The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 11/12/2013 Item # 9A11/12/2013 9.A. Recommendation to consider approving the 2013 Cycle 1 of Growth Management Plan Amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for review and Comments response. (Transmittal Hearing) OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to review the 2013 cycle 1 of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GNP) and consider approving said amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. CONSIDERATIONS: • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government's adopted Growth Management Plan. • The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the "local planning agency" under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held their Transmittal hearing for the 2013 cycle 1 petitions on September 19, 2013 (petitions CP- 2013 -1, CP- 2013 -3 and CP- 2013 -4). • This Transmittal hearing for the 2013 cycle 1 considers amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map. Note: Because the support materials are voluminous, and some exhibits are oversized, the Agenda Central system does not contain all of the related documents pertaining to these GMP /"N amendment petitions. The entire Executive Summary package, including all support materials, is included in the binders provided separately to the BCC specifically for the 2013 cycle 1 of GMP amendment petitions. The complete binder is available for review in the Comprehensive Planning Section office at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, as well as in the Clerk of Courts/Minutes and Records office at 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 401. Or, see h=:// www.colliergov.net/index.gox ?pa eg 2460. Petition PL20130000139 /CP- 2013 -1 is a petition submitted by iStar Development Company, SFI Naples Reserve, LLC, and Wilton Land Company, LLC, requesting amendments to the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and the Density Rating System in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to allow the use of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Credits from any Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ( RFMUD) Sending Lands to be used in the Naples Reserve PUD. A portion of the Naples Reserve PUD is designated Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and a portion is designated RFMUD Receiving Lands. The FLUE presently limits the use of TDR Credits in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict to those derived from RFMUD Sending Lands located within one (1) mile of the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict boundary. The Naples Reserve PUD is located approximately 1' /z miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), and approximately '/2 mile north of US 41 East, north of the Reflection Lakes development (Walnut Lakes PUD), in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East. The purpose of the re- designation is to remove the limitation on where TDR Credits may be derived so as to allow the Naples Reserve PUD to obtain TDR Credits from distant RFMUD Sending Lands. During the creation of the RFMUD GMP amendments, it was asserted by some that the [then ^, proposed] Sending Lands located closest to the Urban Residential Fringe were of higher value, Packet Page -27- 11/12/2013 9.A. therefore should receive a higher compensation, perhaps a greater number of TDR Credits per five acres than other Sending Lands. The RFMUD GNP amendments were adopted without a different compensation ratio but the amendments did restrict the usage of TDR Credits in the Urban Residential Fringe to only those derived from Sending Lands located within one mile. Stated differently, TDR Credits derived from Sending Lands located greater than one mile from the Urban Residential Fringe cannot be used in the Urban Residential Fringe. The proposed amendment would remove that restriction but only for the Naples Reserve PUD. Staff analysis of this petition is included in the CCPC Staff Report. Petition PL20120002909/CP- 2013 -3 is a petition submitted by McGuire Development Company requesting amendments to the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to: a) modify the intent section so as to no longer require small scale, mixed use development; b) eliminate the requirement to develop a mixed use project, i.e. no longer require development of residential uses; c) eliminate the cap on retail uses square feet/acre; d) eliminate the cap on office uses square feet/acre; e) eliminate the maximum building footprint (of 15,000 square feet); f) eliminate the requirement to develop a specified portion of total square feet in multi-story buildings; g) eliminate the restriction on drive - through establishments to banks only, and add allowance for four establishments with drive- through facilities; h) eliminate the internal access requirement; i) eliminate the requirement for all sides of buildings to have a common architectural theme; j) eliminate the specified buffer requirement along Airport Road; k) eliminate the specified landscape buffer requirement along all other property lines; 1) eliminate the screening requirement for parking areas; m) add allowance for maximum of 50% of the total square feet to be within multi -tenant buildings (shopping centers/plazas); and, n) add correlating reduction of commercial square feet to number of residential units and visa versa. The result of these proposed amendments is that the site could now be developed as all residential or all commercial; if developed all commercial, it could now be all retail or all office; commercial uses could now include "big box" stores (up to 100,000 sq. ft.) and shopping centers/plaza ; building profiles could now be uniform (all the same story/height) rather than varying; other uses with drive- through facilities besides banks would now be allowed, and up to four of them; architectural standards and landscape buffer requirements would now be as per the Land Development Code rather than more stringent. In short, development would be allowed similar to Activity Centets except uses limited to C -1— C -3. At the CCPC hearing, the petition agents asserted numerous errors in the CCPC staff report pertaining to available commercial inventory, and a petition consultant spoke about local market conditions. Upon staff and CCPC request, the agents agreed to provide the information and statements they provided to the CCPC in written form. The agents have submitted a petition supplement (Memorandum dated October 3, 2013) which reflects the substance of their comments at the CCPC meeting. It includes parameters for site selection and analysis. There is a difference in perspective between the petitioner and staff. The petitioner has demonstrated there is a limited supply of available vacant lands that would accommodate C -1 through C -3 uses within the site's market area but has not demonstrated a demand for such vacant lands. Staff has consistently requested the demand analysis be provided for such GMP amendments, which typically consists of population data, disposable income, etc. in order to � Packet Page -28- 11/12/2013 9.A. determine supportable commercial acreage within the identified market area. Staff views the demand for additional commercial from an inventory perspective (and recognizes that variables for the commercial lands inventory include location, size, depth, zoning intensity, etc.) — is there a need /demand for more commercial in the subject area? If there isn't, then adding more commercial may negatively impact lands already designated and/or zoned for commercial. Staff does not view the demand, or lack thereof, for additional commercial as an indicator of success or failure for the subject site; that is determined by the market. In considering the appropriateness of location, staff notes this site is at a mid -block location proposing uses — including big box up to 100,000 square feet - which the GMP generally directs to Activity Centers which are located at major intersections. Additional staff analysis of this petition is included in the CCPC Staff Report. Petition PL20130000365/CP- 2013 -4 is a petition submitted by Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Map to change the designation of the Olde Florida Golf Club property from Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral Lands to Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Receiving Lands. The Olde Florida Golf Club comprises 553.7 acres and is located on the north side [at the easterly terminus] of Vanderbilt Beach Road, two miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East. With this re- designation, the property would be allowed all uses and densities, and be subject to all development standards, of the Receiving Lands designation, including use of TDR Credits to increase the maximum density from presently allowed 1 dwelling unit/5 acres to 1 dwelling n unit/acre. If this GMP amendment is adopted, then the property will need to be rezoned from the RFMUO Neutral Lands zoning overlay to the RFMUO Receiving Lands zoning overlay. Staff analysis of this petition is included in the CCPC Staff Report. FISCAL IMPACT: There are no fiscal impacts to Collier County as a result of these three amendments. Petition fees account for staff review time and materials, and for the cost of associated legal advertising/public notice. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item is approved as to form and legality. A majority vote of the Board is needed for transmittal to DEO. - -HFAC GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of these proposed amendments by the Board for Transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity will commence the Department's thirty -day (30) review process and ultimately return these amendments to the Planning Commission and the Board for final Adoption hearings to be held in 2014. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: The site of petition CP- 2013 -4 contains State and County jurisdictional wetlands (previously deemed U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional wetlands), and listed plant and /or animal species may occur on site. An existing conservation easement(s) encompasses some or all of these wetlands. Further, as part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders (e.g. site development plan), the site will be subject to all applicable local, state and federal environmental protection regulations, including applicable Packet Page -29- 11/12/2013 9.A. portions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element of the Growth Management Plan, and the Land Development Code. HISTORICAL /ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT: Petition CP- 2013 -4 contains one identified archaeological site. As part of the process of obtaining subsequent development orders (e.g. site development plan), the site will be subject to all applicable local, state and federal protection regulations relevant to historical and archeological sites. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the CCPC forward petitions CP- 2013 -1 and CP- 2013 -4 to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, and that the CCPC forward petition CP- 2013 -3 to the Board with a recommendation not to approve, as submitted, for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity but to approve one of two alternatives provided in the CCPC Staff Report. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPQ RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC forwarded petition CP- 2013 -1 to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (vote: 6/0). There was one public speaker, opposed to this petition due to affect upon owners of Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. The CCPC forwarded petition CP- 2013 -3 to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (vote: 6/0), subject to changes to: (a) cap individual user size at 100,000 square feet; (b) limit to one fast food restaurant with drive through facility; (c) prohibit convenience store use; (d) reduce residential density to a maximum of 11 units /acre; and, (e) incorporate select text changes from staff's Alternative #I text in the CCPC staff report. The CCPC's motion is reflected in the Resolution Exhibit A text for this petition. Additionally, the CCPC's motion expressed desire for the owner to pay his fair share towards cost of a traffic signal at project entrance, should a signal be warranted in the future — and acknowledged such a condition would be appropriate at time of rezoning. Note: A PUD amendment petition for the Buckley PUD is presently under review and is anticipated to be heard on the same schedule as the Adoption hearings for this GMP amendment petition. There were two public speakers, both in support. The CCPC forwarded petition CP- 2013 -4 to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (vote: 6/0). There were two public speakers - one in support, and one expressing concerns about impact upon wildlife in the area. Prepared By: David Weeks, AICP, GMP Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Planning and Zoning Department, Growth Management Division/Planning and Regulation Attachments: 1) CP- 2013 -1 CCPC Staff Report; 2) CP- 2013 -1 Resolution with Exhibit "A" text; 3) CP- 2013 -3 Memorandum (petition supplement) dated October 3, 2013; 4) CP- 2013 -3 CCPC Staff Report; 5) CP- 2013 -3 Resolution with Exhibit "A" text; 6) CP- 2013 -4 CCPC Staff Report; 7) CP- 2013 -4 Resolution with Exhibit "A" map Packet Page -30- COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 9.9.A. 11/12/2013 9.A. Item Summary: Recommendation to consider approving the 2013 Cycle 1 of Growth Management Plan Amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for review and Comments response. (Transmittal Hearing) Meeting Date: 11/12/2013 Prepared By Name: WeeksDavid Title: Manager - Planning,Comprehensive Planning 10/17/2013 2:41:59 PM Submitted by n Title: Manager - Planning,Comprehensive Planning Name: WeeksDavid 10/17/2013 2:42:00 PM Approved By Name: BosiMichael Title: Manager - Planning,Comprehensive Planning Date: 10/21/2013 8:31:49 AM Name: PuigJudy Title: Operations Analyst, GMD P &R Date: 10/21/2013 11:38:40 AM Name: MarcellaJeanne Title: Executive Secretary,Transportation Planning Date: 10/22/2013 4:20:55 PM Name: AshtonHeidi Title: Section Chief/Land Use- Transportation,County Attor Date: 10/29/2013 11:04:00 AM Packet Page -31- Name: KlatzkowJeff Title: County Attorney Date: 10/29/2013 2:01:59 PM Name: FinnEd Title: Senior Budget Analyst, OMB Date: 10/30/2013 5:38:09 PM Name: OchsLeo Title: County Manager Date: 11/2/2013 10:24:37 AM Packet Page -32- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9 11/12/2013 9.A. WYPIF STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 19, 2013 RE: PETITION CP- 2013 -1 / PL- 2013 - 0000139, Growth Management Plan Amendment (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) APPLICANTS/OWNERS/AGENTS: iStar Development Company Donald E. Mears, Jr., Vice President 3232 West Lake Mary Boulevard, Suite 1410 Lake Mary, Florida 32746 SFI Naples Reserve, LLC c/o iStar Financial, Inc. 1114 Avenue of the Americas, 39th Floor New York, New York 10036 Robert j. Mulhere, FAICP Hole Montes, Inc. 950 Encore Way Naples, Florida 34110 Wilton Land Company, LLC David Torres, President 3921 Prospect Avenue, Naples, Florida 34104 Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element introduce text -based exceptions from certain Transfer of Development Rights limitations, but are not site speck. However, text amendments relate to two identifiable geographic areas of origin and destination: those Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) Sending Lands located beyond one (1) mile from the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF), and; that portion of the URF located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East - commonly known as the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development (PUD). This PUD is located approximately 1'/ miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), and approximately 'h mile north of US 41 East, north of the Reflection Lakes development (Walnut Lakes PUD). REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text of the. Growth Management Plan to introduce specific exceptions from Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program limitations, affecting the transfer of TDR credits among properties in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (RFMUD) and the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict. - 1 - CP-2013-1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development: allowinq TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -33- Agenda Item 9• 11/12/2013 9.A. Presently, properties located within the URF may only receive TDR credits from the RFMUD Sending Lands located within 1 mile of the URF boundary. Stated differently, TDR credits may be transferred from any RFMUD Sending Lands to any RFMUD Receiving Lands and Urban area receiving lands except that TDR credits from Sending Lands beyond 1 mile of the URF boundary cannot be transferred into the URF. This amendment would allow the transfer of TDR credits originating more distant than one (1) mile from the URF boundary for use in [the URF portion of] the Naples Reserve PUD. Adoption of these amendments would grant new rights to the co- applicant's property to utilize TDRs from distant RFMUD Sending Lands. (CP- 2093 -1 Resolution Exhibit A reflects the petitioner's proposed text changes) SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Note: For purposes unique to this application, there are two geographic areas - those RFMUD Sending Lands located beyond one mile from the Urban Residential Fringe (URF), with origination TDRs, and the Naples Reserve Residential PUD, the TDR destination. Subiect [TDR o6aination] RFMUD Sending Lands: The subject Sending Lands area is zoned A- RFMUO, Sending Lands (Rural Agricultural District, Rural Fringe Mixed Use - Sending Lands Overlay) and some portions contain one or more of the MHO, Mobile Home Overlay, NBMO, North Belle Meade Overlay, and NRPA, Natural Resources Protection Area Overlay; and, the area is designated AgriculturaVRural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands (and some portions are within one or more of the North Belle Meade Overlay and the Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay on the Future Land Use Map. These lands are largely undeveloped. Residential density is permitted at 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or legal non- conforming lot/parcel of record. Permitted non - residential uses are limited to: agricultural uses, consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation uses; passive parks and other passive recreational uses; sporting and recreational camps; limited essential services; and oil extraction and related processing. Subiect fTDR destination) Residential PUD Site: The subject site is zoned Naples Reserve RPUD and designated partly Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands and partly Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict (URF) on the Future Land Use Map. The ±688 acre subject site is undeveloped and the PUD provides for a maximum gross density of 1.67 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Lands: North of the [TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Land to the north of the subject RPUD is zoned A- RFMUO, Sending Lands and within the NRPA Overlay, and designated Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands, overlaid by the Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) on the Future Land Use Map. These lands lie inside the Picayune Strand State Forest and are owned by the State of Florida. Public lands are not part of the TDR program. West of the [TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Land to the west of the subject RPUD is zoned Winding Cypress PUD /DRI (Development of Regional Impact) and partially developed as Verona Walk. The Future Land Use designation is Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and Urban Residential Subdistrict. -2- CP- 2013 -1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -34- Agenda Item 9. 11/12/2013 9.A. South of the [TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Land to the south of the subject RPUD is zoned Walnut Lakes PUD and developed as Reflection Lakes of Naples; and, undeveloped land zoned A, Rural Agricultural. These lands are designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map. East of the [TDR destination] Naples Reserve RPUD: Across Greenway Road, land to the east of the subject RPUD is in agricultural use. The zoning district is A- RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. In summary, the existing land uses in the area immediately surrounding or directly opposite the subject RPUD are predominately rural non - residential in nature to the north and east, and residential to the west and south. