Agenda 07/24/2012 Item #17J7/24/2012 Item
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to consider PUDA- PL2011 -1168, The Naples Reserve Golf Club
Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), An Ordinance of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 07 -71, The Naples
Reserve Golf Club Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), to remove a golf course
from the RPUD; providing for amendments to permitted uses; providing for amendments
to development standards; providing for amendments to master plan; providing for
amendments to list of requested deviations from LDC; providing for amendments to list of
developer commitments; and providing an effective date. Subject property is located one
mile north of US 41 and 1 -1/2 miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 1,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 688 +/- acres.
This is a companion to Item 16A20.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) review staff's findings and
recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission
(CCPC) regarding the above referenced petition and render a decision regarding this rezone
petition; and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in
order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The Naples Reserve RPUD project was approved in Ordinance Number 07 -71 on November 13,
2007. The petitioner is seeking to remove the golf course, all related golf course uses, and revise
the internal layout of the development without any changes to the boundaries of the Preserve
Tract. The Project does not propose to increase the approved density. There are refinements to
development standards for land uses proposed in recreation areas to improve compatibility with
future residences.
The Project provides for the following:
• 1,154 residential dwelling units
• 63.7 acres of Preservation
Open Space, including 87+ acres of stormwater management lakes, approximately 74+ acres
of recreation lakes, and three areas intended for community recreation and social space
identified as Recreation Areas on the RPUD Master Plan, Exhibit C of the RPUD Ordinance
Exhibits. Other recreation areas containing buildings and facilities may be developed in
Residential Tract R, subject to compliance with the same development standards for Tract
RA as contained in Exhibit B of the RPUD Ordinance Exhibits.
According to the petitioner, the proposed Project will allow for the full range of residential land
uses. It is currently intended to be developed primarily with single- family homes, with the
potential of having some multi- family land uses. The residences will be oriented around an
expansive lake system that has been specifically designed to provide for recreation as well as for
PUDA- PL2011 -1168, The Naples Reserve Golf Club (RPUD)
June 19, 2012
Page 1 of 5
Packet Page -3372-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
stormwater management.
The petitioner seeks to amend Ordinance number 07 -71 by adopting a new Ordinance allowing
the changes noted previously. The petitioner is also revising the property development standards
as explained in the Staff Report, the removal of an earlier affordable housing payment
commitment, and the approval of two deviations that have been revised slightly from the 2007
zoning action. The Master Plan for the proposed amendment depicts generalized areas of
development and traffic circulation. There is a companion DCA that addresses improvements to
US 41 (East Tamiami Trail).
FISCAL IMPACT:
The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the
impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund
projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as
needed to maintain adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order
to meet the requirements of concurrency management, the developer of every local development
order approved by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated Transportation
Impact Fees associated with the project in accordance with Chapter 74 of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include
building permit review fees. Finally, additional revenue is generated by application of ad
valorem tax rates, and that revenue is directly related to the value of the improvements. Please
note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the
Planning Commission to analyze this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT:
Future Land Use Element: Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed rezone consistent
with the Future Land Use Element. A more detailed description of the GMP consistency is
contained in the Staff Report.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION:
The CCPC heard petition PUDA- PL2011 -1168, Naples Reserve RPUD on June 7, 2012, and by
a vote of 9 to 0, with Commissioner Ebert abstaining, recommended to forward this petition to
the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval subject to the
conditions of approval which have been incorporated into the PUD ordinance:
1. Under Commercial excavation land use, reference Tract L.
2. Add the words "internal to a structure" to the notes below the development standards
table.
3. Add 23 -foot setback note to the notes below the development standards table.
4. Add a reference to the DCA about intersection improvements.
5. Add a community clubhouse start date as a trigger for COs.
6. Accept Deviation number 2.
7. Add a footnote below the Development Standards Table I regarding principal structure
setback when it is on different properties.
8. Add a line for defining zoned and actual heights on Development Standards Table I.
PUDA- PL2011 -1168, The Naples Reserve Golf Club (RPUD)
June 19, 2012
Page 2 of 5
Packet Page -3373-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
9. Commit to a second access road at project completion and remove "potential" note
from the Master Plan.
10. Change the word "may" to "shall" on the preservation area note shown on the Master
Plan.
