus.
Same would be true in the evening. I work out
at 5. I go to the gym. I go home at 7:30, 7,
whatever time it may be.
So it really does support the campus, support
the activities.
The other piece of that is the surgeons who
visit us, these are high-end sports doctors. Many
of them played sports themselves. They're
generally very fit and very into fitness.
So we found, over time, that we've had to
shuttle or work with these surgeons at the hotels
they were at to either -- they would work out there
or they would want to go to a bigger, better gym in
the area. It will eliminate that need.
So when they're staying here, they walk across
the pathway, they work out, they come to class.
So we're, again, trying to create an
environment where the campus is compact,
self-sufficient and really meets the needs of our
employees and our guests.
And that's my last slide.
Do you have questions?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: All the buildings
that you've shown, those are all hotel buildings.
The fitness center is just in this one photograph
because you don't have a building -- you don't have
plans yet to show?
MR. BUMPOUS: No. In this -- in this photo,
this would be the hotel.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right.
MR. BUMPOUS: This is a fitness center.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right.
MR. BUMPOUS: This is an office building.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Right.
MR. BUMPOUS: Tonight, we're talking about the
PUD amendment strictly for this parcel here.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Rich or Dave, can
you comment -- I mean, the paper keeps referring to
a second hotel. The first hotel, so to speak, is
the one east of Goodlette-Frank that's been in the
PUD approval for three years or something like
that; is that right?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah. On this -- I'm sorry.
On this side of the street is the existing 180
unit, not to exceed 180-unit hotel that's been in
the PUD for awhile. You're probably right, three
or four years.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: By some number
(indiscernible).
MR. YOVANOVICH: I can't remember how long
it's been in there. This is an additional hotel to
what's already in the PUD on the west side.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Do you now, by
coincidence, what the status of that hotel is on
the east side?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I know that, as of right now,
there is no hotel, but it doesn't mean there won't
be.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: All right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's no formal plans to
come out of the ground that I'm aware of anytime
soon.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Sir?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Yeah. The earlier
rendering of the hotel, it looked like there was
some sort of a skylight --
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: -- and a concave
skylight. How tall was that? Just give us a
little more detail.
MR. BUMPOUS: Yeah. Let me address that.
First of all, let me apologize. This is the
most current picture I have. This was the artist
rendering of creating a sweeping skylight over the
center of the hotel. It will have a skylight.
That's the plan. But it will be flat.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay.
MR. BUMPOUS: But even with this particular
drawing, it's below the PUD maximum height of 50
feet.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Okay.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: It's a very
attractive design, I must say.
MR. BUMPOUS: This is just a difficult design
and it's expensive, so the flat foot tends to make
a lot more sense. And, quite frankly, no one is
going to see it except when you're underneath it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Any other questions?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And this is still
the hotel?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yes.
MR. BUMPOUS: Yes, sir, this is the hotel.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: And is it a similar
thing where you have an atrium in this fitness
center also?
MR. BUMPOUS: It is similar in that -- except
this atrium in the hotel would actually be open, so
you would see up through the glass into the sky, if
you will. It will allow us to air condition the
interior space and create a nice gathering space.
Where the difference is with the fitness
center, it would have more of a transom effect. So
it would have a roof, but you would have like three
feet of glass. So it, again, it allows sunlight to
really penetrate the building.
It's similar to what we've done on the
administration building. Each floor plate from the
window to the furthest wall is no more than 75
feet. What that does is it allows natural sunlight
to penetrate, which everybody wants natural
sunlight during the day, especially in the work
environment, and so that's something we've worked
really hard to create.
I mean, we have this beautiful weather, so we
want to make sure that everybody gets to enjoy it.
And then kind of to flip that around, we've
also worked with the engineering firms so that the
lighting fixtures in the administration building, I
know we're not talking about the administration
building tonight, but they're designed so that
they're indirect so you don't have light pollution
coming out of the building.
Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: (Indiscernible)
there was the last building, your brand new
building, your administration building, and now
it's this.
Do you see them being built at the same time?
What is the time frame?
MR. BUMPOUS: Great question. As far as
timing, this building, ideally, will start in the
spring, the administration building. That's our
plan right now. In fact, we're already working
with the county on those plans and approvals and
everything.
And then sometime later next year we would
actually begin to work on these projects as well.
The goal for us is to have everything
completely done, buttoned up and beautiful by
December 2019, the end of 2019. That's our
objective.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Anything else? That's all we
have. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE VOICE: Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you all very much.
(Recording concluded.)
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, Joyce B. Howell, do hereby certify that:
1. The foregoing pages numbered 1 through 16
contain a full, true and correct transcript of
proceedings in the above-entitled matter, transcribed
by me to the best of my knowledge and ability from a
digital audio recording.
2. I am not counsel for, related to, or
employed by any of the parties in the above-entitled
cause.
3. I am not financially or otherwise
interested in the outcome of this case.
DATED: November 27, 2017
SIGNED AND CERTIFIED:
________________________
Joyce B. Howell
Arthrex PUDA
November 13, 2017
Applicant:Arthrex, Inc.
Counsel:Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A.
Planning:Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.
Transportation:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, P.A.
PROJECT TEAM
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD
February 22, 2018 Page 1 of 1
Hearing Sign Photos.docx
PL20170000425 – Posted signs February 22, 2018
hffiet c ffi5,4 gcc-
QoVrntv
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORTDA 34104
12391252-2400
COLLI ER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
G ROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
Project Name:
PL #:
Property lD #:
Project Address:
Applicant:
Agent Name:
Agent/Firm Address:
Property Owner:
Please provide the following, if a
i. Total Acreage:
i:. Proposed # of Residential Units:
Assigned Planner:
Engineering Manager (for ppl,s and Fp,s):
PUD
-?L20tb-lafr
v.
Pre-Application Meeting Notes
Date and Time:
Ctr?'
PJ.
3ffi
iii. ProposedCommercialsquareFootage:
iv. For Amendments, indicate the original petition number:
lf there is an Ordinance of Resolution associated with this project, please indicate the
type and number:
lf the project is within a Plat, provide the. name and AR#/p[#:
&t"tc,wmty&
COTLIER COUNW GOVERNMENT
G ROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORTDA 34104
12391 2s2-240O
Meeting Notes
tu
COLLIER COUNW GOVERNMENT
G ROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.collierFov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPTES, FTORIDA 34104
123912s2-2400
Meeting Notes
Crowtty
COLLI ER COU NTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORTDA 34104
(2391252-2400 FAX: (239) 2sz-6gs$
Pre-Application Meeting and Final submittal Requirement checklist for:
I nUo Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code
ffnmendment to pUD- Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code
I eUO to PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code
The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time
of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the
application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets
attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted.
REQUIREMENTS #oF
coPlEs REqUIRED NOT
REQUIRED
Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of
why amendment is necessary rtE (T
Completed Application with required attachments q
Pre-application meeting notes
Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 2 u
Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 2 L
CompteteO nOUress 2
Warranty Deed(s)3 L
7List ldentifying Owner and all parties of corporation 2
Signed and sealed Boundary Survev 4
Architectu ra I Renderi ng of proposed structu res 4
Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with
project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included
on aerial.
5 V tr
Statement of Utility Provisions 4
Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 4
Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental
lmpact Statement (ElS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with
project planner at time of public hearings.
T tr {
Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include
copies of previous surveys.4 T {
Traffic lmpact Study 7 v
HistoricalSurvey 4
School lmpact Analysis Application, if applicable 2 L
Electronic copy of all required documents 2
Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)'l l 4
List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this
document is separate from Exhibit E)Kn {.n
Revised Conceptual MasterSite Plan 24" x36"andOne8/2" x L1" copv YI1J L ,
Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master plan 24" x36" - Only if
Amending the PUD W {I
Checklist continued onto next page...
4/Ls/2OLs Page 11 of 16
a&F"tC,ounty4
COTTIER COUNW GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(2391 2s2-2400 FAx: (239) 2s2-6358
Revised PUD document with crossed thru & underlined
Copy of Official lnte tion and/or Zoning Verification
located in lmmokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal
'The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet:
n Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 E. 1. of the Administrative Code
n Exhibit D: legalDescription
! Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each
n Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments
lf located in RFMU (Rural Frinse Mixed Use) Receivins Land Areas
Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at
239-690-3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention plan."
PLANNERS - INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOTLOWING REVIEWERS:
!School District (Residential Components): Amy
.lockheart !Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan
/Jtilities Engineerins: Kris VanLenqen Parks and Recreation: Vicky Ahmad
Emergency Management: Dan Summers I m mokalee Water/Sewer District:
City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other:
FEE REQUIREMENTS
Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00
! PUD Rezone: 51-0,000.00* plus 525.00 an acre or fraction of an acre
n fUD to PUD Rezone: 58,000.00* plus SZS.OO an acre or fraction of an acre
V gltD Amendment: 56,000.00* plus SZS.OO an acre or fraction of an acre
[/Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: S2,25O.OO t ^! Environmentat Data Requirements-Els Packet (submittal determined at pre-appticatlon [/A
meeting): S2,500.00! Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): S1,O0O.OO t-t/n
fl fransRortation Review Fees:
Methodology Review: 5500.00, to be paid directly to Transportation at the
Methodology Meetingx
*Additionalfees to be determined at Methodology Meeting.
o Minor Study Review: 5750.00
/./ o Major Study Review 51,500.00w'Les^ffii'#*F' $ | zzs,(n
y6cc: Ssoo.oo
! School Concurrency Fee, if applicable:
4/ts/2oLs Page 12 of 16
o Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in
coordination with the County
*Additionol fee for the Sth ond subsequent re-submittol witt be occessed ot 20% of the originol fee.All checks may be mode payoble to: Boord of County Commissioners
COTLIER COUNW GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
wurur.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORITESI{OE DRIVE
NAPLES, FIOR|DA :t4104
(2391 252-2'100 FAx: (2391 2S2€3s8
4/Ls/2OL5 Page 13 of 16
a&C-ounry&
COLLIER COUNW GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(23912s2-240O
Collier County Contact Information:
Name Review Discipline Phone Email
n chris Alcorn UtiliW Billine 821-8136 chrisalcorn @colliergov. net
! David Anthonv Environmental Review 252-2497 davidanthonv@coll iersov.net
U/srrr"r. Araque Environmental Review 252-6290 sum merbrownaraq ue@col I iergov. net
I Steve Baluch, P.E.Transportation Planning 2s2-236t Stephen Baluch @colliergov. net
# Laurie Beard Tra nsportation Pathwavs 252-5782 Lauriebeard @colliergov.net
L-l Rachel Beaslev Zoning Services 252-8202 rachel beaslev@col liersov. net
L-i Marcus Berman County Survevor 252-6885 Ma rcusBerman @colliergov.net
L-J Mark Burtchin ROW Permittine 252-5165 markbu rtchin @colliergov. net
D George Cascio UtiliW Billine 2s2-5543 georgecascio@col I iergov. net
g/H"iaiAshton cicko ManaAing Asst. Countv Attornev 252-8773 heidiashton @colliergov. ner
n Sue Faulkner Comprehensive Planning 252-5715 suefa u lkner@colliergov. ner
n Dale Fev North Naples Fire 597-3222 dalefev@colliersov.net
! P:ula Fleishman lmpact Fee Administration 252-2924 pau lafleish man@colliergov.net
( N^nrv Gundlach, AICP, PLA Zoning Services 252-2484 nancygund lach @colliereov. net
n Shar Hingson East Naples Fire District 687-s650 shingson @ccfco.org
Ll John Houldsworth Engineering Services 252-5757 john houldsworth @colliersov. ner
L-l Jodi Huehes Tra nsportation Pathwavs 252-5744 jod ihughes@colliergov.net
LJ Alicia Humphries Site Plans Reviewer/ROW 252-2326 aliciahu mph ries@colliereov. net
! Eric Johnson, AICP,CFM Zoning Services 252-2931 ericiohnson @coll iereov. net
Ll Marcia Kendall Comprehensive Planning 2s2-2387 marciakendall @col liergov.net
! Stephen Lenberger Environmental Review 2s2-2915 stevelenberger@col I iergov.net
Ll Garrett Louviere Stormwater 2s2-2526 garrettlouviere@col I ierRov.net
! Paulo Martins Utilities 252-4285 paulomartins@coll iergov.net
Ll Thomas Mastroberto Fire Safetv 252-7348 Ihomasmastroberto@col liergov.net
L-l Jack McKenna, P.E.Engineering Services 252-29tI jackmcken na@col liergov. net
L,l Matt Mclean, P.E.Principal Proiect Manaser 252-8279 matthewmclean @colliergov.net
n Gilbert Moncivaiz UtiliW lmoact Fees 252-4215 gil be rtmonciva iz@ col I iergov. net
L-l Annis Moxam Addressing 2s2-5519 annismoxam @colliergov.net
! Stefanie Nawrocki Plannins and Zonins 252-23L3 StefanieNawrocki@col I iersov. net
! Jessica Huckeba CAD Technician 252-2315 JessicaH uckeba @coll iersov.net
n Brandy Otero Transit 252-s859 brandyotero@colliergov.net
&fttc,ounty+
COTLIER COUNW GOVERNMENT
G ROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
Additional Attendee Contact Information:
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORTDA 34LO4
(23912s2-240O
Ll Bill Pancake North Naples Fire 597-3222 billpancake@colliergov.net
f BrandiPollard UtiliW lmpact fees 252-6237 brandipollard @colliersov. net
Ll Fred Reischl, AICP Zoning Services 252-42tL fredreischl @colliereov. net
J Brett Rosenblum, P.E.Utility Plan Review 252-2905 brettrosenblum @colliersov. net
! Edwin Sanchez Fire Review 252-75t7 edwinsanchez@coll iergov.net
ffr Uicnaet Sawver Transportation Plannins 252-2926 michaelsawyer@col liergov. net
Ll Corby Schmidt, AICP Comprehensive Plannine 252-2944 corbyschmidt@col liergov.net
! chris scott, Alcp Planning and Zoning 252-2460 ch risscott@col I iersov. net
L-l Peter Shawinskv Architectural Review 252-8s23 PeterShawinsky@col liergov.net
L-i DanielSmith, AICP Zonins Services 252-43L2 danielsmith @coll iergov.net
tr Ellen Summers Planning and Zoning 252-L032 El lenSu m mers @col I ie rsov. net
L,l Scott Stone Assistant County Attorney 252-8400 scottstone @col I iersov. net
L-l Mark Strain Hearing Examiner/CCPC 2s2-4446 markstrain @colliergov.net
Ll Chad Sweet Transportation 2s2-5687 chadsweet@col lierogv.net
n Mark Templeton Landscaoe 252-2475 ma rktempleton @colliergov.net
L-l Jon Walsh Buildine Review 252-2962 ionathanwalsh@colliereov.net
Y DavidWeeks. AICP Comprehensive Planning 252-2306 davidweeks@colliergov.net
n Kirsten Wilkie Environmental Review 252-55L8 kirstenwilkie@colliergov.net
! Christine Willouehbv Planning and Zoning 252-5748 ChristineWil loughbv@col liersov. net
t
LR
&
COLLI ER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAG EMENT DEPARTM ENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPIES, FLORIDA 34104
(2t91 2s2-2400 FAX 12391 2s2-s724
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division
at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by
Addressinq personnel prior to pre-application meetinq. please allow 3 days for processino.
Not all items will apply to every project. ltems in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE
PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section.
PETfTfON TYPE (lndicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type)
trntr!!tr!trnn!tr
BL (Blasting Permit)
BD (Boat Dock Extension)
Carnival/Circus Perm it
CU (ConditionalUse)
EXP (Excavation Permit)
FP (FinalPlat
LLA (Lot Line Adjustment)
PNC (Project Name Change)
PPL (Plans & Plat Review)
PSP (Prelim inary Subdivision Plat)
PUD Rezone
RZ (Standard Rezone)
E SoP (Site Development Plan)
n SDPA(SDPAmendment)
! SDPI (lnsubstantial Change to SDP)
n SIP (Site lmprovement Plan)
n SlPl (lnsubstantial Change to SIP)
n SNR (Street Name Change)
n SUC (Street Name Change - Unplatted)
fl TDR (Transferof Development Rights)
n VA (Variance)
n VnP (Vegetation RemovalPermit)
! VRSFP (Vegetation Removal& Site FillPermit)
E OTHER PUDAandGMPA
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
Creekside Commerce Park PUD (see Exhibit 2)s27 T48 R25
FOLIO (Property lD) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
See Exhibit 3 See Attached
STREETADDRESS oTADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned)
Creekside Blvd E, Pkwy, Way, Trail, Blvd and Street, Arthrex Blvd and lmmokalee Road
. LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of projecVsite in relation to nearest public road right-
of-way
r SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties)
CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
Creekside Commmerce Park CPUD
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if appticable)
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only)
SDP - orARorPL#
t
C,ollier C-outtt'9#
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENTDEPARTMENT NAPLES, FTORIDA 34104www.coffiersov.net (2t91252-2400 FAx (23912s2-s724
Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application;
indicate whether proposed or existing)
Please Return Approved Checklist By: E Email n fax tr Personally picked up
Applicant Name: Sharon Umpenhour
Phone: 239-947-1144 Email/Fax: sumpenhour@gradyminor.com
Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name
approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Fotio Number See Attached
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Approvedby: p711; 2/3/2017
Updated by:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
Exhibit 2
Creekside Commerce Park CPUD
Legal Description
All that part of Section 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida
being more particularly described as follows;
COMMENCING at the northwest corner of said Section 27;
thence along the north line of said Section 27 South 89"45'2L" East 1-869.61 feeU
thence leaving said line South OO"t4'39" West L25.00 feet to a point on the south right
of way line of lmmokalee Road (S.R. 846) and the POINT OF BEGINNING of the parcel
herein described;
thence along said right of way line in the following Six (6) described courses;
1-) South 89"45'2L' East 485.99 feeU
2) South OO"L4'39" West 10.00 feet;
3) South 89"45'2L' East 150.19 feeU
4) South 89"48'33" East 716.81 feet;
5) North 05"34'33" West 10.05 feeU
6) South 89"48'33" East 486.21 feet to a point on the west right of way line of
Goodlette Road as recorded in Plat Book 3, page 58, Public Records of Collier County,
Florida;
thence along said line South 05"33'48" East L767.02 fee|
thence leaving said line South 89"20'53" West 5L.L8 feet;
thence North 23"55'53" West 13.07 feet;
thence northwesterly, 30.7L feet along the arc of a circular curve concave to the
northeast, having a radius of 80.00 feet, through a central angle of 21"59'52" and being
subtended by a chord which bears North L2"55'57" West 30.53 feet;
thence North 05"00'53" West 31.56 feeU
thence North 36"19'20" West 32.02 feeu
thence North 55"04'35" West 35.11feeU
thence North 80"39'15" West 32.53 feeU
thence North 88"39'12'West 97.78 feeU
thence North 86"04'40'West 45.79 feet;
thence North 89"49'48" West 132.77 feet;
thence North 69"40'LO" West 37.23 feeU
thence South 89"20'53" West 142.47 feeU
thence South 84"59'26" West 24.56 feeU
thence South 74"56'50" West L21.32 feet;
thence South 79"49'59" West 45.93 feeU
thence westerly and northwesterly, 45.51 feet along the arc of a circular curve concave
to the northeast, having a radius of 66.00 feet, through a central angle of 39"30'16"
and being subtended by a chord which bears North 80"24'53" West 44.6L feet to a
point of compound curvature;
f,{lGradyi\linor
-Clvll t:n8lne.ern . l,and liunrlns . I'la0nf s . l,anfticaoe .\rrhllr('t$
February 2,2OL7 Page 1 of4
Arthrex PUDA
November 13, 2017
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
Applicant:Arthrex, Inc.
Counsel:Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A.
Planning:Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.
Transportation:Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, P.A.
PROJECT TEAM
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Transcript 11-13-17 NIM - PL20170000425 (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park
9.A.7
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: 18-3-20 Letter of traffic neutrality_Creekside Commerce Pk PUDA (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)
March 15, 2018
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Naples, Florida, March 15, 2018
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of
Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in
Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain
Stan Chrzanowski
Patrick Dearborn
Diane Ebert
Edwin Fryer
Karen Homiak
Joe Schmitt
ALSO PRESENT:
Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager
Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney
Scott Stone, Assistant County Attorney
Tom Eastman, School District Representative
Page ! of ! 1 72
March 15, 2018
P R O C E E D I N G S
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Thursday, March 15th meeting
of the Collier County Planning Commission.
If everybody will please rise for Pledge of Allegiance, and after we do the Pledge of Allegiance, if
you could stand for just a moment for another announcement we have to make.
(The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you don't mind, the past weekend we had a longtime planner who passed
away from Collier County. He was going through some medical challenges for a while, and this weekend he
passed away. His name was Fred Reischl. So we won't be benefited by his presence anymore. He did a
great job for Collier County. I'd just like to ask a moment of silence for Fred.
(A moment of silence was observed.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Roll call by the secretary, please.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. Good morning.
Mr. Eastman?
MR. EASTMAN: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Chrzanowski?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Fryer?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mrs. Ebert's here.
Chairman Strain?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ms. Homiak?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: Here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Mr. Schmitt?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Present.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: And, Mr. Dearborn?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Present.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you.
And addenda to the agenda. The first item is we're going to be continuing 9F indefinitely, the request
by the applicant. That is the Lawmetka Plaza PUD. It's on U.S. 41 and Wiggins Pass Road. I don't know
what the applicant intends to do, but they asked for an indefinite continuance. They may have to readvertise
for it to come back.
But with that in mind, is there a motion from the Planning Commission to continue 9F,
PL20160002106, indefinitely?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Patrick, seconded by Ned. All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
Another item for the I just need to know if we have a quorum for the April 5th meeting. Anybody
know if they're not going to be here?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, good. We have a quorum then.
And as we have typically done, today's meeting will have a break at around 10:30, wherever a good
Page ! of ! 2 72
March 15, 2018
break point is for the court reporter, we'll have an hour break around noontime. Again, if we're as close to
that as possible, and then an afternoon break.
We will finish today, to whatever extent we've reviewed everything, by 4 o'clock, and then we'll
resume at our next meeting, which is the April 5th meeting.
And with that, we move into the approval of minutes. We had a set of minutes distributed
electronically, the April I mean, February 15th minutes. Is there either changes or corrections?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Move approval of the minutes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Approved by made by Ned. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'll second.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane. Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
Ray, BCC report and recaps?
MR. BELLOWS: On March 13th the Board of County Commissioners heard two landuse petitions:
The Eagle Creek PUD amendment and the rezone for the Old U.S. 41, and they were approved on their
summary agenda.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, thank you.
That takes us to chairman's report. The only thing I'd have I want to stress, and I just want to make
sure the issue's been resolved, Mr. Schmitt's delivery of his packet for the Planning Commission apparently
drove past his house to Everglades City and drove past his house to get back to this building and never
delivered it last week, so and by, I think, Tuesday or so I found out he hadn't gotten it.
I don't know how that happened, but I'd like to ask staff to make sure that doesn't happen again. I
mean, I know if we have people driving down there and his house doesn't run as business hours, so on our
way back they always could stop by and drop it off.
I mean, I don't know that he doesn't run on business hours, but I'm assuming he doesn't run on
business hours.
MR. BELLOWS: We can have Code Enforcement investigate.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It was rather frustrating not to get it. I mean, I spent most of
Tuesday and Wednesday with a pretty significant packet.
MR. BELLOWS: Would you prefer an electronic submittal?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I get it in an electronic version, and they typically put it in an
envelope and just shove it in the front, stick it in the door, and for some reason they didn't deliver it until I
contacted Judy and notified her, and finally Tuesday afternoon I got it.
MR. BELLOWS: Well, we'll definitely check that process.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's simply just a jump drive. That's all they deliver. That's what I
want.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The only with this amount of data, especially, we had, what, at the time, six
cases scheduled. We still have five. They're pretty intense. So hopefully whatever happened is fixed and it
won't happen again, but I just wanted to make note of it so we pay attention to it in the future. Thank you,
Ray.
Consent agenda, there are no items.
***And that will take us directly into our first advertised public hearing. It's Item 9A. And it's also
part of 9B. It's a combination. We'll hear them together, vote on them separately. This item was continued
Page ! of ! 3 72
March 15, 2018
from our March 1st meeting.
We have a new packet that came out last Thursday, and I believe there's more information today. But
I'll announce them first, and then before the applicant speaks, I'll clarify some things with this panel. Item 9A
is PL20170002330, and Item 9B is PL20170002634.
Both are for the City Gate Commerce Park. One is for the Development of Regional Impact
document, which is a DO, and the other is for the Planned Unit Development, which is the MPUD.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And disclosures from the Planning Commission; let's start with Tom.
MR. EASTMAN: No disclosures.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: No disclosures.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: No disclosures in the last two weeks.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I'm going to go last on this one.
Karen?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing. Joe?
MR. SCHMITT: Nothing.
Patrick?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, it looks like I'm the only one that had a lot of disclosures.
I met with the applicant well, there's two applicants. I met with both sides of the both applicant
teams multiple times, had multiple conversations with them.
As you may recall, last time this came forward, the Planning Commission had asked its questions. I
normally allow ask youall to go first as a courtesy, and then I will wrap up with anything that's left on my
list. We only got a little bit into mine before we quit for the day.
I have met with the applicant trying to help get the items cleaned up as much as we could for today's
meeting, so that should save us some time.
But I did meet with Josh and Roger Josh and Roger Rice and Nick Casalanguida. I talked to the
County Attorney's Office and staff numerous times, and I think that's about it. But we did have quite a bit of
work and time put into this, and with that we'll move right into the presentation by the applicant.
And, Josh, I know you've got a lot of new information that's not the same as we got in the packet. So
we'll have to follow along page by page as you bring it up if that's okay with the Planning Commission.
Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. For the record, Josh Freuth with Davidson Engineering.
I'm just going to walk you through the few items, as Mark mentioned, that have changed in the last
two weeks.
One of the items that came up, I think, two weeks ago, I just wanted to clarify for the Commission, in
the deviations, the difference between off premises and on premise for the signs. I broke it down between the
deviations and the LDC in the definition. The offpremise signs, as it relates to this PUD, relates to Deviation
No. 8, No. 9, and No. 11.
Offpremise signs for the sports complex project will be located within the property abutting the
MPUD boundary but off the sports complex project site. Offpremise signs for the sports complex project and
MPUD combined is only related to Deviation No. 11 and the future monument sign within the City Gate
Boulevard rightofway. It simply means off the platted lots or off the sports complex project site.
Onpremise signs, as related to this PUD, Deviations No. 3, 6, 7, and 12. As it relates to the sports
complex only, "on" it simply means it's on the sport complex or within the sports complex boundary. As it
relates to the MPUD, it means within the MPUD boundary or on a platted lot.