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations - History of the Rural Fringe GMP Amendments: The Governor and Cabinet issued a Final Order on June 22, 1999, pertaining to GMP amendments adopted in 1997 pursuant to the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The Final Order required the County to conduct a Rural and Agricultural Assessment for the Rural and Conservation Designated lands within the County, and then adopt measures to protect natural resources such as wetlands, wildlife and their habitats, and prevent the premature conversion of unique agricultural lands to other uses. This was to be accomplished while directing incompatible land uses away from these sensitive lands by employing creative land planning techniques. The Final Order allowed the County to conduct this Assessment in phases. Accordingly, the County divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Area and the Eastern Rural Lands Area. Relevant to this petition, the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ( RFMUD) was established. The RFMUD represents a transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County's urban area, and between the urban area and vast agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The RFMUD consists of approximately 73,222 acres and is divided into three distinct designations: Sending Lands L 41,535 acres originally; ± 41,414 acres now), Receiving Lands L 22,020 acres originally; t 22,373 acres now), and Neutral Lands L 9,667 acres originally; t 9,427 acres now). Allowable uses, density, and preservation standards vary by designation. Sending Lands are those lands that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. The preservation standard for non -NRPA Sending Lands is eighty percent (80 %) of the native vegetation on site while the standard for NRPA Sending Lands is ninety percent (90 %). Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/parcel of record (created on or before June 22, 1999). Transfer of development rights from Sending Lands may occur at a rate of 1 dwelling unit per five acres (0.2 du /ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/ parcel of record. Permitted non - residential uses are limited to: agricultural uses, consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation uses; passive parks and other passive recreational uses; sporting and recreational camps; limited essential services; and oil extraction and related processing. Receiving Lands are those lands identified as being the most appropriate for development and to which residential units may be received from areas designated as Sending Lands. The -3- CP- 2013 -1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development: allowina TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -35- Agenda Item 9..- 11/12/2013 9.A. preservation standard for Receiving Lands, except for the North Belle Meade Overlay, is forty percent (40 %) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed twenty -five percent (25 %) of the total site area to be preserved. The base residential density (non -Rural Village development) is 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du /ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/parcel of record. The maximum density achievable for non -Rural Village development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through the Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). The minimum and maximum density for Rural Village development within Receiving Lands is 2 and 3 dwelling units per acre, respectively, except that the minimum density for Rural Village development on Receiving Lands within the North Belle Meade Overlay is 1.5 dwelling units per acre. Permitted non - residential uses are primarily the same as those uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). Neutral Lands are those lands suitable for semi -rural residential development. Generally, Neutral lands have a higher ratio of native vegetation than lands designated as Receiving Lands, but do not have values approaching those in the Sending Lands. The preservation standard for Neutral Lands is sixty percent (60 %) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed forty -five percent (45 %) of the total site area to be preserved. The maximum residential density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du /ac.) or legal non - conforming lot/parcel of record. These lands are "neutral" to the TDR program and do not generate or receive residential density. Permitted non - residential uses are primarily the same as the uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). The consultant who assisted in development of the RFMUD TDR program found a correlation between the proximity of properties lying east of CR 951 and their land values. The higher transitional /residential densities allowed in the Urban Residential Fringe affected these nearer lands with higher property values while more - distant Sending Lands - which are less dense, further removed from urban services, less acceptable, and so forth - revealed notably lower values. This geographical relationship was recognized and specific limitations established to bolster TDR values for the more proximate lands, and provided special arrangements for the transfer, redemption and use of TDRs. The consultant also directly addressed the TDR program, and predicted the haste which requests to change the program to benefit only a few, or single, landowners would appear. The County was cautioned to keep the TDR program intact [for a substantial period of time]. Changes weaken the program, diminish TDR values and discourage the viability of long -term continuing participation. How TDRs are Expected to Transfer Into Naples Reserve: A number of TDRs are expected to originate from Hacienda Lakes PUD /DRI land. To date, Sending Lands located in the easternmost part of the Hacienda Lakes PUD /DRI have produced ±190 [base & Early Entry bonus] TDR credits from ±475 acres. Development Standards found in the standing Naples Reserve PUD Ordinance indicate, "There shall be no more than 1,154 residential dwelling units permitted which provides for a maximum gross density of 1.67 dwelling units per acre. A minimum of 612 Transfer of Development Rights Credits shall be obtained to achieve the maximum gross density." ...with Planning provision "B" stating, -4- CP- 2013 -1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development_ allowinq TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -36- Agenda item 9. 11/12/2013 9.A. "in order to increase the residential density allowed in the Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Fringe Subdistrict and the Agricultural/Rural - Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands, 612 TDR credits shall be severed from qualifying Sending Lands, of which a minimum of 311 TDR credits shall be severed from /qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Area." The clear implication is that the remaining 301 TDR credits may be obtained from [qualified] Sending Lands located within one mile OR beyond one mile from the Urban Area [unquaffied], as the origination TDRs pertinent to this application - despite such a transfer from beyond one mile being inconsistent with the FLUE provision for the URF. Approximately 190 of these TDR credits originate from Hacienda Lakes' Sending Lands leaving 111 to be obtained from other [qualified and/or unqualified] Sending Lands. [See calculations below.] 1154 maximum DUs in Naples Reserve ** -612 minimum TDR credits to be severed /transferred from RFMU Sending Lands ** 542 intrinsic DU density 311 = minimum TDR credits to be severed /transferred from [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area /attributable to the '612' figure above] ** 301 = remaining TDR credits to be severed /transferred from [qualified and /or unqualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area or beyond one mile of the Urban Area [attributable to the '612' figure] - 190 = TDR credits severed /to be transferred from Hacienda Lakes' [unqualified] Sending Lands beyond one mile of Urban Area [attributable to the 301' n figure] * ** = 111 = TDR credits to be severed /transferred from other Sending Lands located within one mile or beyond one mile from Urban Area [attributable to the 301' figure] Of all Sending Lands, only those located within one mile of the Urban area qualify to transfer TDR credits into the Urban Residential Fringe (URF). 1804 estimated TDR total in [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Area - 721 TDR credits from [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area already committed to URF use * = 1083 TDR credits in [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area remaining for URF use * For the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) lands, only a portion of them can make use of the TDR credits available from [qualified] Sending Lands. 3249 approximate URF acres eligible for TDR use (w/ an equivalent TDR count- potential TDR credit demand in URF) * -1083 TDR credits in [qualified] Sending Lands within one mile of Urban Area remaining for URF use (potential TDR credit supply for URF)* = 2166 approximate potential unmet need of TDR credits for URF use (potential TDR credit demand in URF unmet by Sending Lands within 1 mile of URF boundary) * -5- CP- 2013 -1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development: allowing TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -37- Agenda Item 9 . -11 /12/2013 9.A. Sources: * Petitioner provided figures. ** Naples Reserve PUD Ordinance derived figures. *** Staff provided figures. The petitioner's eligible acreage, thus potential demand for TDR credits, in the URF includes Winding Cypress PUD /DRI. Staff believes Winding Cypress should be excluded. It is presently approved for 2,300 DUs (1.19 DU /A) and 796 acres of preserve. A PUD amendment presently under review would increase this to 2,854 DUs (1.48 DU /A) and 840 acres of preserve. Phase I of Winding Cypress (Veronawalk) has been platted, infrastructure put in place, and DUs at or near build out. Phase II, the balance of the PUD, will contain fewer DUs than Phase I due to environmental constraints. Almost all of the Preserve is located in Phase II; there is limited land available for residential development. The below figures reflect staff's exclusion of Winding Cypress PUD /DRI. 2,177 potential TDR credits demand in URF 1.083 TDR credits in Sending Lands within 1 mile of URF 1,034 approximate unmet need of TDR credits for URF use This potential need for 2,166 TDR credits (petitioner's figure) or 1,034 TDR credits (staffs figure) in the URF would go unmet due to the existing prohibition on transferring TDR credits from Sending Lands beyond one mile of the URF boundary. The subject GMP amendment would satisfy a portion of that potential unmet need for TDR credits. On the other hand, this amendment could potentially devalue TDR credits generated from Sending Lands within one mile of the URF by increasing the eligible supply - all Sending Lands would become eligible to transfer TDR credits to the Naples Reserve PUD, not just those within one mile of the URF boundary. According to application materials, the co- applicant of this petition is the original owner of Hacienda Lakes PUD /DRI, maintains ownership of TDR credits from Hacienda Lakes, and will sell 406 TDR credits to the Naples Reserve developer if this amendment is successful. Accordingly, this amendment could be viewed as self - serving. Nonetheless, it may further the success of the TDR program and protection of Sending Lands. Environmental Impacts: Collier County Department of Natural Resources personnel reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: The majority of the land within Naples Reserve PUD was previously cleared for agricultural purposes prior to approval of the rezone to PUD. Native vegetation occurs primarily in the preserves on site. There is also in an existing conservation easement, in favor of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), over the preserves. An updated listed species survey was recently provided with the subdivision plat/plans for the project, currently under review with the County. Listed species documented on site were all associated with the agricultural ditches and the borrow pond on site, and consist of American alligator, several species of wading bird and snail kite. None of these species were found to be nesting on the subject property. A letter provided with the original PUD rezone, from the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, indicates no significant archaeological or historical sites recorded for or likely to be present within the project area. The letter also states that because of the project -6- CP- 2013 -1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development: allowinq TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -38- Agenda Item 9.- 11 /12/2013 9.A. location and /or nature it is unlikely that any such sites will be affected. The project will be subject to the usual requirement for accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites as required by Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) Policy 11.1.3. The provision is also included in Subsection 2.03.07 E of the Land Development Code (LDC). The proposed GMP amendment for transfer of TDRs to allow Naples Reserve to achieve its maximum allowable density will have no affect on the requirements of the (CCME). The percent requirements of preserves will also not change. [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist] Historical and Archaeological Impacts: The historical and archaeological characteristics inherent to the subject property are addressed in the Naples Reserve PUD. The transfer of TDRs from beyond one mile from the Urban Area does not in itself impact the site and further analysis is unnecessary. Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Analysis, Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination: The traffic capacity and /traffic circulation characteristics associated with developing the subject property are addressed in the Naples Reserve PUD. The transfer of TDRs from beyond one mile from the Urban Area does not in itself impact these traffic characteristics and further analysis is unnecessary. Public Facilities Impact: The public facilities services needed to develop the subject property are addressed in the Naples Reserve PUD. The transfer of TDRs from beyond one mile from the Urban Area does not in itself impact these services and further analysis is unnecessary. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Thursday, August 22, 2013, 5:30 p.m. at the Collier County South Regional Library, Meeting Rm. °B ", located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples. Two people other than the applicant's team and County staff attended - and heard the following information: The applicant's agent provided a full description of the proposed amendment to the group, including how the transfer of TDR credits will be allowed to the Naples Reserve PUD located in the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) from Rural Fringe Mixed Used District Sending Lands. No one in attendance expressed opposition to the changes 5:40 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] The meeting was completed by FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • Impact upon the TDR program could be noteworthy. A number of TDR credits originally intended for use in areas of designated Receiving Lands will be redirected to the Urban Residential Fringe - a reallocation of TDR credits. • This GMP amendment could potentially devalue TDR credits generated from Sending Lands within one mile of the URF. -7- CP- 2013 -1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development: allowinq TDR transfers into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -39- Agenda Item 9. 11/12/2013 9.A. • This GMP amendment would satisfy a portion of the potential unmet need in the Urban Residential Fringe for TDR credits. • Though this amendment could be viewed as self - serving, it may further the success of the TDR program and protection of Sending Lands. • Correlating amendments to the Naples Reserve PUD may be submitted subsequent to, or concurrent with the Adoption phase of this GMPA application. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This staff report has been approved as to form and legality by the Office of the County Attorney. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2013 -1 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve this petition for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. PREPARED BY: DATE: CORBY SCHMIDT, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: �. Y r-IATC• -= t DAVID WEEKS, AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: DATE: MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT APPROYED BY: CASA U AD RATOR G OW MANAGEMENT DIVISION PETITION NO.: CP- 2013 -1 / PL -2013- 0000139 Staff Report for the September 19, 2013, CCPC Meeting. DATE: �-3 —13 NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 12, 2013, BCC Meeting. —8- CP- 2013 -1 / PL20130000139 2013 -1, iStar Development: allnwinn TDR tran -fPrs into Naples Reserve RPUD Packet Page -40- n 11/12/2013 9.A. RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO ALLOW THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE PORTION OF THE NAPLES RESERVE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO UTILIZE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM ANY LANDS DESIGNATED AS SENDING LANDS WITHIN THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT 668 ACRE PROPERTY IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1 -1/2 MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND ONE MILE NORTH OF US 41 IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20120000139 /CP- 2013 -11 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. se g., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Petitioners, Star Development Company and Wilton Land Company LLC, have initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2013, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have Words underlined are additions; Words stfuek thfaugh are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** area break in text PL20130000139 /CP- 2013 -1 Rev. 9/03/13 Packet Page -41- 11/12/2013 9.A. thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.31.84(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day of , 2013. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton -Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit "A" CP \13 -CMP- 0090315 - 7/16/13 GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. Chairwoman Words underlined are additions; Words stfa .'. &,&eugh are deletions 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * are a break in text PL20130000139 /CP- 2013 -1 Rev. 9/03/13 Packet Page -42- PL20130000139 EXHIBIT "A" FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT 11/12/2013 9.A. CP- 2013 -1 [Page 29] 2. Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict: The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural /Rural Area and comprises approximately 5,500 acres and 5% of the Urban Mixed Use District. Residential land uses may be allowed at a maximum base density of 1.5 units per gross acre, plus any density bonus that may be achieved via CCME Policy 6.2.5 (6) b.1., and either "a" or "b" below: a. Up to 1.0 unit per gross acre via the transfer of up to one (1.0) dwelling unit (transferable development right) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands, except in the case of properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may achieve an additional maximum density of up to 1.3 units per gross acre for all lands designated as Urban Residential Fringe via the transfer of up to 1.3 dwelling units (transferable development rights) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands. The Urban Residential Fringe portion of the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development located in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, shall not be subject to the one mile /00� limitation set forth above and may utilize TDRs from any lands designated Sending within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to achieve up to the maximum allowable density; or, [Page 49] B. DENSITY RATING SYSTEM: This Density Rating System is only applicable to areas designated on the Future Land Use Map as: Urban, Urban Mixed Use District; and, on a very limited basis, Agricultural /Rural. It is not applicable to the Urban areas encompassed by the Immokalee Area Master Plan, and the Golden Gate Area Master Plan; these two Elements have their own density provisions. The Density Rating System is applicable to that portion of the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict to the extent that the residential density cap of 4 dwelling units per acre is not exceeded, except for the density bonus provisions for Affordable Housing and Transfer of Development Rights, and except as provided for in the Bayshore /Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. The final determination of permitted density via implementation of this Density Rating System is made by the Board of County Commissioners through an advertised public hearing process (rezone or Stewardship Receiving Area designation). Words underlined are added; words stFurk through are deleted. Row of asterisks ( packet Page - 43 -'otes break in text. PL20130000139 2. Density Bonuses 11/12/2013 9.A. C P- 2013 -1 Consistency with the following characteristics may add to the base density. Density bonuses are discretionary, not entitlements, and are dependent upon meeting the criteria for each bonus provision and compatibility with surrounding properties, as well as the rezone criteria in the Land Development Code. f. Transfer of Development Rights Bonus To encourage preservation /conservation of natural resources, density transfers are permitted as follows: (a) From Urban designated areas into that portion of the Urban designated area subject to this Density Rating System, in accordance with the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) provision contained in Section 2.03.07 of the Land Development Code, adopted by Ordinance No. #04 -41, as amended, on June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004. For projects utilizing this TDR process, density may be increased above and beyond the density otherwise allowed by the Density Rating System. (b) From Sending Lands in conjunction with qualified infill development. (c) From Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of one unit per gross acre, except for properties that straddle the Urban Residential Fringe and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Sending Lands designations, and meet the other Density Blending criteria provided for in subsection 5.2 of the Density Rating System, which may transfer TDRs from Sending Lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary into lands designated Urban Residential Fringe, at a maximum density increase of 1.3 units per gross acre. The Urban Residential Fringe portion of the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development located in Section 1 Township 51 South Range 26 East shall not be subiect to the one mile limitation set forth above and may utilize TDRs from any lands designated Sending within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to achieve up to the maximum allowable density increase. In no case shall density be transferred into the Coastal High Hazard Area from outside the Coastal High Hazard Area. 2 Words underlined are added; words struek through are deleted. Row of asterisks (Packet Page -44- ,otes break in text. 11/12/2013 9.A. DAVIDSON ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM TO: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Review Staff FROM: Dm Hancock, AICP RE: Additional Commercial Land Inventory Data, PL-201200029091CP- 2013 -3 October 3, 2013 Part of the application for GMT Amendment related to the Buckley Mixed Use District was an analysis of existing commercial inventory within a one to three mile radius of the subject site, with the primary focus being on those properties within two miles. The basis for this analysis was to show the lack of availability of zoned, `developer ready' sites within that area and particularly the Airport Road corridor as a basis for the petitioner's position that there is inadequate supply to meet this particular demand. The demand side of the analysis was n supported with elements of the Bergstrom Report included with the application which showed that end -user retail starts are increasing and showing higher demand than other commercial sectors. This is also anecdotally supported by the new construction of commercial end -users in the Pine Air Lakes project. The petitioner contends that the demand is growing, but he supply is dwindling and nearly non - existent in near proximity to the subject property. Staff included in their report an analysis of the available square footage, both built and available in the project area. Due to a short review time frame, staff was limited to analyzing the projects based on the submitted annual PUD monitoring reports and came to the conclusion that the supply was more than adequate to meet the future demand. The petitioner responding with a site specific analysis at the Planning Commission hearing that identified all available sites within a two mile radius of the subject property, using project aerials and site visits to confirm availability. That updated data is included as Exhibit A. Further data addressing the staff analysis is also attached as Exhibit B. Also providing testimony at the Planning Commission was Mr. David Stevens, a commercial property broker with more than 20 years' experience in the local market. Mr. Stevens confirmed that the demand for end -user retail was present and growing and provided further testimony that vacant land within a 2 -mile radius of the site was scarce. His testimony further indicated that most of not all of the 26 vaunt, commercially zoned acreage within the Pine Air Lakes project was `spoken for' and therefore not available, reducing the available acreage even further than shown by the applicant. Mr. Stevens then noted that projects such as the recent purchase of the 3530 Kraft Road, Suke #301 - Naples, Florida 34105 • Phone: 239.434.8060 Fwc 239.434.8084 www.davidsonengineorIna.com Davidson Engineering, Inc. Packet Page -45- 11/12/2013 9.A. Temple Citrus Groves property which will bring some 500 new homes to the area will be cause ^ for increased demand in the future and only exacerbate the issue of minimal supply for this type of commercial property. It was Mr. Stevens's testimony that the Buckley project will fill a demonstrated need for commercial, end user parcels in the project area. End of Memo. Packet Page -46- EXHIBIT A COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES INVENTORY LISTING AND MAPS Packet Page -47- 11/12/2013 9.A. �a o= oll- 0 a U a 11/12/2013 9.A. Packet Page -48- M N LL oz m 0 a D 0 LL- V; O Z to 70 0 ne 0 b ui N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N N W N W C > > > > O O > > > > en > rr) > U U V V V U U U u w G� t�.l Cad a J o 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 s 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 c < a Q a a a a a a ¢ a a a a a J a W w W a W a W W a W W W W W W W a Q¢Q¢ er >a>:ara>- aQQQ¢¢QQaQQQQQaa¢¢aQ a�a�ay ay:c }ate z z z z z3".z z z z3:z3:z3:z z3: N O 0 a 0 p in Q Q a Q p ¢ ❑ < ❑ W Q d yd Q W¢ ❑ W Q o ❑ W Q 0 B W Q Q Z W Q K W¢ Q a Q a C �' Q LL ,Q 43 LL' ¢¢ ,�( OC a K Co J ro:ra z0z10 Q � Q ra z{tyo-;Pozl Q f.�p,,.crai-- a ozozozoz�z�zoz� a, rcF- ocrararara 0 D_ J W W J Q: LL -d 4: W t1 J a U. J Q: W LL J W J W J W J tay W J W J W J s C1 a J =a ,1 N-i i J J J -d N J N J N J =o N J =o J =ono J =og a©z °za°z� =o =o e-I N H W J O ri .-i N W q r-f OR r+ a0 .� 00 �-i .� rri eri ri rri to .-i rt rri O eri W > O a � LL IL 0. 0: IL LLJ C7 o Gt n M d a� O rn a0 w to M i° N er o► N oD W C rl W .-1 a0 q ,'"� -I a 0 of Z ¢ Z N N a CA O p CL z O m a M o N O o O � S O Q Q8 W-4 N C. W w Lo w W to Yl Ln 00 V to w tD l,0 M M M to VM W W > W > W > W > W > W > W > W > W > W > W > M o �z G G a E G G G U U a d a QN a a s a Q a Q a Q a W r W S W cc Wa W N Z O Z pJ W < G z ' w W W W d ,.wit N u �j W< aZ Z t z Y Y bG SC g W 0 W 0 W o N r g g c _o G a a d Q Z Q LLI Q Z m m m C a Z J a Z a a Z a a Q U Q U a U Co a Q z z ❑ G a > > > ❑ > > > ❑ ❑ z > > a u a u a u a u a u a u a u a a a N N N ei N M et N w 1� Co Packet Page -48- M N LL oz m 0 a D 0 LL- V; O Z to 70 0 ne 0 b ' 1 WQ®� t i Qo 11 /12/2013 9.A. Packet Page -49- o. N X D 10 OLv�� N C O z IL LLO a1 O �O m a z N to a 0 0 4' Ln W to W t o W ul to W Cn N W N N W CA N W Ln N W N to W 0 to W H 0 W In to W Ln Ln W Ln to W Ln t/'t W Ln N > CA > > > > > > > > > > O D D m M m m d d? -:� v T Li v t_t v cv u u V v v v u Q u 0 O O O O C) z 4 5 z 0 O ui O O Q Q Q Q a L/ J J uj J Q Q z U J Q �! Q LU rW sue- W> - u `z LU .� Q `� w W f- O� u- � W r c� r Oat r �- c aaQ<caaaQQ¢a CC Cz w �- >- c F- > =Q r ? SGQaLA r u ¢Q¢Q z�zsz�z�zZ�QC3i -, 3:< � z QO O a Q Q s z < LLJ u z< W Q E= E- f- oao 4t p W U a =a =QCa�aQ�aO Q =LnQL trLt J V•f LU w uj ® a°�¢ E- �t- �► -ct-� tr� z0 W�a�� -�Z�u z z =>�zazO z�- -.�E -� z0 O i- z0 Q F- z0 Q t }�q z0 C? f z0 O tt.' O - �� i- 4' -J UOZOL,�a !- d �" w O E' W- �1 Vs V't in t!t LA U1 0 �y 0 cc J Ci it i LL J CC W LL J J Cr W J J � W J Ei Q Z J z r a z J U- J Q z LL LL J J Ln J e0t20 J Vl J <0 t n J QO J -j Lh J V) C.d 0 -t :.� O J Ln J O !- 0 � = u =Q0 N J 0 V i L) S V i L) = r t z v> t: s > U- V T V 0 CL m a% V V M Z Cr �T C7 tT rn N Ln M it' m �!' Ln M Ln M Ln M tai M St C}' (LA rn m m M M ct rn W C. Qm 'i d. Ct m tom- O .-i Ln to O Ln N N of O N N LLS z O N ® Ln N ri 00 tlt t` Cl N O l0 O to N p CO C4 O O td Nq:r Ln Ln O p rn ° g O SSm o 00 Ln LD r- 00 N 00 d' Ln Ln tft rl Ln ri N SM M M M m � M M rn LO .4 o tT Ln e7 Lit tt 00 N o N O r` d as n La n 6p P- LO d' m w N N N O M M O O N M M t� N I- W > W > W > W > LLt > W > W > W > W > ti LA W to iy :n W Ln W > W > a a ¢ a a a a a ui a a Ln J W W W W W W WW W W W LIn W C z O O O Y O u z V V u u Q ? W I W © �g ~ 0 _ t/ he d W W W Q W W LAJ W J W W W J �° ]C X J z z a z z 4 V�Q Z W Q Q V a ti 4C v a Q: C[ V n. L Q LU D- Q l7 U a n. c Q d C Z _ _ ? D CL u u u u ° a a a CL a V u c°5 u r�i eNi .M-t .�-i ��i ci N N Packet Page -49- o. N X D 10 OLv�� N C O z IL LLO a1 O �O m a z N to a 0 0 4' 11/12/2013 9.A. EXHIBIT B ADDITIONAL LAND USE ANALYSIS IN RESPONSE TO COLLIER COUNTY STAFF REPORT 9 -27 -2013 Point 1: Staff contends that relevant examples exist within the Collier County of successful Mixed Use Developments that allow for the conclusion that mixed use can be creatively applied to the subject property. Response: With regard to the mixed use requirement, Collier County Comprehensive Planning staff on page 5 of their staff report points to varying types of mixed use developments as 'working' examples of successful mixed use projects in Collier County. Many of these projects however are not comparable in nature to the Buckley sites. 1. Staff first points to the Town Center components in Village Walk, Island Walk and Verona Walk communities. These are predominantly residential communities with small commercial amenities that exist for the use and benefit of solely their residents. The general public does not have use of these facilities and they are very limited in their size and scope. 2. Staff then cites 5th Avenue South and 3rd Street South as examples of why mixed use could work on this site. Unlike the subject property, 5th avenue and 3rd street are public thorough -fares and part of a grid system of streets in the City of Naples that have been part of the commercial landscape for more than 50 years. The commercial portion of 5th avenue south alone is over YZ mile long and was long established prior to the introduction of residential units over the commercial. This area is considered the center and a focal point in the City of Naples. 3. Also cited is Bayfront, a 65 foot high -rise, water -front up -scale residential development within the city of Naples that has some retail and office components on the lower floors. The project is located on the Gordon River and contains a commercial marina with boat rentals and boat slips. 4. Lastly, staff points to the Mercato MPUD (Ord 06 -32) which is a 53 acre commercial development with up to 495,000 commercial square feet and 175 residential units. To date, while over 486,000 sq. ft. of commercial developments has been built, only 92 mufti- family units have been constructed. The main thoroughfare through the project connects one arterial road, Vanderbilt Beach Road to another arterial road, US 41. The size, commercial mass and location of the project in no way parallels the Buckley parcel. None of these projects compares favorably to the subject property. While at some point in the future, a small, mixed use project may find a market in Southwest Florida that market remains untested to date with no viable working examples at the same scale and physical characteristics as the Buckley parcel. Point 2: Staff provided an analysis of built and un -built commercial square footage for lands both zoned and un -zoned as a basis for concluding that there is ample supply of commercial land in the immediate area to meet current and future needs. This analysis utilizes the annual PUD Monitoring reports with address maximum permitted development allowed. A survey of the physical, built environment yields a Packet Page -53- 11/12/2013 9.A. different result. Below is a summary of the differences between the data presented by Staff with regard to available commercial and the actual physical land that is available. On page 9 of the staff analysis, they identify the remaining commercial opportunities in Activity Center #11, which is the intersection of Vanderbilt Beach Road and Airport Road. According to monitoring reports, out of a total of nearly 1,250,000 square feet of approved commercial zoning at this intersection, over 200,000 square feet remains to be developed. Most of this commercial square footage is not currently available. To illustrate, monitoring reports indicate that the SW Quadrant of Activity Center #11 has over 93,000 square feet of commercial development remaining. However, when you look at an aerial of this area the actual land available is very limited. What appears as a vacant parcel fronting VBR is currently under development forthe Alamo Gun Shop and Range, so in reality only two vacant commercially zoned parcels actually exist and at .2 acres and .5 acres respectively, they could support a combined total of 5 to 10,000 square feet. This is a mere fraction of what is identified in the PUD monitoring reports, resulting in a potential over - statement of availability. Additionally, this small acreage does not front on a collector or arterial roadway as the Buckley parcel does and is therefore cannot be considered similar in nature to the Buckley site. Addressing the balance of the rest of Activity Center #11, similar conditions are present. With regard to the NW and NE quadrants, the staff report indicates 331,400 sq. ft. are approved. The unbuilt acreage however involves only 2 parcels totaling 2.27 acres as shown here that would support 15 to 17,000 square feet of retail space. This is less than 5% ofthe approved square footage. Moving to the SE corner of Activity Center #11, Staff indicates 75.86 acres of land, allowing 600,000 square feet is permitted with 18% or 108,000 square feet remaining to be built. While this quadrant of Activity Center #11 lies within the Vineyards PUD, the PUD covers 1,900 acres, nearly 3 square miles. Of the 75.86 acres of commercial in the PUD, only 32 acres lie in Activity Center #11 and it is 100% built out with no vacant land available. To summarize Activity Center #11, while an analysis of the PUD monitoring report may give the appearance that a significant amount of retail square footage could be constructed, the reality is that only 4 parcels of land totaling less than 3 acres is un- built, which would support just over 20,000 square feet of retail development. Similarly, summary of the staff analysis for Activity Center #13 shows that of the 306 acres of land cited in the staff report, only 26 acres, or 8% is vacant and available for development. This would support less than 200,000 square feet versus the 325,094 sq. ft. cited as undeveloped square footage. All of these 26 acres lie within the Pine Air Lakes DRI, some of which is of sufficient depth to accommodate the largest of the big -box retailers. The Buckley site may compete with Pine Air Lakes for the small to mid -sized retailers but is not a site that could accommodate the needs of the very large discount type of retailers. For example, new Super Target, Wal -Mart, etc. have minimum depths in the 800 —900 foot range with the two older Wal -Marts being over 700 feet in depth. The Buckley site by comparison is only 500 feet in depth, so when ft comes to competing for the true big -box retailers, the Buckley site cannot even enter the race. 2 Packet Page -54- 11/12/2013 9.A. Staffs analysis of available Commercial also includes the Orange Blossom Mixed Use sub - district, also known as the Longview Center PUD, totaling 14.75 acres with up to 143,500 square feet of commercial development allowed. This Subdistrict contains many of the same regulations and restrictions as the Buckley parcel, with an even more stringent cap on commercial building size. Another unfortunate example of the failed mixed -use concept on smaller parcels, this project will in all likelihood need to be re- tooled at some point if it were to move forward in the current marketplace. The last example Staff cites in their analysis is the Orange Blossom / Airport Roads Commercial Sub - district which consists of 2 — 5 acre parcels. Both parcels are limited to fraternal and institutional uses and professional or general office uses. Neither parcel has the ability under the current GMP to develop with retail commercial so while they may permit some commercial development, it is not in the same category as what I permitted on the Buckley parcel. When you look closely at the land within the areas identified in the staff report, less than 6% of this total is actually zoned for retail development and available, and the vast majority of that amount lies within the Pine Air Lakes development, a project geared toward the largest of the large retailers as its target market. The petitioner believes that the low availability of raw land for retail commercial development is insufficient to meet the current and future demands of the area. The data and analysis provided by the applicant looked at land that is 1. Vacant 2. Zoned for retail commercial development 3. And Fronting a collector or arterial Road. Our primary focus was the Airport Road Corridor, which has an established, commercial pattern of development. This is supported by Planning staffs testimony in 2001 where they cite the presence of commercial zoning in the area of the Buckley parcel as well as activity centers 11 and 13 as commercial 'anchors' formed the basis for their support commercial development was appropriate in this location. The airport road corridor is a key corridor for commercial business, and this site has the potential to capture a significant number of trips that are already on Airport Road, accessing existing businesses for residents in the area. Within one mile of the subject site, only two parcels are available, totaling 2.3 acres. These two parcels were not included in our original analysis, but are the only two parcels within one mile of the site that could accommodate retail commercial and have visibility from a major roadway. Extending out to a two -mile radius, you see the addition of the land within Pine Air Lakes in addition to three other parcels. The total acreage of parcels shown on this exhibit is just over 51 acres, 26 acres of which lies within the Pine Air Lakes DRI as previously discussed. Extending out to 3 miles, which translates to drive distances in some cases of more than 4.5 miles from the subject site, we begin to see some of the land located in the 1 -75 Interchange Activity Center on Pine Ridge Road. Many of these PUD's have Sunset, several have no current viable access due to interconnection requirements, and a couple are not adjacent to or visible from the roadway and would not compete with the Buckley parcel, but we have chosen to include them anyway. n 3 Packet Page -55- 11/12/2013 9.A. Looking to the Northeast, you see primarily the Creekside Commerce Park, more than 3 miles driving distance from the subject property. While there exists almost 27 vacant acres, as cited in the Naples Daily News in September, a new hospital is planned for this land, scheduled to open in 2015. This could spark additional medical related development in Creekside with the co- location of NCH north and the new hospital. Using the two mile radius as a market area, the total area is more than 2,000 acres, 52 acres of which, or less than 3% remains available for commercial development. Of that 3 %, half is located in Pine Air Lakes, and only ONE TENTH OF 1 PERCENT of this area lies within one mile of the subject property and meets the criteria to be considered 'developer ready'. The information presented by the petitioner identifies the limited availability of pad -ready commercial sites in near proximity to the subject site. The testimony provided by Mr. David Stevens at the CCPC serves to identify an existing and future demand for these kinds of sites along the Airport Road Corridor. When viewed In total, it is the petitioner's position that this proposed change to the GMP will help meet the demand for more community commercial development in the area in a form that is more conducive to what the market requires. 