11. Revise the Utilities commitment to state: "conveyed or dedicated ".
12. Obtain a copy of the Easement Valuations Letter.
LEGAL CONSIDE;—,,,-,-,,,,;N ",
This is an amendment to the existing Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD (Ordinance No. 07 -71, as
amended) which proposes to remove a golf course from the RPUD; providing for amendments to
permitted uses; providing for amendments to development standards; providing for amendments
to master plan; providing for amendments to list of requested deviations from LDC; providing
for amendments to list of developer commitments. The burden falls upon the applicant for the
amendment to prove that the proposal is consistent with all of the criteria set forth below. The
burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), should it consider denial, that
such denial is not arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by
finding that the amendment does not meet one or more of the listed criteria.
Criteria for PUD Rezones:
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for
approval or not.
1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development
proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic
and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements,
contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as
they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation
and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained
at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only
after consultation with the County Attorney.
3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies
of the Growth Management Plan.
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which
conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on
design, and buffering and screening requirements.
5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve
the development?
PUDA- PL2011 -1168, The Naples Reserve Golf Club (RPUD)
June 19, 2012
Page 3 of 5
Packet Page -3374-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of
assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and
private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to
accommodate expansion.
8. Consider: l viuVlllliiy w,w, ,,,j rem,' _:,,��,, .,. as to desirable modifications of
such regulations in the particular case. ,ased on determination that such modifications
are justified as nice ing public r,arposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and
future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan?
10. Will the proposed PUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use
pattern?
11. Would the requested PUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district
unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts?
12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to
existing conditions on the property proposed for change.
13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the
proposed amendment necessary.
14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood?
15. Will the proposed change create or excessively inc- ase traffic congestion or create
types of traffic deemed incompatible with surro ling land uses, because of peak
volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, in,. tiding activity during construction
phases of the development, or otherwise affect par 1c safety?
16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem?
17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce F and air to adjacent areas?
18. Will the --,Y change adversely a. l�erty values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a def -it f�. '.' imnrovement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with _sting regul -ins?
20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will _)nstitute a grant of special privilege
to an individual owner as contrasted with the r ablic welfare.
PUDA- PL2011 -1168, The Naples Reserve Golf Club (RPUD)
June 19, 2012
Page 4 of 5
Packet Page -3375-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ( "reasonably ") be used in
accordance with existing zoning? (a "core" question...)
22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county?
23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site
alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range
of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification.
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed PUD rezone on
the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of
service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and
implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code
ch.106, art.II], as amended.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the PUD rezone request that
the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the
public health, safety, and welfare?
The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the
written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive
Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the
BCC hearing as these items relate to these criteria. The proposed Ordinance was prepared by the
County Attorney's Office. This Executive Summary has been reviewed for legal sufficiency and
is legally sufficient for Board action. An affinnative vote of four is required for Board approval.
(STW)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff concurs with the recommendations of the CCPC and further recommends that the Board of
County Commissioners approve the request subject to the attached PUD Ordinance that includes
both the staff recommendation and the CCPC recommendation.
PREPARED BY:
Nancy Gundlach, AICP, Principal Planner,
Department of Land Development Services
Attachments: 1) Staff Report 2) Application 3) NAM Synopsis 4) TIS 5) Ordinance 07 -71
6) Ordinance 7) DCA Agreement
PUDA- PL2011 -1168, The Naples Reserve Golf Club (RPUD)
June 19, 2012
Page 5of5
Packet Page -3376-
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 17.J.
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Item Summary: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in.
Recommendation to consider PUDA- PI2011 -1168, The Naples Reserve Golf Club Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD), An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of
Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 07 -71, The Naples Reserve Golf Club
Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), to remove a golf course from the RPUD;
providing for amendments to permitted uses; providing for amendments to development
standards; providing for amendments to master plan; providing for amendments to list of
requested deviations from LDC; providing for amendments to list of developer commitments;
and providing an effective date. Subject property is located one mile north of US 41 and 1 -1/2
miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida consisting of 688 +/- acres. This is a companion to Item 16A21.