And for both combined, if the deviation affects both the PUD and the sports complex project, it
means that it's on platted rightofway.
Going through the changes, the Commission
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's just go to the pages first. So that's page
MR. FRUTH: Page No. 10.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I want to make sure I mean, the Planning Commission, for the most
part, asked some of their questions last time. I'll make sure we don't have any other questions and I checked
Page ! of ! 4 72
March 15, 2018
mine as well so we'll get them all wrapped up.
MR. FRUTH: No problem.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any other questions all the way to Page 10?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I did on Page 7, 1.6. It's the new language entered in that says the original
PUD ordinance 8893 was found consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in effect at that time. And I asked
for the original Comp Planning memo. And I know that youall answered it. Maybe you can rephrase it for
the Planning Commission since it was brought up last time.
MR. FRUTH: Consistency was determined for the 1988's ADA. We were unable to gather
information that you requested.
Go ahead, Roger.
MR. RICE: Roger Rice, for the record.
That language was in the original PUD. We're just leaving it unchanged.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's underlined. Generally if it's underlined, it's new language. That's
why I was questioning it. If it was in the original, we wouldn't have an issue. That's why I don't know why
you needed to add it.
MR. RICE: Well, yeah. That language was only there staff asked for that language to be inserted to
clarify the language which is unchanged, which is the next paragraph, that "development of City Gate
Commerce Park as a Planned Unit Development will comply with the planning goals and objectives of
Collier County as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan," et cetera. That was just a clarification.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the only reason I brought it up to find out how originally, like today,
you get a Comprehensive Planning memo. In fact, you've got one attached here for today's request. If one of
those existed in the past, I just wanted to see if. If this is the purpose of it was to rephrase that second
statement or strengthen it, that's fine, too, as long as Nancy is on page with that.
MS. GUNDLACH: We're fine with it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Moving on, does anybody have anything else up to Page and up to and including Page 10?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Josh, let's move to Page 10 then.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. I'm just going to go over the items. What you'll see here in yellow was part of
the CCPC packets. In green are the changes I've changed that the Commission did not receive, and they were
changed and coordinated with staff over the last week or so.
In yellow, to Item D, "Notwithstanding the foregoing, the sports complex project as defined herein
will not include the lake and recreational tract." And then at the bottom for 2.3.A, "Project development
PPLs and SDPs shall generally conform to the approved master development plan."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. This is some new language, so if any of you have a question on it,
it's a reorganization of that last sentence is all it is.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: What does "generally" mean?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: To the effort it wouldn't be a substantial deviation to the code, which is
under your insubstantial deviation section of our Land Development Code.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. I was going to say everything follows the Land Development Code.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: The Land Development Code uses the word "generally"?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, it does not.
MR. FRUTH: Not specifically.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. I would be looking for "in all material respects."
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's fine. The previous version had "generally" in it. That's the only
reason I think it was left in.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Noted.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 11. Under 2.4, this is related directly to the traffic discussion from two weeks
ago.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can you make that larger. It's real hard to see for us up here.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I cannot see.
Page ! of ! 5 72
March 15, 2018
MR. FRUTH: I'm sorry. I can't hang on for one second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you see that bar on the lower right? There you go.
MR. FRUTH: I don't know if it's going to pull through on the presentation.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It probably won't, no.
MR. FRUTH: Nope. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: I will read what it says. "The MPUD's total trips shall not exceed 5,999 net externally
twoway p.m. peakhour trips as calculated in the approved ADA, parenthetical, approved trips. In any
development scenario, the MPUD's total trips shall not exceed the approved trips based on the use codes in
the ITE manual on trip generation rates in effect at time of application for SDP, SDPA, or subdivision plat
approval."
And 2.4.B is related to hotel and motel, and the sentence below that says, "The proposed hotel and
motel rooms in Section 2.4.A may be increased to a maximum of 950 rooms subject to the traffic cap in
Section 2.4.A.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the 5,999 comes from the original ADA approval for the
intensity of this project; is that a true statement?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. I have a slide that covers that as well, but that is a correct statement.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. My concern is Jeff, I thought you were going to be late this
morning.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: He was.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't see you come in. We've got to take a pause here.
MR. KLATZKOW: Oh, no.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Guess whose birthday it is today. Congratulations, Jeff. Happy Birthday to
you. He thought nobody would know, but I happened to hear the scuttlebutt this morning. So he's in for a
day of surprises, I think.
Okay. Now, back on the more serious issue. Do you have your traffic engineer here?
MR. FRUTH: He is not because of spring break, but I have a statement
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wait a minute; he's that young?
MR. FRUTH: He's on spring break with his children.
I have a statement from him that I prepared to put in a letter from him to put into the slide show and
presentation.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is it something you can put on the overhead now or
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'd like to but the question that I had asked the applicant to resolve
before today's meeting is if the traffic impacts as configured in the original PUD, which is back in the '80s,
was the methodology was consistent with the same methodology that compares it today so we have an
applestoapples comparison. And if he responded to that, that's what we're looking for.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. So this slide here is what we were talking about. Table 2.A within the Traffic
Impact Statement is the original ADA calculations, 2.B is the approved ordinance, and 2.C is the projected
buildout. I'll hit on these slides just because we're on them. But the key here is, as we talked about before,
traffic neutral, and the projected buildout, as you can see highlighted in green, is less than the original 1980
ADA, total trips and net external.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Question?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, sir.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: On the 2017 AUIR, how many trips are left before we hit deficiency?
MR. FRUTH: Staff?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, I notice some other applicants in here today were smart. They
brought their, let's say, the children who are not in are on spring break, they brought them with them, which
is a good exercise, because they can see how government works.
And the young lady, Reagan, actually, President Reagan was named after her, so she's here today to
hear what we're doing. So Norm couldn't bring his children?
MR. FRUTH: I think he might be on a cruise boat.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Lucky him. Okay.
Is there anybody, then, that's county side, though, that can talk to the detail of the traffic, then, since
Page ! of ! 6 72
March 15, 2018
your expert is not here?
MR. SAWYER: Good morning. For the record, Mike Sawyer, transportation planning.
Bear with me. I have the 2017 AUIR numbers. I'm going to be looking at Collier County sorry,
Collier Boulevard basically; 75 and Davis. The capacity on that roadway system is 3,600 peakhour and the
remaining capacity is projected to be four twenty yeah, 421.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Isn't this a vested project?
MR. SAWYER: It is.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Now, when that is said, does that mean that your 5,999 trips are
included in the AUIR?
MR. SAWYER: Yes. For when we've got projects like this where those trips were already
anticipated, those trips are automatically built into the projection of what we are projecting in the system
itself.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So the 3,600, was that the number? What's the remaining capacity?
I'm sorry.
MR. SAWYER: I believe it was 421.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Four twentyone. So 421 would not encroach upon the 5,999 because
that's already in; is that correct?
MR. SAWYER: Yes, yes.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'll let it go.
I could belabor that point, but it's not going to it doesn't at this point it's a vested project, so it doesn't
matter, so I'm not going to get into the statements just made.
Okay. And then that gets us to the hotel/motel issue, which is raising the number of hotel/motel units
up to 950, which is above what's in 2.4, because what's in 2.4 is consistent with the original PUD. But you're
just raising the hotel as the only one, and that's still going to be subject to the same cap that the rest is because
you're not raising the cap, so that actually makes it neutral in regards to impacts on the system.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. We wanted to put a cap on it, and the cap still shows that we're traffic
neutral. We're actually less than the original ADA.
And then, Mark, for the original question, for the record, this is the letter from Trebilcock Consulting
from Norm Trebilcock. What this letter outlines is the consistency between the ADA, Table 2.A through
Table 2.B and 2.C, the projected buildout that the calculations are done the same.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Were the internal capture rates the same back in those days as it is today?
MR. FRUTH: It changed because of the ITE manual. The '88 ADA was done with the third manual.
We're on the tenth. But, yes, in general the internal capture is the same. The changes are the technology
changes, so the way calculations are done today versus in '88 changes some of the traffic counts.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on then. We'll be probably going back to Page 12 of the
PUD.
MR. FRUTH: Page 12, Item 2.5.B, this was simply cleanup of text. You can see strikethrough,
some items highlighted in green and underlined. What it now says is prior to the issuance of the building
permits for a structure or structures on any development site, Site Development Plan approval must be
obtained in accordance with the Land Development Code.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Joe.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That statement is sort of a matter of the LDC anyway. Why is it
even in there?
MR. FRUTH: I agree.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I realize it's old language, but
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. We were simply cleaning up. Previously it said Chapter 10 of the Collier
County Zoning Ordinance. We were cleaning it up to be consistent and update it to today's standards. But
because it follows the LDC, I understand your question.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I mean, you have to do this anyway. I don't know why it has
to be in the PUD. The entire sentence could be the entire paragraph, essentially, could be eliminated.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. And I'll defer to staff if they agree.
Page ! of ! 7 72
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's not a big deal. I just found it to be a repeat of existing
requirements.
MR. FRUTH: Agreed. It's redundant.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, new PUDs we would have that language struck. We wouldn't have it
in it. Because it was an old PUD, I think staff reviewed it. And it's up to the staff at this point.
MR. FRUTH: We were trying to simply clean up and be consistent with the original PUD. I think
that's one of the reasons why applicant and staff agree to simply clean it up.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's essentially the same as Paragraph 13, the next Paragraph C, it's
nothing more than a repeat of the requirements of the code. I realize it's again, it's an existing PUD, but it's
language that is redundant.
MR. FRUTH: Agreed.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm fine with leaving it in if that's what staff wants to do. It's just, as
Mark said, you know, we can if it's a new PUD, it could be cleaned up and eliminate a lot of this language.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is this an amendment or a repeal and a replacement; do you remember?
MR. BELLOWS: Amendment.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, it's probably cleaner I mean, we try not on an amendment we
don't make as many as if it was a repeal and a rewrite.
MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. Sometimes the language might impact other land holdings within
the PUD not subject to this amendment so we can't change it in that regard.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on, then, to the next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 13, which is part of the packet. It was a strikethrough. "Sidewalks shall be
required on at least one side of all internal project streets." The strikethrough simply is through, as shown on
the master development plan.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 14. We're into the deviations. Deviation 1 and 2 were intentionally omitted per
the hearing two weeks ago. Those were related to sign deviations.
Deviation No. 3, the language that was added to the end of 3.A says, as shown on the attached master
development plan, Exhibit A1, Page 2 of 5.
Page 15, Deviation No. 4, Item C, at the request from the last hearing, we clarified the number of
flagpoles, and it now reads "up to 100 flagpoles."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well and that was something that Nick's involved in that, not so much you
guys. This is going to go on the sports stadium, right?
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. This is directly related to on site for the sport complex and the contract
purchaser.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Not all of those 100 flagpoles are the ones on top of the building. They
could be just anywhere on the site?
MR. FRUTH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And including the entries and things like that.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct, yes.
Item D, under the same deviation, No. 4, the word "project" was cleaned up since your CCPC
packets, but the overall statement reads, the actual height of future structures on the sports complex project
shall be equal to the actual structure height plus the flagpole height. For example, the maximum actual
structure height of 85 feet plus the maximum flagpole height of 40 feet equals an overall maximum height of
125 feet.
Page 17, Deviation No. 8
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Question on Deviation No. 6. The last line of the introductory paragraph on
No. 6, I'll read the sentence, or at least it says, offpremise directional signs which require that directional signs
be limited to 1,000 feet from the building structure or use for which the sign is displayed to, instead, allow
combined offpremise and onpremise directional signs for the MPUD and the sports complex for the MPUD's
internal public or private rightofway or abutting thereto but more than 200 feet from Collier Boulevard as
follows.
So you have this is for those, I think they're green poles or street signs you showed one of the
exhibits with street names on them or directions to the various facilities?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, correct.
Page ! of ! 8 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So none of those will be within 200 feet of Collier Boulevard?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct, as it reads.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I don't know why you chose 200 feet, but that's fine. I just didn't
understand that. I wanted to make sure I understand it. Thank you.
Oh, and on number you went to 8, so No. 7. The deviation is to apply to onpremise directional signs
along public or private rightofways throughout the City Gate Commerce Park. This deviation does not apply
to directional signage on the sports complex. See Deviation 12. And I think you probably answered my
question when we met, but just so I understand it now because I still have the note, Deviation 12 is not
necessarily about directional signage, is it? It's sign exemptions located on this is not a this isn't directional.
It seems like it's the fence and wall signs that they attach around the inside of a stadium; is that correct?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the reference to Deviation 12, is that still accurate in No. 7?
MR. FRUTH: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I think that's the point I needed to make sure we
MR. FRUTH: No, we'll strike through and remove that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now let's go to 8.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Number 8, again, is related to the sports complex project, the polemounted
sign. The language that was changed at the end now reads, "Within the Collier Boulevard, parenthetical, 951,
rightofway with future Board of County Commissioners approval of the location." And the language that was
removed was "or off site along lands outside the PUD." That was removed.
Deviation No. 9
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, back up. So you said you took out the word "Board" on No. 8 as we
have it in our packet, and you replaced it with Board and you had added "of County Commissioners" on the
end of it, and in front of it you put the word "future," right?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. "Board" remains, and we clarified what "board" meant, because it's
not a defined term in the PUD.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Approval of the location. Okay. And then instead of "future board,"
wouldn't you mean further Board of County Commissioners approval? Because the current board could have
that question come to them.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. I guess it should if it's stated, it would be current or future Board of County
Commissioners.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Either way.
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's it in 8. Then let's move to 9.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Number 9 is related to the same item. It's the sign related to the sports
complex along the rightofway.
E was added and clarified at the end. It now reads, "Shall be abutting to the MPUD boundary."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that takes out the issue of it could go actually, I think there was a
reference where it could have gone substantially off site. You have D that was the concern there. So it's still
got to be adjacent to the site, but it could be in the rightofway if the Board of County Commissioners
approved rightofway signage.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct, yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now, under the third well, let's start out with the top line. Deviation
9 seeks relief from the section of the LDC. "Offpremise directional signs which allows no more than two
onesided or one doublesided offpremise directional sign to be permitted for building, structure, or use," and
then it says, "which is not visible from the roadway serving such building."
So what you're asking to do is have this on the roadway so it would be visible from the roadway, and
you're asking it to be substantially changed in size, and the basis for that has been, from what I could see in
the packet, that it's typical to what other communities have for their sports parks.
MR. FRUTH: Correct. And I can pull that up. But from you two weeks ago we had a slide that
showed typical sign detail that's actually part of the PUD package and exhibit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep.
MR. FRUTH: And if needed, I can pull it up.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, I'm familiar with it.
Page ! of ! 9 72
March 15, 2018
MR. FRUTH: But that's the reason why. Okay.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question on that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I missed part of that. I tried to can you show that was that like the
Hammond Stadium and the so that size?
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. Those were the slides that we showed two weeks ago, that's correct. I'll pull it
up right now.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There; right above you. That's it. Good. No, that's one to the there you are.
MR. FRUTH: Well, this the exhibit that's within the packet. It's Exhibit 7 or, sorry, Exhibit A5, Page
2 of 2, and then we gave examples of Jet Blue and Hammond, as Commissioner Ebert stated.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: But this is not a commercial are we getting the Atlanta Braves or
somebody in there?
MR. FRUTH: No. This is essential service.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Those are awfully big signs.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well and that's part of the issue we probably need to discuss a little bit.
You're asking for 350 square feet area, and really what you mean, you need a 9by15 on each side, which is a
total of 350 square feet.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It would be better if we broke that sentence down to say, a total of 350
square feet with display area not to exceed 9by15 on either side or to whatever dimension you need to so you
get to the 350, and that would help understand the sizing of it, first of all. Second of all, you're not going to
be using any animations or other issues that the code would not allow typically on signage like this; is that a
true statement?
MR. FRUTH: Correct. The Code of Ordinances, anything prohibited, we can't change that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. Okay. So it's a static sign. Basically, it's going to be whatever it is.
Does that help
COMMISSIONER EBERT: A rolling sign.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. That helps understand it? Okay.
So let's move on. I think we have Page 18 is the next one.
MR. FRUTH: Page 18, Deviation No. 12. We added since the CCPC packets went out, we updated
the language. It simply reads now, "The projection of light from signs to the north shall be prohibited."
That's the last sentence of the deviation.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I still have questions about that. Now, let's start, first of all, with what you
mean by the "projection of light." How do you not project something that's lit? If you see it, you're
projecting something that wasn't there before. I know you're looking for Nick.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. I'm going to ask the contract purchaser to weigh in on this. But I have my
theory, but I'll go with Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
I think, Mark, when we talked I don't know if we conveyed it to Josh.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It doesn't look like it did, no.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Limited to 25 feet in height to the north that's lit. Anything above 25 feet
would not be lit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But you'll still have it won't be projected, but it will be lit. Lighted signs
can't be higher than 25 feet.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And above that you can still have signs, but they won't be lighted?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the other piece was we talked about this. You have a statement
in here which we don't normally allow in any deviations or PUDs because we always like limitations. It says,
"without limitations for type of, location, size and number," and I just when we talked you had some
parameters you wanted to make sure you got, and that's the kind of criteria I'm looking for.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah. And I think the discussion we had was the signs are not higher than
the top of the building that might be seen from a far distance away.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
Page ! of ! 10 72
March 15, 2018
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Internally, I need to keep that "without limitation" because you're going to
have wayfinding, advertising, promotional, things that are going to be on the fields directing to different
fields. When you get above 25 feet, I think the limitation we had, or we talked about, was to the east, south,
and west we'd have a box of maybe, say, 15by40 that we could have a sign, because it would be lit,
nonanimated, not LED, but we expect to have a sponsor for one of these facilities, and they'll probably want
their name on it. They'll probably want to be seen close to from I75, but it would not project to the north and
it will not be animated and it would be in that box. So those are the three directions we talked about.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So it would face the landfill to the east.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I75 to the south and 951 to the west.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And there the limitation on size would be, I think you said, 15 by
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And the only reason I say that is because we have one person that's talked
to us, and they have a symbol they like to use, and I'm not going to mention names today because it's still too
early on, that talks about one might be 12 feet high, and then go across approximately 30 to 40 feet; that they
want to maybe purchase the naming rights for the stadium.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The goal from my perspective is to make sure we have limitations, because
everybody has limitations, so these need to be limited to some extent. What you do inside normally doesn't
bother anybody from a zoning perspective. It's all internal; you can't see it anyway.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I know the ballpark signs that go around the fencing at the bottom row,
that's typical to all kinds of high school stadiums.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think we I understand that. And the location and size would be limited to
the frontage as you just talked about, and the size would be limited to the biggest that you talked about was
the 15 by
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Fifteenby40 box to work in.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, that language needs to get written up somehow and put in here so we
can review it on consent or review it at the next time when we go come back and make sure it's all wrapped
up in one package.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, up to three signs, limited within a 15by40 box that would not
would only face to the east, south, or to the west, or any combination thereof, and nonanimated but possibly
lit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And those are your external limitations. Internally, quantity, size, whatever
you want to do to block the view of people trying to watch the sport, that's up to you.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's up to us.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Very good.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So somehow could you have someone get that written up so when we come
back and we have to deal with that.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Josh, let's move forward.
MR. FRUTH: Page 21, Deviation No. 21.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Back up to 18. You've got one, Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No. You were on Page 18.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. He wanted to move to Page 21. I have an issue on No. 18, Deviation
18, which is on Page 20. And it's going to occur with a couple different instances in some of the deviations.
We'll get to them all eventually, but in 18 it's the first one.
You have a buffer requirement, it says, "which requires (sic) developments shall be buffered for the
protection of the property owners from land uses to instead eliminate the buffer requirements along the
eastern boundary of the sports complex lot provided there is unified ownership in the sport complex lot and
the abutting property to the east where the development is jointly planned."
Page ! of ! 11 72
March 15, 2018
When you come in for your first SDP, one of the other changes that we talked about and I did talk
about it with Nick because he's the contract not he, but he represents the contract purchaser. There was a
watermanagement issue, and there was a preservation issue that deferred to the property next door owned by
the county when the county brought it into a unified plan. The problem is, if the county delays pulling it into
the unified plan, it's going to be delayed in getting to making sure we have those setasides in that property
next door.
So we have talked and I think there was mutual understanding that the first SDP would include
enough land on the 305 property to accommodate for the offsite preserves that potentially might be there if
and, in fact, they're needed and for the watermanagement area that you guys have been promised to offset
some of the watermanagement capabilities on your property.
So this could be should be basically tied to that first SDP, because you can your first SDP now is not
going to be just for this property. It will lap have an overlap. And I'm just suggesting we can probably solve
that deviation by the SDP process that's going to be coming up.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah, that's not a problem. Actually, Deviation 21 probably sums up the statement
you're referring to, and that could be simply added to No. 18 as well.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Number 19 and 20, the landscape buffers there, "remove the
requirement from public or private rightsofway with any existing and subsequent subdivision within the City
Gate Commerce Park MPUD east of the FP&L easement." So what are you taking out that isn't in the yard
plan?
MR. FRUTH: Okay. So this specifically relates to the MPUD, and it's a clarification because the
internal rightofways at plat require us to have the landscape buffers; however, because of the required yard
plan, we're deferring it to SDP level in similar fashion to the recorded Phase 2 plat.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So this doesn't override the required yard plan?
MR. FRUTH: It does not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the required yard plan will still give us the vegetation and buffers
that that plan requires?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. Basically, we're clarifying the language that was already completed in
Phase 2.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Now we can I'm done. We can move to 21 if you'd like.
MR. FRUTH: Deviation 21, Page 21, we added at the end of this statement there's a sentence that
was added, but also added, which is key here within the statement, "shall be shown on the first Site
Development Plan, and concurrently a unified site concept plan shall designate the additional required" yard
"required offsite yard on the abutting parcel." "Abutting" was added. And then the last sentence that was
added, "the offsite native vegetation shall be shown on the Site Development Plan (SDP application) but may
be relocated with a Site Development Plan amendment (SDPA application) in the future."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good. That locks it in so it's guaranteed to be there no matter what
changes.
MR. FRUTH: And I can add that same statement to 18 as well.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Something to the effect we've got them covered, so...
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Deviation 22, per the hearing two weeks ago, we updated it from six to five
caretaker residences, and Deviation No. 23 is the watermanagement item the Chairman mentioned just a little
bit ago. We added the last sentence. It says, "Collier County will take water management to the abutting
countyowned property as a future copermittee in the South Florida Water Management District
Environmental Resource Permit (SFWMD ERP)."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But if the 305 property first of all, it's a lot of wetlands. It doesn't
have its Corps permit. And since Joe was with the Corps, and we know while he was there he made sure
Corps permits take three or four years to get done, we're looking at a long time. Is this going to coordinate
with the needs for those properties that need that additional water management? Are we going to run into any
problems there?
MR. FRUTH: If time, as you mentioned, is a factor, Collier County and this is why it was revised to
say "abutting countyowned property." Collier County's Resource Recovery Park and the additional acres up
there, which has an ERP, would be modified to add the necessary stormwater management.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, how is that piping done? You guys would have to do the piping?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct, yes.
Page ! of ! 12 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because that's a longer distance to pipe.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. It's set up now as I mentioned two weeks ago, it's set up now to feed. But, yes,
there would have to be some sort of network added.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So this is going to be sort of an incremental permitting process?
MR. FRUTH: Yes. I mean, the City Gate property is obviously ahead of the 305 parcel, the
countyowned parcel, for obvious reasons. But, yes, it will be incremental.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But Mark brought up about the 404 permit, Army Corps of
Engineers' Clean Water Act 404 permits, so but they're still going to want a waterquality certification from
the ERP process. So it just complicates your life by increments of permitting rather than one permitting
process.
So I not that it affects the zoning, but it will impact significantly your review times, especially
through the federal permit process.
MR. FRUTH: Agreed. My office and the environmentalist here with me today, Jeremy Sterk, we
did the permitting for Collier County for the Resource Recovery Park, so we anticipate it to be exactly what
you mentioned for the 305 parcel as well, so...
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on to the next change.
MR. FRUTH: Page 25, Item 3, as related to the sports complex project and development standards,
Item B under 3
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question on
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Page 23, which you bypassed quickly. So just a statement on
impact fees, again. I find it to be unnecessary. It's already required. You have a whole paragraph about
impact fees. Again, I know it's an existing PUD. But you're going to pay the impact fees. I mean, that
statement is not necessary.
MR. FRUTH: Is that the first part you're referring to, the first paragraph?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. "City Gate commerce park shall be subject to all impact
fees." Of course you will. I'm looking at 2.9, your Paragraph 2.9 now.
MR. FRUTH: 2.9, yes, I see it. It is now Page 22, sorry. That's why I was
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Page 22. I'm fine with leaving it in there. It's just, again, another
statement of fact.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If this was a repeal and a replace, all that would come out.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. That's what it boils down to, how the application and what you have to do. I
mean, I'll defer to staff again, but I think that's the main reason why.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Leave it in, but it's just taking up space.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. Page 25, again, we were on the development standards for sports complex
project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before you I think that's on our Page 26.
MR. FRUTH: Yes, you're probably correct. There with the updates
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep.
MR. FRUTH: some of these items have shifted.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, that is on Page 26 in our packet, yes. Okay.
MR. FRUTH: So under Item B of 3, the sports complex project, the word "primarily" and "amateur"
have been stricken, and it now reads, "Recreational uses designated and operated to serve athletes and/or the
public."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the word "amateur" that was there before kind of provided us with
some insurance it wasn't intended to be a professional ball team like the Braves and everything else we had to
deal with before. I'm not sure it's a good thing to strike that out because it leaves it open to everything unless
you voluntarily add some language to make a prohibition there.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, I think, Commissioner Strain, Chairman, we talked with Josh
yesterday, and I said, either strike the two out or keep it primarily amateur. And let me explain why. You're
going to have from time to time a professional athlete having a camp during the day. So, you know, for
instance, if David Beckham says, I want to run a kids camp here on a Saturday and a couple kids want to
come, there's a professional athlete there.
Page ! of ! 13 72
March 15, 2018
So I don't want to get into an argument that a professional athlete can't come and do an event there.
And that's typical at all events. They do it at high school stadiums. An athletic team will come down and say,
we're going to run a kids camp for a day. That's a professional team running a kids camp, but it's not a
professional game.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I don't think at least that's not the concern I have. My concern is the
word "primarily" would mean 51 percent. So we have 365 days a years, half of those days the Braves could
come down and say or 49 percent of those days the Braves could come down and say this is our summer
training camp. And, like Fort Myers, it would fit because they're not there 365 days a year. So now we still
have an amateur athletic facility that's primarily there to serve amateurs because they have one day a year
more than the Braves. That's the scenario I'm concerned about.