4 Packet Page -56- } w -- .: x r , 3 A r .= J�'(;,�., �1-1 F '`Jl ¢ �,. >} 6 r!I :r' +F, � -'•Y x+'1.1. >.� 5 ioTil 1_ 4. _i " %* - Aap � ire-°' FL I: t Y , f 1 i �` ,• LEGEN =MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER 13 fjh dorl UNDEVELOPED PARCELS MOV fiamam �i.�, r,- •�.c.��.�� ur•+ � ±,� Dui,': ''` `' � ',.. doMW DAVIDSON • \tt � , i`t.:�«'wiG>'i �a+k.' Gr kp}��y' il�s{r1AE'e� I } �' - - y - -�•. � � +� _ LEPEN r.':j'ORANGE BLOSSOMIAIRPORT -• -• r • MMERCIAL SUBDISTR r.':30RANGE BLOSSOM r SUBDISTRICT __FFM�7777 77 r. - n � rt • •. � a ..�. rwur r i i , mamt '- 4 r i I 1 \tt � , i`t.:�«'wiG>'i �a+k.' Gr kp}��y' il�s{r1AE'e� I } �' - - y - -�•. � � +� _ STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 19, 2013 RE: PETITION NO. PL20120002909/CP- 2013 -3, BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT — GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) AGENTS /APPLICANT /OWNER: Agent: Tim Hancock, AICP Davidson Engineering 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples, Florida 34103 Agent: R. Bruce Anderson, Esq. Roetzel & Andress Law Firm 850 Park Shore Drive, Third Floor Naples, Florida 34104 Applicant: McGuire Development Company 560 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, New York 14202 Owner: Airport Pulling Orange Blossom, LLC 560 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, New York 14202 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject site contains approximately 21.7 acres and is located at 7501 Airport Road (CR 31), on the west side of Airport Road, north of Orange Blossom Drive, approximately .23 miles south of Vanderbilt Beach Road (and approximately 1.55 miles north of Pine Ridge Road), in Section 2, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (See aerial map on the following page.) -9- Packet Page -60- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) text by amending the Urban Mixed Use District, specifically the existing Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict to remove the office and retail square feet caps; allow up to 7,500 square feet of gross floor area of commercial uses per acre or 15 residential dwelling units per acre; to make residential development optional; to prohibit commercial and residential uses on the same parcel; to limit multi- tenant commercial buildings to no more than 50% of the commercial square footage in order to provide for stand -alone commercial development; and, to revise development standards, including the elimination of the cap on the size of commercial building footprints. The petitioner's proposed text changes, shown in strike - through /underline format (words underlined are added, words s#FUek- threug# are deleted.), are as follows [This text is reflected in the Resolution Exhibit A; staff - recommended alternative text is located at the end of this Report.]: Proposed Future Land Use Element Text Amendment: [page 41 ] C. Urban Mixed Use District 12. Bucklev Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict is to allow for limited small -slake retail, office and residential uses while ro^, „ring that the project Fes It in ^ t allowing for the development of a mixed -use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large -scale commercial uses, while this Subdistrict is intended to promote small le convenience and intermediate commercial development mixed use develapmeRt with nodos_+r; ^., „rien+ ^then to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is intended We bean example f9F future R;ixed Use RGdeS IpMvidiRg residents with pedestrian GGale development - while- also redUGing will serve to reduce existing trip lengths for GMall SGale convenience and intermediate commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those allowed in the C -1, C -2 and C -3 Zoning Districts except as noted below. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. -2- Packet Page -61- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11 /12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. b. A unified planned development with common architectural theme, which utilizes shared parking and cross accesses. c. Retail Commercial uses will be capped at a maximum of 3,259 7,500 square feet per acre for the total project. d. Offise uses will be Gapped at a maximum of 4,269 6quaFe feet pep aGFe for the total . e. Residential development for multi - family dwelling units will be subject to a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre for the total project. f. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 35% for the total project. g. No more than ° of the total built squaFe footage will be devoted to single steFy buildiRge 50% of the commercial square footage may be constructed as multi- tenant buildings. i .seaendery assessesfaGiRg the street. k. A re6ideRtial GGmpeReRt equal to at least ° of the allawable maximum density must be GORStFUGted befGFe GGMP'etiOR of aR aggFegate total Gf 40,009 squape feet retail 9F eff'Ge 6+696. I. Residential units may be located throughout the Subdistrict, as stand -alone development. M. For each acre of land utilized for residential purposes, 7,500 square feet of commercial buildable square footage will be eliminated for the total square footage allowable. For each acre of commercial square footage built 15 residential units will be eliminated from the maximum allowable number of residential units. n. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. 9. NG buildiRg feetpF.Rt will eXGeed 15,000 squape feet. GemmaR staiFs, breezeways GF p. No building shall exceed three stories in height with no allowance for under building parking. q. Drive - through establishments will be limited to a maximum of 4. Bbanks with shall have no more than three drive - through lanes; these drive - through lanes must be architecturally integrated into the main building. r. No gasoline service stations will be permitted s. All buildings will be connected with pedestrian features. t. . A twenty- foot wide Type C landscape buffer shall be required along all ether perimeter property lines adjacent to residential use. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION: Subject Site: The subject site is zoned PUD, Buckley Mixed Use Planned Unit Development zoning district, and designated Urban (Urban Mixed Use District, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict) on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. The subject site is vacant and mostly cleared. The existing Subdistrict requires integrated residential and commercial mixed use development; allows a maximum density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre; allows up to 3,250 sq. ft. per acre or up to 70,525 sq. ft. of retail uses and up to 4,250 sq. ft. per acre or up to 92,225 sq. ft. of office uses; and contains specific project development standards. -3- Packet Page -62- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Surrounding Lands: North: Brighton Gardens PUD; assisted living facility development; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict West: Emerald Lakes PUD; single - family residential development; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict South: A, Rural Agricultural zoning district, with a Conditional Use for essential service uses; Collier County Headquarters Library and other governmental uses; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict East: Across Airport Rd. (C.R.31), Lakeside of Naples at Citrus Gardens PUD; and, A, Rural Agricultural zoning district, with a Conditional Use for a church; single - family residential development and St. Katherine's Greek Orthodox Church; Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict In summary, the current zoning and existing and planned land uses in the immediate area surrounding the subject property are residential, institutional and community facility uses. BACKGROUND and PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Establishment of the Bucklev Mixed Use Subdistrict (GMP amendment — CP- 2.001_ -2, adopted 5114/02 by Ord. No. 2002 -24) Prior to the establishment of the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict, the subject property was zoned Agricultural and used as a plant nursery. The property at that time was eligible for up to 3 dwelling units per acre (without density bonuses) and a variety of community facility uses and institutional uses, e.g., child care facilities, churches and places of worship, assisted living facilities, adult care facilities, nursing homes, social and fraternal organizations; public and private schools; recreation and open space uses; a variety of agricultural uses; and, essential services. In 2001, the property owner submitted a Growth Management Plan amendment application for a residential and commercial integrated mixed use project. The owner established specific development criteria, a residential density cap of 15 dwelling units per acre, and retail and office caps to ensure the development of a traditional mixed use project on the site. County staff recommended approval of the Subdistrict to the Board of County Commissioners, despite the substantial supply of commercial acreage within the nearby Activity Centers and within other commercial Subdistricts proximate to the subject site, based solely on the premise that the project would provide a bona fide mixed use development that was consistent with County residents' vision for 'new' development as detailed in the County's Community Character Plan. The Board of County Commissioners subsequently approved the Subdistrict as a live- work -play development which promotes walkability, provides for housing opportunities at various price points, and includes provisions for small -scale neighborhood - serving commercial at a pedestrian scale. Proposed Project The proposed amendment to the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict changes the project entirely from its original form. Foremost, the amendment eliminates the required residential and commercial mixed use component from the Subdistrict by making residential development on the site optional, and eliminates the various design elements integral to developing a mixed use project. The proposed project promotes strip and /or big -box shopping center development — typically characterized by oversized parking lots, excessive signage, and total dependence on the automobile for access and circulation. OEM Packet Page -63- 11/12/2013 9.A. CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. The table below provides a summary of the existing and proposed Subdistrict regulations. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Existing Regulations Proposed Regulations Density 326 units 15 DU/A) 326 units 15 DU/A) Integrated Residential & Commercial Development Required Eliminated Residential Development Required Optional Zoning Intensity C -1, C -2, C -3 C -1, C -2, C -3 Retails . ft. CAP 3,250 s . ft./ ac. or 70,525 s . ft. Eliminated Offices . ft. CAP 4,250 s . ft. /ac. or 92,225 s . ft. Eliminated Total Commercial S . Ft. 162,750 s . ft. 162,750 s . ft. Development Standards Multi-story buildings 75% of the total built sq. ft. must be multi-story buildings Eliminated Primary Retail and Commercial Entrances Access must be interior to the site; secondary accesses required for buildings fronting Airport Road. Eliminated Building Height 3- stories 3- stories Maximum Building Footprint 15,000 s . ft. Eliminated Building All sides must have common architectural theme Eliminated — Now subject to LDC requirements - Drive - through Establishments Banks only Maximum of 4 drive - through establishments Landscape buffer along Airport Road 20 ft., Type D buffer Eliminated — Now subject to LDC requirements Buffering along perimeter property lines, except Airport Rd. 20 ft., Type C buffer Eliminated — Now subject to LDC requirements Screening of parking areas Required (Airport Rd. and from properties ad'. to Subdistrict ) Eliminated — Now subject to LDC requirements Mixed -use projects, including the traditional residential over commercial development, and those with office over retail and stand -alone residential on the same site, provide a desirable lifestyle for residents. These developments promote active living, provide housing opportunities at varying price points, provide accessibility to shopping and leisure activities without the dependence on automobiles, and provide a focal point and sense of place for its residents. There are many examples of mixed use developments working throughout the country. Locally, there are varying types of mixed use developments — town centers (Village Walk), village centers (Island Walk and Verona Walk), main streets (5t' Ave. South and 3`d Street South) and mixed use residential over commercial (Mercato, Bayfront, and Ave Maria). These sites are larger than the proposed subject site; however, the mixed -use concept can be creatively applied to infill properties such as the approved Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict (refer to the approved Buckley Mixed Use PUD building sketch and conceptual master plan on page 7). -5- Packet Page -64- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Examples of Local Mixed -Use Development Mercato, Naples 3`d Street South (retailloffice), Naples Mixed Use- Mercato, Digital Image. FL Commercial. Mon. 26 August 2013. <flcommerciel.com> Coconut Point, Estero Mixed Use - Coconut Point, Digital Image. Sellingestero. Mon. 26 August 2013. <sellingestero.com> Mixed Use -3rd, Digital Image. Voices.yahoo. Mon. 26 August 2013. <voicesyahoo. com> Bayfront, Naples Mixed Use- 6ayfront, Digital image. Loopnet. Web. 26 August 2013. <loopnet.com> Ave Maria, Naples Mixed Use —Ave Maria: Naples. Digital image. The Valentines Projects. Mon. 26 August 2013 . <thevaleniinesweb.comlprojects /avemaria.php> 9.2 Packet Page -65- lip! r • - f p . i i i — p h n an r� • BOB I id" J 3 1 TIM c. It-��,... sF+ 3 1 CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. STAFF ANALYSIS: -- Appropriateness of Change If approved as submitted, this Growth Management Plan amendment will potentially result in the introduction of varying types of commercial development — big -box, fast -food, 24 -hour convenience, etc., and other activities — to an area not contemplated for these uses. Consequently, the proposed amendment has the potential for impacting the stability of residential and other established uses within the immediate area. The suitability of the proposed Growth Management Plan amendment to accommodate the petition's request is to be established through an evaluation of relevant and appropriate data for population growth, commercial inventory, infrastructure development, and other considerations in the surrounding area. The compatibility of potential big -box development, fast -food restaurants, 24 -hour convenience commercial development, etc. with its surrounding land uses will need to be addressed in the consideration of the companion Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment request. Density Allowances pursuant to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Density Bonus Provisions Base Density (applicable to subject site) • Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Subdistrict — Up to 4 dwelling units per acre Bonus Densities • Activity Center — Up to 16 dwelling units per acre • Proximity to a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center (Residential Density Band) — Up to 3 additional dwelling units per acre • Affordable Housing — Up to 8 additional dwelling units per acre • Roadway Access — Up to 1 additional dwelling unit per acre • Residential Infill development — Up to 3 additional dwelling units per acre • Conversion of Commercial Zoning — Up to 16 dwelling units per acre • Transfer of Development Rights — variable unit count • Transportation Concurrency Management Area — Up to 3 dwelling units per acre The proposed amendment to the Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict allows for the retention of the project's residential density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre without developing a mixed use project or complying with the various FLUE density bonus provisions identified above. It should be noted that the density approved for this mixed use development was deemed compatible with other densities in the area, however, those projects with similar high densities complied with the provisions of the FLUE (density bonuses or clustering). Commercial Development and Analysis Commercial development is not planned or approved adjacent to the subject site. However, there is a substantial amount of commercial development planned or developed within a 1 -mile and 2 -mile radius from the subject site. The subject project is located within the segment of Airport Road (CR 31) between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Pine Ridge Road (CR 896), anchored at each of these intersections by Mixed Use Activity Center Commercial Subdistricts. The Activity Centers (see red squares on page 9 map) were comprehensively planned to provide sufficient commercial development opportunities. These planned locations are purposely sized and spatially arranged to encourage and support the business environment and to discourage and avoid over commercialization and strip development throughout the County. Packet Page -67- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Activity Centers Proximate to the Subject Site 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Activity Center # 11 (Airport Rd. and Vanderbilt Beach Rd.): The mid -point of this Activity Center is located approximately '% mile north of the subject site (refer to green area on above map) and the closest commercial zoning and development is ±500 feet north of the Subdistrict. The Center consists of approximately 188 acres and is permitted for up to ±1,249,600 square feet of commercial development. The range of uses includes, but is not limited to: restaurants, retail, and office — situated on stand -alone sites and within the traditional shopping center configuration. Below is a summary of developed and undeveloped commercial acreage within Activity Center 11: • Southwest Quadrant of Airport Rd. & Vanderbilt Beach Rd. — Walgreen's PUD (15.68 ac. /156,800 sq. ft, with 78,904 sq. ft. undeveloped); Fountain Park PUD (10.14 ac.171,400 sq. ft.); and, Venetian Plaza PUD (6.02 ac. /90,000 sq. ft., with 15,000 sq. ft. undeveloped) • Northwest and Northeast Quadrants of Airport Rd. & Vanderbilt Beach Rd. — Pelican Marsh PUD /DRI (80 ac./331,400 sq. ft.) • Southeast Quadrant of Airport Rd. & Vanderbilt Beach Rd. — Vineyards PUD (75.86 ac. /600,000 sq. ft, with approximately 82% of sq. ft. developed.) Activity Center # 13 (Airport- Pulling Rd. and Pine Ridge Rd.): The mid -point of this Activity Center is located approximately 1 -mile south of the subject site (refer to green area on above map) and the closest commercial zoning and development is +2/3 mile south of the Subdistrict. The Center consists of 306 acres and is permitted for up to ±2,275,017 square feet of commercial development. The range of uses includes, but is not limited to: Big -box development such as "category killers" (PetCo, Sports Authority, Bed, Bath and Beyond, Toys R Us, Staples and more), grocers, restaurants, general retail, and office — situated on stand -alone sites and within the traditional shopping center configuration. "0 Packet Page -68- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Below is a summary of developed and undeveloped commercial acreage within Activity Center 13: • Southwest Quadrant of Airport Pulling Rd. & Pine Ridge Rd. — Falls PUD (32.50 ac. /280,000 sq. ft.) • Southeast Quadrant of Airport Pulling Rd. & Pine Ridge Rd. — Carillon PUD (24.01 ac./319,000 sq. ft., with 16,641 sq. ft. undeveloped) • Northwest and Northeast Quadrants of Airport Pulling Rd. & Pine Ridge Rd. — Pine Air Lakes PUD /DRI (148.99 ac./1,075,000 sq. ft., with 308,453 sq. ft. undeveloped); and approximately 100 acres of non -PUD commercial zoning and with over 601,017 sq. ft. of commercial development within these two quadrants. Commercial Subdistricts outside of Activity Centers 11 & 13: In addition to the commercial acreage within Activity Centers 11 and 13, there are other site - specific commercial subdistricts located proximate to the subject site that provide commercial development opportunities. These include, but are not limited to, the following: • Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict — Longview Center PUD (14.75 acres /143,500 sq. ft of commercial) located across Airport- Pulling Rd., and southeast of the subject site — Undeveloped • Orange Blossom /Airport Crossroads Commercial Subdistrict — Two 5 -acre parcels (10 acres /74,000 sq. ft. of C -1 commercial and other uses) located across Orange Blossom Dr., south of the subject site — Undeveloped (except existing Italian American clubhouse facility) The above - listed commercial sites (Activity Center and non - Activity Center) provide a total of over 3,742,117 square feet of commercial use opportunities in all commercial category ranges, including but not limited to, professional and general office, convenience, intermediate or neighborhood serving, general or community serving, and, etc. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Amendment: The proposed changes to this Subdistrict could potentially add up to 162,700 sq. ft. of community serving commercial land uses, including big -box development (e.g. large scale sporting goods, auto supply, office supply, pet supply, discount supermarket, etc.), 24 -hour convenience and /or strip -style neighborhood shopping, banks, fast -food restaurants, etc., in an area already saturated with these same uses, and on a transitional infill site suitable for lower intensity commercial development. Conversely, development of a mixed use project would provide housing opportunities at varying price points, shopping and employment opportunities for the residents within the community, and provide a development that is complimentary and of a scale consistent with the surrounding land uses — Emerald Lakes single - family development (west of site), Brighton Gardens assisted living facility (north of site), County Library and other government services (south of site), and residential development across Airport- Pulling Road (Lakeside and the future development of the Orange Blossom Mixed Use Subdistrict). Staff Summarization of the Data Submitted in Support of the GMPA Request The GMPA application package includes the narrative (dated August 9, 2013) in response to staff's request for data and analysis, Exhibit Q "Commercial Properties," and Exhibit R, a Bergstrom Center report titled Survey of Emerging Market Conditions, to support their requested amendment. The commercial support documentation submitted with this GMP amendment petition does not describe a "market area," but instead consists of a listing of vacant commercial lands within a 3 -mile radial distance from the subject site that would potentially accommodate stand -alone or "pad ready" commercial development, similar to what is being proposed by the subject Growth Management Plan Amendment. The table on page 11 is a summary of those commercial lands that may be suitable for national retailers (see Exhibit "S" of the GMPA submittal for retailer listing) potentially looking to enter the Collier County commercial market. _10- Packet Page -69- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Undeveloped properties within 2 -miles Undevelo ed properties °within 3' =miles Zoning Location Acreage Zoning Location Acreage CPUD Pine Air Lakes 1.09 CPUD Creekside 1.33 CPUD Pine Air Lakes 8.89 CPUD Creekside 1.61 CPUD Pine Air Lakes 4.68 CPUD Creekside 2.04 CPUD Pine Air Lakes 11.36 CPUD Creekside 21.94 CPUD Cambridge Sq. 10.56 CPUD Gasper Station 12.07 MPUD Bradford S . 9.04 CPUD Clesen 4.19 PUD P. Rid e Commons 3.94 CPUD Pine View 5.65 MPUD Malibu Lakes 1.50 PUD P.R. Corners 4.22 PUD An ileri 2.24 PUD Ra ge 3.60 PUD Naples Gateway 1.85 PUD P. R. Center West 4.15 C-4 Naples Twin Lakes 1.32 TOTAL 49.56 acres or the equivalent of 371,700 sq. ft. (assuming 7,500 sq. ft /ac. ) TOTAL 67.71 ac. or the equivalent of 507,825 sq. ft. (assuming 7,500 sq. ft. /ac. Note: This listing does not include stand -alone properties within the 3 -mile radius of the subject site that are built, but vacant (such as available building space in Galleria located in the northwest quadrant of Vanderbilt Beach Rd. /Airport Rd., and in Pine Air Lakes PUD /DRI); nor does the listing include commercial lands that have the potential to be redeveloped with stand -alone commercial uses, e.g. acreage within the Activity Centers. The applicant's "Commercial Properties" listing indicates that there is approximately 49.56 acres of vacant commercial land with the potential for up to 371,000 square feet of stand -alone commercial development within 2 -miles of the subject site, and another 67.71 acres of vacant commercial land with the potential for up to 507,825 square feet for stand -alone commercial development within 3 -miles of the subject site. The total acreage and potential square feet for stand -alone commercial development is 117.27 acres and 879,525 square feet, respectively. This potential developable square feet, combined with the projected commercial square feet within the Activity Centers and commercial subdistricts, provides ample commercial opportunities proximate to the surrounding residential areas for all commercial categories in both stand -alone and shopping center configurations. The Bergstrom Center Report generally describes the outlook on the residential and commercial markets within the southwest coast of Florida as positive and further describes that these markets are trending upwards. However, this information is not specific to the Naples' area market or the subject site. Information from local sources, such as the Naples Area Board of Realtors, confirm that residential inventory in the Naples area is decreasing while demand is strong, and interest in multi - family (apartments) is increasing. Additionally, office and retail rents are on the rise due to vacant inventory slowly being absorbed. However, demand for new commercial development will continue to be slow, except for the occasional end -user. Finally, all market sectors appear to be improving as the health of the local economy improves. - 11 - Packet Page -70- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Environmental Impacts: n The subject property was previously cleared and used for row crops in 1975, according to an aerial on the Property Appraiser's website. As a result, the property qualifies for an agricultural clearing permit exemption pursuant to Section 10.02.06 D.1.f. of the Land Development Code. Native vegetation present on -site would not be required to be retained. Given the location and present condition of the property, listed species would not likely occur on site. Base on these findings, the subject proposal was found to be consistent with the applicable provision of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Historical and Archaeolooical Impacts: Historic, archaeological or other cultural resources have not been identified as being present on the subject property, based on a review of the Florida Master Site File by the Division of Historical Resources of the Florida Department of State. The Master Site File is the State of Florida's official inventory of historical and cultural resources. The project will be subject to the accidental discovery of archaeological or historical sites, as required by Policy 11.1.3. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and Section 2.03.07 E of the Land Development Code. Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Analysis and Impact: A Traffic Impact Statement, dated July 12, 2013, was prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Solutions and submitted with this petition. Transportation Planners with the County's Transportation Planning Section reviewed the impact analysis and provided the following comments: The analysis provides a comparison between the existing development allowed within the approved Subdistrict and the proposed land uses allowed by the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Based on the analysis, staff determined that there is the possibility for an increase in total net new trips of 58. Directionally distributed there would be approximately 17 additional trips in any given direction, which would have an insignificant impact on the adjacent roadway network. As a result, there are no anticipated adverse impacts to the existing level of service on Airport Road or Orange Blossom Drive expected to occur with the approval of this Plan amendment. It should be noted that project impacts will be analyzed again for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan at the time of request for zoning change, and concurrency and operational impacts will be evaluated at the time of request for local development orders (SDP, Plat, etc.). Public Facilities Impacts: The petitioner prepared Public Facilities calculations, which were submitted with this petition. In summary, the proposed project (based on the land uses identified below) results in a reduction of impacts on certain Category A public facilities (potable water, sanitary sewer, drainage, and solid waste), while potentially resulting in an increase in vehicle trips on adjacent roadways (refer to TIS and transportation summary above). Existing Subdistrict Proposed Subdistrict Land Use Water /Sewer Solid Waste Land Use Water /Sewer Solid Waste Total GPD Total lbs. Total GPD Total lbs. Neighborhood Neighborhood Shopping Center 7,053 430,233 Shopping Center 12,275 779,275 70,530 s . ft. (122,750 s . ft. Restaurant Restaurant 150 seats 6,000 1 Not provided 150 seats 6,000 Not provided- Office — Low Rise Office — Low Rise 46,113 s . ft. 6,917 170,618 15,000 s . ft. 2,250 74,000 -12- Packet Page -71- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Office — Medical 46,112 s . ft. 11,210 188,137 Office — Medical 20,000 s . ft. 5,015 61,200 Residential 326 DUs 97,800 1,349,314 Total 128,980 2,138,302 Total 25,540 914,475 OR Residential 326 DUs 97,800 1,349,314 Total 97,800 1,349,314 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by Land Development Code Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on July 30, 2013, in the Sugden Room of the North County Library Headquarters, located at 2385 Orange Blossom Drive. Approximately 21 persons other than the applicant's team and County staff attended the NIM, and heard the following information: Tim Hancock, the applicant's agent, provided a full description of the proposed development to the group gathered, including discussion about the maximum residential density of 15 dwelling units per acre and the commercial cap of 7,500 sq. ft. per acre. Mr. Hancock described the differences between the existing Growth Management Plan Subdistrict and the proposed Subdistrict. The public speakers' questions are noted in italicized text, followed by the agent's [Tim Hancock] responses in bold text. Question #1. How many stories will the building be? Two stories are being proposed from the currently approved three stories, however that change is not part of the growth management plan amendment and will occur during the zoning process. Question #2. How far will the setback be from Airport Pulling Road? Toys R Us was built so close to Airport Pulling Road and had to provide plants and trees to soften the look. The growth management plan does not deal with setback requirements and this will be addressed during the zoning process. He explained that the minimum setback requirement is 25 feet and current architectural standards and the land development code would apply to this project. Question #3. What will the traffic impact be on Orange Blossom and Airport Pulling Road? Collier County Transportation issued a traffic study and our property at the Naples Italian American Club was required to expand the left turn lane. The uses being proposed are equal to or less intense than what is currently approved. Tim explained that the Naples Italian America Club could contact him after the meeting or the County Transportation department to discuss questions regarding their development contribution agreement. Question #4. If the proposed changes are approved will there only be commercial or could there also be residential? It is possible for both residential and commercial but they would have to be on separate parcels and there is the possibility for 100% residential. Question #5. Would a big box store be allowed? There is no size limitation but that larger stores like Home Depot or Target are nearly impossible on a site of this size and configuration. Tim pointed out that the majority of big box stores prefer to be at a signalized major intersection which this property will not have. Question #6. We have 15-20 houses in the back of Emerald Lakes, how far are they going back with this property. How much room are they going to leave for the people back there? They could end up with dumpsters or big lights at the back of their houses. -13- Packet Page -72- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11 /12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. The current zoning for this property requires a 100 foot setback and that no one can be closer than n 100 feet to the rear property line. The setback requirement will be determined at the time of zoning and there is no intention of putting the building closer than 100 feet of the property line. In reference to the second part of the question, the PUD does not currently limit the location of dumpsters and will be further addressed during the zoning process. The lighting requirements will also be addressed during the zoning process. The growth management plan amendment does not address those requirements. The next neighborhood information meeting being held for the zoning process will address those items and will be held approximately around November to December of this year. Question V. Do you have commercial buildings committed to the project? There are a couple of prospects but there are currently no letters of intent or commitments. Question #8. Do you have any idea what the square footage will be of the individual residential units? It Is not the intent to build residential units but if maximum density were built the approximate square footage would be 1,000 -1,200 s.f. Question #9. You say maximum commercial is going to be a C -3? Yes, the proposed land uses are consistent with C -1 thru C -3 zoning. Tim further explained that there are 5 commercial zoned categories, C -1 being the least intensive and C -5 being almost industrial. C -3 is intermediate and allows for retail and office such as restaurants and banks, and C-4 is more typical of a shopping center. Question #10. Those three arrows that are there, those are the access and whatever that other word is? The only reason Lakeside is concerned about this is that this is our only way out, we only have one entrance, one exit, most other places have at least two and have tried to get a traffic light in the past. Those are consistent with what is currently approved and explained the location of the main access points. Tim agreed that a traffic light would be preferred and explained that because the access is divided the projects turning movements would not affect Lakeside's left in turning movements nor cause any additional back up or make it unsafe. A traffic signal at the entrance however, is very unlikely. Tim stated that at the time of zoning they will propose an interconnection to the library and having this interconnection could keep people going to the library off the intersection. Due to security reasons interconnection to the assisted living facility are not allowed. Question #11. 1 live right on Milpond Circle across the street from the Buckley property, when you say 25 feet do you mean from the street? Clarified the 25 feet he was referring to is the setback from Airport Pulling Road could be as close to as 25 feet. The total distance from homes to buildings across the lake would be approximately 200 feet and this will be clearly identified during the zoning process. [Tim again reviewed the Exhibits and the proposed Development Plan.] Question #12. That set back is from the right of way not the edge of the road. That is correct, from the edge of the right of way, the setback is another 25 feet beyond that. Question #13. If the master plan is successful when do you intend the start of construction? The growth management plan process would need to be completed along with the zoning and platting of the property. Once the property has been platted construction of the infrastructure, water, sewer and internal roadways could commence with the earliest being the first or second quarter of next year. The building would commence at best, in approximately a year to 18 months. Question #14. You can't really start anything without commitment from the people moving in there, whether commercial or residential, can you? The intent is to put the infrastructure in allowing the property to be "developer ready" as soon as possible. -14- Packet Page -73- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. Question #15. 1 do not have a question but you eloquently said at the last meeting 'something is going to be built here" and what you are building there and are proposing to build there is the least offensive to everybody.... is that not correct? Yes, ideally, we all want to live next to a park, but what is being proposed is less intensive than what is currently approved. Tim again referred to exhibits showing the currently approved development and what could be built vs. the proposed development. Question #16. Will the parking be facing Airport Pulling Road? The development has not reached the point of the parking design but generally speaking, the parking will surround the building. Because of the 100 foot setback there will be some parking in the rear but most commercial businesses want to have some parking between the road and their business to show activity and livelihood. Question #17. Will the fagade of the building be facing Airport Pulling Road? The design intent is to have access from the rear of the property and the building fagade to primarily face Airport Pulling Road and explained again that this would be further discussed during the zoning process. Question #18. The architectural ordinance states that the nice face of the building has to face the road. Correct and because Airport Pulling Road is a collector or arterial road, the building has to meet architectural standards along Airport Pulling Road. Tim further explained these are considered outparcels with other sides being secondary facades. All four facades of the building will have a degree of architecture but the primary fagade has to be the one facing Airport Pulling Road. The agent encouraged representatives from the public to contact him with any additional questions or concerns. The meeting was completed by 6:15 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by T. Hamlin, Senior Project Manager with Davidson Engineering, with edits provided by M. Mosca, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The following are findings and conclusions as a result of the review and evaluation of this GMPA request: The subject property was originally approved for mixed use development only — not stand -alone commercial and residential development. The approved density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre was approved in order to incentivize the development of a traditional residential over commercial mixed use project. Additionally, the square feet caps placed on office (92,225 sq.ft.) and retail (70,525 sq.ft.) development along with the stringent development standards approved for the Subdistrict further ensured the development of a mixed use, pedestrian scale project with low intensity commercial uses. Based on the total existing and potential commercial development within a 3 -mile radius of the subject site, there is no additional need for the proposed commercial uses contemplated by this amendment to serve the surrounding residential areas. In addition to commercial opportunities within the Activity Centers, there are over 117 acres of vacant, documented commercial lands available for the stand - alone /pad ready commercial uses proposed. Further, existing commercial acreage is adequate to meet the demand for all types of commercial development, including those proposed by the subject amendment. • The petition's data and analysis attempts to substantiate the need for stand -alone or "pad ready" development for potential national retailers wanting to enter the Collier County commercial market, but fails to do so. _15- Packet Page -74- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.C. n Any expansion of commercial development should be driven by the policies and provisions of the Future Land Use Element, not by speculative development attempting to meet a perceived demand. • Local indicators suggest that new commercial development will continue to be slow within the County, except for the occasional end -user. • Local indicators suggest that residential inventory is decreasing while demand is strong, and interest in multi - family (apartments) is increasing. • As a result of this amendment, there are no significant impacts to public facilities, as defined in the Capital Improvement Element, with respect to Transportation, Potable Water, Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater Drainage and Solid Waste facilities. Staff finds that the data and analysis for the subject Growth Management Plan amendment does not support the proposed changes to eliminate the mixed use development requirement within the Subdistrict and replace it with a high density residential option and /or big -box and /or stand -alone commercial and /or strip -style commercial development. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report has been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 2012 -2, as submitted, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation not to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. However, staff would recommend transmittal of either of the following two alternatives: ALTERNATIVE 1: MIXED USE 12. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict, which comprises approximately 21.7 acres, is to provide for a mixed -use development consisting of residential uses and limited small -scale retail, office and personal service uses, built at a pedestrian scale and with pedestrian orientation. The allowable commercial uses are intended to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area thereby reducing existing trip lengths for small -scale commercial services. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. Residential uses are allowed at a density of 10 dwelling units per acre, calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreage, yielding a maximum of 217 dwelling units. c. Commercial uses are limited to those permitted and conditional uses allowed in the C -1, C -2 and C -3 Zoning Districts, except as further restricted herein. d. Commercial uses shall be capped at a maximum of 162,750 square feet of gross floor area. e. Individual commercial users shall not exceed a maximum gross floor area of 15,000 square feet. f. Drive - through establishments shall be limited to a maximum of two, and no such establishment shall have more than three drive - through lanes. All drive - through lanes shall be architecturally integrated into the main building. g. Gasoline service stations, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants are prohibited. -16- Packet Page -75- 11/12/2013 9.A. CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict Agenda Item 9.C. h. A residential component equal to at least 25% of the allowable maximum density (i.e. 54 dwelling units) must be constructed before completion of an aggregate total of 40,000 square feet of retail, office or personal service uses. i. Residential uses may be in stand -alone buildings or may be integrated into mixed use buildings with commercial uses. Integration of residential and office, retail or personal service uses in the same building is encouraged. j. The Subdistrict shall be developed with a common theme for architecture, signage, lighting and landscaping. k. All buildings shall be connected with pedestrian pathways. I. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. ALTERNATIVE 2: RESIDENTIAUCOMMUNITY FACILITY 12. Buckley Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict, which comprises approximately 21.7 acres, is to allow for medium density residential development and the non - residential uses as generally allowed in the Urban designation. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. The base density allowed is seven (7) dwelling units per acre, by right, calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreage, yielding a maximum of 152 dwelling units. c. Other than the base density, the Density Rating System shall be applicable. d. All residential unit types are allowed except mobile homes. e. Non - residential uses are allowed as generally provided for in the Urban designation, e.g. community facilities, essential services, parks, recreation and open space, etc. f. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. However, IF the CCPC should determine that this petition, as submitted, provides appropriate data and analysis that warrant a recommendation to approve for transmittal, staff recommends minor modifications to the proposed Subdistrict language as shown below. (Note: single underline text is added, and single stFikat#r-swg# text is deleted, as proposed by petitioner; double underline text is added, and double e text is deleted, as proposed by staff.) In the intent (first) paragraph, insert text (Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those permitted and conditional uses allowed in the C -1, C -2 and C -3 Zoning Districts except as noted below.) In existing paragraph g., insert text (No more than ° of the total built squaFe feetage will be devoted *;v steFy buildings 50% (uq to 81.375 sa. ft.) of the commercial square footage may be constructed as multi- tenant buildings.) Re -letter paragraphs as necessary to correlate with paragraph deletions -17- Packet Page -76- CP- 2013 -3, Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict PREPARED BY: r Z.�L�z� DATE: - 3 M_ ele R. Mosca,.AICP, in, icipal fanner ,'Comprehensive,/.Planning Section Planning and Zoning Department 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda item v.t;. �. 'A' ---- -- c'�,,�3� f / 3 REVIEWED BY —4 DATE. ✓ Uavid Weeks, AICP, GIMP Manager ` Comprehensive Planning Section Planning and Zoning Department REVIEWED BY: DATE: $ Michael Bosi, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning Department Growth Management Division APPROVED BY:", if f DATE: salan inis r �—.. Growth Man gement Division PETITION NO. CP- 2013 -3 0)°3`13 NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 12, 2013 BCC Meeting. -18- Packet Page -77- 11/12/2013 9.A. RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO REVISE THE BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT OF THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO REMOVE THE OFFICE AND RETAIL CAPS AND ALLOW UP TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF COMMERCIAL USES PER ACRE OR 11 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, TO MAKE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONAL, TO PROHIBIT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SAME PARCEL, TO LIMIT MULTI - TENANT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TO NO MORE THAN 50% OF THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, TO REVISE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INCLUDING THE CAP ON THE SIZE OF THE FOOTPRINT OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 21.70 ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AIRPORT ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET NORTH OF ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20120002909/CP- 2013-3] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sea., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Petitioner, McGuire Development Company, has initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2013, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and Words underlined are additions; Words s4-aek flifeugh are deletions * * * * * * * * * * * * are a break in text PL20120002909/CP- 2013 -3 Rev. 10/10/13 Packet Page -78- 11/12/2013 9.A. WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its continents within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day of , 2013. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton -Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit "A" CP\ 13 -CMP- 00901110 GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. Chairwoman Words underlined are additions; Words stpaek thfaug# are deletions 2 * * * * * * * * * * * * are a break in text PL20120002909/CP- 2013 -3 Rev. 10/10/13 Packet Page -79- Exhibit A I. URBAN DESIGNATION A. Urban Mixed Use District 11/12/2013 9.A. CP- 2013 -3 [Page 40] 12. Buckley Mixed Use Subdistrict The intent of this Subdistrict, which comprises 21.7 acres, is to allow for limited sFRall -scale retail, office and residential uses while allowing for the development of a mixed -use development. The Activity Centers to the North and South provide for large -scale commercial uses, while this Subdistrict is intended to promote G^,^'�,,,�-ssale convenience and intermediate commercial development mi *ed use development with to serve existing and future residential development in the immediate area. This Subdistrict is will serve to reduce existing trip lengths for small -scale convenience and intermediate commercial services. Commercial uses for the purpose of this section are limited to those permitted and conditional uses allowed in the C -1, C -2 and C -3 Zoning Districts except as noted below. The development of this Subdistrict will be governed by the following criteria: a. Rezoning is encouraged to be in the form of a PUD. b. A unified planned development With GOMFnen aFGhiteGtWFal theme, whiGh utiliz-&6 Gha=ed Par king and sFassaGesses. The Subdistrict shall be developed with a common theme for architecture signage lighting and landscaping c. Retail Commercial uses will be capped at a maximum of 372,9 162.750 square feet of gross floor area peF aGFe f9F the tetal pFejest. d. offi-- be sapped at a maximum ef 4,250 squaFe feet peF aGpe feF the tetal it- ed. . lesideRtial develepmeRt feF multi family dwelling uRits will be subjeGt t0 of 15 dwelling units peF aGFe f9F the total PK�JeGt. Residential uses are allowed at a density of 11 dwelling units per acre calculated based upon the entire Subdistrict acreaoe, yielding a maximum of 239 dwelling units fe. Maximum lot coverage for buildings is capped at 35% for the total project. gf. No more than ° ef the total built squaFe feetage will be devoted te SiRgle StGFY buildings 50% of the commercial square footage may be constructed as multi- tenant buildings. theme. ftem the onteFieF 9f the site, Buildings .,- #ORtiRg en AiFpoFt Read will PFOVide j. A FesideRtial GempeReRt equal to at least o maximum dens4y Fetail eF offirs uses. kg . Residential uses may be in stand -alone buildings or may be integrated into mixed use buildings with commercial uses. Integration of residential and office retail or personal service uses in the same building is encouraged [Single underline text is added, and single strike thFeugh text is deleted.] Packet Page -80- 11/12/2013 9.A. I-h. . _ o of the eemmeFGial sqUaFe feetage shall be withiR Mixed use For each acre of land utilized for residential purposes. 7,500 square feet of commercial buildable square footage will be eliminated for the total square footage allowable. For each acre of commercial square footage built, 11 residential units will be eliminated from the maximum allowable number of residential units. fw. Pedestrian connections are encouraged to all perimeter properties. fl. No buildiRg feetpFint will eXGeed Individual commercial users shall be limited to a maximum gross floor area of 100.000 15,899 square feet. Gemmqn st , ek. No building shall exceed three stories in height with no allowance for under building parking. pl. Drive - through establishments will shall be limited to a maximum of four. Only one of these drive - through establishments shall be allowed for a fast -food restaurant, and no drive - through establishment shall have DIES with F;G more than three drive - through lanes„ these All drive - through lanes must be architecturally integrated into the main building. gm.Na g jasoline service stations and convenience stores are prohibited. will be wed- fn. All buildings will shall be connected with pedestrian pathways fea#UFes. so. A twenty feet wide landsrape Type ID bUffeF shall be FeqUiFed al9Rg AiFPGFt PUlliRg Read. A twenty -foot wide Type C landscape buffer shall be required along all etheF perimeter property lines adjacent to residential use. ac�aGent to this SubdiStFiSt-. [Single underline text is added, and single StFike thFo gh text is deleted.] Packet Page -81- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. poifr6r �aic-kzty STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION /PLANNING AND REGULATION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 19, 2013 RE: PETITION CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365, Growth Management Plan Amendment (TRANSMITTAL HEARING) APPLICANTS /AGENTS: Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc. William Barton, Corporate Secretary 9393 Vanderbilt Beach Road Naples, Florida 34120 Margaret Perry, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 200 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34105 Naples, Florida 34103 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The ±554 acre subject property is located on north side of [the eastern terminal end of] Vanderbilt Beach Road, in Section 31, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. The Cypress Canal abuts the southerly boundary, and the northern terminal ends of 17th St. NW thru 23`d St. NW are across this stormwater management canal to south. REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan to re- designate the subject site from Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District (RFMUD) Neutral Lands to RFMUD Receiving Lands, affecting approximately 553.7 acres. This re- designation would allow for an increase in residential density from 1 dwelling unit/5 acres to 1 dwelling unit/acre for non -Rural Village development, through participation in the TDR program; allow for development of a Rural Village (density of 2- 3 dwelling units /acre; commercial, civic and recreational uses; greenbelt on the project perimeter), also through participation in the TDR program; and, decrease the native vegetation retention requirement from 60% to 40% of the native vegetation present on site. -1- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -82- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Site: The subject site is zoned A- MHO- RFMUO, Neutral Lands (Rural Agricultural District - Mobile Home Overlay, Rural Fringe Mixed Use - Neutral Lands Overlay) and designated Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands on the Future Land Use Map. The subject site is partially developed with a golf course and is elsewhere wooded lands. Surrounding Lands: North: Lands to the north of the subject site are zoned A- MHO- RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. Conservation Collier lands and an adjacent Wildlife Corridor lie immediately north of the "Existing Conservation Easement" located at the northeast comer of the subject site. With the exception of scattered large -lot single - family residences built on Richmond Street, Krapke Road, Rivers Road and Moulder Drive, this area is also a portion of undeveloped TwinEagles AGR South. There are some nursery and land care businesses, horse stables and equestrian facilities, and other rural businesses in this area. The southern terminal ends of [all but one of] these rural roads do not reach as far south as the subject site. The maximum density achievable for non -Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. West: Lands to the west of the subject site are zoned A- RFMUO, Receiving Lands and designated Agricultural/Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map. They are currently developed with a golf course (Golf Club of the Everglades). This neighbor has approached the County with the prospect of combining their property with the subject site to develop a unified residential community. The maximum density achievable for n non -Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. South: Lands to the south of the subject site are zoned E- Estates, and designated Estates on the Future Land Use Map. This area is developed with single - family residences in the antiquated Golden Gate Estates subdivision. Residential density for residential estates is 1 dwelling unit per 2.25 acres, or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/parcel of record. East: The zoning on lands to the east of the subject site is split between A- MHO- RFMUO, Sending Lands - designated Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands on the Future Land Use Map (southerly portion), and A- MHO- RFMUO, Receiving Lands - designated Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map (northerly portion). A 300 -foot wide linear Wildlife Corridor lies between the subject site and developable lands to the east. With the exception of a few residences, this area is undeveloped. This neighbor has submitted the preliminary plat plans to the County to develop a residential community, as TwinEagles Phase III. Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres, or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/parcel of record, in Sending Lands. The maximum density achievable for non -Rural Village Receiving Lands' development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through participation in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. In summary, the existing land uses in the area immediately surrounding the subject site are predominantly undeveloped or sparsely developed rural -type residential. The Receiving Lands FLUM designation allows the same land uses in these areas as proposed on the subject site, -2- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -83- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. except to the south and except on Conservation Collier lands, the adjacent Wildlife Corridor and the Sending Lands to the north and east. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations - History of the Rural Fringe GMP Amendments: The Govemor and Cabinet issued a Final Order on June 22, 1999, pertaining to GMP amendments adopted in 1997 pursuant to the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The Final Order required the County to conduct a Rural and Agricultural Assessment for the Rural and Conservation Designated lands within the County, and then adopt measures to protect natural resources such as wetlands, wildlife and their habitats, and prevent the premature conversion of unique agricultural lands to other uses. This was to be accomplished while directing incompatible land uses away from these sensitive lands by employing creative land planning techniques. The Final Order allowed the County to conduct this Assessment in phases. Accordingly, the County divided the Assessment into two geographical areas, the Rural Fringe Area and the Eastern (Rural) Lands Area. Relevant to this petition, the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ( RFMUD) was established. The RFMUD represents a transitional area between Golden Gate Estates and the County's urban area, and between the urban area and vast agricultural lands and agricultural operations farther to the east. The RFMUD consists of approximately 73,222 acres and is divided into three distinct designations: Sending Lands L 41,535 acres originally; ± 41,414 acres now), Receiving Lands L 22,020 acres originally; ± 22,373 acres now), and Neutral Lands L 9,667 acres originally; ± 9,427 acres now). Allowable uses, density, and preservation standards vary by designation. Note: If Olde Florida Golf Club amendment is adopted, acreage figures would be closer to: Sending Lands (+ 41,414 ac.) - no change, Receiving Lands L 23,128 ac.), and Neutral Lands L 8,873 ac.). Sending Lands are those lands that have the highest degree of environmental value and sensitivity and generally include significant wetlands, uplands, and habitat for listed species. The preservation standard for non -NRPA (Natural Resource Protection Area) Sending Lands is eighty percent (80 %) of the native vegetation on site while the standard for NRPA Sending Lands is ninety percent (90 %). Density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 40 acres or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/parcel of record (created on or before June 22, 1999). Transfer of development rights from Sending Lands may occur at a rate of 1 dwelling unit credit per five acres (0.2 du /ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/ parcel of record - or as much as 4 dwelling unit credits per five acres or lot of record with use of density bonus credits. Permitted non - residential uses are limited to: agricultural uses, consistent with the Florida Right to Farm Act; habitat preservation and conservation uses; passive parks and other passive recreational uses; sporting and recreational camps; limited essential services; and oil extraction and related processing. Receiving Lands are those lands identified as being the most appropriate for development and to which residential units may be received from areas designated as Sending Lands. The preservation standard for Receiving Lands, except for the North Belle Meade Overlay, is forty percent (40 %) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed twenty -five percent (25 %) of the total site area to be preserved. The base residential density (non -Rural Village development) is -3- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -84- 11 /12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du /ac.) or 1 dwelling unit per legal non - conforming lot/parcel of n record. The maximum density achievable for non -Rural Village development is 1 dwelling unit per acre, through the Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). The minimum and maximum density for Rural Village development within Receiving Lands is 2 dwelling units per acre and 3 dwelling units per acre, respectively, except that the minimum density for Rural Village development on Receiving Lands within the North Belle Meade Overlay is 1.5 dwelling units per acre. Permitted non - residential uses are primarily the same as those uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order in 1999 (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). Neutral Lands are those lands suitable for semi -rural residential development. Generally, Neutral lands have a higher ratio of native vegetation than lands designated as Receiving Lands, but do not have values approaching those in the Sending Lands. The preservation standard for Neutral Lands is sixty percent (60 %) of the native vegetation present, not to exceed forty -five percent (45 %) of the total site area to be preserved. The maximum residential density is limited to 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres (0.2 du /ac.) or legal non - conforming lot/parcel of record. These lands are "neutral" to the TDR program and do not generate or receive residential density. Permitted non - residential uses are primarily the same as the uses permitted in the agricultural zoning district prior to the Final Order in 1999 (e.g. full range of agricultural uses, community facilities, recreational uses, etc.). Considerations Specific to the Olde Florida Golf Club: The Olde Florida Golf Club property lies within the Agricultural /Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ( RFMUD), Neutral Lands, as depicted on Collier County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Neutral Lands designated areas allow golf courses and single - family residential units by right. �. Olde Florida Golf Club was approved by Conditional Use in 1999, and in November 2001, by Site Development Plan (AR- 1383). The 18 -hole golf course, its clubhouse and maintenance facilities occupy the developed portions of the subject site. An existing conservation area comprising approximately 51 acres would remain unchanged. The County's Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program provisions were not applicable at the time of Olde Florida original approval. TDR program provisions apply only to extent that they presently prohibit the transfer of development rights into or out of Neutral Lands. If approved, the Olde Florida development would be eligible to utilize not only the base density entitlements generated by developing property located in Receiving Lands but also the TDR entitlements accompanying the new FLU designation, as the transfer of development rights into the development would no longer be prohibited. Environmental Impacts: Collier County Department of Natural Resources personnel reviewed this petition and provided the following analysis: The GMP amendment proposes to change the FLUM designation of Olde Florida Golf Club from RFMUD Neutral Lands to RFMUD Receiving Lands. The applicant states that adoption of the amendments would allow the petitioner to utilize TDRs from RFMUD Sending Lands and add residential density in the Olde Florida Golf Club. Environmental information submitted with the application, are as follows: FLUCFCS Code map with standard modifiers identifying percent exotic and nuisance vegetation coverage —4- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -85- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. 2. Native vegetation retention calculations based on the updated FLUCFCS Code map, and information in accordance with Ordinance No. 10 -08 3. Listed species survey for the site, dated October 15, 2008 4. A list of state and federal listed species know to inhabit biological communities similar to those fond on site 5. SFWMD and USACOE wetland jurisdiction determinations 6. Cultural resource summary and assessment for the site According to the application submitted, the subject property is 553.7 acres in size. The FLUCFCS Code map provided identifies 88.4 acres of native vegetation within the golf course, 51 acres of native vegetation in existing conservation easement and 246.8 acres of native vegetation outside the golf course, for a total of 386.2 acres of native vegetation on subject property. Exotic vegetation within the native vegetative communities on site are primarily in the E2 (25 -49 %) range, with some areas of E1 (0 -24 %) and E3 (50 -74 %). The same is true of the level of exotic vegetation in the existing conservation easement. According to the Property Appraisers website, the Olde Florida Golf Club is divided into two parcels. The golf course parcel (parcel No. 00219400103) is 254.84 acres and future development parcel (parcel No.00219160003), 299.16 acres. The approved site plans for the Olde Florida Golf Club Clubhouse Facility Expansion (SDPA- 2010 -1104) required exotic vegetation to be removed from the golf course parcel and for it to be maintained free of exotic vegetation in perpetuity. The Olde Florida Golf Club occupies most of Section 31 and falls within one of two Sections of land in Sections 31 & 32, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, both of which were designated as Neutral Lands when the RFMUD was created. These two Sections of land are surrounded by RFMUD Receiving Lands and Estates (Golden Gate Estates). Growth Management Plan amendment number CP- 2004 -2 for the TwinEagles South property changed the FLUM designations of land immediately to the east of Olde Florida Golf Club, from Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands (153 acres) and Sending Lands (79 acres). The 79 acres of Sending Lands approved with the GMP amendment are located at the southern terminus of the property, adjacent to Vanderbilt Beach Road and the golf course at Olde Florida Golf Club. Although not part of the application package, there is a verbal agreement between the owners of TwinEagles South and the local wildlife special interest groups to retain a 300 foot wide wildlife corridor along the west side of TwinEagles South. This wildlife corridor starts by the wildlife underpass at Immokalee Road and terminates at the Sending Lands along Vanderbilt Beach Road, at the southern end of TwinEagles South. This wildlife corridor runs alongside the east side of the existing conservation easement and golf course on Olde Florida Golf Club. There are also approximately 76.74 acres of Conservation Collier land (Rivers Road Preserve) in the area, abutting the north side of Olde Florida Goff Club and west side of the 300 foot wide wildlife corridor. The listed species survey identified gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), American alligator (Aligator mississippensis) and several listed species of wading bird on subject property. Seventeen active and inactive gopher tortoise burrows were found in the undeveloped area on the west side of the property, in the future development parcel. The listed wading birds and American alligator were observed in the gold course stormwater management lakes. Listed species of wading bird were also located in the scraped down (created) wetlands on the south -west portion of the site. -5- CP- 2013 -4 /PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -86- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. Undeveloped land within the Olde Florida Golf Club and in Sections 31 & 32, are within the USFWS Panther Secondary Zone. No panther or signs of panther were observed on the subject property during the listed species survey. According to the Listed Species Survey Report, two collared panthers have occurred within 1.3 mile of the subject property (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) telemetry data). Panther and black bear telemetry points provided in the Listed Species Survey Report show most panther and black bear activity beyond two miles from the subject property, primarily on undeveloped lands adjacent to and within RFMUD lands to the north and south, and in the Golden Gate Estates along Everglades and Desoto Boulevards. Panthers have been documented utilizing the underpass for TwinEagles South, at Immokalee Road. The wetland jurisdictional determinations provided, show wetlands on site being drained by the major canals in the area and converting to uplands. According to the Formal Determination of Wetlands and Surface Waters received from the State, 30.88 acres of jurisdictional wetlands occur on the property, within the future development parcel. The Determination also states that habitats within the existing 38.71 acre conservation easement on site were excluded from the application, and thus not included in the Formal Determination. The loss of jurisdiction wetlands on the property is documented by the jurisdictional wetland determinations provided with the application. Pursuant to the Supreme Court ruling, USACOE jurisdiction wetlands on site are no longer jurisdictional since they are not connected to waters of the United States. Wetlands on site are also not within flowways or connected to wetlands off -site. In March, 2013, the Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. conducted a reconnaissance cultural resource assessment of the site, in accordance with the specifications set forth in Chapter IA-46, F.A.C. One archaeological site, 8CR1305, was recorded as a result of the assessment and can be characterized by two non -local chert flacks found on a disturbed surface. These flacks are consistent with the Archaic Period (ca. 7,000 to 3,000 BP (before present)), and likely represent a small prehistoric camp. According to the assessment, the site is not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places due to the paucity of the material and disturbances associated with the site. The cultural resource assessment also states that the parcel has an overall low to medium probability for cultural resources, based on the field reconnaissance and aerial imagery. The consultant's site review with the Florida Division of Historic Resources determined no previously recorded archaeological sites on the subject property. In summary, the lands within Sections 31 & 32, Township 48 South, Range 27 East are surrounded by RFMUD Receiving Lands and Estates (Golden Gate Estates). These designations allow for a greater percentage of land to be developed and will, in time, reduce use of the subject property by larger free roaming listed species of wildlife such as panther and black bear. Other lands designated Neutral in the RFMUD abut at least on one side land designated either Sending or Conservation, thus providing greater protection for native habitat in those areas and for viability of corridors for the movement of wildlife. The agreement between the wildlife special interest groups and owners of TwinEagles South does provide a wildlife corridor linking Olde Florida Golf Club to undeveloped land to the north, within Bonita Bay East Golf Club. Conservation Collier lands in the immediate area, also provide additional long term protection of native habitat in the area. One of the major purposes of the RFMUD is to preserve higher quality habitat for listed species, flowways and corridors for the movement of wildlife, in particular that for Florida panther and black bear. When the RFMUD was created, lands within the RFMUD were afforded greater protection based on the quality of habitat and location within the landscape. Although currently -6- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -87- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. surrounded by native vegetation, areas around Sections 31 & 32 are allowed to be developed more intensely with less or, in the case of single - family residences in the Estates, no native vegetation required to be retained on individual lots. This will, in time, decrease the habitat value of the land and use of the subject property by larger free roaming listed species of wildlife. Creation of a 300 foot wide wildlife corridor on the neighboring TwinEagles South property, coupled with adjoining Conservation Collier lands and higher native vegetation retention requirement for Neutral and Sending Lands within Section 31 & 32 will benefit wildlife, but may not be suitable for long term use by listed species such as panther and black bear, particularly when the adjoining properties are all developed. Given the environmental efforts which have occurred in the area, along with the level of development allowed for the area, allowing density to be transferred into Olde Florida Golf Club while retaining the Neutral Designation and therefore greater requirement for retention of native vegetation, may be an option for the Neutral Lands within Section 31 & 32. [Stephen Lenberger, Senior Environmental Specialist] [Refer to Exhibits E through G -8, FLUCCS Map, Soils Map, Listed Species Survey and Table, and Wetland determinations, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Historic or archaeological resources have not been identified on the subject property, based on a review of the Collier County Index of Historic/Archaeological Maps, and the site is not identified on County Historical and Archaeological Probability Maps. A reconnaissance assessment team led by Robert Carr, M.S. of Archaeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc., has since surveyed the subject site and identified one archeological site. [Refer to AHC Technical Report No. 982, dated April 2013, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] Traffic Capacity/Traffic Circulation Impact Analysis, Including Transportation Element Consistency Determination: Capital Improvement Element (CIE) Policy 1.2 sets forth that the County Board shall not approve any such petition or application which would directly access a deficient roadway segment or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient, or which significantly impacts either: (1) a deficient roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment; This language is mirrored in Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element (TE) and adds, [the Board] shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and /or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. CIE Policy 1.2 states, "Significant impact is hereby defined... as generating potential for increased countywide population greater than 2% of the population projections for parks, solid waste, potable water, sanitary sewer, and drainage facilities, or as generating a volume of traffic equal to or greater than 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume of an impacted roadway." TE Policy 5.1 provides for same, and allows certain petitions and applications to be approved with "specific mitigating stipulations ". -7- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -88- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic i-e Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the 5 year planning period. Staff recommends that the subject application can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Vanderbilt Beach Road Impacts: The first link of Vanderbilt Beach Road East of CR -951 is a Public roadway, but is not listed on the County AUIR as an Arterial or Collector roadway and as such is not reviewed by staff for consistency with policy 5.1 of the Transportation element. However, the applicant has identified a significant (though not adverse) impact on this roadway. At such time that the applicant proposes a plat or site plan that will create operational impacts on this local roadway, staff will analyze operational impacts and determine any operational mitigation for the 238 Peak Direction trips, if warranted. The first [concurrency] link that is impacted by this project is Link 112.0, between Collier Boulevard and Logan Boulevard. The project generates 86 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 2.87% impact. This segment of Vanderbilt Beach Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,684 trips, and is currently at LOS "B" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. The next link that is impacted by this project is Link 111. 1, between Logan Boulevard and Airport Road. The project generates 60 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 2.00% impact. This segment of Vanderbilt Beach Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,137 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. County Road 951 (Collier Boulevard) Impacts: The first link that is impacted by this project is Link 30.1, between Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road. The project generates 72 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 2.40% impact. This segment of Collier Boulevard currently has a remaining capacity of 1,067 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. The next link that is impacted by this project is Link 30.2, between Golden Gate Boulevard and Vanderbilt Beach Road. The project generates 17 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a 0.57% impact. This segment of Collier Boulevard currently has a remaining capacity of 921 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. Immokalee Road Impacts: The first concurrency link Immokalee Road that is impacted by this zoning amendment is Link 43.2, between Logan Boulevard and Collier Boulevard. The project generates 100 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a significant 3.13% impact. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,223 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. The second concurrency link Immokalee Road that is impacted by this zoning amendment is Link 43.1, between 1 -75 and Logan Boulevard. The project generates 83 new directional p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a significant 2.37% impact. This segment of Immokalee Road currently has a remaining capacity of 1,142 trips, and is currently at LOS "C" as reflected by the 2012 AUIR. -8- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -89- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. No subsequent links beyond these segments are found to be significantly impacted by this project. [John Podczerwinsky, Transportation Planning Project Manager] [Refer to Exhibit J, Traffic Impact Statement, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] Public Facilities Impact: This petition will result in increased impacts on certain Category "A" public facilities (potable water, wastewater treatment, stormwater management, solid waste disposal, and community parks), but these impacts will not be significant (generating potential for increased countywide population greater than 2% of the BEBR medium range growth rate population projections for parks, solid waste disposal, potable water, wastewater treatment and stormwater management facilities, per CIE policy 1.2) as defined in the Capital Improvement Element. ■ Planning Community = Rural Estates ■ Population density = 2.15 persons /DU* ■ x number of additional DU's = 444 new units maximum for non -Rural Village (955 population increase) OR 1,552 new units maximum for Rural Village (3,337 population increase) • BEBR -based population projection = 371,914 (2018) • x.02 = ±7,438 * based upon 2010 Census population and housing unit figures for Tract 104.12 The Collier County Sheriff's Department will provide police protection /law enforcement services. The Sheriffs Golden Gate Substation, District No. 2 is located at 4741 Golden Gate Parkway; and the temporary Golden Gate Estates Substation, District No. 4 is located on Oil Well Road. The Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Station 73, located at 14575 Collier Boulevard, will provide fire protection. (There is also a Sheriff's Department presence at Fire Station No. 10.) The [Zone 10] EMS station [Medic 10, located at 14756 Immokalee Road; OR, the [Zone 42] EMS station [Medic 42, located at 7010 Immokalee Road; OR, Medic 71, located at 95 13th Street SW] will provide emergency medical services. The Public Utilities and Engineering Department has no objection to the proposed re- designation. WATER & SEWER DEMAND Water (gallons /day) Sewer (gallons /day) , PROPOSED (Receiving Lands) 235,450 138,500 CURRENT (Neutral Lands) 46,750 27,500 Appropriateness of Change: The table below identifies potential changes in density, use of TDR Credits, and preservation standards, resulting from the proposed re- designation of the subject site from Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands (±554 acres). If this amendment were approved as proposed, the required native vegetation preservation amount would decrease by ±111 acres. -9- CP- 2013- 4/PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -90- Neutral. Lands 554 acres Proposed Receiving Lands 554 acres Eligible Density + 110 dwelling units +554 dwelling units -9- CP- 2013- 4/PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -90- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. • Neutral Lands native vegetation retention standard is 60 %, not to exceed 45% of the site. • Receiving Lands native vegetation retention standard is 40 %, not to exceed 25% of the site. Approximately 88.4 acres of native vegetation are identified within the Olde Florida golf course, 51 acres of native vegetation in existing conservation easement and 246.8 acres of native vegetation outside the golf course, for a total of 386.2 acres of native vegetation on subject property. [Source: FLUCFCS Code mapping] Much of these areas remain undisturbed. As proposed by this amendment, residential density will be allowed to increase in the proposed Receiving Lands. The present designation allows residential density at 1 du /5 acres or a total of + 110 dwelling units, while the proposed Receiving Lands re- designation will allow density at 1du /1 acre or ± 554 dwelling units for non -Rural Village Development and 3dus /acre or ± 1,662 dwelling units for Rural Village development. Based upon cluster development requirements, and property sizes -which afford flexibility in site design and provision of buffers, staff believes the development patterns allowed by the proposed amendment could generally be considered compatible with surrounding development as it exists and is allowed. The native vegetation preservation requirements, however may not. The destruction of more than 110 acres of preserved vegetation and habitat on the subject property will have the result of interrupting /disrupting a long development history, during which time adjacent lands have been configured and reserved for uses typical to and interconnections among open space and ^ habitat preserved in the immediate area, if not ending it entirely. The practicality of the application's proposed Subdistrict was established through an evaluation of environmental characteristics predominantly, and other relevant factors, to ascertain insufficient need for retaining the Neutral Lands designation and the appropriateness of the Receiving Lands designation. The intent of the RFMUD is to direct development away from properties with high environmental values. Re- designating the property to Receiving will direct higher intensity land uses into an area that warrants semi -rural development and environmental protection. While the open space, environmentally sensitive and preservation areas of the Olde Florida Golf Club property may now have a lesser degree of environmental or listed species habitat value, their value has not been disturbed through development, agricultural operations or other factors relative to how values are determined. The aggregation of on -site and off -site environmentally sensitive areas should be recognized and maintained at the highest possible retention or preservation levels. [Refer to Exhibits / through 1 -9, Public Facilities Report and supporting exhibits, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Tuesday, July 16, 2013, 5:30 p.m. at the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Headquarters, located at 14575 Collier Boulevard, Naples. Approximately seven persons other than the applicant's team and County staff attended, and ^ heard the following information: -10- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -91- 1 du /5ac. 1 du/ac. Preservation + 249.3 ac. (60 %, + 138.5 ac. (40 %, presume presume 45% w /100% 25% w /100% native native vegetation) ve etation • Neutral Lands native vegetation retention standard is 60 %, not to exceed 45% of the site. • Receiving Lands native vegetation retention standard is 40 %, not to exceed 25% of the site. Approximately 88.4 acres of native vegetation are identified within the Olde Florida golf course, 51 acres of native vegetation in existing conservation easement and 246.8 acres of native vegetation outside the golf course, for a total of 386.2 acres of native vegetation on subject property. [Source: FLUCFCS Code mapping] Much of these areas remain undisturbed. As proposed by this amendment, residential density will be allowed to increase in the proposed Receiving Lands. The present designation allows residential density at 1 du /5 acres or a total of + 110 dwelling units, while the proposed Receiving Lands re- designation will allow density at 1du /1 acre or ± 554 dwelling units for non -Rural Village Development and 3dus /acre or ± 1,662 dwelling units for Rural Village development. Based upon cluster development requirements, and property sizes -which afford flexibility in site design and provision of buffers, staff believes the development patterns allowed by the proposed amendment could generally be considered compatible with surrounding development as it exists and is allowed. The native vegetation preservation requirements, however may not. The destruction of more than 110 acres of preserved vegetation and habitat on the subject property will have the result of interrupting /disrupting a long development history, during which time adjacent lands have been configured and reserved for uses typical to and interconnections among open space and ^ habitat preserved in the immediate area, if not ending it entirely. The practicality of the application's proposed Subdistrict was established through an evaluation of environmental characteristics predominantly, and other relevant factors, to ascertain insufficient need for retaining the Neutral Lands designation and the appropriateness of the Receiving Lands designation. The intent of the RFMUD is to direct development away from properties with high environmental values. Re- designating the property to Receiving will direct higher intensity land uses into an area that warrants semi -rural development and environmental protection. While the open space, environmentally sensitive and preservation areas of the Olde Florida Golf Club property may now have a lesser degree of environmental or listed species habitat value, their value has not been disturbed through development, agricultural operations or other factors relative to how values are determined. The aggregation of on -site and off -site environmentally sensitive areas should be recognized and maintained at the highest possible retention or preservation levels. [Refer to Exhibits / through 1 -9, Public Facilities Report and supporting exhibits, of the GMP amendment exhibit package.] NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05 F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Tuesday, July 16, 2013, 5:30 p.m. at the Golden Gate Fire Control and Rescue District Headquarters, located at 14575 Collier Boulevard, Naples. Approximately seven persons other than the applicant's team and County staff attended, and ^ heard the following information: -10- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -91- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. The applicant's agent provided a full description of the proposed amendment to the group, including the two -step GMPA process, the Rural Fringe Mixed Used designation and the TDR program. Also overviewed was the history of the Olde Florida property. The presentation indicated that natural vegetation preserve areas already exist on the site - and they would not change as a result of residential development. The present golf course and proposed residential uses were described, particularly abandoning earlier plans to expand the 18 -hole golf course to 36 holes. Although no firm plans are in place, residential development would be limited to a specific development sub -area. The Olde Florida Golf Club was more recently approached by the neighboring Golf Club of the Everglades with the prospect of combining the two properties to provide a unified residential community. Questions generated during the subsequent discussion focused on the nature of the changed environmental characteristics [progressively dryer conditions], how the existing on -site preserve area would be affected [not by new residential areas], and if future development would include different or additional access to Vanderbilt Beach Road [none are contemplated]. Also questioned was the County's timetable for extending Vanderbilt Beach Road eastward [not in its present financially feasible planning schedule] and the possibility of aggregating additional large tracts to establish a Rural Village [extremely improbable]. An "unrecorded" conservation easement located along the northeast side of the Olde Florida Golf Course property was questioned. [This is the 300 -foot wide wildlife corridor discussed in the Environmental Impacts section above.] It was explained that this easement does exist and would remain in place, while any further recordation would be the responsibility of another party. At least one party in attendance expressed opposition to the proposal. The meeting was completed by 6:10 p.m. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The following findings and conclusions result from the reviews and analyses of this request: • The present designation on the subject site allows development consistent with the surrounding development patterns, both existing and proposed. • Development allowed by the proposed amendment is generally compatible with development existing and allowed on surrounding lands. • Original RFMUD designations were based upon landscape scale analysis. Since then, proposals for re- designation have relied on site - specific environmental findings in order to demonstrate different property characteristics. The application provides data and analysis that the subject site's specific environmental condition supports the re- designation. • The subject site is reported to have approximately 70% native vegetation on site and no longer contains jurisdictional wetlands. • The re- designation of the subject site as proposed would allow for a loss of approximately 111 acres of native vegetation. • This property will be subject to all GMP requirements and limitations of the Receiving Lands designation, including the native vegetation preservation /retention requirements of the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). - 11 - CP-2013-4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -92- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. • The history of preserving native vegetation and wildlife habitat in this area through n Collier County and non - governmental organizations are important aspects to consider. • The Receiving Lands in this area now are characterized by the presence of 300 ft. wide wildlife corridor, 150 ft. wide golf course buffer, established native vegetation Preservation acreage on Olde Florida Golf Club property, Conservation Collier lands, wildlife passage crossing under Immokalee Road. • Utility of the adjacent wildlife corridor and its interconnecting habitat areas may be reduced over the long term by the loss of native vegetation from Olde Florida Golf Club property; a drainage canal, future Vanderbilt Beach Road Extension, and Estates development to the south; a future roadways through the lands to the east of the property and, Receiving Lands to the north. • Although currently surrounded by native vegetation, areas around Sections 31 & 32 are allowed to be developed more intensely with less or, in the case of single - family residences in the Estates, with no native vegetation required for individual lots. This will, in time, decrease the habitat value of the land and use of the subject property by listed species. • Impact upon the TDR program could be noteworthy. Potentially, this amendment could result in a new demand for over 400 TDR credits. • Subsequent zoning activity must include a request to modify ( "rezone ") the RFMU Overlay, changing the RFMU Overlay - Neutral Lands zoning overlay on the subject site to RFMU Overlay - Receiving Lands zoning overlay. This request may be concurrent with the Adoption phase of this GMPA application. EAC RECOMMENDATION: The Environmental Advisory Council heard and vetted this application on August 7, 2013. Council members heard presentations from the petitioner's agent and environmental team, with emphasis placed on the changed conditions - of native vegetation retention areas specifically, and in the development market generally. By a 5 -0 vote, the EAC recommended to the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners to transmit this GMPA application to the DEO. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This staff report has been approved as to form and legality by the Office of the County Attorney. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition CP- 20134 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve this petition for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. -12- CP- 2013 -4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -93- 11/12/2013 9.A. Agenda Item 9.B. PREPARED BY: 1 t DATE: CORBY SCHM DT, AICP, PRIN IPAL PLANNER COMPREHEN IVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DE ART NT REVIEWED h DATE: J,7 DAVID. WEEKS, AICP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MANAGER COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT REVIEWED BY: DATE: MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT APPROVED BY: r NICi ASALANGUIDA, ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION PETITION NO.: CP- 2013 -4 / PL- 2013 - 0000365 Staff Report for the September 19, 2013, CCPC Meeting. DATE: NOTE: This petition has been scheduled for the November 12, 2013, BCC Meeting. GAMES Planning Services \Comprehensive \COMP PLANNING GMP DATA \Comp Plan Amendments\2013 Cycles & Small Scale Petitions\2013 Cycle 1 - February\CP - 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club \Sbstnty Rvws\2013 -4 CCPC staff report_aug 21 DRAFT.docx - 13 - CP-2013-4 / PL20130000365 2013 -4, Olde Florida Golf Club: changing RFMUD Neutral Lands to Receiving Lands Packet Page -94- n, 11/12/2013 9.A. RESOLUTION NO. 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PROPERTY FROM RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) NEUTRAL LANDS TO RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) RECEIVING LANDS, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTING OF 554± ACRES IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION, TWO MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20130000365/CP2013 -41 WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. sea., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Petitioner, Olde Florida Golf Club, Inc., has initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2013, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3 174, F. S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have Words underlined are additions; Words stFuek tip are deletions * * * * * * * * * * * * are a break in text PL201300003651CP- 2013 -4 Rev. 9/04/13 Packet Page -95- 11/12/2013 9.A. thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this day of 52013. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BY: Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: Heidi Ashton -Cicko t" Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit "A" CP\ 13 -CMP- 00902 \8 GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ. Chairwoman Words underlined are additions; Words stf:ueeugh are deletions * ** * ** * ** * ** are a break in text PL20130000365/CP- 20134 Rev. 9/04/13 Packet Page -96- N n �Ov Z O H H W a X W I /--` is ¢ ¢ 46 S t i T 47 S T 48 1 o � p u Jill ❑ ®ODo: ❑: ®m1 ®!- s jqp 6 k S tt y- yy a �K a e � ��f F�$ F -� ■ 2 �2 I�yyga� �i S z. n i I 11/12/2013 9.A. I T 49 S I T 50 S T 61 S T 52 S T 53 S W e n ¢ y 1 - 4 / W e n ¢ y 4 / L � s 9 fin,' :_ �'=�✓Y V ¢ <t ° ¢ l i o� N •o I l � �� r4 LL wa�o <Wtli U cj /• // W Jz' m(nN � 6 3. 45,;:,, W you W N NCO a >< ° f M ex Gulf S gy 1 S It 1 ; S It 1 S 6y 1 S 05 1 S t9 1 S Z9 1 Packet Page -97- I iW 1 � N ¢ W j n i ¢ N s - W i ¢ � o ¢ {I e L W N �f 777 p6 e W N I ¢ N l ¢ i y aQp ¢ x S�B W itg s Flo W_ Z } J Q 0 Ln LU J IL Q Z a _M O N (Y? (V L Q) Y Q }-r U O Ln Iv C (1>) n r- PUBLIC NOTICE Pi�mLIC`NO'FICE V Plif 11 /12/2013 9.A. NOTICE OF n"IBLIC'._H RING A IO} ,r I NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AESOLUTIONS=F. Notice is hereby given that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on November .. 12, 2013 in the Board of County Commissioners Chamber, Third Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, to consider the Transmittal of the following County Resolutions, for Transmittal amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M. The purpose of the hearing is to consider a recommendation on amendments to the Growth Management Plan, Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series (FLUE/FLUM), for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO). The RESOLUTION titles are as follows: RESOLUTION 13- A RESOLUTION OFTHE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO ALLOW THE URBAN RESIDENTIAL FRINGE PORTION OF THE NAPLES RESERVE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO UTILIZE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM ANY LANDS DESIGNATED AS SENDING LANDS WITHIN THE RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT 668 ACRE PROPERTY IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1 -1/2 MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND ONE MILE NORTH OF US 41 IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20130000139/CP- 2013 -1] RESOLUTION 13- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO REVISE THE BUCKLEY MIXED USE SUBDISTRICT OF THE URBAN MIXED USE DISTRICT TO REMOVE THE OFFICE AND RETAIL CAPS AND ALLOW UP TO 7,500 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF COMMERCIAL USES PER ACRE OR 11 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, TO MAKE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONAL, TO PROHIBIT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE SAME PARCEL, TO LIMIT MULTI - TENANT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TO NO MORE THAN 50% OF THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, TO REVISE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INCLUDING THE CAP ON THE SIZE OF THE FOOTPRINT OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 21.70 ACRES AND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AIRPORT ROAD AND APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET NORTH OF ORANGE BLOSSOM DRIVE IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20120002909/CP- 2013 -3] :t .K11]t111171tL6L1Qcip A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89 -05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MAP SERIES TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB PROPERTY FROM RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) NEUTRAL LANDS TO RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT (RFMUD) RECEIVING LANDS, AND FURTHERMORE RECOMMENDING TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTING OF 5541 ACRES IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD EXTENSION, TWO MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 27 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20130000365/CP2013 -4] All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendments will be made available for inspection at the Planning & Zoning Department, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dc, Naples, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Furthermore the materials will be made' available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's Office, Fourth Floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 401, Naples, one week prior to the scheduled hearing: Any questions pertaining to the documents should be directed to the Comprehensive Planning Section of the Planning & Zoning Department. Written comments filed with the Clerk to the Board's Office prior to Tuesday, November 12, 2013, will be.read and considered at the public hearing. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Board of County Commissioners with respect to any. matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he will need a record of that proceeding, and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. If you are a person with a disabllity who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to.you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112 -5356, (239) 252 -8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA GEORGIA A. HILLER, ESQ., CHAIRWOMAN DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK By: Ann Jennejohn - Deputy Clerk (SEAL) 222 0594. October 23 2013 Packet Page -98-