Meeting Date: 7/24/2012
Prepared By
Name: GundlachNancy
Title: Planner, Principal,Comprehensive Planning
6/21/2012 1:34:46 PM
Approved By
Name: PuigJudy
Title: Operations Analyst, GMD P &R
Date: 6/22/2012 3:50:12 PM
Name: BellowsRay
Title: Manager - Planning, Comprehensive Planning
Date: 6/26/2012 3:57:47 PM
Name: BosiMichael
Title: Manager - Planning,Comprehensive Planning
Date: 6/27/2012 8:56:55 AM
Name: MarcellaJeanne
Packet Page -3377-
Title: Executive Secretary,Transportation Planning
Date: 6/29/2012 3:16:32 PM
Name: WilliamsSteven
Title: Assistant County Attorney,County Attorney
Date: 7/9/2012 1:36:17 PM
Name: FinnEd
Title: Senior Budget Analyst, OMB
Date: 7/9/2012 2:33:13 PM
Name: KlatzkowJeff
Title: County Attorney
Date: 7/12/2012 11:49:03 AM
Name: OchsLeo
Title: County Manager
Date: 7/12/2012 2:19:00 PM
Packet Page -3378-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/
PLANNING AND REGULATION
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
w.colliergov.net
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR:
AMENDMENT r s s s TO PUD REZONE
PETITION NO
PROJECT NAME To be completed by staff
DATE PROCESSED
NAME OF APPLICANT(S) SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC
ADDRESS 2727 E. IMPERIAL WAY CITY BREA STATE CA ZIP 92821 -6713
TELEPHONE #
E -MAIL ADDRESS:
CELL #
FAX #
NAME OF AGENT DWIGHT NADEAU AICP• RWA INC.
ADDRESS 6610 WILLOW PARK DRIVE. SUITE 200 CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34109
TELEPHONE # 239 - 597 -0575 CELL # FAX # 239 -597 -0578
E -MAIL ADDRESS: DHN CONSULT -RWA COM
NAME OF AGENT RICHARD D YOVANOVICH• COLEMAN YOVANOVICH P.KOESTER P.A.
ADDRESS 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL NORTH SUITE 300 CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34103
TELEPHONE # 239 -435 -3535 CELL # FAX # 239 - 435 -1218
E -MAIL ADDRESS: RYOVANOVICHaGCJ LAW. COM
BE AWARE THAT COLLIER. COUNITY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY
AND ENSURE THAT YOU APE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REOULATIONtS.
February 4, 2011
Packet Page -3379-
ti
E
N
N
O
N
d'
N
ti
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/. NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www,collierciov.net
APPLICANT INFORMATION
Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide
additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner's
website at Irti):,t i%, �Ni -��,,c(>ilier•<�(oN.,ttfttlilel€ x ,sw
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
NAME OF MASTER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
NAME OF CIVIC ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
February 4, 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
zr County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
wwwxollier ov.6et
Disclosure of s
a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy
in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the
percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
Name and Address % of Ownership
b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the
percentage of stock owned by each.
Name and Address
% of Ownership
SFI Naples Reserve, LLC
100%
C/O iStar Financial
1114 Avenue of the Americas, 391h Floor
New York, NY 10036
C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percentage of interest.
Name and Address % of Ownership
February 4, 2011
Packet Page -3381-
v
t`
r
E
N
N
O
N
d'
N
ti
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
vrww. ollieroov,net
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of
the general and /or limited partners.
Name and Address I % of Ownership
e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a
Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below,
including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners.
Name and Address % of Ownership
Date of Contract:
f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals
or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
Name and Address I
February 4, 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.collieroov.net
g. Date subject property acquired ®8 2010 leased ❑ Term of lease yrs. /mos.
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
Date of option:
Date option terminates: , or
Anticipated closing date
h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur
subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it
is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental
disclosure of interest form.
I PROPERTY LOCATION I
Detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: (If space is inadequate, attach on
separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separate legal description
for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed
within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre - application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the
legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required.
Section /Township /Range 01 /51 /26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: 00723880002
Metes & Bounds Description: ALL OF SECTION 1 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY FL
Size of property: ft. X ft. = Total Sq. Ft. 29.969.280 Acres 688
Address /general location of subject property: 10097 GREENWAY ROAD
PUD District (LDC 2.03.06): ® Residential ❑ Community Facilities
❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial
February 4, 2011
Packet Page -3383-
W
ti
N
N
O
N
d-
N
ti
N
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.collieMEv.net
L ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? IF so, give
complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate
page).