I don't care about the Braves. I don't care what team it is. It was never intended to be a professional
place. And I understand what you're suggesting doesn't make it a professional place. It just makes it usable
for camps and for the purpose of a park.
I don't know how to get there right now with the language, Nick, but I'm concerned that the word
"primarily" is going to open the door for more than we would anticipate, than what you're describing.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Predominantly, limited to 15 percent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, you're getting that ambiguous language. It's a matter I can hear the
attorneys going back and forth describing who's right on that, you know.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not leased to a professional facility, to a professional team.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Mark, question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aren't professional and public athletes members of the
public?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They are.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So why are they in there separately? Just say "primarily
serve the public." And who else is there other than the public?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's why we pulled it out. Primarily amateurs is to serve athletes, I
mean, and/or the public. So, you know, if you want to put a restriction the facility shall not be leased to a
professional sports team, I'm okay with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That would work.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's the issue that I'm mostly concerned about.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question for you. I was not here during the last hour before,
but I'm going to ask you, is this the one where this is all tourist tax dollars? This is not we are not, as
residents this is nothing to do with parks and rec?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No, it's like North Collier's probably 70 percent local and 30 percent
tourist tax, this is probably 70 percent tourist tax and 30 percent local.
All the people who live in Collier County will have access to this facility. So the O&M will be
covered by the General Fund, because legally, if it was 100 percent paid by tourist tax, I couldn't let the public
use it. It would be one of those where, okay, how are the justifying the use is locals?
So what we told the Board of County Commissioners was the general O&M would be done by
parks, done by the General Fund. They would maintain the facility, keep it clean, run leagues at night; that
way the children who live in Collier County would have a rational nexus to be able to use the facility. So this
would be a 70/30 trying to attract tournaments and weeknights open to the public for me and you or anybody
else who wanted to use the facility.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: What about the 305 tract? Isn't that park and rec?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: 305's general services to the county. A portion will be for this facility as
well, too. So about 60 acres of 305 is planned to abut this facility on the City Gate site. But tourist
development tax is doing all the vertical construction, ma'am; 100 percent of that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let me understand this then. The $70 million budget, I had thought I heard
on the Board's meeting that that is going to be out of the tourist development tax.
Page ! of ! 14 72
March 15, 2018
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you're not changing that?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Not at all.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And what's this 30/70 mix you're talking about? That's for the operations,
O&M?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: The use; the use of it. In other words, for instance, let's say the O&M is
$2 million a year. When you go 10 years, okay, at $2 million, that's $20 million, a General Fund that supports
maintaining the facility. That's how we can say it's open to our residents, because we're picking up the O&M
cost. That's actually a good thing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So 70 percent of the O&M cost is going to come out of TD funds?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: No. The use of the facility probably will be about 70/30 split
predominantly geared towards having attracting teams and tournaments. But you can imagine on a Monday
night, a Tuesday night, and a Wednesday night, just like North Collier, it's all league play for locals, you
know, the residents who live here. That was one of the big selling points of why the people embraced it so
much is all of our kids are going to get to play at this facility weeknights and on weekends when it's not
booked.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But only 30 percent of the time.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm saying roughly the split of the facility. If you're looking at North
Collier, right now North Collier has 70 percent local and they have tournaments on the weekends, so I'd say
70/30 split between league play and tournamenttype attractions.
This is more geared toward tournaments, so probably 60, 70 you know, we haven't booked anything
yet. This is predominantly attracting people to come here and attend tournaments, camps and things like that.
But a large portion of that time, weeknights when we're not booked, our kids are going to play on all these
fields.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But the use will be the reverse of the North Naples one. The North Naples
one is 70 percent local, 30 percent not. This one's going to be 70 percent not local and 30 percent local.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's the intention, and those percentages aren't exact.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, I understand. I just didn't understand that aspect of it till now. We're
entering it into the AUIR as 110 acres or whatever of additional parkland.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But it's not parkland that's driven by the budget, basically, for local people.
It's parkland that is put there as a tourist attraction.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's right, but used by the local. Now
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But 30 percent, or whatever the low number is.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You've got to consider, Mark, like North Collier, during the weeknights,
you don't have tournaments; Monday night, Tuesday night, Wednesday night, Thursday night. Usually they
start around Friday, Saturday, or Sunday. And then on Friday, Saturday, or Sunday during the day those
tournaments are using most of the fields.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: This will be brought up by AUIR. Does this now put us in an
excess park capacity? Because I believe last year we were
MR. CASALANGUIDA: That's a good question for Amy.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We were in a deficit. This now puts us in an excess, which I have to
ask, because it was a recent issue. Then that exposes the Manatee Park as being site as being declared excess
because you now purchased this site. Since we're now talking about AUIR.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Between Big Corkscrew Park and this facility, we've put a huge amount
of park facilities in the next two years on plan. And I don't know if, Amy, you want to cover that.
MS. PATTERSON: Good morning. Amy Patterson, for the record.
So two different types of parks, you remember. We have community parks and regional. So this
would go into the regional category and it, in fact, does put us into a surplus situation. We've been in a
surplus situation for a little while with community parks, which is where Manatee sits.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Are you looking at it for I'll ask staff: Are you looking at
affordable housing on this site since it's now excess?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm not going to answer that question.
Page ! of ! 15 72
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I know you're not. But I will put it on the record.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yeah. That's a board policy decision. I know it's a hot one that was on
yesterday or Tuesday, yeah.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The one at Orangetree, that park
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I'm trying to find out the funding. I talked to somebody with Parks and
Rec, and they said this project they have never discussed. So I thought Park and Rec would be in on this.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: They are. Right now the plan is to have Parks and Rec run the O&M of
this facility. They would have program managers just like at North Collier that schedule the league play for
our kids at this facility. Three o'clock in the afternoon when kids get out of school, I expect a bunch of these
kids to be inside that field house, to be on those fields playing.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: How come they have not how come this has not been brought to them?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It has. I've met with them ma'am, James Hanrahan, Derrick Garby are on
the team that went and toured, around Florida, these facilities. They actually, three weeks ago, gave me an
O&M budget, and I've reviewed that with them.
The cost for the Big Corkscrew Park is 100 percent park impact fees or General Fund. The cost for
this vertical construction is 100 percent TD tax, and the O&M is General Fund.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't know if I've got anything more for you, Nick. We'll just move
through them and see where we go.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think we left off on 25 or 26.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. Page 25, your 26, we added Item E under 3. It's the hours of operation
for the sports complex project. And that reads, "Hours of operation for outdoor activities (may not exceed)
Item 1, Sunday through Thursday 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. (Weekday holidays are subject to Friday and Saturday
time schedule below.)"
Number 2 is the Friday and Saturday time, 7 a.m. to 12 a.m., and No. 3 reads, "weatherrelated delays
will extend the hours of operation accordingly."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under the comment where you said "weekday holidays are subject to
Friday and Saturday"; weekday holidays recognized by Collier County Government?
MR. FRUTH: Yes. I mean, we can write that in there, add that to it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I mean, yes, if you don't there's a lot of holidays out there that we
may not
MR. FRUTH: Fine. We're okay with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then on the number it's on the next page, okay. Anybody else? If not, let's
move to the next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 26, your 27.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question on Page 26.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Page 26. Okay. Let's go back.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm sorry, Page 27.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's 29. You've got to go back two pages.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No, it's Paragraph 6.
MR. FRUTH: I'm sorry. I don't have it. I can put it on the visualizer.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. You have boat docks with recreational lake tract, and the rest
of this paragraph is strikethrough, so why do you have that sentence there? Is there something missing? I'm
looking at the one I got.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What page are you on in the one we have?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm on Page 27.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Paragraph it's 3.2, Subparagraph 6.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's under the accessory uses.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. There it is. It says, "boat docks with recreation on lake tract,"
and then the rest of it is a strikethrough, so...
Page ! of ! 16 72
March 15, 2018
MR. FRUTH: Remove the whole paragraph.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I don't know why you had it underlined. You added it. So I
was wondering was there something was there an intent there or
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. The old language is strikethrough, and that's correct. And we're updating the
numbers, as Nancy was noting there. And "boat docks with recreation on lake tract" is actually part of the
new PUD document. We're adding that language. I'm sorry. I keep rotating.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It has nothing to do with the previous paragraph language. It just happened
to be the placeholder where you would add it.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. It was the location.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And while we're on that page, you made some changes to the top that you
skipped. The two greens.
MR. FRUTH: Yes. Yes, that's correct. B3.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You've got to pull it down a little bit, Josh. There you go.
MR. FRUTH: B.3, we added to the end of that. It now reads, "Signs as permitted by Collier County
zoning ordinance in effect at time of application for the sign permit and as subject to Section 2.7 in this
document."
B.4, we also added to the end of that. It says, "2.7 of this document." It's referencing the reader back
to the location of the information that was added.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on to the next one.
MR. FRUTH: Page 29. Under the sports complex project, the actual height, it was clarified. I
already read one statement, but it now reads, "85 feet except flagpoles may be extended 40 feet above the
structure height per Deviation No. 4 within this document."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wouldn't you mean 40 feet above the actual height of 85 feet? Because the
structure height isn't a defined that could be just about anything.
MR. FRUTH: Yes. I'll remove the word "structure" and replace it with "actual height," the word
"actual."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 30, Item I, again, it's a clarification. We added a sentence that says, "subject to
Section 2.7 in this document." It's related to the parking and loading.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mark, I have a question on Page 30, at least our Page 30.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You have a statement in there under Paragraph E, "Taller buildings
may be authorized upon application following the advertised public hearing." It goes on. I mean, since
you're cleaning up the document, wouldn't you just want to make that statement pursuant to the requirements
of the LDC, you'd have to pursue an amendment to the PUD in order to make any changes? Because that's
basically what you're saying. This has to go through the Planning Commission, the Board of County
Commissioners.
MR. FRUTH: Again, that's old language. We left it in there. We didn't touch it.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah.
MR. FRUTH: There's no clarification from our end. Nancy, I don't know if you have anything to
add to that, but it's
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You can leave it. I just I think there would be an easier way to say
it, but that's fine. I just thought, again, it was
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And, Joe, you're right. There's a lot of unnecessary language. I only left it
alone because it's an amendment; it's not a rewrite. So I think that's probably where they were coming from
when they did it, too.
MR. FRUTH: Yeah. The only statement in that paragraph that was updated was, throughout the
document, instead of one word, City Gate is two words. That's all we cleaned up.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, let's move on to the next page.
MR. FRUTH: Page 30, Item I, as I read before, we added the sentence "subject to Section 2.7 in this
document."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 34, Item I and J, Items I and J were added.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let us get our numbers aren't the same as yours. It takes us a minute.
Page ! of ! 17 72
March 15, 2018
MR. FRUTH: Yeah, you guys should be Page 35. I'm sorry.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It takes us a little harder to get to that's Page 35 in our packet.
MR. FRUTH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: After H, Item I was added, and it reads, "The 0.82 acres of retained or recreated native
vegetation for City Gate Commerce Park, Phase 1, shall be completed by City Gate Development, LLC, prior
to the next SDP application issuance within Phase 1 for the remaining undeveloped Phase 1 lots."
Item J was added as well for clarification, and it reads, "Lot 1 of City Gate Commerce Park, Phase 2
replat (Plat Book 50, Page 24) also known as the South Florida Water Management District Big Cypress
Basin field station or formerly known as Lots 5 and 6, Phase 2, include 0.42 acres of retained vegetation.
This is included in the overall retained vegetation calculations shown within this document in Exhibit A6,
Pages 25 through 28. The Phase 2 requirement equals 5.15 acres minus 0.42 acres, which equals 4.73 acres
(remaining Phase 2 required retained vegetation)."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the reason for that is previous to the incorporation of the yard
plan into this PUD, it wasn't a document that was readily available when staff did the reviews for the Big
Cypress Basin property. As a result, they didn't adhere to the yard plan, and this will provide there are areas
that can be used for native vegetation replanting and recreation to be used and counted against the yard plan
requirements; is that accurate?
MR. FRUTH: That is accurate. The last hearing I showed an exhibit that showed the Big Cypress
Basin site. We coordinated with staff. Staff concurs. I won't speak for them, but that is correct, Chair.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's roll on to the next section.
MR. FRUTH: Updates to the Master Development Plan. There's no further updates in the PUD
document, the actual word text part.
Highlighted in green here, we added "Phase 1, Lot 7," at the request of the last hearing. It's one of
the deviation locations. You'll see it on the next slide.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep.
MR. FRUTH: We added this note at the bottom as well. "A portion of retained vegetation may be
provided off site pursuant to Deviation No. 21," and we clarified a calculation error. It was off by
onehundredth. Instead of 30.57, it now reads 30.56.
Page 2, Exhibit A1, Page 2 of 5, again, Phase 1, Lot 7 is identified to help clarify the location of
Deviation No. 3.
We added the note to this page, and it reads, "Note, sports complex project actual height: The actual
height of future structures on the sports complex project shall be equal to the actual structure height," which
we can adjust, as we noted just now, "plus the flagpole height. For example, the maximum actual structure
height of 85 feet plus the maximum flagpole height of 40 feet equals an overall maximum height of 125 feet."
And, again, as we just mentioned in the word, in the text portion of the document, we can revise
where it's and remove the word and add "actual" instead of "structure."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So no matter where you would add a flagpole to that structure, the flagpole
itself may be no higher than 40 feet?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No longer than 40 feet.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct, and the maximum height will not be higher
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So if you have a stepped structure, the lower part of the structure is still
going to be, say, 60 feet plus 40 instead of 85 feet plus 40?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, that's
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The flagpole itself can't be greater than 40.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That's what I needed to understand. Thank you.
MR. FRUTH: And green, again, it's the same carryover from Page 1 of the Exhibit A1. We simply
updated the acreage from 30.57 to 30.56.
Pages 3, 4, and 5 of the Master Development Plan, Exhibit A1 are verbatim to the deviations that we
just reviewed. They're just included in this document. And the next is the updates to the required yard plan,
which is Exhibit A6
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's go back.
Page ! of ! 18 72
March 15, 2018
MR. FRUTH: of your documents.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's look at our Page 54, which is permitted uses SIC code. It starts there.
I don't have issues with that page, but I do with several pages past that, which is titled "East of FP&L
Easement, Sports Complex Project," and that's on Page 58 in our packet.
Now, No. 2 is your amusement and recreation services, and it says, "indoor except stadiums may be
outdoor." Well, everything's outdoor until its indoor. So what you mean here, you've got an open stadium,
right?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So, really, everything you do in the stadium is subject to rain,
weather, and it's enclosed, so you're not going to have any, necessarily, noise attenuation other than the walls
around the sports the stadium, which leads me to a concern with Principal Use No. 2. "Bands, orchestras,
actors, and other entertainments, entertainment groups." Now, based on the way this is written, those could
all be in the stadium, I'm assuming, and if they're all in the stadium, we're looking at jamborees or like we've
had up at the Vineyards Park and things like that. And I now know why you took out Deviation No. 1,
because Deviation No. 1 would make you come in for temporary events so that they would be somewhat
regulated so it wouldn't be 365 days a year.
This would allow you to do all those temporary events as a principal use by right, and you wouldn't
have any regulation. So I don't think the intent is to let rock bands or country western or whatever kind of
music operate out of that stadium 365 days a year. So on that one in particular, I think it needs a cap of the
amount of times it would be there as a principal use.
MR. FRUTH: Fiftytwo.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know, it's like the 100 flagpoles. It's just one of those you just grab out
of the air and say, that's a nice round number. Let's do that.
MR. FRUTH: I said it with a straight face.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I know.
How often do we have those kind of activities going on at the other fairly large park in Collier
County, which is North Naples Regional Park?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: You don't have those activities that take place there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. How about the Vineyards Park?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Probably not Vineyards. Probably the high schools have it more than
anything else. I mean, we've had
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: How often do the high schools have it? They don't do it 52 times a year
because they're not open 52 times a year. Are they, Tom?
MR. EASTMAN: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: He's the school representative.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I didn't know that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: He just undermined your argument, so...
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mark, you know, nothing's booked, so, you know, you want to put a
ceiling on this thing and above that would require a temporaryuse permit. Does that give you some comfort?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's yep.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: So you want to put 20, and above 20 would require a temporaryuse
permit?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's a lot more reasonable. Let's start there. Then when the Board deals
with it, they can look at it any way they'd like.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's not the primary, you know, intent, so I don't think that's what we're
shooting for.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Joe, did you have something you wanted to
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And, Josh, we're down to the yard plan now, right, did you say?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
Page ! of ! 19 72
March 15, 2018
MR. FRUTH: Exhibit A6 in your documents.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that's Page you have yeah. It's on Page 63 of our electronic version.
MR. FRUTH: That's correct. On this page, your Page 63, and Item No. 4, it was, again, a
calculation cleanup. It was off by onehundredth, the same as the last exhibits. So the numbers now read
24.59, and in parenthetical it reads 26.02 instead of 26.03.
Page 63, your 64, this is a strikethrough. Under the required yard heading, the last sentence was
removed.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And that sentence was there primarily to address the issue with Big Cypress
which you've addressed by a separate paragraph that takes care of it. So now it doesn't have to be a general
inclusion into this yard plan.
MR. FRUTH: That is correct. It primarily was moved over into as you'll see coming up on these
slides in coordination with staff, into a new category.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's move on.
MR. FRUTH: And here it is. Page 64, your 65, the open space definition was removed. It's a full
strikethrough on that paragraph. And at the end underneath sports complex project, Item B, "with all three
strata" was added to the end of that sentence. And Item C is brand new, and it reads "Within other areas of
the sports complex project, parcels in the PUD that are not perimeter yards may be used to meet the native
vegetation retention acreage required for the PUD. These areas shall not be occupied by buildings,
impervious areas, streets or driveways, and will consist of 100 percent retained and/or replanted native
vegetation. These areas shall meet the minimum widths (25 feet of yards) and a minimum contiguous area of
1,250 square feet."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good. Is that the language you worked out with Summer? She's nodding
her head. That's good. Thank you.
MR. STONE: Mr. Chair, just a small grammatical fix.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. STONE: AT the beginning of that sentence, there should be a comma after "project" and then
delete the comma after "yards" to make it more readable.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Noted. And we will correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 65, your 66, E was added as well under this category. It relates to the passive
recreational uses, and it reads, "Passive uses are allowed within yards as long as any clearing required to
facilitate these uses does not impact the minimum required native vegetation. Passive uses are specified in
LDC section 'allowable uses within the county required preserves.'"
Page 67, your 68, under what must be retained in the required yards, Item 2B, at the end of that
paragraph there, it now the addition reads, "but in no case will the total be less than 29.74 acres (Phase 2 and
Phase 3)." And we added 2C, "The minimum native vegetation for Phase 1 is pursuant to Exhibit A6, Page
26 of 29.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And why don't you add the amount there, too. Just make it simple so
someone hasn't got to go searching through these 100 pages to find it. It's .82 or something like that, isn't it?
MR. FRUTH: That is correct, 0.82, and then the page number should be 28 instead of 29. I'll correct
that.
And this is why your pages are different than ours, because the required yard was updated.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: The 0.82 was moved just for the record, was moved because it's not part of the
required yard plan. Phase 1 is not. It's noted coming up here. Actually, I think I already read it into the
record, but we can put it back in.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it just makes it clean. If staff's reading it, they haven't got to thumb
down and find your page and your exhibits. There's an awful lot of them. They're hard to follow. So this will
just make it easier.
MR. FRUTH: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It doesn't negatively affect you that I could see.
MR. FRUTH: Page 68, your 69. Item under the replacement standards V.C.2, added a sentence
that reads, "Native trees that were seriously damaged or destroyed in platted utility easements must be
Page ! of ! 20 72
March 15, 2018
replaced outside of the easement."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, you didn't actually add it. You unstruck it.
MR. FRUTH: Yes, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's a new word, "unstruck." I don't know how else to describe it.
MR. FRUTH: I agree.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Something that was previously struck is not.
MR. FRUTH: Page 74, Exhibit A6, Page 13 of 28, we changed the title, coordinating with staff, just
because of actually, this part of the replanting and replacement plan relates to trees and shrubs. So the title is
now "Native Vegetation Replacement Plan." There's a strikethrough on shrub layer and ground cover. And
the same goes for Page 75, your Page 76; we just updated the title.
Exhibit A6, Page 25 of 28, what we were just talking about, the Phase 1 retained vegetation of 0.82
acres. It was noted on this exhibit, added.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: What page is that? Page number?
MS. GUNDLACH: It's 87.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So they're not numbered, are they?
MR. FRUTH: They are numbered. I just I have it clipped in this presentation.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Did you say 24 of 28?
MR. FRUTH: Eightysix; 87 for you.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: The next item is the traffic items. We went over this. I can go over it again, or we
can go over it
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think unless anybody has any questions, I think we understood it.
When we get into your TIS, there is a couple of questions, but without Norm here, I'm not sure how
much in Table 1 of the TIS, and it might be the one that you've got on the right, do you see where it says size,
350 rooms? You're really asking for 950. And I'm just making that clarification, because isn't this where
you'd want to see the new number?
MR. FRUTH: Correct. This is the 950 is the total of that category, and above it, if you go up, you
see the 250. So that number there, instead of 350, would read 700, but the calculations
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. Yeah, 250 and 350, you still are deficient the 950 you're looking for.
MR. FRUTH: Correct. However, in this letter, what Norm's getting at here is those numbers were
pulled out of the square footage per the consistency. That table just has to be updated to the 900, but it was
done and calculated.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The quantities, because of the cap of traffic, it's kind of irrelevant, but at
least the document would be right. That's all I was trying to
MR. FRUTH: Commissioner, thank you. And the final item I have is, because of the traffic updates,
we sent clarification text back to the Regional Planning Council, the item right in front of you, and this
clarification was worked out with staff. And this language was sent to Dan Trescott. Dan Trescott replied and
said that these revisions were acceptable.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So that gets us through the recent information you provided. Did
you have anything else you wanted to add, Josh?
MR. FRUTH: All good. Thank you very much. Thank you, staff. We appreciate it. This was a long
document, and we appreciate all the help.
MR. STONE: Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
Josh, I may have missed it, but did you just introduce the new language to the resolution?
MR. RICE: Yes.
MR. FRUTH: I did, yes.
MR. STONE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I'm just checking to make sure I don't have any other issues that need
to be asked, unless anybody else has any. Now's the time to bring them up.
Did you have some, Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No. I'll do it in discussion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Use your mike when you get a chance, I mean, when you talk.
And I think everything's been addressed that I had at this time, so okay.
Nick, did you want something to add?
Page ! of ! 21 72
March 15, 2018
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mr. Chairman, I'm going to leave, but I just I can't leave without thanking
Nancy and Ray and Mike, Summer and Matt on the internal team.
Mr. Chairman, you spent quite a bit of time both with the applicant and myself and the County
Attorney's Office. I think you're going to get a beautiful project when we're done. We're going to take into
consideration the neighborhood, and our kids are going to get to use it. That's exciting. It's not professional.
It's recreational. It's amateur. It will be a great facility for Collier County.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. I appreciate your cooperation in getting some of these
numbers. I know you didn't like to do that, but it was necessary, so thank you.
Go ahead, Diane.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question for Nick.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Sure.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nick, I'll be real honest with you.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yep.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The deviation the amount of deviations is it is we just took the whole
LDC book and threw it out. That bothers me because this is the county.
And as far as signs, I understand some things, but I'm going, 22 is a lot, and you blew it past what
anybody would be allowed. And I just it's kind of upsetting, because we are the county.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Ma'am, if you want to go through any one in particular, I'm happy to do
that. But I think, working with the applicant, we tried to you know, that sports complex lot is going to be
exciting internally, and we definitely want to not, you know, pollute signs to the north, and we're asking for
one, really, sign on Collier Boulevard, and that's really the only big deviation in signs.
All the ones on the local streets, really, just are wayfinding for the purposes of City Gate and the
sports complex. But if there's one that's got particular concern, I'm happy to spend some time with you on it.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. And as soon as you leave, we'll probably undo everything you
did.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Thanks.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Josh, I don't think there's any more you want to add to it at this point.
And I'm going to turn to staff to see what kind of staff report we have, and then we'll go to we might have
public do we have any public speakers registered, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No one has registered. Oh, Scott has them.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just in order for understanding the timing of our break for the court
reporter, is there anybody here who wishes to speak on the sports park?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then that will we might wrap this up before break. Well, let me go
through staff report first.
Nancy, it's all yours.
MS. GUNDLACH: Yes. Good morning. For the record, I'm Nancy Gundlach. I'm principal
planner with the Zoning Division.
And staff is in agreement with the proposed changes that you've made today, and we did recommend
approval of these petitions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The changes today only tighten it up, don't loosen it up, so I didn't
expect staff to have any problems with it, and I appreciate your comments. So thank you.
MS. GUNDLACH: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any questions of staff before we go to public speakers? And we have two
public speakers, did you say, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As your name's called, please come up to the microphone, identify yourself,
and we ask our speakers to limit themselves to five minutes.
MR. BELLOWS: The first speaker is Anthony Ferraro.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Were you sworn did you stand to be sworn in when you
MR. FERRARO: No, I did not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The court reporter will have to swear you in.
Page ! of ! 22 72
March 15, 2018
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
MR. FERRARO: Good morning. My name's Anthony Ferraro, and I with I represent Indigo Lakes
Homeowners Association. I'm on the board of directors.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are you here for the project that's going in next to you called Rushton
Pointe?
MR. FERRARO: Yes, I am.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This isn't that one. This is for the sports park on I75 and 951. So you'll
have to stay a little longer till we get to that one.
MR. FERRARO: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sorry for the confusion.
Do you have anybody else for the sports park, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Sorry for that.
With that, we will end that's the end of our discussion for the sports park.
Now, the changes were put on the panel in front of us today. Normally what we would do is we
would try to pass it and then to some extent, or deny it, and then come back for consent. We've got to come
back for consent anyway, and I don't mean to delay a vote, but your changes were so fresh, and there were so
many paragraphs, I would rather come back and finish the vote on it next time so that if there are any
questions when we look at those paragraphs closer and see how they fit into the document, we can ask them
rather than have our hands tied because we voted on it now and we closed the door to any discussion on
consent.
Is that any objection from the applicant? Let's say, is there any reasonable objection from the
applicant? I didn't know they were going to send you up here, so...
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Well, I think, Mark, we've queued up a lot with closing and financing, and
we expect to go to the Board on the 27th. If Josh can make these changes and bring them back after lunch,
would that be acceptable?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm more concerned about the time to read them all and digest them. I
mean, Josh has been sending out repeated and rightfully so. I have no problem. He's tried real hard to get
the information to, at least to me, because I had most of the issues that we brought up today continually. He
sent them out and sent them out and sent them out. I have every day I got a new email practically with a new
change. Well, that's, what, 30, 40, 50 changes that I have to check them all to see how it fits together. And,
Nick, we had seven cases originally, or six originally here. I could not read all that every day with everything
going on.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: When's the next Planning Commission hearing?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It would be the 5th of April.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We wouldn't get to the Board till the second meeting in April. That's 30
days.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What does that mean "it's 30 days"?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: It's 30 days before we would close. That adds to the closing dates the 30
days before we can start. We're actually ready to start working on the next phase of the project. The A&E
selection is scheduled to come to the Board, the closing, and the financing to do the closings is scheduled to
come to the Board. I think that's why we went to such extent to try and meet this deadline, because we're teed
up for the 27th at the board meeting.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Josh, when could you have the drafts done? Electronically.
MR. FRUTH: Close of business today.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That doesn't get us an ability to vote on them today.
Joe, did you have something?
MR. FRUTH: You guys done at 4 p.m.?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we're not going to be here.
MR. RICE: We'll have them done. When you get back from your lunch break, they'll be done.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: See, I was hoping you'd say you could have them done by the lunch break
so we could read them at lunch. I'm willing to sit here and read.
MR. RICE: We'll have them done for the lunch break then.
Page ! of ! 23 72
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Would you clearly identify, though because I didn't see the version
that was presented today. The only thing I reviewed was what was on the disk that I or on the jump drive
that I got. I followed everything Josh presented. But the changes you're going to give us, you need to clearly
identify in another color or whatever what you added just so we can go through it quickly. I don't want to go
read all of the
MR. RICE: We'll make today's changes in orange.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Whatever, just so we can go through it quickly. I don't want to go
try and go through all the green highlight again that we discussed in every detail. Is that what you wanted to
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, I just want to make sure that our comments today because even if we
continued it for consent, you're still stuck in the same problem.
MR. RICE: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So now you're saying we can't have that problem. We're going to do our
best to work with you but, at the same time, you've got a whole hour and a half just to type a few sentences
up.
MR. RICE: That's what we're going to do.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: If you could leave (sic) Josh to leave right now, we'll put a cattle prod on
him and give him an office to work on it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Actually, he's done good in keeping up with everything, so...
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Josh, you billable hours are three times to the county for this.
MR. FRUTH: My only question is, what color would you like these to be highlighted, to be
consistent?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You just make it any color that
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: I make a motion for orange, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, orange is one you haven't used yet, so let's try that.
MR. FRUTH: Sounds good.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then we will have that before lunch distributed in hard copies or
electronic. What do you can you some of us don't have electronic, so...
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Hard copy.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't care. Hard copies will do fine. I can compare my electronic to the
hard, and we'll be in good shape. So by the time we get back from lunch, we'll schedule you to be first up to
finish it up if we have any issues. If not, we can vote on it and be done.
MR. FRUTH: You'll have the 89page hardcopy document.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Eightynine page hard copy. Whatever it is. Just as long as it's in orange,
we'll be able to flip through it quickly.
MR. FRUTH: Sounds good. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hold on a second. Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Nick, why are you saying this cannot come back? Have you already
planned this for the BCC?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, ma'am. This was scheduled for the 27th knowing we went through
these couple hearings.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The 27th of?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: March, yes, ma'am. Closing because of the 30day appeal period of the
state, we're going to close 30 days later. We're going through the development of the guaranteed maximum
price for the lot clearing and a lake excavation. We've got a pretty tight schedule we're running on this
project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we have accommodated when we can. And if you're willing to
accommodate us so we can look at the highlights over lunch, we'll make it work.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: I'm surprised Josh is still in the room.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I am, too. He doesn't need as much time as he's got.
MR. FRUTH: I'm packing up and leaving.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And we'll see you back at 1 o'clock, or approximately, depending on
when we take our hour lunch.
Now, Ned, did you have something?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Chairman, thankfully you've been intimately involved in this over
Page ! of ! 24 72
March 15, 2018
the last two weeks, but I feel rather behind the eightball not having been included in the emails even on a
oneway communication basis. So I don't know if there's anything that could have been done, but I guess I'm
glad that you're on top of it, but I don't feel like I'm able to do very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's kind of hard for anybody to communicate one Planning
Commission member's issues to another. We're not supposed to do that. We're not even supposed to let them
be conduits for that purpose. So it's a little difficult to do that with the Sunshine Law.
The only thing I tried to do was last time, at the last meeting, we brought this issue up, youall asked
your questions, and from that perspective it would have just been about done. I couldn't rest with that. I had
these two hours, plus an hour last time to try to get everything ferreted out as best we could and these
corrections made.
So that's why I tried to solve some time today so you could see it in a prepared mode like they did on
the screen. Because if I hadn't talked with them prior to today's meeting, the concerns I had wouldn't even be
on the screen today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Understood.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that, I was hoping, would get us far enough where we could resolve it,
so...
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I was just suggesting that if you had raised an issue that the applicant
agreed to so that it was going to come before us this morning, but that agreement had been reached five or six
days ago, couldn't that have been sent to us in a oneway communication?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, no. I just met with them I mean, I met with Nick Monday, I met with
Josh Tuesday or Wednesday, and I've been in meetings continuously since then. So I'm not sure they even I
don't even know that they got what I told them they had. They sent it to me. I didn't see it till today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So, I mean, it's just been this meeting had six cases. There isn't a single
one of them that's going to be simple, and that's been driving the train. And the other applicants, we had to
meet with them, too. So it's been piling up this week.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: And to Mark's credit, everything was very more restrictive. He was just
making sure we were putting the four corners on this thing with everything that was presented in the prior
meeting.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Chairman, please don't get hit by a truck, okay?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm going to get hit by him. He's bigger than a truck.
Okay. That takes us to our break. Let's come back at 10:45, and the next one up is Creekside. We'll
move right into that when we get back, so thank you.
(A brief recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, everybody, if you'd please take your seats again.
Nick, you may want to hear this real quick announcement. During the break someone came up to
Ray, a resident, and said they wanted to talk about the sports park.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And without the applicant being here, not just you but the other side being
here, I don't think it would be fair to hear the gentleman until they got back, and everybody is coming back
after lunch, so approximately 1:00. At that time if this gentleman who put the slip in late is still here, we can
hear him at that time before we vote.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So that's the fairest way I could think of handling it at this time.
And, Ray, what was the gentleman's name?
MR. BELLOWS: Steve Carmichael.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mr. Carmichael, if you're here, that's the scenario we're going to use
to move forward. I just wanted you to be aware of it. Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mark, was he not here when we asked for speakers, or we don't
know?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's irrelevant. He put a slip in, so we'll just deal with it like we can so
everybody is aware of it.
***Next item up is 9C. It's PL20170000425. It's a Creekside Commerce Park CPUD located south
of Immokalee Road and both east and west of GoodletteFrank Road.
Page ! of ! 25 72
March 15, 2018
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And we'll start with disclosures with did Tom disappear? Well, we'll start
with Stan for now.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I talked to Mr. Yovanovich.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: As have I. That's all.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Just staff.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I for a change, I didn't talk to Mr. Yovanovich.
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's not true.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I talked to the applicant and Wayne. When did I talk to you?
MR. YOVANOVICH: On the phone.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't even know you called me. Okay. I did talk to him on the phone,
but what's nice is I have no recollection of talking to him, so and I have talked to staff.
Go ahead, Karen.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I spoke to Mr. Yovanovich and briefly to Mr. Arnold.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Spoke to Mr. Yovanovich, addressed several questions I had.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Patrick?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that, Wayne, proceed.
MR. ARNOLD: Good morning. I'm Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor & Associates and I'm here
representing Arthrex and the PUD amendment for Creekside. Our team represents Arthrex and, of course,
Rich Yovanovich and myself and Trebilcock Consulting Solutions unfortunately, as you learned during the
first agenda item, Mr. Trebilcock is out of town and not able to join us, but hopefully we can address any
transportation questions you may have.
So the amendment that's before you was prompted largely by the need for Arthrex to develop a hotel
for their own use, and out of that grew the ability to want to put in a physical fitness facility, a wellness center
for themselves and employees, and so we have made some adjustments related to the PUD to address that.
And to address the increased intensity of the hotel, we've reduced some of the intensities in the industrial and
the business district as you see reflected in the strikethrough and underline.
We also added some general provisions for outdoor recreational facilities for the PUD in areas that
not designated either IC or B, which means that the FP&L easement and parts of the canal bank and things
like that could can be utilized for outdoor recreational facilities. Arthrex is, of course, a large sponsor of the
Blue Zone project in Collier County, as is Collier County government, and they're trying to offer
opportunities for their employees to remain fit and stay on their campus.
So I'm going to introduce David Bumpous, who's with Arthrex, their operations group, and he's got a
short presentation to show you some images of the hotel and talk a little bit more about the need for the hotel,
and then we'll be happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MR. BUMPOUS: Good morning. David Bumpous, Bumpous. I'm the senior director of operations
for Arthrex. It's always a pleasure to be here presenting to the Board.
As you just heard first of all, let me say this. I'm not going to spend any time today presenting on
Arthrex and who we are. Hopefully you know who we are, so I won't waste your time on that, but really
we're here to talk about the two key factors, one being the hotel, the other being a fitness or wellness center
for our guests and our employees.
Starting with the hotel, it's no secret Arthrex is a major contributor to medical tourism. We have
thousands of orthopedic surgeons that visit Arthrex's campus on Creekside each year for educational
purposes. And over the past few years, we've really gotten into a situation where having adequate hotel space
has become a real challenge for us.
We are governed by very strict regulations uses through the FDA and through AdvaMed, so it's very
specific in where we can put doctors. As an example, you can't put them at highend resorts. Well, Naples is
full of highend resorts. So that really limits our ability and options, if you will.
As an example, last year we had about 40 percent of the occupancy of the Hyatt Place at Coconut
Point for most of the year, and so what that does is it creates a burden on the guest but, more importantly, it
Page ! of ! 26 72
March 15, 2018
also adds to traffic, because those people are being shuttled back and forth from the various hotels around
Southwest Florida.
And so by building a hotel on our camps, what that will allow us to do is have those surgeons that are
flying into RSW be brought directly to the hotel on campus and basically, from that point forward, all their
transportation will be either by golf cart or on foot.
So, again, we feel like it's a great opportunity to provide a better opportunity and educational
opportunity for those visitors and, at the same time, again, we think there's some benefit.
Next door to that facility we are hoping to build a fitness facility. This, of course, being the
Creekside PUD, the tracts that we're talking about are really this area right here.
This gives you somewhat of an overview of the overall campus. I'm not sure how to get rid of my
circle here. We're really talking about these two spaces here; the one in the forefront being the hotel, and the
smaller one being a wellness or fitness center.
As all hotels typically have some sort of a wellness or fitness opportunity, our idea was to build this
separate so that it would provide access to the employees that work on our Creekside campus. We're, again, a
very healthy company, Blue Zone company. We have an overwhelming majority of our employees that are,
every morning or every evening, driving to a fitness facility somewhere in the county and then, again,
clogging the roads coming to work at 7:45 or whatever time they come in.
So we see double benefits here. One, it provides them the ability to work out during the day, during
lunch; at the same time, rather than that person driving to the gym at 5:30 or 6:00 in the morning, working
out, showering, and then driving to Arthrex at 7:45, they're not going to drive to the Arthrex campus in
nonpeak hours. They're going to work out, and then basically walk across the street to work.
The same thing would be true in the evening time as well; people would finish work, go work out,
now they're on the roads at 7:00 o'clock rather than 5:15 when everybody else is on the roads.
So, again, some of the benefits that we think that we will enjoy from this, even with the hotel, one of
the key factors here is staff has been great in working with us, and agreeing to allow us to put in less parking
than what would be required for a hotel of this size, and the point is the guests are going to be brought in by
shuttle. That's how they arrive today. That's how they'll continue to arrive in the future. They load on a
Dolphin bus, or whatever the vendor happens to be at RSW, they're brought down and, again, they're now on
our campus.
Closer view of the hotel. And, as you can see, I mean, the designs here are all to be very cohesive
with the campus with everything that's currently there. The administration building, that's been previously
approved and, actually, construction has begun.
So the idea is that everything would blend and create a nice environment. Tremendous amount of
landscaping. Again, we're creating a campus environment to continue our growth and support our
employees.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that the hotel, one of the renderings? This one here?
MR. BUMPOUS: This would be the wellness center.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
MR. BUMPOUS: This would be the hotel.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's just interesting you said you can't put the doctors in highend hotels. So
this is a lowend hotel?
MR. BUMPOUS: It's a moderate hotel.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It looks pretty nice, so...
I can't imagine doctors staying in something that isn't nice. Usually they certainly can afford that,
so...
Yeah, it's a nicelooking building, okay.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I have a question. Is this a private hotel? Is this yours only?
MR. BUMPOUS: It is a privately owned hotel; however, again, to meet AdvaMed requirements, if
we were to create an independent private hotel only catering to physicians, that would violate some
regulations. So we have to establish it as a public hotel. You will not see this on Expedia. You will not see
this on Orbitz. This will not be something that's publicized. This will be a business hotel for our visiting
surgeons and visiting employees that come in from Europe, from California, from other locations that would
stay there as well.
MR. KLATZKOW: So there's no flag on it?
Page ! of ! 27 72
March 15, 2018
MR. BUMPOUS: Correct, no flag.
MR. KLATZKOW: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any is that the end of your presentation?
MR. BUMPOUS: Yes, sir, it is.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions?
Go ahead, Ned.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: The structure that is immediately north of Tract 6, I believe that that
houses something called NCH Physicians; immediately north of Tract 6.
MR. BUMPOUS: Tract 8. Are you referring to Tract 8?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: No, 6, I believe.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Tract 6 is where the hotel is, so the one north of it would be Tract 3.
MR. BUMPOUS: Yes, Tract 3. Yes, there's a building there on the corner. That's also owned by
Arthrex. It's referred to as the Polaris Center. It was originally a joint venture between, I think, Barron Collier
as well as John R. Woods. Arthrex purchased that a few years back, and it has some medical offices in there
as well as our own medical facility and general offices for Arthrex.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Yeah. I now see where I got that off of Google Earth, they have
it labeled NCH Creekside, but so you own the building
MR. BUMPOUS: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: and you have tenants whose leases are expiring or they're somehow
being taken care of?
MR. BUMPOUS: We actually have a couple of tenants that are currently, if I in this location right
here, there are two medical buildings currently sitting in that location. Those buildings are slated to be torn
down to make way for the hotel and the wellness center.
There are two tenants that we've agreed to allow them to move into the Polaris Center, so they'll just
be simply moving across the parking lot. And one of those is NCH.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. I had a very helpful conversation with Mr. Yovanovich with
respect to an issue that is frequently of concern to me, and that is traffic. Looking at the AUIR, 2017, it looks
like there are 55 additional p.m. peak trips available which, of course, on its face, becomes a point of concern.
And I'm not asking which one of your presenters will be making the case, but there are a lot of very
helpful points that I think should be made a record of to support an argument that this will actually help
traffic. And rather than just having had that conversation one on one with Mr. Yovanovich, I hope that a full
record will be made of those points.
MR. YOVANOVICH: For the record, Rich Yovanovich.
I wanted to a couple of things that we discussed that Dave highlighted was a lot of the you know,
the physicians that are coming now, that traffic is already on the road system, and that will now be reduced
because they'll be coming straight to the hotel and not having to travel to and from other hotels. Also, we
originally prior to your time on the Planning Commission, we had revised the PUD to increase square
footage for the PUD, and increasing that square footage for the PUD, we entered into a Developer
Contribution Agreement to make some roadway improvements to address the current square footage allowed
in the PUD. So we've addressed transportation impacts that way, by committing to making some
improvements to GoodletteFrank Road mainly at the intersection past our intersection on GoodletteFrank
Road to make it a fourlane section, increase capacity there.
Also, the way we analyzed this hotel is we analyzed it as if it were a public hotel, a real public hotel
like a Marriott or a Hilton or whatever from a transportation standpoint. We analyzed it that way, and we
actually reduced the square footages in the PUD as if this were a standalone hotel open to the public and,
therefore, the typical traffic impacts of that type of a hotel. So we reduced square footage in the PUD to
offset those impacts so the PUD would be transportation neutral.
So you're really looking at this in a worstcase scenario as if it's a publicoperated open hotel for the
general public when, in reality, it will be operated as a private hotel, essentially, for Arthrex's visitors and
guests.
So between the improvements we already committed to we're making to the transportation system
through the DCA, through the fact that we're now going to have our doctors staying on campus versus
traveling to and from the campus, the analysis we did to reduce square footage, now we have the wellness
center, too, that is a benefit to our as Mr. Bumpous pointed out, to the employees in getting them off the
Page ! of ! 28 72
March 15, 2018
roads during the peak and off peak.
We think a combination of all of that is really an overall reduction to the transportation system and it,
I think, addressed the concerns that have been raised in the past about, you know, what's the realworld traffic
impacts versus what's the theoretical approved in the PUD.
So those are the conversations we've had, and I wanted to put a little bit more detail on the record,
and hopefully that addresses our conversation satisfactorily.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: It does. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Rich, how many square feet is this hotel going to be?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, I know it's going to be 169 rooms. I don't know the actual square
footage of the physical structure.
Do you, David?
I don't think we've designed it to the final it's going to be X square feet.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: So you're telling me the 169room hotel will not be more than 29,900
square feet?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No, no. That's not how it works. It's the impact of 29,900 square feet of
either IC or B uses from a traffic standpoint offsets the traffic from a 169room hotel, not it's not square foot
for square foot.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else?
Joe?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are you done with your presentation?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do want I wanted to put something on the record based upon the
conversation we had that you don't remember the other day. I'm a little hurt.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You know how many things had to happen to have this meeting today, not
just with you but the other? It's just been a whirlwind for the last three days, so...
Oh, yes. I was going to bring that up but okay. I remember I talked to Wayne about it as well.
MR. YOVANOVICH: There are two sections of the PUD that address the wellness center, and we
wanted it's both in Section 3.2 and 4.2, and they're both the same changes, but I can put them both up if you
want.
After a conversation with Mr. Strain, Mr. Stone, Ms. Ashton and, I think, Mr. Bosi was also in the
conversation, we thought it was a better way to clarify the floor area ratio or the floor area comment related
to, in this case, the IC district of 709,100 square feet; that it's not necessary to reference the LDC because
everything is defined as in the LDC. And then also the wellness center, we wanted to clarify that the use was
limited to the employees and hotel guests within the PUD; shall not exceed a maximum of 40,000 square feet
and shall not be counted towards the overall square footage.
The basic intent was, is since this is a use for people who are already coming to the PUD, it really
isn't an impact from a transportation and other facility impacts for Comprehensive Plan analysis. When
you're making changes, you can't increase the intensity of the PUD, because we were deemed consistent by
policy originally for this original PUD.
So this, I think, better clarifies that this wellness center really is not impacting roads and other capital
infrastructure and, therefore, we're recognizing that there will be a 40,000squarefoot building, but it's part of
the 709,100 square feet of IC uses, and also the 269,000 square feet of B uses. So that's what those changes,
and it's both in the Section 4.2 I'm sorry, 3.2, which is on the screen, and then also in Section 4.2 to make
those clarifications. And I think I got that right.
Did I get that right, Mr. Stone, based on our conversation?
So I think that's all I wanted to add to the record, Mr. Chairman. I think that addresses all the
changes that we're making to the PUD.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: One more point of conversation we had, Rich, that deserves, I think, to
be a part of the record. Certainly, you know, some physicians will want to go out for the evening and go to
Third Street or Fifth Avenue, but they won't have to do so for restaurant needs or other typical needs of people
who are traveling that will be covered within this development, correct?
MR. YOVANOVICH: And that's true. Arthrex provides meals for their guests and their employees
Page ! of ! 29 72
March 15, 2018
during the week and, obviously, you could walk across the street if you wanted to within the Creekside
project. There are a few restaurants that are in the center up there.
So, yes, they and I'm assuming there will be some that do actually go to either the Fifth Avenue or
Third Street or Mercato or wherever, but we make it very convenient for them to not have to leave if they
don't want to.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you.
MR. ARNOLD: Wayne Arnold, for the record.
I just wanted to make sure that we addressed the fact that we've added a notation for a deviation that
would apply to the hotel building and to the wellness center. It's the same deviation that was previously
approved for the office building that lets staff do an alternative review to make sure that the nuance of the
LDC standards can apply to these buildings because they want them to be more of a unified theme for their
campus activities.
And then I wanted to point out that we also added a landscape buffer deviation to allow some
existing trees, due to some utility conflicts, to count as our typical landscape buffer for their primary office
building tract. I just wanted to make sure I cover those if anybody had any questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, let's start on Page 45 it's PUD Page 215, No. 9. It says you're
adding "outdoor recreation facilities including, but not limited to, playfields, fitness fields, et cetera." I have
no problem with what you're trying to do when you explained it to me, but if you watched the project in front
of us today, they had a word that said "recreation" in their PUD, and now we have stadiums. You don't mean
stadiums, but someone else could take it that way. So I need that language cleaned up to go to the limitations
you're asking for, not to the unlimited standards that could be applied to it by somebody else. Is that a
problem?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Chairman, what page did you say you were on?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: On the PUD Page 215. It's 45 page electronically, and it's No. 9.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Fortyfive. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And it's the underlined section on No. 9.
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, under No. 9, you and I discussed that it currently reads outdoor
recreation facilities including, but not limited to, playfields, fitness trails, et cetera.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR. ARNOLD: And I think the clarification you wanted, because of the sports complex that you
brought up in our conversation, was to further limit that to areas that are not identified as either IC or B tracts
on the PUD master plan. So that would then limit it to various
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. That's a common area, which is minimum in size.
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have no problem with that.
MR. ARNOLD: So I would add language that simply said after that "et cetera," could be on areas
not designated IC or B on the PUD master plan.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So there wouldn't be an "et cetera"?
MR. ARNOLD: Probably not. Well, I think we don't want to limit it, so maybe we need to
MR. YOVANOVICH: What if we said "including but not limited" yeah, it does say that. We don't
need the "et cetera."
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you.
MR. YOVANOVICH: You're welcome.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. If we I mean, the next page is the paragraph that's in front of us, and
that same language appears under the business District 2, I believe. I haven't got to that page yet, but I
believe it's there. So basically we're saying, the IC districts and the B districts you can have wellness centers.
You're not intending to do more than one, are you? Because we need to limit it to the one wellness center you
want on the south part of Tract 3 as shown on the master plan.
So I don't want someone coming back in and saying we can have all these wellness centers and say
they all don't count because they're all neutral for whatever reasons they want to conjure up. I fully believe
what you're saying. I'm convinced it's going to be neutral. I don't have a problem with this one, but I don't
Page ! of ! 30 72
March 15, 2018
want to go through this with an argument on a hotel on the other side of the street, because it wouldn't even be
rational, a size of that nature.
So, anyway, would you mind limiting it to this one wellness center on this tract? And if you don't,
then that's going to open up a Pandora's box of questions.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So that's okay. I'm going to have to open up the Pandora's box because I can't
first of all, this wellness center is to serve for both Arthrex and the hotel. Hotels can have fitness facilities,
and there's no limitation on a hotel and the size of the fitness facility within the hotel provided that the
development standards are met within the PUD and we don't exceed the number of rooms, et cetera.
So if you have a separate hotel on the east side, they have every right to have a fitness and workout
facility within that hotel and, frankly, I would expect for them to have their own fitness and wellness facility
for their hotel guests. That would be clearly an accessory use to the hotel.
This wellness center is not intended to serve if a second hotel is built on the second on the east side.
And since the people who own the east side of this PUD are not here to say, this will be the only wellness
center and it will serve my hotel as well, I can't agree to that condition.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This is the only wellness center we're talking about today that fits the
criteria of being for Arthrex, their hotel and their facilities. You didn't tell me this is going to be for the
Barron Collier Group to add more square footage next door. That's a whole different program. A
40,000squarefoot second wellness center to support a hotel. By itself, how do you justify that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, first of all, Mr. Strain, hotels in the PUD are recognized by rooms.
They don't count towards either the 269,000 square feet, B, or the 709,000 square foot IC. It was higher
before we adjusted those numbers.
Theoretically, we wouldn't even be here discussing this wellness center if I wanted to play hide the
ball and just made this part of the hotel. I could have made it as big as I want. But the reality is, it wasn't
going to be just limited to the hotel guests. We were being open and honest in letting people know that this
wellness center on the west side of the Creekside PUD was being utilized by employees and guests of Arthrex
and the hotel guests.
If I'd have just closed my eyes and said this is a wellness center in the hotel, I wouldn't even be here
talking about this wellness center, and it wouldn't have counted against the 709,000 square feet. I wouldn't
even have had to reduce.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then you've got no problem. These sentences that are added are for the
benefit of the one that you want for Arthrex, because you're already telling us you believe the other one is use
by right. So you don't need this language to apply to it.
So I'm asking is, the two sentences that are being added to the IC and the B are for the purposes of
what Arthrex wants to accomplish for their campus. That's the whole argument.
MR. YOVANOVICH: But the way you phrased it, you made it sound like it also applied to the east
side of the street. So if you're telling me it only applies to the west side of the street, I don't have an issue
with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It only applies to Arthrex campus. The problem is, you have this same
sentence in the IC and the B. You don't need it in both if you're going to do it just on the Arthrex campus. So
let's cross the one out you don't need. And the only one
MR. YOVANOVICH: Which one don't I need?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: that this sentence applies for is for the use by Arthrex.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do need it in both.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, that's what the problem is. You want if you don't need it on both,
because you just testified that you already have the ability to put it on the east side. So why do you need this
language to apply to the east side?
MR. YOVANOVICH: What I'm saying, Mr. Strain, it's both in the IC and the B because it straddles
6 and 3.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to fill the street in?
MR. YOVANOVICH: That's not a street. There's no street there today.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it shows on the master plan
MR. YOVANOVICH: There's no street.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're going to take that street out and you're going to go across that
roadway with it?
Page ! of ! 31 72
March 15, 2018
MR. YOVANOVICH: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, then
MR. YOVANOVICH: So that's why it's in both.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, then, we don't have an issue with adding language to both IC
and B that says this sentence pertains to the Arthrex campus uses, do we?
MR. YOVANOVICH: No. It already says employees of the PUD and
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then we'll add that language.
MR. YOVANOVICH: guests of the hotel. It's already in there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: What I'm saying is, your argument about the hotel somewhere else on this
property needing a wellness center is moot because you're saying you got that by right. So you don't need
this sentence to apply to it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I just wanted to make sure the way I heard you say it is this was going to be
the only wellness center in the entire PUD. That's what I
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: For purposes of this sentence.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I don't have a problem with that, but the way you phrased it, it could
have been interpreted to mean a wellness center on the east side. That's all I'm saying.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This sentence needs to be clarified for the purposes as Arthrex needs to use
it as we talked about today. So however you want to word that. And your rights to do one of these on
wherever else you want it, that's your issue. You can argue that point when you come in for a permit for it.
Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just to make sure, Rich, this is not a commercial facility.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It is strictly a private facility for the employees and the hotel guests.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's not Gold's Gym or California Gym or whatever else you want to
call it where you can have outside members.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right. That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hotels have outside members.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And, Mr. Strain, I'm fine with that. But what it says
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Hotel guests can be there, though.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. But hotel guests and hotels do allow outside members. You can go
join the one over at Tiburon or someplace like that, so...
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's what I'm asking. Are you going to is this going to be open for
non
MR. YOVANOVICH: You can't come.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay? I can't go.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I feel slighted now.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I do, too, and I drive by every day.
Now, Mr. Strain, I'm not arguing with you, but I thought that's what it said when it says "wellness
centers limited to employees and hotel guests within the PUD." If there's another word you want to add, tell
me what other words you want to add.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Employee
MR. YOVANOVICH: I thought it was there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. No, I don't believe because you've got it in both districts you're
already indicating there's two hotels, 180room on the other side, 160room on this side. You already have you
believe you already have a right without having to count it, for the one next door on the east side. And all I'm
saying is this sentence, because of its rights that it's doing by not counting to the square footage, is only for
the benefit, as described in here, for the west side of the property.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. So tell me the words you want, and we'll
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just told them to you. And Wayne can craft them up for consent, so...
MR. YOVANOVICH: Are we coming back?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, unless you can come up with the language. I'm not going to sit here
Page ! of ! 32 72
March 15, 2018
and craft your language for you. I'm telling you what my concern is. If you want to address it, you guys
come back with some language. You can do it today still, I don't care. While we're going through the rest
MR. YOVANOVICH: Why don't we say "wellness centers limited to employees and guests within
the west side of the PUD."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That will work.
MR. YOVANOVICH: West of GoodletteFrank Road, how about that? West of GoodletteFrank
Road.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That will work.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Presumably, each of the two hotels would have fitness centers which,
when I think of that term, I think of maybe one or two adjacent hotel rooms that have had some gym
equipment put in there versus a wellness center, which is a lot more than that.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I don't you know, it can vary. It could be as small as that. Maybe it will
have five or six ellipticals or something. You don't know what they're going to build I don't know what
they're going to build on the east side.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Forty thousand square feet?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Strain, I'm not fighting with you. The wellness center is a separate
building.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's the big differential here. This is a standalone large building.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I got it. I got it. And I thought the language we just did works for that. I
don't know, Mr. Fryer, what could happen.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I didn't mean to reopen that. I just wanted clarification.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I understand. I don't know what they're planning on the east side as far as the
hotel.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. From my read of this, the rooms are capped on each side. You've
got 169 on the west side and 180 on the east side; is that your reading of it, too?
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Under and this is I've got to go back and see where this falls.
Under the continuing on the IC use, and it looks like it's our electronic Page 49. Under permitted
accessory uses it's PUD Page 35 all the way to the bottom, C1. Uses and structures that are accessory and
incidental to the uses permitted in this district. Then you added this new language: "Including indoor and
outdoor recreational facilities including, but not limited to, physical fitness facilities, playfields, fitness trail,
et cetera.
What was your mindset in adding that language? What were you trying to accomplish by it? I mean,
you've got your wellness center separately stated. It's not defined as either an accessory or principal. It's
basically a use on the site, and it's not going to have it's counting because it's capture.
So, Wayne, what was your thinking here?
MR. ARNOLD: Wayne Arnold.
Mr. Strain, when we discussed this briefly, I think the issue was the reference to the physical fitness
facilities because we're already taking care of them on the other sentence that's before you, I think, was the
conversation we had.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you're saying we don't need the new underline in this particular one?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think what we wanted to be clear on as well and maybe the physical fitness
facility could be dropped, but I think we want to make sure that Arthrex can have other outdoor recreational
opportunities that would meander across their campus, and they would be on tracts.
For instance, the outdoor recreation that we talked about not being located on the IC or B tracts, that
could include some of their playfields and outdoor recreation space for Arthrex campus. Those same fitness
trails may meander onto their campus and be part of their fitness complex, so we wanted to make sure, as an
accessory to their use, they could also have outdoor recreational opportunities.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Could I make a suggestion?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And I hate to go backwards. The different campus plans that I've seen, I don't
know that we know for an absolute fact that a playfield or a recreational space may not also overlap onto one
of those firm hard lines that is an IC tract or a B tract. I think your concern is you want to prohibit stadiums
Page ! of ! 33 72
March 15, 2018
and outdoor lighted playing fields.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, and the noise and the traffic and everything else generated from an
attractive an issue like that that wasn't originally, I think, intended for the PUD. That's all.
MR. YOVANOVICH: So if we can I'd rather, when we go back and say the general permitted uses,
"exclude stadiums and lighted playing fields" there will be lights? Okay. There won't be your normal
stadium lighting that you would have at a county park, you know, related to that. There will be lights that, I'm
sure, will be safetyrelated lights so you can see but not for you to go play softball at 11 o'clock in the evening.
So I think the better way to handle it is to put the prohibitions you're concerned about, because I don't
think we want to run the risk that, you know, where people are playing soccer may spill out on something
that's like Tract 5. And if I knew how to get over to what I could see on the screen.
Do you know how to switch over to the master plan? How do I switch over to the master plan?
There we go.
My concern is, if you look at Tract 5, for instance, it's right next to an area that's common area; do
you understand what I'm saying? I'm a little concerned that the playfield, if there's a playfield here in this
area, may still spill over onto Tract 5. And if we take out this language we're talking about, accessory uses,
I'd have a code violation if I spilled over into that area, and I don't think that's your concern. Your concern
was, am I going to have a stadium or lighted field. So can we
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes.
MR. YOVANOVICH: address it that way?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. I mean, my only concern is not to open up Pandora's box for another
possible Braves stadium this close to residential communities, and that's what I want to make sure we've not
indicated.
MR. YOVANOVICH: If we can come up with language, and hopefully you could trust us to make
sure we can get it right without having to come back for a hearing
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We'll see. Let's see when we get through the rest of it.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I'd like to go back into that 215, No. 9 where it said outdoor rec facilities,
change Wayne's language to prohibit stadiums, prohibit, you know, typical recreation lighting versus we
won't prohibit lighting, but we won't have your typical ballfield lighting.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And you might also put hours of operation, if you know what those are.
Something like that would help dispel it. If you don't, that's not critical. More critical, just not the stadiums
and then
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay. So we'll absolutely prohibit stadiums in 9, and then on these general
permitted uses, I mean, sorry, accessory uses, we'll make it clear, no stadiums are allowed as an accessory use
to any of the other uses that we're allowed to do in the PUD.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. YOVANOVICH: I think that works better than trying to be firm on those lines.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We need to well, you understand where we're trying to go, so when we get
to discussion, we'll figure out how to craft some language to make sure it comes out right.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm just checking the rest of the questions I had and made sure there's no
others at this point.
MR. YOVANOVICH: And we'll also deal with that on Page 44 in the B district.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The changes we make under the IC district's language for the
wellness center we have to make under the you're going to make the same ones under the B section as well.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the changes you're going to make under the IC for C1, you
make the same ones under the C1 for the B section.
MR. YOVANOVICH: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then that gets us through it. The only thing I had asked when I met
with youall, or not you, but when I talked to the others in the meeting was to have an acknowledgment from
your traffic engineer that the way that you're going to put this wellness center in at the 40,000 square feet is,
in fact, considered traffic neutral. Were you able to get that?
MR. YOVANOVICH: I was able to talk to him and have him verify that, yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. As long as he verified it. And I'll ask from Mike's Mike Bosi, from
Page ! of ! 34 72
March 15, 2018
your perspective, I know we have talked about it. Are you comfortable with that from a Comprehensive
Planning perspective? Because it's Comprehensive Planning that's driving that issue.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
And, yes, we've had a discussion with the Chair and internally, and we recognize that this is primarily
served as an amenity for the members that are already on campus and, therefore, a net neutral traffic impact
would be expected; therefore, it doesn't provide for any inconsistencies with the way that we calculate the
public facilities impact analysis.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Anybody else have any questions of the applicant?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nancy, what's the situation with staff?
MS. GUNDLACH: Good morning, Commissioners.
Staff is as this petition is consistent with the Land Development Code and the Growth Management
Plan, staff is recommending approval and, of course, subject to today's revisions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions of staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With that, are there any registered public speakers, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No speakers.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there anyone here who would like to speak on this topic?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And that takes us to a wrapup then, Wayne. As far as the issues,
we're going to tighten the language up on the paragraph to make sure the wellness center that's being
discussed in that paragraph is the one on the west side of the property, for the west side, as we've discussed.
Now
MR. ARNOLD: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, I'm going to have to talk to the Planning Commission when we get
into discussion how this it either comes back on consent, or if they want to leave it up to me to review it as
you change, and we can just go from there. I'll make sure it's the way we're talking about.
The other one other issue we have is clarify the outdoor rec use limitations, which is the stadium
issue.
And then the statement of traffic neutrality. I still need to see that from your traffic engineer, but I
would suggest you need it in time we'll just stipulate that that ought to go to the Board of County
Commissioners as part of your package and it goes to them.
And that would take care of the issues I think we have from today. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: I just have a question. You closed Creekside Boulevard. What are you
putting there? There's that's not where the facility is going to be? I mean
MR. ARNOLD: The closure for Creekside was due to the fact they were trying to make sure this one
cohesive campus and not have the public roadway bisecting their campus, so this became an opportunity to
make it a pedestrianfriendly campus by rerouting the traffic to the north around the campus.
So the facilities that may go there could be some green space, could be walking paths, et cetera, but
it's not going to be the public road. That road has been vacated.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No, I know that. Okay. I was just wondering because you've got 60
feet or whatever, and that's quite a bit extra.
MR. ARNOLD: It is, but the outdoor recreational facilities that we're talking about are really for
there to be some athletic fields, trails, fitness facilities that are outdoor for the Arthrex employees. They
would like to utilize part of the FP&L easement, for instance. There may be an opportunity to put a box
culvert over part of the canal that's there to make that more of a pedestrian pathway or something that can
function as part of their overall campus.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else have any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
Page ! of ! 35 72
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I have a motion, if it would be appropriate.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, first, I think I want to know what do youall feel about a consent
hearing?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: That's my motion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: To have consent?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: No, to obviate the need for
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, then.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I move that we repose this matter in the hands of our Chairman, and if
the Chairman is satisfied that his changes measure up to what was discussed today, that we accept that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the motion is approve subject to that?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Also, if I could have you add to that motion subject to the changes
we discussed today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Motion for approval subject to the and we can go through the
paragraphs, but subject to the changes we discussed today.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: That would be a substantive motion then, and that's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then both of you are in agreement on that.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, that's he seconded his. So any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All those (sic) signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
Please get the information in time before the board meeting so I have a chance to review it, Wayne.
That's all I ask.
MR. ARNOLD: I'll have it for you no later than tomorrow.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We'll have it by noon today.
MR. ARNOLD: That may be a challenge. I'm here for the next item, but we'll do our best.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Highlighted in what color? I don't have highlighted.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, highlighted in shades.
***Okay. The next item up, and we'll start this. We may not finish it before lunch. We'll just have to
see how it goes.
It's 9D. It's PUDAPL20170001345. It's the Marco Shores golf course community planned unit
PUD. It's located near the Marco Island Executive Airport.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Disclosures? We'll start with Tom.
MR. EASTMAN: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I talked to a couple of nice people out in the hall during
break.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'm sorry. I was distracted. Is this Marco Shores?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: This is the Marco Shores, yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I've not had any discussions on this.
Page ! of ! 36 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. I spoke with Nicole Johnson, and I spoke with the airport
authority.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I have had meetings with staff, I talked to Wayne on the phone,
I think, yesterday, I also talked to the Conservancy yesterday as well. And I believe they're here somewhere
today. Yes, Alison's here.
Okay. Karen?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: I spoke to Mr. Arnold.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I spoke to Mr. Arnold about it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Patrick.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Correction from me. I'm sorry. I spoke with Mr. Arnold.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Wayne, it's all yours.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. Wayne Arnold from Grady Minor. I'm here representing the applicant,
Al Moscato. The property owner's present, as is Jim Bank, our traffic engineer that worked on the project.
Before you is an amendment to the Marco Shores Country Club to the basic addition is to add
provisions for senior housing on what we're calling Tract 2A of the PUD. On the aerial photograph I have the
subject property highlighted. It's just a little over five acres, and it's located north of the golf course tract and
just west of the Marco Island utility tract. It's currently a residential tract and has deeded rights to 100
multifamily units on the PUD. And Mr. Moscato purchased that from WCI Communities.
And your last amendment that you heard as Planning Commission severed the airport, excuse me,
out of the property, and so it's no longer part of the PUD. But our interest was in obtaining senior housing/
group housing rights for Tract 2A that Mr. Moscato owns. There's been interest by senior housing providers
in that area.
And we carried forward the development standards for the multifamily that was previously approved,
and we've added standards for the senior housing. We've also made provisions for changing the building
heights. It was previously expressed as three stories, and we're trying to make this clear that it could be four
stories over parking. We added a zoned height of 58 feet and actual height of 72 feet.
I've spoken with the airport folks, and there doesn't seem to be any concern with those heights. We
have three towers that have been built within the same PUD that exceed 200 feet.
So those are the minor changes. I saw the Conservancy's early correspondence related to this, and I
also had the correspondence that was received yesterday or the day before, I forget. But this property and the
entire PUD was part of the overall Deltona Settlement Agreement as was parts of Isles of Capri, Fiddler's
Creek, et cetera.
So there are limitations for mangrove trimming and structures that could be built out into the bay, et
cetera. We're well aware of those and intend to respect the settlement agreement as encouraged by the
Conservancy.
I would say that with regard to the senior housing use, we're traffic neutral. The 100 multifamily
units equated to the 240 units of senior housing. That's how we arrived at that number so our p.m. peakhour
trip could be a neutral number.
Of course, the project is served by a traffic signalized intersection at Collier Boulevard and Mainsail
Drive. We think it's compatible. There are no immediate neighbors here that are residential in nature.
And that's my short presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Questions from the Planning Commission? Joe and then Ned.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question, but it's directed towards staff, and I'll wait until
staff gives its presentation, because I have an issue question about the onetime contribution concerning I
guess it was a requirement from emergency management, but I'll wait to discuss that with staff.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: The conversation that I initially forgot I had with Mr. Arnold was, once
again, about traffic. And looking at the 2017 AUIR, Collier Boulevard, between Walmart and Manatee, is
scheduled to go deficient in 2020 with 94 more peak p.m. trips. And, Wayne, I'll ask you to say again what
you told me when we were on the phone.
MR. ARNOLD: I'll do one better than that. I'll let Jim Banks, our traffic engineer, address
Page ! of ! 37 72
March 15, 2018
specifically your concern. I mean, I know in his traffic analysis we are traffic neutral. But let him explain
how, from a zoning perspective, we utilized the trips that are in the network.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Mr. Banks, may I begin by asking how many additional trips
will actually be generated by the project?
MR. BANKS: The project is expected to generate 60 p.m. peak hour twoway trips and 32 p.m. peak
hour peak direction trips. And the reason I want to distinguish is because you were mentioning 94 trips
remaining capacity. That is one direction. So when we're looking at our one direction of our peak trips, it's
32.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you. That pretty much answers my question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you.
Anybody else have any questions of the applicant? Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah, just one.
The people that talked to me out in the hallway mentioned that your neighborhood information
meeting was held at the Marco Island Library one week after Hurricane Irma forced everybody to evacuate.
They thought that was kind of unfair. Was there any other meetings held?
MR. ARNOLD: No. That was our required neighborhood information meeting. And, obviously, I
couldn't control the fact we had a natural disaster the week before. But these meetings are scheduled well in
advance.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Did you have power?
MR. ARNOLD: We had power.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Really?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: One week after? You're ahead of most people.
MR. ARNOLD: I personally didn't, but the library did on Marco Island.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Amazing. Especially Marco. That got hit the hardest. Anything else, Stan?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: No, it just seemed like maybe they should have had a second
meeting.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it's I mean, there's some residents here. Let's move through the
questions and see where it goes and see what comes out of it, so...
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I was without power over a week.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That should have been something directed by staff if they felt it did
not comply. It technically met the requirements. Staff, frankly, should have directed it.
MR. ARNOLD: Keep in mind, if I might, that there are mail notices of those meetings. There are
phone numbers attached to those. There's an email address. I mean, there's any number of ways that people
could reach out to us if they had questions or concerns, and it's not uncommon for other projects that we don't
have large attendance. I mean
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I know that. I'm just trying to remember what I was like one
week after Irma hit, and I would not have wanted to go to a meeting.
MR. ARNOLD: But we did have two residents that happened to live in this project that did attend.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You did indicate to those two residents that the housing will not include
residents having substanceabuse issues or who are developmentally disabled. Do you mind that as a
stipulation then?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't think we have any issue adding that as a stipulation.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You also said emergency management has met with the applicant and
expressed its concerns regarding the possibility of senior housing having to evacuate due to the high
likelihood of storm surge inundation. The developer indicated that they will build in an elevated fashion to be
more surge and flood resilient. What did you mean by that?
MR. ARNOLD: There are new standards under the county and FEMA requirements that we have to
elevate above FEMA by a foot, plus our applicant likely will develop on the site, given its size, underbuilding
parking which is going to naturally elevate it. And in our conversations with Dan Summers, that was
discussed. And his issue was more related to making sure he could accommodate any evacuees. And,
certainly, we'll make the mitigation payment, as he requested.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So by that statement, you really didn't mean you're going to do anything
Page ! of ! 38 72
March 15, 2018
more than code requires.
MR. ARNOLD: No.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But there are new rules about generators and emergency and
all that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're going to get to that. Yes, there are. And, yes, when we get into the
PUD, we need to talk about some of the language that needs to be used to do that.
And now we're getting since we are, let's move right into the PUD, and it's your Section 4,
multifamily. It's electronic version Page 16. It's Exhibit A in our document. There's page 1 of 4.
On the uses permitted, 4.07.01 and when I talked to you, Wayne, I think I mentioned to you I've got
to read this one I had to read this one last night because it was one of the I couldn't get to it all because of the
other projects.
Under uses permitted you start that paragraph out, it says, "Residential and group housing uses may
not be jointly developed." A group housing use is a residential use. And I'm just wondering if that
MR. ARNOLD: It's our intent and I think staff would tell you group housing is more of a
community facility use, not a residential use, which is how we've tried to distinguish those. And if there's a
better way to express it our intent was not to have conventional residential and the group housing blended on
this site. It's going to be one or the other.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then when you get into the No. 3 where you added "group housing
for seniors, including assisted living," and yada, yada, yada, and then you get to not to exceed 242 total units/
beds of group housing. How big are these rooms?
MR. ARNOLD: There's no minimum size expressed, because they vary wildly.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I know there's no minimum, but what are you thinking what's the
you make it are you going to put someone in a 4by4squarefoot hole?
MR. ARNOLD: No, but
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. What's the minimum size you think you could practically build by
state regulations?
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, I don't think I've ever worked on a group housing project where I've
expressed a minimum size, because they vary all
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not asking you to, Wayne. I just wanted to know what you thought the
minimum size would be. Here's why. You've got an FAR of .45. If you use the FAR available on those sites,
you come up with 249 times .45. You end up with 109,000 square feet. You divide that 240 units, and each
unit is going to be 454 square feet, but you've still got common areas and all the other things you're going to
have. So I'm just wondering how small these units are going to be to get the FAR you'd need for that
property.
MR. ARNOLD: I would say that depending on the type of care that ends up being provided for
memory care facilities, for instance, Mr. Strain, many times those are bedroomsize units that one person is
housed in in a bed because they don't have the same need as somebody who's living in a 55andover
independent facility.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is it fair to say, since you didn't ask for a deviation from the .45
FAR, you are going to meet that .45 FAR required for the grouping group housing on No. 3?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That will resolve it then. And I don't know we went instead of
using the group the .45, it's not in there. I don't know if we typically include that as a reference in the use,
Ray, or not, but I was just trying to figure out how they're going to build that many units and still hit that
FAR. But if they can, that still meets code.
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows.
The LDC has the standard under group housing, and it is 0.45. So they would be subject to it unless
they asked for a deviation as part of the PUD amendment.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Under the principal uses, you've got the boardwalks, viewing stands,
and docks, nature trails. Now, you know about the concerns with the settlement agreement, and I know
you're familiar with it. You know I am. What were you intending by that principal use? I mean, was it do
you know? Just out of
MR. ARNOLD: There was no specific intent with it other than to make sure we could have sort of
opportunities to enjoy the water views that are there.
Page ! of ! 39 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Because you couldn't put a dock in past the settlement agreement line
without getting the signators of that settlement agreement to sign off on it.
MR. ARNOLD: There are numerous regulations and standards in that settlement agreement, and we
know we're subject to those.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Diane?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Can you just take the dock out?
MR. ARNOLD: I mean, I would prefer to leave it, because I believe there may be an opportunity to
have a dock on the project and still meet the settlement agreement terms.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, as long as yeah, there's terms. I mean, I know of you guys should go
back to the seven or nine signatories and show them what your alternative plan is, and they either sign off or
they don't.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm very familiar with the settlement agreement as well, and it will
be a challenge. But the language can stay in. Good luck on getting it approved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under your go ahead, Diane.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: The other thing is, when I when I spoke with the airport authority, they
said that the owner did not want to mention that there's an airport within a thousand feet. I feel that that really
should be on there, that people should I mean, I don't know whether they're coming from out of town or
what, but I think they should know that there
MR. ARNOLD: We had that conversation, but there's if you look at the existing PUD, there's no
mention of it. It seems a little unfair to single out a fourandahalfacre parcel and tell them that they have to
notify people but nobody else in the PUD that allows 1,580 units does. That was our thought.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: That was your thought on that?
MR. ARNOLD: Yep.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Typically, you would be required to do that if they were in the cone
of departure cone of entry for the flight path, but this is not in the flight path.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under your Part B on that same page, it says "customary permitted
accessory uses," then it says, "customary accessory uses and structures including parking structures." Are
you going to put a parking garage there, or is that what you're insinuating by that or
MR. ARNOLD: No. I think that was to make sure that it was understood that we could have
underbuilding parking.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Can we just say "including underbuilding parking"?
MR. ARNOLD: Fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under 4.07.03 on the following page, you have "minimum yards
multifamily/group housing." And since you're differentiating the group housing from residential structures,
what does B refer to?
MR. ARNOLD: The statement that says "setbacks from edge of pavement of public roadways"?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. It says, "30 feet for residential structures," but I think you indicated
group housing isn't you're trying to differentiate that from residential. But the group housing would still have
the same 30foot setback, right?
MR. ARNOLD: We expressed that in Item C, Mr. Strain, that says "setbacks from the rightofway for
group housing would be 25 feet."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And under 4.07.07 you have the offstreet parking issue. I know that
used to say, I think, 1.5. Now it's 2. That's what the code requires?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So just why did you feel you had to state it? So
MR. ARNOLD: The offstreet parking section was in the prior multifamily section, so we just carried
forward all those categories, except for the group housing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 4.07.09, the generator, A. You talk about enough fuel supply for seven days,
but the generator we need language to indicate the generator must be sized to operate the airconditioning
units and be placed above the floodplain levels as well.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That would be required by code, would it not?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not sure. I just don't know. I just wanted to make sure that we didn't I
Page ! of ! 40 72
March 15, 2018
hate to see the thing flooded out.
MR. ARNOLD: Maybe after the reference where the sentence ends at seven days it would say, "to
operate the airconditioning unit for the facility and must be placed above minimum flood elevation."
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Not just the airconditioner.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. Just capable of operating the airconditioning units. Then whatever else
the state's dictated in the rules they've got, but you're going to have to do more than just that. I mean, lighting
and things like that would automatically be included.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Is natural gas available down in that area? I know there is in
Fiddler's Creek. But, no, not in that area?
MR. ARNOLD: I'm not aware of it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question on the next sentence, and then I'll
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: ask it now.
Tell me how you came about this developer commitment, under what authority, who dictated it, how
did they justify it. Because to me, it appears more of an exaction than it is a there's nothing that I know of in
the code that requires this. I fully understand it's in the coastal high hazard area. I fully understand the
requirements are that may fall upon you as far as evacuating personnel. But why 50? Why not 350? Why
not 4,550? I mean, who made the determination? Where'd it come from? Under what justification and what
authority?
MR. ARNOLD: Staff has been including Dan Summers from emergency management
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Is he here today to talk about this?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't see him in the audience, but had several conversations with him. But in his
review he commented that, you know, we just had Hurricane Irma. This is in coastal high hazard, you know,
gee, it really would be nice if you do some other things like the emergency generator grew out of that, and he
said, mitigation for certain things for evacuees. And we started talking about it, and he said, go take a look at
Hacienda Lakes and, on a proportionate basis, you know, they looked at this issue.
So I came up with some calculations, and it came up with a dollar amount that was a few thousand
dollars. And our client said, there really is no statutory requirement to do this but, you know what, it's such a
minimum amount of money, I'm willing to do it because we want to be
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And where are these cots going?
MR. ARNOLD: They would be donated to the county, and the county would then utilize them at
their shelters.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Again, it's why don't we require that of every building permit in the
coastal high hazard area then?
(Multiple speakers speaking.)
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I know you can't answer that. I'm looking for staff to answer that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Mike's coming up.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, is this something that was just invented?
COMMISSIONER EBERT: No.
MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director.
No, not invented. As we have said, Hacienda Lakes, which was a 2010 approval, had a similar
contribution. If you look at the CCME, Goal No. 12 is to make every reasonable effort to ensure the public
safety, health, and welfare of people and property from the effects of hurricane storm damage are protected.
That's the overarching policy. Within or overarching objective.
Within goals and policies of the CCME, it does talk about if warranted by the results of hurricane
evacuation, the studies that are periodically conducted by the State of Florida and federal authorities, further
restrictions of development may be proposed.
Also 12.2.1 says, the hazard mitigation section of Collier County comprehensive emergency
management plans shall continue to be received and updated every four years beginning in 2005. The
periodic update of the CMP shall include a review and update as necessary related to county evacuating and
sheltering proceedings.