Section /Township /Range 31 /S0S /27E
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: 00467400007
Metes & Bounds Description:
THE SOUTH HALF ( 1 /2) OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH RANGE 27 EAST COLLIER COUNTY FL
Ir - I a
This application is requesting a rezone From the RPUD zoning district(s) to the RPUD zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property: UNDEVELOPED DISTURBED LAND
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 1,154 RESIDENTIAL UNITS
Original PUD Name: NAPLES RESERVE GOLF CLUB PUD Ordinance No.: 99 -42: AS AMENDED BY 07 -71
February 4, 2011
Zoning
Land Use
ICULTURE
PICAYUNE STRAND STATE FOREST
RE
ICULTURE & PUD, WALNUT LAKES
REFLECTION LAKES SUBDIVISION & DISTURBED LAND
ICULTURE
AGRICULTURE & DISTURBED LAND
INDING CYPRESS
UNDEVELOPED
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? IF so, give
complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on separate
page).
Section /Township /Range 31 /S0S /27E
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: 00467400007
Metes & Bounds Description:
THE SOUTH HALF ( 1 /2) OF SECTION 31, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH RANGE 27 EAST COLLIER COUNTY FL
Ir - I a
This application is requesting a rezone From the RPUD zoning district(s) to the RPUD zoning district(s).
Present Use of the Property: UNDEVELOPED DISTURBED LAND
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 1,154 RESIDENTIAL UNITS
Original PUD Name: NAPLES RESERVE GOLF CLUB PUD Ordinance No.: 99 -42: AS AMENDED BY 07 -71
February 4, 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.00llieL ov.nel
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Pursuant to Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's analysis and
recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the
Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below.
Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted
below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request.
PUD Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 10.02.13.13)
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical
characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and
other utilities.
The proposed Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) is consistent with the locational criteria set
forth in the Growth Management Plan (GMP) and the Land Development Code (LDC) as it relates to
the physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, water, sewer,
and other utilities. Additionally, the development conditions and commitments contained in this
application provide reasonable assurance that all infrastructure will be developed consistent with
County regulations.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or
other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to
arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such
areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and
recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney.
The documents, including the Covenant of Unified Control, submitted with this Application provide
evidence of unified control. Further, this application makes appropriate provisions for continuing
operation and maintenance of common areas.
3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, ob? dives and policies of the growth
management plan. (This is to include identifying what >-ub- district, policy or other provision
allows the requested uses /density, and fully explaininc .3ddressing all criteria or conditions of
that Sub - district, policy or other provision.)
The amendment to the Naples Reserve RPUD will confo -.i to the goals, objectives and policies of the
GMP. Please refer to the Statement of Compliance attached to this application.
February 4, 2011
Packet Page -3385-
T
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
Www.00llieraay.ne t
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
The RPUD Master Plan has been designed to optimize internal land use relationships through the use of
various forms of open space separation. Additionally, most external relationships are automatically
regulated by the LDC to ensure harmonious relationships between projects.
N
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development.
N
C The amount of open space set aside by this proposed project meets or exceeds the provisions of the
LDC. Trails and pathways will be incorporated into the open space for
N opportunities
p p passive recreation
ti
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
The timing and sequence of the permitting of the proposed development coincides with the
programming of the County's proposed capital improvements to meet concurrency requirements.
Adequate improvements, utilities and other facilities can be provided.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
Ability, as applied in this context, implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system,
potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads is
supportive of conditions emanating from urban development. The development of the subject property
is timely, because supporting infrastructure are available, or will be in place by the time permitting of
the proposed improvements is complete.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the
particular case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
The development standards in this application are included in RPUD Ordinance Exhibit B and are
similar to those standards used for the residential structures and related improvements when compared
to County regulations.
February 4, 2011
.J
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/
PLANNING AND REGULATION
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.colllerg v.nei
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, many
communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in
the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by
existing deed restrictions.
Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on
this property within the last year? ❑ Yes ® No
If so, what was the nature of that hearing?
Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation
or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? ❑ Yes ® No
If so, please provide copies.
This application will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency" has been made and
the application is assigned a petition processing riumber. The opplicuti€rn will be considered "closed"
when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to suppily necessary
information to continue rocessincj or otherwise actively pursue the rezon .g._for a perked of six..(6)
rnont s. An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and an application
"closed " through inactivity shall be deemed wiihdra gin. An application deemed "closed" may be re-
opened by submitting a new application, repayment of coil application fees send grardincg of a
determination of "sufficiency ". Furfhc -r review of the project will be subi.ect to the then cwrent crude.
(LDC section 10403.05. 0.)