There are provisions within the CCME that relates to emergency management and how we shelter,
and the overarching goal or the overarching goals with specific policies would suggest that is not an
Page ! of ! 41 72
March 15, 2018
unreasonable exaction because it could be tied to a policy or goal within your Growth Management Plan.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mike, I fully understand. What but why not the requirement to
create a facility on site to house in case of an evacuation? Are we now creating
MR. BOSI: Policy 12.1.14, all new nursing homes and assisted living facilities that are licensed shall
have core area to shelter residents and staff on site. The core area will be constructed to meet public shelter
design criteria that are required for new public schools and public community colleges and universities.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Slow down a little bit.
MR. BOSI: Additionally, this area shall be capable of ventilation or airconditioning provided by
backup generator for a period of no less than 72 hours. So that's a specific policy that's within the CC
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That will be required as part of the construction of this building.
MR. BOSI: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But we're still requiring them to provide 50 it's a small amount, and
I realize the developer's just saying, I give up. Here's your 50 cots. Thank you very much. Don't bother me
again.
But I'm still having a difficult time understanding why we require this person to do it and not the
person who's building the highrise or the multifamily unit or whomever else.
MR. BOSI: I think all development that's being proposed within a PUD or PUD amendment or a
rezoning will be that's in the that's in the coastal high hazards area is routed to emergency management, and
they've been consistently asking for these type of improvements when we've had these issues.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Then make it an impact fee. Then everybody pays it. I'm just
saying, this is just, to me, an exaction that the developer is saying, I give up. Here's your 50 cots.
MR. BOSI: Understood. I understand the perspective.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I think when we years ago we asked that emergency services take a
look at
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They review everything.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: this review, and they never responded much before. My hope was that
they would look at and suggest ways to harden the facility or something that is attributed to that facility, not
use that opportunity to have an extraction for something just unregulated, basically. Fifty cots, they could go
up to the north end of town. They would have no little benefit here.
I was hoping they would tie it to a benefit that would be attributed to the site itself. It doesn't seem
like that's happening with any of them I've seen so far, so...
MR. BOSI: It would suggest to me that coordination with Dan Summers and his team and maybe a
presentation or a discussion item at a future board meeting, say, in the summertime right prior to hurricane
season might be appropriate with the Planning Commission so your perspective could be shared with the
bureau and their perspective, I think, could be articulated as well. And I'm sure that an agreement or at least
an understanding could better be established as we move forward.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, I think that would be a good idea.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: My concern is that we build the site; it doesn't become a burden on
Dan. The site itself sustain and can support the staff that it has, and then if there's an evacuation, unless there's
going to be a significant threat as far as storm surge or whatever, that they could support the people that are
on site. And that is the type of payment or that's the type of requirement it should be, not just simply giving
50 cots.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I think I beat it to death.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, you didn't. You're right. You're right. You're 100 percent right, and I think
the Planning Commission may want to consider asking Mr. Summers to appear before it and explain the
rationale and maybe codify it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As soon as we get yeah.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I will make that request then.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Staff yeah, Mike will have to put it through, and we'll get it scheduled
sometime after the Board leaves on vacation, because right now we have we're backed up. So let's just do it
at a time where we can really take a look at it hard, and that will be the best time. Is that okay?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yep.
Page ! of ! 42 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I'm that's the last questions I have, Wayne.
So does anybody else have any other questions?
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. Just on this emergency generator, the slab that it sits
on is going to be at or above whatever FEMA says is the flood zone for that area, or are you going to take into
account that it's kind of maybe a little nearer the coast? And I know the flood zones are based on the surge
models that were done, but they're redoing their surge model. You probably, you know any thought that you
might want to raise it up a foot or two above that?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think our building floor is going to be a foot above FEMA, so, I mean
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, you have first habitable floor over parking; you should have
sufficient height. Your airconditioners would be above BFEs.
MR. ARNOLD: I don't want to imply that we're absolutely going to have building above parking,
but I understand where Mr. Chrzanowski's coming from. I just don't know
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: The generator itself, yeah. It does no good to have all the
airconditioning if the generator floods out or gets hit by saltwater, so it's just a thought.
MR. FRENCH: Good morning. Jamie French, for the record.
To let you know that NFIP, the last two revisions of the Florida Building Code, the National Flood
Insurance Program was, for lack of a better term, dropped right in the middle of the Florida Building Code.
So this structure or any structure built in Collier County now, whether it be residential, commercial,
or residential use in a commercialtype building, is going to have to meet all of those requirements to include
BFE plus one. So there's one foot of freeboard now that's been incorporated within the Florida Building
Code with regards to habitable space, mechanical equipment.
So they yes, Stan, they're going to have to meet the most latest, the most stringent requirements as
set forth by the Florida Building Code.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah, but all the electrical equipment in there depends on the
functioning of the generator if you lose power. So it seems to me the generator might be a little higher than
the other stuff.
MR. KLATZKOW: Jamie, this is a Florida Building Code requirement, correct?
MR. FRENCH: That's correct.
MR. KLATZKOW: Are we entitled to ask for more?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Those are minimums, those codes are.
MR. FRENCH: Typically, with the Florida Building Code, no. You would have to if you wanted to
file an amendment with the Florida Building Code, if the Board did, to make it more restrictive, it would have
to be approved by the Florida Building Commission.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, wait a minute. The building codes, like the LDC, they're minimum
codes. So you're saying you can't ever you can't ever overstrap your house, for example? I mean
MR. KLATZKOW: You can voluntarily do it, but we can't require them to do it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we weren't. I don't think it was going it was going to be a request,
and then it might impact somebody's vote on this board, but that's how it would be proposed.
MR. FRENCH: Mark, you're absolutely correct. You can
MR. KLATZKOW: Planning Commission exaction now, huh?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not hey, talk to the guy the engineer at the end.
MR. FRENCH: You can certainly require it. And I know there was a question as well as the wind
zones. Also, within the latest revision of the Florida Building Code, there's not much differential from East
Coast to West Coast any longer. So when we look at those coast high hazards areas, our wind load went up
from, let's say, 140 miles. This area and I don't have the map in front of me. I would imagine that 30 second
gust on this building is probably going to have to be about 185 miles an hour.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you, sir.
Any more questions of staff before we go to well, I've got to talk to what does the Planning
Commission want to do about our lunch break? You want to how many public speakers do we have
registered, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: Two speakers.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, I'd like to get through the public speakers first.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a staff report, Ray, before we go to public speakers?
Page ! of ! 43 72
March 15, 2018
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. I'm filling in for Eric Johnson who's on vacation,
and the presentation made by the applicant is consistent with their request, and staff is recommending
approval.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any questions of staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Would you call the public speakers, and whoever wants to speak,
just use one of the microphones, identify yourself for the record. And we'll need to ask if you've been sworn
in when you come up. If you haven't been, just tell us, and we'll take care of that.
MR. BELLOWS: The first speaker is Alison Wescott to be followed by Mark Andrews.
MS. WESCOTT: Okay. Can you hear me? Great.
Okay. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Alison Wescott for the Conservancy of Southwest Florida on
behalf of our more than 7,000 members.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Were you sworn in when we
MS. WESCOTT: Yes, I was.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MS. WESCOTT: Yep, I stood up.
The Conservancy, as a signatory of the Deltona Settlement Agreement, and in fulfillment of its
oversight authority, would like to put on the record our concerns about this project.
We acknowledge the parcel on the north side of the PUD is located within the approved development
area as identified in Exhibit B and can be developed; however, the Conservancy is concerned about the uses
permitted in Section 4.07.01 of the PUD.
As it states now, as was pointed out earlier, principal uses include viewing stands or docks and nature
trails not associated with any particular multifamily development and noncommercial boat launching
facilities and multiple docking areas with a maximum extension into the waterway of 20 feet in accordance
with Section 5.03.06 of the Land Development Code.
The Conservancy has sought clarification from the state in light of the Deltona settlement, as has
been pointed out. In their letter of February 16th of this year, the state reminds us that although the property
is in an area that is approved for development, beyond the primary property boundaries are stateowned lands
and waters subject to additional protections under the settlement.
And since the Conservancy, the county, and the State of Florida are signatories to the settlement, we
should act to uphold the restrictions within the settlement, including with regard to boardwalks or boat docks
not authorized by the settlement.
So we believe it would not be right to sell this property to a buyer who might intend to build docks or
boardwalks, as this would likely not be permitted by the state, which I believe has already been pointed out.
We'd like to put on the record that the county should consider this when it conducts its review, and I
have a copy of the letter from the state which I would like to leave for the record.
And I just wanted to remind everyone, and it has come up this morning, that the events of Hurricane
Irma underscore the importance of ensuring development projects such as this are built with smart growth
principles, in particular, preserving mangrove fringe for protection from storm surge and coastal erosion.
This is very important.
Thank you.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: There was no settlement agreement in the materials, was there?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I mean, it's about a 90 or I forget. I don't know how many pages. It's
a rather nice document.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I've got a question.
MS. WESCOTT: We'd be happy to share it with you if you'd like to see it.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I have a question. The lake that this property butts up
against, is it possible to boat from that lake anywhere?
MS. WESCOTT: I don't believe that you can enter into Rookery Bay, if that's what you're asking.
And the lake is
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: There's, like, a bridge and a weir and a few other things in
the way, right? So anybody that puts a boat into there would just be able to go back and forth in a quarter
mile worth of lake?
MS. WESCOTT: I'm not sure about that in the future.
Page ! of ! 44 72
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Stan, there are control structures that control the internal
drainage to the
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Yeah. Because we tried to get up there with a canoe one
time, and I don't remember being able to.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And I know there's one where it says Mainsail Drive there, where
the D is. Approximately in that area there's another control structure, so it's
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: So you just have to if they put a boat dock in, they would
just be boating back and forth in that lake?
MS. WESCOTT: I can't answer that question.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Is the settlement agreement crafted so that only uses that are expressly
permitted are permitted, or is it that uses that are prohibited are expressly stated?
MS. WESCOTT: I think the point that I was trying to make, actually, is that that land which is
waterward of the private property line is stateowned water. And the mangroves, even though they're
emergent and may have grown up since the settlement, are actually considered to be under the control of the
state.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Does anything in this presentation, in this PUD, does it violate the
settlement agreement?
MS. WESCOTT: Well, if they intend to build boat docks going 20 feet into the water, that would
have to go through state land, I would assume.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Well, I guess you're speculating.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, no. It would. I spent 20 years working under a settlement agreement,
and I had to go to the signators to have all the things that I was doing corrected or modified, or to the extent
they would. Some of them they wouldn't. And it's a process that's outlined in the settlement agreement and
it's from 19 what is it 84? It's an old document.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Eightyfour.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. And it's got multiple pages. It's got almost more pages of exhibits
than it does text, but it's got nearly a hundred pages of text, so...
MS. WESCOTT: But in our discussions with the state, they indicated that they would not approve
the use of a boat dock.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: At all?
MS. WESCOTT: No.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Even if it were, like, a small floating dock for canoes or
something like that? I mean, I can't see somebody putting a power boat in there at all, period.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're getting a little off track on this whole thing.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Well, except I'm not sure we'd want to approve a in permitted uses of
this PUD something that is
MR. KLATZKOW: Are not docks already approved?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're not necessarily approving it. What I would have done during
discussion is suggest that any docks or other development beyond the settlement agreement line must have
the approval through the process required by the settlement agreement.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: There is a process. You've seven to nine signatories. They can go ahead
and agree to something. Not all of them have to. You can get the majority, and you can something can
happen. So that's all subject to that process. It's outlined in that document. So when we get to discussion,
Ned, I was going to read that, so...
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Next speaker, Ray.
MR. BELLOWS: Mark Andrews.
MR. ANDREWS: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Were you sworn in, Mr. Andrews?
MR. ANDREWS: Yes, I have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MR. ANDREWS: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name's Mark Andrews. I reside at
1356 Mainsail Drive, Unit 1422. I'm also the president of the Marco Fairways II, Marco Shores Condo
Page ! of ! 45 72
March 15, 2018
Association, and we are against this project mainly because of the traffic.
As everybody should know, that's a oneway street. There's one way in and one way out to Collier
Boulevard. It's a very long wait at the traffic light trying to get either into the Mainsail Drive or getting out.
And we feel that the additional traffic that's going to generate from the staff. It's a 24hour facility from the
residents that live there and we know that it's assisted living. Some people do have their own vehicles; and
then you have the families coming in visiting, and so that's a very, very big concern of ours.
The next thing is the utilities there. And it's just it's strange to see a facility that's going to be built
right next to a wastewater treatment plant. It's right there, right next to the property. It abuts the property
right there.
The other things with the utilities is the water supply. We do get our water from Marco Island.
That's how we get that. And sometimes the pressure and stuff like that isn't the best all the time. So that's one
of our biggest problems.
And, basically, we are not against assisted living projects whatsoever. It's just that on that site, being
locked in on that oneway street with all the traffic coming in and out, and with the emergency vehicles
coming in at all hours, it could happen, our members feel that it's a little bit of a burden to the whole area.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before you leave, the property right now, as it stands, could have all the
uses they're asking for basically except for the group housing, and the other uses, like multifamily, especially
two or threebedroom units with a family and teenagers, would generate an equivalent amount of traffic that
they're asking for.
Why do you think there's more traffic when the testimony and the analysis shows that this is an
equivalent amount of that's why the number was chosen. It's equivalent to the multifamily. So if you're
going to have the traffic with multifamily and you've got actually a quieter use with senior living, they
generally are more benign than kids and families.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Probably fewer drivers, too.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. Just out of curiosity
MR. ANDREWS: Well, you know, living there and seeing the traffic going up and down the street
and I know, you know, the area is zoned for residential. It's just that I'm just conveying what we see every
day with the traffic. And with the additional traffic coming in and with the utilities and stuff like that, we just
feel that, you know, it's going to add quite a bit of traffic to that area. Getting in and out of that I know, you
know
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, it won't add any more, sir. I mean, that's what the testimony is. And,
to be honest with you, we do this with a lot of projects. It's not going to add traffic. It's going to be
equivalent to the traffic or less than what's already allowed to be at that location. That's the difference.
MR. ANDREWS: Well, just, you know, by living there and trying to get out of the street and trying
to get into the street every day, you have to wait a very, very long time with just what we have now for the
traffic, you know, for the residents that live there now.
So the additional is going to be a lot more wait time trying to get in. I'm just stating the fact of us
getting in and out of that street; that's all.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I'm just trying to understand I understand what you're saying,
but it really isn't additional traffic. It's already been voted on, not by this board, but by 19 I think the
settlement agreement and the Marco Shores Unit 30 was in the 1980s it was approved. So the density and
stuff that they're using is equivalent traffic. So I don't know if it I knew you didn't want more traffic, but they
have a right they had a property right here to put more traffic there at some form over decades. That's the
piece I'm trying to understand better.
Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Mark, there also would be additional traffic that's already I don't
know if it's vested or was counted because of the three towers that are there; it was originally zoned and
approved for five. So that's a significant amount of traffic that's still is yet to be added or could be added to
that PUD because it is there's two tracts that have yet to have been built.
MR. ANDREWS: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Based on CTS, which is the property rights we keep them calibrated you
have, I think, 1,580 total units available to be on that property by right based on the PUD or the DO, and you
still have 643 left to go.
Page ! of ! 46 72
March 15, 2018
Now, a lot of times they don't build out that many, thankfully, and that's why this is going to take the
place of 100 multifamily, so those would automatically come off. And I doubt if the two towers are going to
take as much as what's left, so you may never get built out to the maximum density and traffic that was there.
It's not going to get better for you, because that's the way this thing was approved, what, four decades ago.
MR. ANDREWS: So there's no recent traffic studies that have been done recently?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we're going to get their traffic engineer to comment on your
comments when we finish with public speakers, so
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: But those trips have already been counted.
MR. ANDREWS: They already have?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: They're already part of this project for years, so they're already
counted. They're in every traffic study.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. ANDREWS: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir. Are there any other registered public speakers, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: No other speakers.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any other members of the public that would like to speak? We're
going to ma'am, if you'd like to no, you have to come up to the microphone, and you have to let us know if
you've been sworn in, and you have to identify yourself for the record, then we can hear you.
MS. FINK: My name is Yvette Fink.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. FINK: My name is Yvette Fink, and I have lived on Mainsail for 20 years.
The increase in traffic in 20 years is not comparable from the day that I moved in there. We also
have the airport there that you have to take in consideration. And the airport has been sized maybe three
times as big as it was when I was when I moved into Marco into Mainsail.
So you have the additional traffic from the homes, the residents, plus the airport, so and plus, if this
is a facility over there with the airplanes flying all over the place, it's not a really quiet neighborhood, plus the
water purifying plant, which is really annoying to many people because it doesn't if the wind blows the right
way, you get a very beautiful scent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, ma'am.
MS. FINK: So this is what I would like you to consider. Okay. Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Sir, if you'd like to come up and speak, you'll have to be sworn
in if you haven't been already.
MR. HARRIS: I haven't been sworn in, sir. My name is Robert Harris.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. HARRIS: I also have lived in Fairways II.
My consideration is just as a point of interest. Were the traffic studies done during peak season?
Because basically there's 80 units, and I think maybe 10 percent are yearround. I'm not sure in my building
of 12, there's two people that are yearround. All the rest of us are snowbirds, okay. We come down for three
months to get out of the New Hampshire weather and enjoy your beautiful sunshine.
The other thing is that my question would also be the duration of the building time frame. The
airport extension, we had 18wheel dump trucks from 7 o'clock in the morning to almost 7 o'clock at night.
The speed of the dump trucks we had a county sheriff sit there at the end of Fairways II monitoring. I know
they get paid by the load, but you've got a full load going up the street, speed limit's 35, and I know most of
us don't it, but it's awful to see an 18wheeler full of dirt and rock going 40, 50 miles an hour up your street
and that.
So what would be the construction impact on the traffic and the amount of time that it would take to
do this?
The other question is that that lake which they're trying to build docks on and recreation has a good
amount of alligators in it. We've had one gentleman be bit walking along the side of it and almost dragged in.
And we didn't buy on Mainsail because all the docks had a warning of, don't go three feet near the water
because there's alligator.
And I know it sounds silly, but my wife wanted to live on the other side because she figured the
alligators wouldn't across the street. And I said, yes, dear, and we now live in Fairways II. Luckily she's not
here so I won't get a dope slap for saying that.
Page ! of ! 47 72
March 15, 2018
But, you know, these are my concerns. Duration. The animal hazard to some of these elderly people.
If they go on the dock, they put their feet in the water, you've got an issue for safety.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, we're going to have the traffic engineer comment on these
issues.
MR. HARRIS: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Is there anybody else in the public who would like to speak who hasn't already spoken?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And your traffic engineer is here?
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, Jim Banks is here.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But is he doing that today?
MR. ARNOLD: Yes, he's a traffic engineer today.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, good.
MR. ARNOLD: If I might just address a couple of the issues that were raised before we talk about
traffic.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go right ahead.
MR. ARNOLD: The dock issue related to the Conservancy, the language that we have in our portion
of the PUD is exactly the language that is in the rest of this PUD except for the reference to Section 5.03 of
the LDC, which are your dock standards.
So that language was carried over. Staff asked us to update it by adding the reference to the new
Land Development Code requirements for docks.
So the rest of this PUD has the same language. And I understand the Conservancy's point, but there is
a legal process for going to the state and asking to build beyond that development line. So I would think it
would be unfair for us to not have any opportunity to approach the state to build a dock.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, who said that?
MR. ARNOLD: One of the residents or I mean, I think it was implied from somebody that maybe
we shouldn't be allowed to
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I read the language that I would suggest regarding that situation. Do you
have an objection to that is what you're telling me?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, you read it fast. But I think I understood what you said. It's subject to going
to the state.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR. ARNOLD: And I think we're fine with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That just clarifies it should anybody else buy this property and look at the
uses that can be there and think they can do docks. It's interesting to understand there's probably already
docks somewhere along there. So maybe that needs to be followed up with someone who was signator to
that settlement agreement.
AUDIENCE MEMBERS: No, no, no.
MR. ARNOLD: The only other issue that I would mention, Mr. Strain, there was a comment about
the utility site. That site is being abandoned by Marco Island Utilities. I don't know what they're going to be
doing with the disposal of the property, but the site's going to be taken out.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: They're going to put docks there.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Mark?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'm looking at Google, and that short of like Ned said, looks
like a dock, it quacks like a dock. It looks like a couple of docks along there.
MR. ARNOLD: There are docks out there.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Okay. What are they putting in there, power boats or
MR. ARNOLD: I don't know what other portions, but this is an isolated water body, for the most
part. It's not navigable by a boat but, you know, there's kayaking and paddle boarding and lots of other
opportunities you might want to put a small dock in, so...
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's move on to Jim Banks, because we're going into some time here we
need to break for lunch. So, Jim, you heard the issues involving the traffic. Can you explain the neutrality of
the traffic issue you have and also what happens during the construction phase of projects and issues like that.
Page ! of ! 48 72
March 15, 2018
MR. BANKS: For the record, Jim Banks. And, yeah, I'll address traffic first and then whatever you
want me to do after that.
But, yeah, one of the questions was, are the analysis based on seasonal conditions. The traffic studies
that were prepared for this project as a whole were based on full occupancy of the units. There's not this
offseason analysis that's done. It's done for seasonal fulloccupancy conditions.
The traffic study was based on complete buildout of this development for the number of units that
were approved, and the design and the access onto 951 was based on full buildout of the development.
Now, as you all correctly conveyed to the public that the request here to you today will not affect
how much traffic is going to be on Mainsail Drive or how ingress and egress is going to be in the future on
getting in and off of 951.
So you're correct, the application here today, your decision does not affect what the future traffic
conditions are on Mainsail Drive or on 951.
Now, what is occurring right now, as you heard, that they said that there's extended periods of time
getting in and out on 951. Well, that is actually a function of the signal timing. That's not so, today, your
traffic engineers, they go down there and they look at these intersections and they put priorities on the
sidestreet demand and the mainline. And right now, because this project isn't built out and there's not as much
traffic as is going to be expected in the future, they have the timing of that signal turned down.
Now, what's going to happen in the future, as this development continues to grow and there's more
and more units in there and then the sidestreet demand increases, traffic ops will adjust the timing as
necessary to where there's not undue a substantial amount of delay for people getting in and out of this
development.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I was trying to figure out where the variables might have been on this
project, because when the projects are approved through the PUDs and development orders, especially these
old ones, they have a vested amount of density that goes with them. You can't just take that away, and it's
supposed to have been calculated in our checkbook concurrency process, which I know it was.
But, you know what the variable probably here is is the airport. If anything could generate more
traffic than was anticipated, it's probably the airport functioning and expanding like it has. And maybe that's
what they're feeling. But as far as these units and the other units and up to total maximum, the project's
always been approved for that total maximum.
So I'm not sure how to address a traffic that they have that hasn't already been acknowledged and it's
just part of the way this project was designed.
MR. BANKS: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And we didn't design it. That was designed by the developer at the time. He
met the minimum codes, and that's what they put in there.
MR. BANKS: Right. And, again, the action today isn't going to change is not going to change the
traffic conditions that are going to occur in the future.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But I think one of the things Jim brought out is, where I live
we come out and we go down to make a Uturn at the local light, and sometimes during rush hour the traffic
people have throttled that down to where only three cars can go through and there's 10, 15 cars in line, and it
takes you three or four times to get through.
And the right turn coming from or the left turn coming out of Piper's Grove, some mornings, you
know, it lets three or four or five cars through, and there's 10 cars in line.
So I know that traffic can change the timing on those signals for certain times of the day and
whatever. And a lot of this, I think, depends on them. They could probably alleviate some of the traffic
concerns if they paid real close attention, but it's all seasonal and it's all timeofday related, and there is a lot of
traffic on 951.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. I was there yesterday in a long line waiting to get to 41, so...
Okay. Anybody else have any questions on traffic? Oh, maybe Wayne can address phasing of the
construction, how the not that we can't stop construction vehicles, but just to at least explain the phasing
you're going to use. How were you intending to build this out?
MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think, given the number of units and how either a typical multifamily
development of this size on this acreage would build out, it's probably a onephase project, most likely.
Construction project of that style probably takes less than a year to once you commence.
Page ! of ! 49 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Are you going to if you do underbuilding parking, you won't need
as much fill. Is that a fair statement?
MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. Plus the site has already been filled largely. It probably doesn't meet
new FEMA, but it has been cleared and filled previously.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that go ahead. Did you want a rebuttal?
MR. ARNOLD: No, no real rebuttal. I know that you've got issues. But Mr. Banks just found a
cellular phone on the floor. So I don't know if it fell out of any of the speakers' pockets, but we have a cell
phone I'll give to Ray and let somebody claim it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Okay. With that, we will no, ma'am, you can't talk from the audience. You have to come up and be
sworn in and identify yourself for the record, please.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MS. BRODAK: My name is Roma.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you spell your last name for us just so
MS. BRODAK: Roma Brodak.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Could you spell the last name.
MS. BRODAK: Roma, Roma; Brodak, Brodak.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MS. BRODAK: I purchased the property there 20 years ago. I'm from Michigan; originally from
Poland.
I have a question to the gentleman. How many residents
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You'll have to ask us the question, and we'll get him back up here. We don't
have communication between you and the applicant.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. How many residents will be living in facility?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: 1,580 times 2.47. Here. I'll tell you what that is. You're permitted for 1,580
units, and if you multiply that times the average person per household in Collier County, that's 2.47,
according to the latest census. So what you come up with is a total number of residents in the whole thing of
3,902.6. I'd round it up.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. That unit is going to be built, right?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, that's the number you asked for the number of residents. That's the
number of people that could live there.
MS. BRODAK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The number of residences, that could be a total of I think the last I looked it
was 1,580, and out of that, I think there's 643 left to build.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. You are funny, but my question
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. I'm not trying to be funny. I'm answering your question.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. Maybe I ask wrong way, but I would like to know how many residents will
be in a building or the facility the sir would like to build.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just their facility?
MS. BRODAK: Just their facility.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Wayne?
MR. ARNOLD: For the senior housing we've asked for a maximum of 240 units/beds.
MS. BRODAK: So it's 240 people seniors, right?
MR. ARNOLD: Potentially, yes.
MS. BRODAK: Okay. How many employees will be there working to serve the people, to deliver,
to help them, to exercise them, whatever the staff that's needed to provide for 240 people? How many
employees will be there
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wayne?
MS. BRODAK: on everyday base?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ma'am, you're not you'll need to talk to us. When you finish, he'll come up
and make what's called a rebuttal, and he'll try to answer your
MS. BRODAK: Okay. I'm a little nervous. I never take place like this.
Page ! of ! 50 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You want to know how many employees and how many residents, right?
MS. BRODAK: Right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there anything else?
MS. BRODAK: Well, that's going to bring the traffic, right? And how many of you went there and
see the place when they build a facility, how it's going to look in all the residential area? It's typical
residential area. I understand the plans and approval years and or years ago, but I just will really appreciate if
some of you go and look what you're trying to approve and which area.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you. And we'll your answers for you from the planner (sic).
MS. BRODAK: And I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough, but I never speak publicly, plus I have an
accent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's okay. I just wanted to make sure we factually answered your
question. That's why when you asked about how many residents, that number can be estimated, and that's
what I was trying to do for you.
MS. BRODAK: Right. But asking, I was thinking about facility that you're trying to approve.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I understand now, yep.
MS. BRODAK: And it's any way we can protest if you approve?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're not we don't approve. We only recommend. So you can go to the
next meeting, which will occur probably in about a month, in front of the Board of County Commissioners,
and they are the ones that actually approve things. So at that level you can have the same conversation, and
they can decide what to do
MS. BRODAK: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: with our recommendation.
MS. BRODAK: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're welcome.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wayne?
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you, Mr. Strain. I don't have a direct rebuttal, but I know that you mentioned
a few items that we probably want to go through in the PUD document.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well but let's answer the lady's questions.
MR. ARNOLD: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: She asked how many people will reside there, and basically you've got
beds. Two hundred and
MR. ARNOLD: Forty of those.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: forty beds. So that means you've got at least 240 people, but they're in
beds. They may not all be drivers.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: At most.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right, at most, because you can't fit any more residents there that can't fit
into a bed. So how many employees do you think you'll have on a single shift to run that operation?
MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, I honestly have no idea.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does your client know, since he's in the business?
MR. ARNOLD: He's not in the senior housing business.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, okay.
MR. ARNOLD: He's not a senior housing provider. We have senior housing providers who are
interested in purchasing the property, but we're not senior housing providers, so I don't have a direct answer
for how many employees that equates to. But the traffic analyses under the IT manual for senior housing
facilities factor in employees, numbers of persons that reside there, et cetera. So I think we're covered with
regard to the traffic analysis.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you don't have number of employees per shift, but you know that
the beds are going to limit the number of residents. So you've got 240 people. Generally, the people in these
facilities don't all drive, so I wouldn't imagine you'd have a high percentage of drivers, compared to what it
would be if it was multifamily. That's just an assumption. So I think that's the best answer we're going to be
able to get with the information we have today.
So with that said, did you want to have rebuttal, Wayne, on anything else?
MR. ARNOLD: I don't think it's necessary. Thank you.
Page ! of ! 51 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have anything?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Wayne, one other thing. You know, when we have approved senior living
facilities before, staff usually adds to them the standard conditions we've approved on those, and I didn't catch
it this time.
Ray, do you know if it's in there or not?
MR. BELLOWS: The standard
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Remember the ones like we did at the Cleary PUD and the others where we
just, a long time ago, had those?
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. Those conditions were generated when there's mostly your primarily
independent living. That's not the case here, so I don't believe we've included all of them, but...
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just wanted to understand. If you haven't included them for that reason,
that's fine. I wanted to make sure we had a reason.
MR. BELLOWS: Ray, I believe, in my discussions with Mr. Johnson, we did pass along what we
thought was applicable. But since this isn't a completely independent living, some of the others weren't
necessary.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Wayne, is there anything else you want to add before we close?
MR. ARNOLD: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I have made I've written five notes for the Planning Commission to
consider.
The first one is no substance abuse or developmentally disabled residents for the group housing.
Number 2, any docks or other development beyond the settlement agreement line must have
approval through the process required by the settlement agreement.
Number 3, we're going to add A/C language to the group housing generator so the generator we're
going to add language so that the generator includes enough for the airconditioning units in the group housing
and will be installed according to the FEMA regulations that the main building is installed to, which is one
foot above FEMA.
Parking structures that was referred to under accessories was meant to be building parking under the
building, underbuilding parking.
And then the well, that's it. That's the four of them I have.
MR. ARNOLD: That's consistent with the notes that I made. I would if those are going to be part of
the motion, if I could get a copy of the language just to make sure that I
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I usually send it to Ray. He can send it to you.
MR. ARNOLD: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any other discussion?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll make a motion to approve the PUDA subject to those four points.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second?
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Ned, seconded by Karen. Further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
This will move on to the Board of County Commissioners probably late in April.
And with that, we're going to take a 59minute or 58minute lunch. Be back at 1:30, and we'll resume
Page ! of ! 52 72
March 15, 2018
with the I think it was the first one City Gate project at that time.
(A luncheon recess was had.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good afternoon, everyone. If you'll please retake your seats, we'll move
with the remainder of the Planning Commission's issues this afternoon.
And I'm going to turn to the Planning Commission and ask if they would consider a change to our
agenda. City Gate wasn't available to us before lunch, and it's going to now that they sent it to us, we're
going to need some time to read it. Some of us may have had that time.
But I would like, since we were late on lunch, I'd like to move Rushton Pointe up first and then finish
City Gate up for as long as it takes this afternoon. Is everybody okay with that?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'm okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Especially since City Gate couldn't get the right color of highlighting on
this thing. We've got blue and it was supposed to be orange. And I went through it. And then based on that,
they haven't changed anything because there's no orange in the whole thing.
***So with that in mind, we'll move forward, and the next item up will be 9E. It's PL20150000306.
All those wishing to testify on behalf of this item, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And disclosures. We'll start with Tom on the my right.
MR. EASTMAN: None.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I spoke to Mike Fernandez.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: None.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: None.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I had conversations with Mike Fernandez and Patrick White, and I just
met one of the people from Indigo Lakes in the audience.
Karen?
COMMISSIONER HOMAIK: Nothing.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I also spoke with Mike Fernandez and Patrick White.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Patrick?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: None.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: I'd like to amend. I did speak with Patrick White quite a
while ago about this.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And one other thing I have to clarify.
Trinity, I didn't (sic) notice you brought your husband with you. Did you want to introduce him
today? I'm assuming that's your son.
MS. SCOTT: My son, yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Nice to meet you, young fellow. I'm glad you're here seeing these exciting
things happen in government, so...
And with that, Michael, we'll turn it over to you.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Good afternoon, Commissioner. Michael Fernandez with the firm of Planning
Development representing the owners of the 38.1acre infill parcel off of Collier Boulevard just south of
Indigo Lakes and north of Brittany Bay. Also, Indigo Lakes abuts it on the west end.
As you can see there, there's an aerial in front of you right now. The property was actually a portion
of the old Indigo Lakes lands under the same farming. So there's some old row crops; that area that you can
see that was carved out of the property.
You will also notice that there's a water management feature that's at the northeast corner of the
property. It's within a 5.09acre tract that the county acquired in 2005, and it's used in portion to satisfy the
water management requirements for Collier Boulevard.
I would tell you that there is a provision that allows the owner of the property to reconfigure that
lake, and that's exactly what we're proposing to do to enhance the ability for the site plan that we've proposed.
This is a proposed residential development. It's, as I said, an infill parcel. It abuts existing residential
development. To the north, as I said, is Indigo Lakes. Around the perimeter of the graphic you can see that
there's the Indigo Lakes entry drive in the northeast corner followed by a small section of preserve that is
isolated as part of the Indigo Lakes project, then singlefamily along the balance of the border with the
Page ! of ! 53 72
March 15, 2018
Rushton Pointe project.
On the south side is part of Brittany Bay. You'll see that they have some multifamily residential near
the east portion. Then there's a road and recreational amenity, another recreational amenity and, finally, a lake
and openspace tract. So that's how we abut the properties.
As part of the agreement with the county when they acquired the easement, the county went ahead
and identified the exact location for the access to this parcel, and we're showing we're depicting it at that
location. They also are committed to providing a 250foot turn lane for that access point, and you can see in
our master plan that we have reconfigured the county's drainage lake, but we have our own large centralized
feature.
The parcel itself is very rectilinear and slightly slender, and it kind of suggests the plan that we have,
what is a large linear central lake surrounded by residential tracts.
The preserve requirement, the 25 percent of the native vegetation, is located at the western extreme
of the property. That's the P tract, and it acts additionally as a buffer to singlefamily residential along the west
edge and, because it's placed there, we don't have to cut through it, so it stays in one contiguous parcel.
That location was identified in earlier documents of other development further to the south. In the
graphic that you see there that's overlaid the aerial, this preserve area at the western end of the parcel becomes
part of a mosaic larger area for habitat, and it's composed of preserves, open space, including lakes.
The proposed land uses could be multifamily or singlefamily. We looked at the analysis that staff
did, relationships to the adjacent development, and we're very comfortable with their analysis and agree with
it. We're limiting all residential development to no more than two stories, and currently there exists along the
north border with Indigo Lakes homes of one and twostory development.
Our development standards limit the height to 30 feet. The adjacent PUDs limit their heights to 35
feet. So we're going to be a little bit shorter than they are.
Our landscape buffers meet the code requirements, and the developer has actually added, in No. 5,
their development commitments, a provision that would if there's only a requirement for a Type A buffer,
they would come back and enhance that with a Type B hedge which would be planted at five feet, grown to
six feet, and be 80 percent opaque. So there will be an enhanced buffer along the north and south buffers.
In addition to that, we have been working cooperatively with our neighbors to the north and to the
west representing they're representing Indigo Lakes Master Association, and I believe they have a couple of
members here today that will address the results of our cooperative efforts in coming up with ways to
mitigate some of their concerns.
With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have regarding the project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Planning Commission, anybody have any questions? Ned?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: In the NIM it was said, the proposed rezone requests only six units per
acre and does not request any bonus density or affordable housing; is that correct?
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's what that document says, yes. And what we were saying there
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Is the underlying fact correct?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. Correctly stated, we were asking for the density that is permitted by the
density band but not density for affordable housing. That would have been a correction.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. So but then in the staff report it said this project is eligible for a
base density of four residential dwelling units per acre and is eligible for a density bonus of three additional
dwelling units per acre for a total of seven DU per A.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's correct.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So those two things don't agree with one another.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah, I agree with you. Obviously, what we were asking and what we
presented to the homeowners associations at the NIM was that we were requesting six.
And we described it at that time as four plus two out of the three that would be eligible from the
density band.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Would you mind, then, stating exactly what the density will be and of
what it will consist?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Sure. The density is a maximum of six units per acre. It can be a singlefamily
development, multifamily development, or a combination of the two. We did make an additional
commitment at that NIM, and it's incorporated in the agreement that we have with Indigo Lakes and would be
added to this text and that it would prohibit a rental apartment community.
Page ! of ! 54 72
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Are you asking, then, for a density bonus?
MR. FERNANDEZ: From whom?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: From the county.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We are asking for I'm not sure if the criteria
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not a density bonus. You have four units by right, and then you've got
the band that is allowed do you have a higher intensity band around activity areas.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. I'm not sure if it's called a bonus or not, but it's from the density band.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: This is the language I'm just quoting from the NIM.
MR. FERNANDEZ: I understand.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you. That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Michael, let's start with Page 23.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Typically, we have asked that the accessory uses that are community wide
be allocated to a separate section of the PUD, general development or rec tracts or whatever, and I gave Ray
an example of another one we did. You have informed me during the break you thought that you could
reallocate your communitywide accessory and guardhouses and other things to paragraphs like this in your
PUD.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We can do that very easily, yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. What I wanted to clarify is that the you also have in here, including
recreation yeah, facilities for lawn care and maintenance. I didn't notice in your standards table a category
for maintenance. It says clubhouse and recreational buildings.
Now, the category's fine I mean, the numbers are fine, possibly, but could you add to the title,
"clubhouse recreational and/or maintenance buildings"? Because you're going to have to have a separate
situation for those, too.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That will take out a lot of my questions and concerns from the
principal uses and accessory issue.
You're going to move guardhouses and gatehouses in here, as you've seen on here. So that clears that
whole page up. I appreciate that.
When we get into your Development Standards Table
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. Mr. Strain?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah.
MR. FERNANDEZ: One moment, please. Can you tell me, when you referenced that Page 23,
where were you looking?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. Electronic. It's Page 2 of 9.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Exhibit A.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. In our packet we delivered, there's continuous page numbering that goes
up to, like, 279.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh. Well, it's Page 5 of your continuous page number where I just spoke
from, the paragraph I was changing. And the table I'm talking about is your Page 6.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Got it. Thank you. Appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. On that Page 6, you say maximum number of storage. And you look
at maximum building height, 30 feet. Are you doing any underbuilding parking?
MR. FERNANDEZ: No, we are not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So we can just make a note that there's no underbuilding parking. So a
story is not inclusive you've just got two stories, and they'll be habitable stories?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct. So you want that as a
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm just going to add a stipulation, no underbuilding parking.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We can add that under the footnotes, if you wish.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's fine. Just so it gets I didn't think you intended to. I just wanted to
make sure it was clear.
You have buffers around your facility, 10 and or 15 feet, and plus you have lakes. Are you intending
Page ! of ! 55 72
March 15, 2018
to put those into separate buffer tracts or lake maintenance easement tracts?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, as required by staff.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. I wanted to make sure it was done.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Absolutely.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So when we look at your rear setbacks, your setback for accessories is five
feet. So when you go up against Indigo Lakes, you'll really be five feet plus whatever buffer you have there.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good. That's what I needed to find out.
And why, under your singlefamily detached, you have a maximum building height at 40 feet, but
then you've got maximum and zoned actual height for accessory at 40 feet. That's just out of curiosity, would
you build at 40 feet as an accessory?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Well, again, you're talking about overall height. And as an architect, I will tell
you, I would do some kind of embellishments or something that and I want to have that ability to do that, for
instance.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: For, like, a pool cage or something?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Well, no. I was thinking more like a you know, a rec facility that may have
two levels in it that's maybe an Olde Florida style with a large roof.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the rec facility yes, the rec facility there, you've got the same thing.
It's the same as principal structure, so that's what you're referring to.
I was looking at your 40 feet under your singlefamily detached. Because you've got 40 feet on that
one specifically
MR. FERNANDEZ: If you're talking about accessory, yes, then that would be, for instance, a pool
cage that would match the
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Height of the house?
MR. FERNANDEZ: The height of the house or the configuration of the roof.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Just then when we go into the footnotes, in your Footnote No. 1,
you talk about a 23foot setback, and then we get into the second paragraph where it says, last line, "Shall not
conflict with the sidewalk; however, in no case shall the front setback for the side entry garage be less than 10
feet."
Then in the paragraph after that you talk about your other setbacks, including front entry and side
entry garage shall be set back 20 feet from the front yard property line except where the lot is an intersection
of two streets in which case the front yard setback herein shall only apply to the street on which the entrance
is located.
Now, let's start with the word "entrance." Do you mean entry door or garage? Because some people
can put an entry door on the side of the house, and that's the front, and the garage can be on the opposite side
with a driveway off the road. You mean where your garage door fronts, right, or where your driveway fronts?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So the entrance in this case, in which the driveway is located, could
we say that instead of entrance?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And then in the previous one I read where you wanted to be 10 feet back
and on this one, on a corner lot, you could be five feet back. Now, if we turn to your if you could put one of
your road cuts up there. Is utilities here? No.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yes. He's out he's sitting out in the hall.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Thank you, Jamie.
You've got two, two crosssections. This is C2. This would be the one you're saying you want to do
at 42 feet, which I'm assuming is those mostly those east/west ones and then part of north/south, right?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct. The only time the other one comes into being is in those extensions
that we're asking for the deviations for a dead end of less than 100 feet.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So let's start with this one. And on each side of your 42footer,
you've got the CUE, which is a county utility easement.
MR. FERNANDEZ: If it's required. They may not be required.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But where is your 10foot PUEs?
MR. FERNANDEZ: They would be beyond that.
Page ! of ! 56 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then you can't have a fivefoot setback on the side.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Again, we don't know if there's going to be a CUE at all there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then you can't have a fivefoot setback on the side because you've
got a 10foot PUE.
MR. FERNANDEZ: We may not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FERNANDEZ: In other words, depending on which side we load the utilities, they could go
across the street and serve the individual lots.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not okay. I'm not familiar with that, but if you say it can be done, I'll
take your word for it.
Then we need to add language to that footnote that where there are either CUEs or PUEs, those
setbacks will have to be outside of those easements.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. I think that's in the code now, but we have no problem putting that in
there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I'm just concerned that someone's going to read this and not pick up
on it because
MR. FERNANDEZ: I don't have a problem putting it in.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. The other issue is and this is the County Attorney's Office. A while
back we had this issue concerning overhangs going into PUEs or CUEs, and I thought we weren't allowing
the overhangs in. You don't know if you're going to have overhangs or not, but if you do, I think the language
ought to be added also, any overhangs will not extend into the easements.
MR. FERNANDEZ: What I would prefer is that we come up with a standard that gives us so much
clearance above that. For instance, if I have a twostory home, I may have an eave that comes over, you know,
two or three feet, and it's 30 feet up in the air.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the issue came up quite a while back. There was some
correspondence back and forth with the County Attorney's Office. I didn't bring it with me because I didn't
expect a I didn't think you'd be objecting to it.
MR. FERNANDEZ: I'm just asking for a clarification. I would prefer to handle it that way.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you guys remember that, Jeff? I know you were involved in it, but I
don't know if you remember. It's been a while. And you've gotten a year older today, so...
MR. KLATZKOW: I was involved in this years ago, and it was a staff concern because, they've got
to get equipment in.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR. KLATZKOW: And staff never wanted any overhanging in any of the utility easements because
of the equipment concerns.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's what I had thought you said back then, and we actually had I think
the first project to come in that had this issue was Bent Creek up in the north end, and they had to be held
they wanted to have overhangs, and they said they wouldn't be deeper than two feet, so we had them 12 feet
back.
Whatever you want to do, but I don't think we would need something better than just going to build
it high enough.
MR. FERNANDEZ: How about a clearance of a minimum 15 feet?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I don't know if that's the issue, rather than just because if we let you
get your overhangs into these, everybody's going to be able to do it, and we're going to have to start getting
into how high the eaves are going to be on every single house that could be along that frontage. What's so
critical about that two feet for the eaves or whatever you'd have? And yesterday you told me
MR. FERNANDEZ: I'm not
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: you didn't even know if you were going to have an eave.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's correct. And I don't know. And I'm looking to retain flexibility. I'm
looking to understand what is the county's need if they have equipment. If it's going to be more than 15 feet,
that's
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not worried about the county. I'm worried about the PUE. That's the
one you're up against. That's not a county easement.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Even then, it's
Page ! of ! 57 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, you've got FP&L. They don't have small equipment. They've got big
trucks. They break up sidewalks all the time. You've got Sprint, you've got Comcast, you've got a series of
elements like private utilities like that that are the concern. And if we haven't let that happen before, so I'm
not thinking this is the right way to go.
So you need to be outside either whatever the aggregated total of the CUEs, if they exist in PUEs by
the depth of the soffits or the depth of the overhangs if you have them. I mean
MR. FERNANDEZ: If they're encroaching, right?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. You can't encroach on them, yeah.
MR. FERNANDEZ: All right. That's good. We'll accept that.
MR. STONE: Mr. Chairman, just clarification. You want it to say something to the effect of the
structure, in addition to the overhang, will not encroach into a CUE or PUE.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That works great. Thank you.
MR. STONE: But in both of those sections.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the next exhibit, exhibit go ahead.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Can you clarify, Scott, which two sections?
MR. STONE: I think it's the last two the second paragraph of Footnote 1
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
MR. STONE: where it's a 10foot setback, and then the last sentence of Footnote 1 where it's a
fivefoot setback.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
MR. STONE: We can say that we can wordsmith it but, essentially, it will be the structure in
addition to the overhang will not encroach into PUE or CUE.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, and I noticed Eric's in the audience. Eric, could you come up and
answer a quick question about the CUEs on the typical road section that's on the overhead right now.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And, Eric, the question is, on these road cuts, they're for a reduced county
standard to 42 feet. The deviations it's not untypical deviation. They do show the CUEs going five feet onto
the private property. Normally we see PUEs outside of those. I'm assuming you wouldn't allow a joint effort
with a PUE overriding your CUE.
MR. FEY: That is correct. We have exclusive subsurface utility rights within the CUE, and I think
there would need to be access rights across our CUE.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Do you on this particular project, do you know yet if there's something
you're going to be needing or not? I mean, they're called out, so you can have them if you want them. I just
didn't know if you've gone that far with the review of this site yet or not.
MR. FEY: Well, there's to be water main and force main. So, you know, they have a
sevenandahalffoot setback as shown, and those additional CUEs are just to provide maintenance access to
those mains within the rightofway.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FEY: So with the reduced width of the rightofway, it puts us up against the rightofway line, and
we just need some space for maintenance.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, that does help. I appreciate that. Because it looks like you're
going to need them. So we'll approach it as though they're needed. So, thank you.
MR. FEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And, Michael, you have a deviation requesting sidewalks be eliminated on
the south side of the south road because the houses are on the north side of the road, which is something
we've allowed before or recommended to be allowed before, so that part doesn't bother me.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But look at your next typical look at your Exhibit C3. You've only got a
sidewalk on one side, and that's not on the south side of the project.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's in the turnaround area at the very end, and we may not have lots up there
or it may be
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But you didn't ask for a deviation for that. Unless staff tells me you don't
need a deviation for that, you still do. So I don't know how far these are missing sidewalks. If it's just the arc
around the end but then if someone's coming up one side they've got to cross the street to get to the other to
Page ! of ! 58 72
March 15, 2018
get to the sidewalk on the other side?
MR. FERNANDEZ: If my memory serves me correct I'm trying to recall I believe the code gives
us some flexibility when it comes to the end of a culdesac; that it only needs to be on one side.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, aren't these proposed as hammerheads? I mean, where's your cut?
They're straight cuts. They're not culdesacs.
MR. FERNANDEZ: They would be straight cuts. But, effectively, what I think what we've done in
the past, that staff has required them only on one side. And these particular sections, both these sections that
you're seeing here, were already approved in prior PUDs.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't you know, if we made a mistake one time before, we're not going to
make it forever.
Ray, do you know the issue that are you familiar with the issue we're talking about, or do you need
time to take a look at it?
MR. BELLOWS: I think we should take a look at it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Because this will have to come back on consent, and before it comes
back, this needs to be either added to the deviation, if that's what staff think is appropriate
MR. BELLOWS: It probably will be a deviation.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: or not allowed to happen.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That takes us back to the PUD itself. And I think I've hit the footnotes, and
if we go past that into let me see what I've got here.
Diane, did you have something you wanted to
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ray, I'm going to ask you the question. Being most of this is on the
property because it's so narrow of a rightofway, is this going to end up like a couple projects that we talked
about that the one on Livingston? Just please look at this one carefully
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: because the plantings and stuff, it's horrendous.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, I understand what you're referring to in regard to cluster development and
the required tree. We'll take a look at it.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Michael, if we go to your Exhibit E, which is on your Page 12, Electronic
Page 32, your first deviation refers to the 42foot width of rightofway internal to proposed as dictated on our
PUD master plan Exhibit C1 and C2. C2 is a roadcut exhibit. It's not a master plan.
MR. FERNANDEZ: You're correct. That's an error.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And on number Deviation No. 2, it talks about the deadend streets,
and those are depicted on master plan C1, but they're also the ones you're talking about as road Exhibit C3,
right, the road crosssection?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir. We can correct that labeling.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. When we get into the development commitments, you we don't
have it in our packet, so I'd like to walk through the ones that you're proposing to add. They're strange.
They're different. We've not seen those before, but if you were volunteering to add them, I guess they can be,
so...
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir. I don't know if you would want to wait. The master association
representative's here.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No. It's it's your language to your PUD. I'd rather you present it. Then
they can decide if they like it or not, and we can listen to their concerns.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Also, just to advise you, county staff, Scott Stone, reviewed our
language, came back with proposed revisions. We have incorporated those revisions, shared them with the
master association, and they're comfortable with them as well.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Usually his language tightens them up and makes them a little bit more
legally sufficient, so...
MR. FERNANDEZ: Here we go.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Just pull it down. There you go.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Should I go through them one by one?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yes. We haven't seen them. I mean, I know you showed them to me, but I
Page ! of ! 59 72
March 15, 2018
really haven't had time to study them since you sent them back. So let's go through them, each one of them,
yes.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Number 8 is one that basically proposes that should there be a
recreational amenity as part of a multifamily development and that recreational amenity requires a parking
lot, that parking lot will be improved or the pavement will be concrete and a basketball hoop and backboard
will be installed at one end, and that would only apply to the first recreational amenity.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you've got to do concrete pavement.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And the basketball hoop and backboard. Never had this happen before, but
if you agree to it, we can add it to the PUD. It's generally not done this way, but
MR. FERNANDEZ: We agree to it. We don't have to provide the basketball.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'm not sure where it's different. Let's look at No. 9 then, unless there's any
questions.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Number 9 is something that we've done quite frequently in a lot of
PUDs and, basically, it's to install a vinyl covered fivefoot fence inside the hedge. So we basically build a
hedge with shrubs on either side so the hedge, then, is concealed or hidden, and it enhances the security,
basically, between developments.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Fence. Fence is concealed or hidden.
MR. FERNANDEZ: The fence, correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: When it says hidden, you mean 100 percent opacity?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Basically, this has to do with the north line north and south property line
buffers and potentially the one along the preserve, and it references the 80 percent opacity standard as the
Type B buffer.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But this No. 9 doesn't reference the 80 percent opacity standard.
When you say "hidden," that's an undefined term. So after "hidden," could you put in parenthetical, "80
percent opacity as required by a B buffer" since you're going to do that anyway?
MR. FERNANDEZ: We can. It does say Type B buffer. When it references to the north property
line buffers in the south ones
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep.
MR. FERNANDEZ: those do reference
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But those don't have a hidden fence in them. I just want to make sure
MR. FERNANDEZ: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: nobody misreads the word "hidden."
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Now it's concealed by Scott's language.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, so he's already this is one of your changes?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah, this is one
MR. STONE: Well, I just wanted clarification as to what
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I thought I was reading your language.
MR. STONE: No. Well, everything is except for that word, "hidden."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. You normally would have caught that.
MR. STONE: I didn't catch it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, okay. Then this isn't your language, okay.
MR. STONE: Just that everything is except for that one word. I wanted to talk about that, actually.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. What did you want to talk about?
MR. STONE: Well, what we're talking about now.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh. So you disagree or agree?
MR. STONE: I think if you're relying on the Type B buffer being the obscurity, you can simply say
"placed in the shrub installation" and rely on that instead of putting "hidden." Because if it's already required
to be 80 percent opacity, then
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. That works, too. Can you take out the word "hidden" and use
"placed"?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Let's go to 10.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Number 10, the trees that are going to be planted along the north boundary,
Page ! of ! 60 72
March 15, 2018
what we're proposing is that 30 percent of those trees, which would be canopy trees, be substituted with the
county permitted threeperone palms. This would give an initial thicker buffer, if you will. So you'll have
three palms of 10, 14, and 16 foot clear trunks, and then one such grouping will be located immediately south
of each offsite Indigo Lakes lot. And we've done the math so we know that that works out so that there will
be one cluster, one grouping of palms substituting for one canopy tree behind each one of those lots.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And will the grouping and spacing of these clusters be consistent with the
LDC spacing requirements?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Even though they're trying to match up to the Indigo Lakes lots, they're still
consistent with the spacing required by the code?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes.