February 4, 2011
Packet Page -3387-
r
C
N
N
O
N
d'
N
ti
NAME OF APPLICANT(S) SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC
ADDRESS 2727 E. IMPERIAL WAY CITY BREA STATE CA ZIP 92821 -6713
TELEPHONE #
E -MAIL ADDRESS:
CELL # FAX # 239 - 304 -0991
ADDRESS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (IF AVAILABLE): 10097 GREENWAY ROAD
LEGAL D I SCRIPT10N
Section /Township /Range O1 /51 26
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: 00723880002
Metes & Bounds Description: ALL OF SECTION .1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH RANGE 26 EAST COLLIER COUNTY FL
TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED I
(Check applicable system):
COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM
a. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM
b. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM
(�
PROVIDE NAME
(l
c. PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT
(GPD capacity)
D
d. SEPTIC SYSTEM
TYKE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED
a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM
b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM
c. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM
(l
PROVIDE NAME
d. PRIVATE SYSTEM (WELL)
D
February 4, 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.collieroov.net
TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED: 2308 (1.154 x 2.0 persons /dwellin
PEAK AND AVERAGE DAILY DEMANDS:
A. WATER -PEAK 444.77 GPM AVERAGE DAILY 426.980 GPD (185 LOS)
B. SEWER -PEAK 208.03 GPM AVERAGE DAILY 230,800 GPD (100 LOS)
IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COLLIER COUNTY REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM, PLEASE
PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO BE REQUIRED 2013
NARRATIVE STATEMENT: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of
sewage treatment process to be used as well as a specific statement regarding the method of affluent
and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be used, then percolation data and soil involved shall
be provided from tests prepared and certified by a professional engineer.
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT: If the project is located within the services
boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, written notarized statement shall be provided
agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water distribution and sewage collection facilities
within the project area upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all
applicable County ordinances in effect at the at time. This statement shall also include an agreement
that the applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County
Utilities Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement
shall contain shall contain an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the
water and sewer systems.
STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY CAPACITY FROM OTHER PROVIDERS: Unless waived or otherwise
provided for at the pre - application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or potable water
services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that provider indicating that there
is adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided.
February 4, 2011
Packet Page -3389-
ti
N
T-
C)
N
N
ti
1
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www- collieroov,ne#
AFFIDAVIT
We /I, being first duly sworn, depose and say that we /I am /are
the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all
the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches,
data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to
the best of our knowledge and belief. We /I understand that the information requested on this application must
be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed
shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all
required information has been subs - pitted.
As property owner We /I further authorize
any matters regarding this Petition.
Signature of Property Owner
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
to act as our /my representative in
Signature of Property Owner
Fyped or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
20_ , by who is personally known to me or has produced
as identification.
State of Florida
County of Collier
(Signature of Notary Public — State of
Florida)
Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned
Name of Notary Public)
February 4, 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
county clue"'T
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www,coiliergov.net
COVENANT OF UNIFIED CONTROL
The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that we are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property commonly
known as
(Street address and City, State and Zip Code)
and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
The property described herein is the subject of an application for planned unit development
PUD) zoning. We hereby designate , legal representative thereof, as the legal
representatives of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in the
course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the hiring and
authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning
approval on the site. These representatives will remain the only entity to authorize development activity on the property until
such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to Collier County.
The undersigned recognize the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the project:
1. The property will be developed and used in conformity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed on
the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the planned unit development
rezoning.
2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions, safeguards, and
stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in part,
unless and until a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County.
3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a failure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or
safeguards provided for in the planned unit development process will constitute a violation of the Land Development
Code.
4. All terms and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and restrictions
which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within the planned unit
development must be consistent with those terms and conditions.
5. So long as this covenant is in force, Collier County can, upon the discovery of noncompliance with the terms,
safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel compliance.
The County will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit development and
the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with all terns, conditions
and safeguards of the planned unit development.
Signature of Property Owner
Printed Name
Signature of Property Owner
Printed Name
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this day of , 20_ by
who is personally known to me or has produced
as identification
Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned
(Name typed, printed or stamped)
February 4, 2011
Packet Page -3391-
2
ti
N
N
T—
C:)
N
d
N
ti
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/
PLANNING AND REGULATION
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
ww .colllerpoy.nel
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW
W /COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION. NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
REQUIREMENTS
COPES
RLQUIRED
RE 1401 D
STANDARD REQUIREMENTS:
1 Additional set if located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area)
x
Copies of detailed description of why amendment is necessary
Completed Application with list of Permitted Uses; Development Standards Table; List of
proposed deviations from the LDC (if any); List of Developer Commitments (download
application from website for current form)
14
PUD Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36" and One 8 1/2" x 1 1 " copy
14
®
❑
Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36 "and One 8 '/2" x 11 " coy
14
Original PUD doc ord and Master Plan 24" x 36" — ONLY IF AMENDING THE PUD
14
Revised PUD application with changes crossed thru & underlined
14
Revised PUD application w amended Title page w ord #'s, LDC 10.02.13.A.2
14
Justification /Rationale for the Deviations (must be on a separate sheet within the application
material; please DO NOT include it in the PUD documents)
14
Copies of the following:
Deeds Legal's & Survey (if boundary of original PUD is amended)
3
List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation
2
Owner Affidavit signed & notarized
2
Covenant of Unified Control
2
Completed Addressing checklist
2
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and digital /electronic copy of EIS or exemption
justification
❑
Historical Surveyor waiver request
4
Utility Provisions Statement w sketches
4
Architectural rendering of proposed structures
4
1
El
Survey, signed & sealed
4
®
El
Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) with applicable fees. For TIS guidelines & procedures refer to
Recent Aerial Photograph (with habitat areas defined) min scaled 1 " =400'
Z
®
❑
5
Electronic copy of all documents in Word format and plans (CDRom or Diskette)
2
Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification
1
School Impact Analysis Application — residential projects only
(download the School Impact Analysis Application from website)
2
®
❑
If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas - Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. Lacavera, State
of Florida Division of Forestry @ 239 - 690 -3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan ", LDC
Section 2.03.08.A.2.a.(b)i.c.
February 4, 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
AFFIDAVIT
Z-F I�ttY�f� y (being first duly sworn, depose and say that SFI Niles
Reserve LLC is the owner of the property described herein
and which is the subject
matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application,
including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other
supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and
true to the best of our knowledge and belief. Well understand that the information
requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this
form, whether computer generated, or County printed shall not be altered. Public
hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all
required information has been submitted
As property owner I further authorize Mr. Richard Yovanovich, Coleman Yovanovich &
Koester, P.A. to act as my representative in any matters regarding this Petition.
Signature o Property Owner
Samantha K. Garbus
Senior Vice President
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
Signature of Property Owner
Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of o6e1Z— ,
2011, by who is personally known to me or has produced as
identification.
State ofer- ( eature o otary Public - State ofd}-
County of �eili�er- �F,,,.) �c- J
Notary Stamp:
Packet Page -3393-
Jesus Rosado
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01 R06242246
Qualified in Bronx County
Commission Expires May 31, 20 i
ti
m
N
O
N
d'
N
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I hereby authorize RWA Inc
(Name of Agent — typed or printed)
to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting the
property identified in the Application.
Signed: S-- -- _ _._ --.- 1.-- -- Date:
Sasnanf a K Garbgis
Senior Vice Pres,irlan±
I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true,
correct and complete to the best of my knowledge.
Signed: i:__ ,.f..._- Date:
Saslior Vice President
STATE OF ( or-
COUNTY OF (Geliaer r
Swom to and subscrlb d before me this day of Ju res , 20'11.
By: )� RQ
y -r.. AN WK,
(Notary Public) ISSION EXPIRES:
N ubl''c - State o
No.o1VA6172875
CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: Qualified in New York Cost 20.2011
who is personally known to me�y Commission Expires Aug
who has produced as identification
and
did take an Oath
did not take an Oath
NOTICE — BE AWARE THAT:
Florida Statute Section 837.06 — False Official Statements Law states that: "Whoever knowingly
makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance
of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided
in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083" by a fine to a maximum of $500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail
term.