MR. STONE: And, Mr. Chair, one thing about that, is it going to be exactly 30 percent? I don't want
to, you know, put you in a
MR. FERNANDEZ: It's exactly 30 percent.
MR. STONE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Number 11?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Number 11, it talks about the kind of vegetation that's going to be utilized.
We've specified that our neighboring property owners have desired a specific kind of plant. We said that's
fine. They've agreed to maintain those plants. Those are nonnative plants so, basically, we've said that those
will not be placed within 50 feet of a preserve or abutting a preserve, but we've identified what those plants
are. The specification is the same as what's required in a Type B buffer.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I believe you had Mark Templeton check this out, and he's
satisfied with it, too.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's my understanding. He did review it, what I've heard from our planner.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. 12?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Twelve is a threetab asphalt roofing shingles are prohibited from being utilized
in this. It is a significantly less expensive product, and so they desired a more compatible one from an
architectural and value standpoint, and we agreed to eliminate that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the last one is?
MR. FERNANDEZ: The last one, basically, goes back to the NIM as you and I discussed, that the
site will not be developed as a rental apartment community. Our homeowners association was a little
concerned with the change. We add "will not," and staff has put in there "shall not." I told them it's the same.
I just want to put it on the record that it is the same language. It would prohibit in either case.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. "Will not" means could start out that way and not change it, possibly.
But I think "shall not" is better, so that works fine.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. As far as
MR. FERNANDEZ: And these would get incorporated right now. Our development commitments
are 1 through 7. These would just be 8 through 13.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And then the only other issue I have and I don't know if there's
others after I get done is your master plan. And let me look at what I
MR. FERNANDEZ: Can I show you the one that we produced based on the comments we received
from you, and perhaps it will address your issues?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure. Well, I know they won't, but that's okay. I've already seen what I've
seen this, and the first thing I noticed is one of the things I didn't think you needed, but we'll get into it.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay. Basically, it's a simplification of the master plan that we had. It
eliminates any confusion of line (sic) weights being associated with individual tracts. Instead there's one
single R tract that shows a general circulation or road depending on whether it gets platted or not.
There's a note added, No. 7, that says the deviations are applicable publicly when platted. So, in other
words, if we're not platting it, then it's just basically drive through and parking lot driveway.
In the R tract description in that same table under comment, it now lists singlefamily, multifamily, or
combination, and it may include a community recreational facilities area except within 125 feet of Indigo
Lakes, and that is one of the other development commitments, I believe No. 5, that was already existing in
our in our document.
Page ! of ! 61 72
March 15, 2018
And then, finally, under the tract name where it says rightofway, in the comments section, it's
applicable when platted; otherwise, this acreage is aggregated into Tract R.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Over on the right side, you've got that dissertation about the county
designed, permitted, and constructed turn lane. That whole paragraph needs to come out.
MR. FERNANDEZ: I'd defer to Scott Stone. He can explain.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. STONE: Actually, I'd prefer that it's not in there.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Okay.
MR. STONE: I think okay.
MR. FERNANDEZ: That's fine.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good. Okay. We're done. Thank you, Scott.
At your table that you have at the bottom, you added a new line, and I had a question about Line 6.
Could you magnify that a little bit so we can read it.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Is that good enough?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yep. Deviations applicable when platted. Okay. What is how would they
not be applicable until you plat? What was your fear there?
MR. FERNANDEZ: No. That was to clarify because, for instance, the deadend situation doesn't
occur in a nonplat. The sidewalk on one side of a road doesn't occur in a nonplat. The 42foot
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's SDPs then.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yeah. They all would not apply, and that was one of the issues I thought you
raised in our conversation. So by putting that there, it allows this to be it's more clear that this can be
multifamily or singlefamily.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The last line of Note 6
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: if you strike that, it doesn't change anything. So why would we have it
there? It might confuse. "This requirement is not applicable for singlefamily development." If it isn't
applicable, it's already not applicable by the code, then why would you need to have that last sentence there?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Staff requested it so that it doesn't get dropped for clarify. That's something I
can take out, but that was something that staff put in there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I didn't know staff
MR. FERNANDEZ: I think that was the environmental and landscape, yeah.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So it's Summer's fault?
MR. FERNANDEZ: Well, I think this I think what Summer explained to me was that this was text
that had been incorporated in other PUDs and, of course, if it's if it's singlefamily, it's not required, and then
that tract never occurs.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. So that's why I just I mean, it's kind of a moot point. I didn't know
why we would add it as superfluous language, so...
MR. BELLOWS: I think it's probably not necessary to put in there. It's a point of clarification, and
it may be helpful to some reviewers down the line.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we can leave it in, Ray. I just tried to understand why it was there. I
just couldn't
MR. BELLOWS: It's kind of a point of clarification for future staff reviewers.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, if we get that other stuff struck, I don't have any other
questions on the master plan. So that takes care of that for me.
Which takes us back to the end of the questions I have for now, depending on what the speakers may
say.
Does anybody else from the Planning Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a staff report, Tim?
Thank you, Michael.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you.
MR. FINN: For the record, I'm Tim Finn, principal planner.
The project is compliant with the GMP and the zoning criteria within the LDC; therefore, staff
recommends approval.
Page ! of ! 62 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With the changes you heard and the adding of the general uses section of
the PUD, do you have any change in your position on the on this application?
MR. FINN: No, we don't; no.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody have any questions of staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: With that, is there any registered public speakers, Ray?
MR. FERRARO: We have one speaker, Anthony Ferraro.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir, if you could come up, identify yourself for the record, and let us know
if you've been sworn in.
MR. FERRARO: My name is Anthony Ferraro, and I have not been sworn in.
(The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.)
MR. FERRARO: I'm here today representing Indigo Lakes. I'm a member of the board of directors,
and I just want to say today that we are accepting the developer agreement with Rushton Pointe.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So all the stuff that was read into the record you heard us just going
over, you're fine with all that from your end?
MR. FERRARO: Yes, I am.
As a matter of fact, if I could just get a copy of the new language from, I believe, 8 to 13. Maybe
Mike could provide that for me so I can give it to our attorney and I could discuss that, you know, with the
rest of the board.
But according to this, we fully accept the developer agreement.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great. Thank you very much, sir.
MR. FERRARO: Thank you.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Mr. Chairman, quick question.
So you speak for the entire board for Indigo Lakes?
MR. FERRARO: Yes, I do.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: It was unanimous? Okay. Just curious.
MR. FERRARO: Yes, it was unanimous. We voted on it at the last meeting, and we fully accept this
developer agreement, and I speak for the entire board. It was unanimous.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Thank you.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Just a point of clarification. We've been working with Patrick White and
Joshua Bialek of Porter Wright, and there is actually a copy of a signed agreement between the two parties,
and Scott Stone was given a copy.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And I just have a curiosity question.
MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Why were youall concerned about concrete or asphalt parking area and a
backboard with a basketball hoop? And what was that big deal about? I just thought that was the strangest
thing to see in the language.
MR. FERRARO: No. The reason why we requested some type of a basketball facility, you know,
with their recreational area is because we have a development next to us now called Brittany Bay, and they
don't have amenities in their development. And it just seems like a lot of times, quite often, as a matter of fact,
we get lot of kids from Brittany Bay coming into our development using our basketball courts, and we've had
a lot of friction between our teens and people in our development with Brittany Bay.
So we just thought that if Rushton Pointe has a facility like that with a basketball court, it just would
prevent them from coming across and using our facilities illegally.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So the kids at Brittany Bay will use their court instead of yours. Good
move.
MR. FERRARO: You never know, Chairman.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I think they'd be better off paying for a court over at Brittany Bay, and then
you both won't have to worry about it.
MR. FERRARO: That would be a good option also. But that's the reason why we decided, you
know, just to
(Multiple speakers speaking.)
MR. FERRARO: alleviate some of the traffic coming into our development illegally.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, I appreciate it. That's a strange thing to add to a PUD. But if the
Page ! of ! 63 72
March 15, 2018
applicant agrees with it, it's okay.
MR. FERRARO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just we never did it before that I know of, so...
MR. KLATZKOW: And the curious thing is there's a school right there that has basketball courts,
but they close it off to the public.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, do they?
MR. FERRARO: Yeah, they do.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: That's why they call it a public school.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Tom's not here. We should bring that up.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir.
MR. FERRARO: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Appreciate it.
Any other member of the public wish to speak on this item?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Michael, I think we've we don't have any other comments. I'm
going to read several things, besides the small changes we talked about as we walked through the document
MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I made a note of about five or six things.
All buffers and lakes will be platted as separate tracts. You're going to create the general
development section which will then you'll move those accessory communitywide accessory uses into that
area.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to have no underbuilding parking. No overhangs will extend
into the utility or CUEs or PUEs.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Or structures.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, structure well, obviously, structures or overhangs.
And then we're going to address the sidewalk issue on the 50foot road cut section where it's missing.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir. One way or the other.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And you're going to add the new development commitments as corrected
by Mr. Stone and you've read to this panel.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Those are the changes I'm seeing.
Now, as far as how we handle this, I'll leave it up to this board as far as what we're voting on. And
then if we need to come back as consent so we have this wrapped up as a package or you want to do it any
other way, I'm open to it.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Come back. Come back for consent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Does anybody want to make a motion? Let's start first make the motion on
the changes, a motion if the changes are if it's to be approved with the changes, or whatever the Planning
Commission wishes.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll make that motion.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Subject both of you, subject to the conditions we just read?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Yes.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's start with that. All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
Page ! of ! 64 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
Second piece is, do you want this to come back on consent, or do you want to let staff handle it? Do
you want me to review it before it goes to the Board with staff, or do you want to see it back here? It's up to
you guys. But that would be the first item up on the next agenda, which wouldn't be until August I mean
April 5th.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Ray, can you get
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not that complicated. I just didn't know. I just didn't know what
MR. BELLOWS: I don't believe a summary agenda's going to or a consent agenda's going to help
too much in this case. It's pretty straightforward. And if you, as Planning Commission, defer to Mark on the
final check, we're good with it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, if you just want to do that informally, I'll check it with staff before it
goes back to
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm fine with that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Good. There's no consent then.
Michael, thank you.
MR. FERNANDEZ: Thank you very much, all of you.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We have to vote.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, we did vote. No, we don't have to vote on consent. If we don't the
only time we vote on consent is if we want one. That's what I was trying to poll everybody for.
And that takes us done with our last really regularly scheduled item, and we have to go back to the
other project, which is City Gate. And we got our orange highlighted copies in blue; blue and green and
yellow. Still missed the orange.
***So let's go from that. And I'll just announce that we're returning to let me get the we're going to
return for our afternoon discussion on Advertised Item 9A, which is PL20170002330, which is the City Gate
Commerce Park Planned Unit Development, and PL20170002634, same project, City Gate Commerce Park,
for the I75 Collier Boulevard interchange.
All those wishing to testify again, oh if you haven't been sworn in previously, please rise to be sworn
in. Mr. Carmichael, were you here this morning early?
MR. CARMICHAEL: (Nods head.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then everybody Ray, you already were sworn in this morning,
weren't you?
MR. BELLOWS: That's right.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then we'll just go forward.
Josh, let's walk us through all these changes.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. For the record, Josh Fruth, Davidson Engineering.
As Mark mentioned, the highlights are in blue. Sorry, Mark. I didn't have my Apple computer with
me.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Microsoft should have orange, but that's okay.
MR. FRUTH: They didn't. I tried.
The first blue is on Page 10. I know that you guys do not have page numbers, so I'll walk you
through this.
It is Section 2.3. At the end we added "in all material respects" and removed the word "generally"
per the Commissioner's request, after "shall."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: The next page is 16. It's Deviation No. 7 where you're jumping to. Strikethrough on
Deviation "see No. 12" being removed.
Go to the next Page, 17, Deviation No. 8, we changed the word to "further Board of County
Commissioners," and Deviation No. 9, in parenthetical, "to the surface area of the sign," we added "not to
exceed 9 feet by 15 feet in display area."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, do you want to make that in each display area so that you know
because you're going to have one on each side of the sign.
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I don't want anybody to mistake that, that's all.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Yeah. That's why you do the 350, right?
Page ! of ! 65 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yup.
MR. FRUTH: Will do.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MR. FRUTH: Page 18.
MR. KLATZKOW: Could we go back one second on 8?
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
MR. KLATZKOW: You said "further Board of County Commissioner approval"?
MR. FRUTH: Yes, on Deviation No. 8.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just so we don't have an issue, are we looking at three votes or four votes?
MR. FRUTH: Do you want me to add that?
MR. KLATZKOW: I'm asking, is this going to be three vote or four vote?
MR. FRUTH: Good question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's not a zoning issue. Well, it's in the rightofway, but it's not a zoning issue.
Wouldn't it be a threevote?
MR. KLATZKOW: It's going to be whatever you guys want to put into this document.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Five.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: We get to decide for the Board whether it's three or four?
No problem; two.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to open up a can of worms with this.
MR. KLATZKOW: No, no, no. You could do it with three, or you could do it with four.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's a nonzoning change, so
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's not a it doesn't require supermajority. Three votes.
MR. KLATZKOW: Just to avoid this issue: On majority vote, a simple majority vote.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Simple majority.
MR. FRUTH: Okay. I'll note it "with simple majority vote" or "by simple majority vote."
Page No. 18, Deviation No. 12. The bottom of that deviation we added the external projection sign
limits. Bullet Point No. 1, lighted signs are allowed facing to the east, west, and south. Bullet Point No. 2,
lighted signs facing to the north are allowed, cannot be taller than 25 feet, and cannot be animated. Bullet
Point No. 3, up to three 15feetby40feet, parenthetical, service area signs may be installed for naming rights.
Signs can be lighted but not animated.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And the first bullet, since you were so nice to say it cannot be
animated in the other two, can you just add that to the first one?
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then there's no question that none of them can be animated, so...
MR. FRUTH: Okay.
Okay. Jumping ahead to Page 20, which is Deviation No. 18. This language is similar to what's in
Deviation 21, as we discussed a few hours back. It reads, "In conjunction with the offsite native vegetation
requirements (See Deviation No. 21 in this document), the buffer requirements (acreage of typically retained
native vegetation) shall be shown on the Site Development Plan application but may be relocated with the
Site Development Plan amendment application in the future."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And both of those references that you have, 21 as well, it needs to be on the
first Site Development Plan application because then everything after that's an SDPA.
MR. FRUTH: Noted. We'll add that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That also occurs in No. 21, so...
MR. FRUTH: Page 25, Item No. 3 under the sports complex, 3B, we added the sentence that says,
"The sports complex project shall not lease any property/facility to a professional sports team/franchise."
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And go ahead, Joe.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just a question on that. This does not prohibit, though, if you
wanted to have, I don't know, you pick, the South Buffalo professional softball team come in and put on a
softball demo. They can't do that or they can do that, a onetime event.
MR. FRUTH: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. We clarified.
MR. FRUTH: The goal is to allow that to happen.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's what I thought we had clarified. So this doesn't prohibit a
Page ! of ! 66 72
March 15, 2018
onetime event, okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If you look at that new blue, "The sports complex shall not lease or sell."
We have a wheelerdealer here in the county called Nick Casalanguida. If he doesn't find one way to get it
done, he might try another.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: He's got to get that money for the overpass, you know. That's the
way to do it.
MR. FRUTH: Noted. We will add "or sell" after lease.
3E, we also added, after weekday holidays, it now reads, "recognized by Collier County
Government."
The next page is 29; it's the height of the sports complex. Instead of "structure," it now reads "actual
height" to match the defined term that's already in the document.
Jumping ahead to Page 58, these are the SIC codes at the top. It would be Exhibit A3, Page 6 of 6.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. You didn't highlight the copy I've got at least, but I noticed you did it
on the one you the electronic version I have isn't highlighted for that addition.
MR. FRUTH: Really?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I went and checked it. That's how I happened to find it.
MR. FRUTH: It must be your Apple.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It could be, yeah.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: But these pages are numbered; 58 is numbered on the ones
you gave us. The electronic version will be is numbered now. That was one of the things that we scrambled
to get done last minute. So it is now.
Under No. 2, which describes the uses, the bands, orchestras, actors and other entertainers and
entertainment groups, we added the bullet point that says limited to 20 events, one per weekend. Above 20
requires a temporaryuse permit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: Page 64, the required yard plan at the bottom, this was Scott's comments. We
removed a comma, and we added a comma highlighted after the sports complex project and after yards, we
removed.
And Page 67, which was also the required yard, at the bottom or at the end of Item 2C, we noted the
acreage, 0.82 acres, which is also shown on Exhibit A6, Page 26 of 28, and that's actually supposed to be 25
of 28, so that will be corrected.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. FRUTH: And that is it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anybody have any questions?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It looks like it got cleaned up; very good. So we'll have to come back for a
final reading on April 5th and then a consent after that in the end of April, and maybe we'll get to the Board
before their summer break. Just kidding.
MR. FRUTH: You need to look out that way.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, I'm looking at Nick. I think with all the corrections and changes, that
gets us going now. Now we just
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Will that reread be in orange, though?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It will be orange, yeah.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The correct color.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, do we have any registered public speakers?
MR. BELLOWS: No speakers. Oh, wait, we do have one speaker. I'm sorry. We do have one.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And I Nancy, did we ask you for a report this morning on this issue?
MS. GUNDLACH: Yes, you did.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then we got that. So let's ask for public speakers. Mr. Carmichael?
MR. BELLOWS: Steve Carmichael.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Steve Carmichael, and, yes, I've been sworn in, so thank you. Thank you for
having me. I apologize for the way in which this went about, but I appreciate you letting me speak.
To start off the bat, I want to say I'm 100 percent against this sports complex, and one of the reasons I
am or the main reason I am is I'm 650 feet beyond their 85foot wall. It's right in my backyard. I would
Page ! of ! 67 72
March 15, 2018
assume that none of you would like that if it was in your backyard either. So I'm against that.
And the other reason that I wanted to come up here and speak was I heard a couple of times today
somebody saying that the public was 100 percent behind this. Not true. Everybody that was in the
information meeting who were residents last year was 100 percent against it. So the public is not 100 percent
for it, so I wanted to point that out.
I'm now hearing for the first time that there's going to be concerts available, and I'm now hearing for
the first time that Saturday night's going to go to 12 o'clock at night. Again, I'm 650 feet beyond this thing,
and it's going to be right in my backyard. I don't want to be awake at 12 o'clock on a Saturday night, just my
personal opinion.
Traffic, that's been kind of a subject throughout the day on a number of different projects. You've
used the term called vetted plan. I'm assuming that means that the traffic has been vetted for that area.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Vested.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Vested; I'm sorry, vested.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. This is a DRI that came about back in what, 1980s sometime, and so
all these traffic counts were approved at that time.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Okay. I would really appreciate it if all you guys could be on the corner of
that complex at 5:30 tonight and see the traffic backed up from Golden Gate Boulevard all the way back to
where you cannot get in and out of my development, that development that we're talking about.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Excuse me. Where do you live?
MR. CARMICHAEL: I live right behind the canal.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: On the north side of the canal, Golden Gate Main Canal?
MR. CARMICHAEL: Yes. That's where I live, right there. Literally, from what they showed us at
that public hearing, the Planning Commission, I was literally 650 feet from their 85foot wall.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: And you're on a canal lot?
MR. CARMICHAEL: I'm on a canal lot, correct.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Are you nearer the west end or the east end?
MR. CARMICHAEL: I'm nearer the east end. I'm about four lots from the east end of that canal.
3270 31st Avenue Southwest, if you need an address. So it's literally right in my backyard.
Against concerts never talked about before.
Public use, I heard, you know, this is going to be great for our families and our neighbors because the
public can use this. There are two other major sports complexes on Golden Gate Boulevard and on Santa
Barbara that have all of these facilities and more. So I'm unclear as to why there's a need for this. So I don't
know if there's been a study developed for this or what.
But going back to the traffic, we're now going to add not only the 100 percent residents that are there,
and now we have the seasonal residents, now you're going to be bringing 240,000 according to the article in
the Naples Daily News, 240,000 new people into that complex over the year. That's a lot of traffic to be
coming through that area. So, again, just a thought.
And, finally, this isn't Field of Dreams. You know, if you build it, they will show. No, not
necessarily so. I mean, that's just, you know, my opinion, and I'm just one guy. And I'm aware that chances
are my comments mean absolutely nothing, but I wanted to put them on the record anyway.
So I appreciate you having me up here. And do you have any questions for me?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I just you had said there are two other facilities we don't have anything in
Collier County that I know of like this facility. Where did you where did you find these other
MR. CARMICHAEL: Right behind next to the sheriff's station, the right on it would be Golden
Gate Boulevard right next to the Sheriff's Department. There's an entire sports complex behind that behind
the community center.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Oh, yeah. But there's no stadium or
MR. CARMICHAEL: Oh, no. There's no big stadiums, no, no, no.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. CARMICHAEL: There's no big stadiums, but there's places to play and there's parks and
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah, it's a community park.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Yeah, community park areas; that's what I meant by that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else have any questions?
(No response.)
Page ! of ! 68 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Thank you, all, very much. Appreciate it.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Mark, if I could, just to maybe help Mr. Carmichael a little bit, and put it
on the record, we'll agree to a stipulation that says the stage side will face to the south. So if any amplified
sounds, if the stadium's built and we have a stage side, we should plan to on one side, we'll point that to the
south so that at least
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You'll put that into the PUD?
MR. CASALANGUIDA: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
MR. CASALANGUIDA: We've talked about it
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The position I basically have on this is that I think it's going to get approved
because it was actually already reviewed by the Board, and there's a hint that they think this is a needed
facility.
On the condition that it is, the best thing we can do is put as many stipulations that are practical on it
such as that. And so with the other stuff we did today, I don't know what else we can do to make this any
better that would stick. So does anybody else? I mean, anybody have any ideas?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I would agree with you. I mean, it's sort of a I fully understand the
issues. We've done everything we could to try and mitigate the impact, and especially with signage and other
things, it's really you need to bring your issues to the Board of County Commissioners, because that's where
that
COMMISSIONER EBERT: That's where it comes.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: that decision will finally be made.
MR. CARMICHAEL: Let me know when the meeting is, we'd be happy to be there.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, Nick or the staff
MR. CASALANGUIDA: March 27th.
MR. CARMICHAEL: March 27th. Here?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. With that, Josh, do you have anything you want to wrap up with?
MR. FRUTH: Just what Nick stated. We'll add that under it's on Page 25. We'll add Item F under 3,
the sports complex project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Stages and sound amplifying music
MR. FRUTH: Will face south.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: facilities will be facing towards will be directed toward the south.
MR. FRUTH: Correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, that's at least a beginning, so...
Okay. There's not really any stipulations to read into it because everything that was going to be
stipulated seemed to have gotten fixed. I'm checking right now to make sure there's nothing else. No.
Oh, at some point there was going to be Dark Skies lighting. Did that get into the we've read this
thing so many times, I want to make sure it's still in there.
MR. FRUTH: It was read into the record two weeks ago.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It needs to be added.
MR. FRUTH: But it was not but I'll add that as the other under same page, 25.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You're going to stay with the Dark Skies outdoor lighting basics, which will
be much better for the lighting system, and that was volunteered by youall, so...
And then there's staff recommendations. Do you have any objections to staff recommendations?
MR. FRUTH: We do not.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Then those need to be included as well.
And we're going to have to review this one under both cases as EAC and Planning Commission for A
and EAC and Planning Commission for B. So I want to make sure that we've got everything done.
Ray, is there anything else from staff where you guys
MR. BELLOWS: No. You've got it right. You have two motions, and
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So I'll call as the EAC the recommendation on this is for the PUD.
PL20170002330, and the recommendation, if for approval, should be consistent with what's been read into
the record and requested as changes that we've seen here today.
Page ! of ! 69 72
March 15, 2018
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Patrick.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Seconded by Joe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's the Planning Commission sitting as the EAC.
The second one we're sitting as the EAC on is Item 9B. It's PL20170002634, and it's for the this is
for the DRI portion of it. We discussed that the first time the original way back when two weeks ago when
we heard it. Really, this is going to be this is consistent with that, and to that effect, that's the most the
motion needs to contain. Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there a second?
MR. STONE: Mr. Chair, there was language added at this meeting
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right.
MR. STONE: to the resolution? Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The language that we discuss now to the point that it affects the DO is what
we're voting on.
MR. STONE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So we're approving the DO with any language needed to be changed
as a result of this discussion. There's been a motion. Who does the second?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: (Raises hand.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe did. Okay. By Patrick and Joe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
Now, sitting as the Planning Commission, Item 9A, PL20170002330. It's for the Planned Unit
Development for City Gate subject to the conditions we heard today and the corrections passed out.
Is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Patrick. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: (Raises hand.)
Page ! of ! 70 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
Second Planning Commission vote will be on 9B, PL20170002634. It's the City Gate Commerce
Park Development of Regional Impact. Subject to those items that pertain to the DRI as read into the record
and discussed today, is there a motion?
COMMISSIONER FRYER: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Ned, seconded by Joe.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 70.
That takes us to the end of our agenda, gentlemen. So Item 10A is new business; there isn't any.
Item 11 is old business. There's none listed.
Is there any other Joe?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just the discussion we had about emergency management staff will
need to come back and tell us when Dan Summers can come in and give us at least a rundown on the
MR. BELLOWS: Definitely.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And it would be a new business item, but please put it on an agenda or think
about it ahead of time before we have a backedup situation.
MR. BELLOWS: We'll coordinate that on the agenda with you.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. You need to convey the concerns so he understands. If he
wants to come in and discuss some kind of a program that he wants to move forward with, we're open to that
as well.
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. And we've had extensive discussions with him already, so he's willing to
work with us.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there any public comment?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, is there a motion to adjourn?
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Motion to adjourn.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by Patrick. Seconded by?
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second.
Page ! of ! 71 72
March 15, 2018
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Joe. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER CHRZANOWSKI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER EBERT: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye.
COMMISSIONER DEARBORN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: We're out of here. Thank you, all.
*******
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of
the Chair at 2:40 p.m.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
_____________________________________
MARK STRAIN, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
These minutes approved by the Board on ____________, as presented _______ or as corrected _______.
TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF
U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY
TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.
Page ! of ! 72 72
9.A.9
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: legal ad - Agenda ID # 5159 (2) (5159 : Creekside Commerce Park CPUD)