G:,Invesimentsl64elaughDiNaplcs Reserve REO\RPUD Legal Does 6- I5- 111Aoent 1tr nrm:thoriuUion.doc
Packet Page -3395-
ti
E
N
O
N
d'
N
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT
I, &Q ovt 6L K' 06 t'` , being first duly sworn, depose and
say that SFI Naples Reserve, LLC agrees to dedicate to Collier County Utilities, the water
distribution, and sewage collection facilities within the project area upon completion of the
construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at
the time. Additionally, SFI Naples Reserve, LLC or successor developer, agree that the
applicable system development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities
Division prior to the issuance of building permits by the County. Finally, and if applicable, SFI
Nantes Reserve, LLC or successor developer, agrees to dedicate the appropriate utility
easements for serving the water and sewer systems.
f�
Senior vice Presirerit
The foregoing instrument was acknowled ed before me this % `day of
2011, by f (.��iV n —C�' � u�
J
CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING:
X who is personally known to me,
who has produced
and
did take an Oath
did not take an Oath
fay,
o ry Public)
as identification
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:
MICHELE VAN DE RIJN
Notary Public - State of New York
No. 01 VA6172975
Qualified in New York County
My Commission crpires August 20, 2011
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/
PLANNING AND REGULATION
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Co Ter County
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.coiliergov.net
COVENANT OF UNIFIED CONTROL
The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that we are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property commonly
known as SFl Naples Reserve. LLC
1114 Avenue of the Americas. 391' Flr. New York. NY 10036
and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
The property described herein is the subject of an application for residential planned unit development (RPUD) zoning. We
hereby designate RWA legal representative thereof, as the legal representatives of the property and as such,
these individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to
develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the hiring and authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of
applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning approval on the site. These representatives will remain the
only entity to authorize development activity on the property until such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control
is delivered to Collier County.
The undersigned recognize the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the project:
1. The property will be developed and used in conformity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed on
the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the planned unit development
rezoning,
2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions, safeguards, and
stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in part,
unless and until a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County.
3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a failure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or
safeguards provided for in the planned unit development process will constitute a violation of the Land Development
Code.
4. All terms and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and restrictions
which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within the planned unit
development must be consistent with those terms and conditions.
5. So long as this covenant is in force, Collier County can, upon the discovery of noncompliance with the terms,
safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel compliance.
The County will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit development and
the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with all terms, conditions
and safeguards of the planned unit development.
Signature of Property Owner
Samantha K. Garbus
Senior Vicg Presfderd
Printed Name
Signature of Property Owner
Printed Name
STATE OF 1
COUNTY OF
Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this day of r `�1 , 20 by
who is personally known to me or has produced as identification
Print, Type, or Stamp Commissioned
(Name typed, printed or stamped)
MICHELE VAN bE RIJN
Notarj Public - State of New York
No. 01'VA6172975 February 4, 2011
Qualified in New York County
my Commission Expires August 20. 2011
Packet Page -3397-
C2,o ie-r Co-r nt
_ y
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.collierclov.net
AFFIDAVIT
We/I, a �� %kl�cs (� L being first duly sworn, depose and say that w—t/l am /are
t` tie owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all
the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches,
E data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to
the best of our knowledge and belief. We /I understand that the information requested on this application must
N be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed
T_ shall not be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all
Nrequired information has been submitted
N As property owner We /I further authorize to act as our /my representative in
ti any matters regarding this Petition.
Signature of Frroperty Owner Signature of Property Owner
Samantha K. Garbus
Senior Mice President
Typed or Printed Name of Owner Typed or Printed Name of Owner
The foregoing instrument wap ackntow dged before me this _� day of ,_4 20JJ_, byes' I'3' IC •(vrho is personally known to me or has
ru
produced
as identification.
State of Florida (Signature of Notary Public — Snof County of Collier Florida) MICHELIE VAN iii' Notary Public - State of vi
No. 01 VA6172075
Qualified in New York County
Print, 1'''y�eABifiifli� °r9b 2011
Name of Notary Public)
February 4, 2011
INSTR 4471686 OR 4602 PG 273 RECORDED 9/3/2010 3:40 PM PAGES 2
DWIGHT E. BROCK, COLLIER COUNTY CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
DOC @.70 $35,000.00 REC $18.50
CONS $5,000,000.00
ISTAR FINANCIAL, INC., a Maryland
corporation,
Plaintiff,
V.
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
11
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER:
COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case No.: 09- 1977 -CA
CIVIL, ACTION
NAPLES RESERVE, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company-, and RWA, INC., a Florida Q,
corporation, J�
OR C Defendants. Qom, '-
1' , rn
C er ' Ce 'f ea pf Tie ° w
The undersigned Clerk th C s e an filed a C catipof ge- hi-its
action on G S1 O+ r in C li r ty, Flo' seged Eafoliows:
PARCEL NO. 1: All o on 1, Township 5 ~ e 26 East, Collier County,
Florida "
PARCEL NO •EASE + - ement described in Roadway
Easement and Maintenance Agreeme Book 2495, Page 1430, as amended
in O.R. Book 2525, Page 300, O.R. Book 2773, Page 2118 and 0. R. Book 2842, Page 565,
all of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, further described as the West 110 feet
of Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26. East lying North of U.S. Highway 41, Collier
County, Florida
and no obj ection to the sale having been filed within the time allowed for filing objections, the property was
soldto SFT. NAPB C RGSeKV1= LLC n 1 '.+.ed I;„6;i'f-v Cc-
-r
C40QMR I %o, 1Zetw.TSONAQLL�Si�P.q. 3�50T�iM+9mr�7�RH-- Nt�P-CS;�La2tOq.3411a-y90s
WITNESS my hand and the seal of this court on � J469 n c,.� 20- 2010.
DWIGHT E. BROCK
Clerk of the Circuit court
Deputy Clerk.::.
(Court Seal)
Law Offices of Cardillo, Keith & Bonaquist, PA
3550 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112 -4905 (239) 774-2229
Packet Page -3399-
* ** OR 4602 PG 274 * **
I?
ti
E
_(D
N
C)
N
d'
N
ti
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Certificate of Title has been furnished by
United States Mail on S jpjj. n Ls— % , 2010, to each of the following. `Edward K. Cheffy, Esq., Cheffy
Passidomo, P.A., 821 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 201, Naples, Florida 34102 - 6621,166 D. Kehoe, Esq.,
Cheffy Passidomo, P.A., 821 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 201, Naples, Florida 34102 - 6621' erdinand J.
Gallo, Esq., Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, 575 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10022," Stewart T. .
Kusper, Esq., Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, 525 W. Monroe Street, Chicago, IL 60661, andames A.
Bonaquist, Jr., Esq., Cardillo, Keith & Bonaquist, P.A., 3550 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112. .
DWIGHT E. BROCK
Clerk of the Circuit Court
08000Bidrg
2
Law Offices of Cardillo, Keith & Bonaquist, P.A.
3550 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112 -4905 (239) 774 -2229
Defaware
The First State
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
PAGE 1
I, JEFFREY W. BULLOCK, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF
DELAWARE, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THE ATTACHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT
COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION OF "SFI NAPLES RESERVE
LLC ", FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON THE SECOND DAY OF JUNE, A.D. 2009,
AT 3:09 O'CLOCK P.M.
4693899 8100
0905BO119
You —x verify this certificate onzzrze
at comp.delaware.yov /anthver.shtm2
Jeffrey 1N. Bullock, secretary of State
AUTHEN T�TION: 7336684
DATE: 06 -03 -09
Packet Page -3401-
ti
E
a)
N
T-
0
N
,'I-
N
ti
State of Delaware
Secretazy of `t:. to
Division of Corparations
D91ivered 03:15 PM 0610212009
FILED 03:09 PM 0,-10212009
SRV 090560119 - 4693899 FILE
CERTIFICATE OF FORMATION
OF
SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC
1, The name of the limited liability company is SFI Naples Reserve LLC,
2. The address of its registered office in the State of Delaware is
Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, in the City of Wilmington, County
of f: ,v Castle. The name of its registered agent at such address is The
Cot: r,:tion Trust Company,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate of
Formation of SFI Naples Reserve LLC this 2nd day of June, 2009.
/s/ Geoffrey M Dugan
Geoffrey M. Dugan, Authorized Person
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
THE MEMBERSHIP INTERESTS EVIDENCED BY THIS AGREEMENT HAVE NOT BEEN
REGISTERED UNDERTHE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 ORUNDERTHE SECURITIES LAWS
OF ANY STATE OR FOREIGN JURISDICTION AND MAY NOT BE SOLD OR
TRANSFERRED WITHOUT COMPLIANCE WITH ANY APPLICABLE FEDERAL, STATE OR
FOREIGN SECURITIES LAWS.
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT
OF
SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC
THIS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT OF SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC
(the "Agreement ") is entered into as of the 3rd day of June, 2009, by iSTAR FINANCIAL INC., a
Maryland corporation (the "Member"), and such other persons as may from time to time be
admitted as members of the limited liability company formed hereby (the "Company") in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement and the Act (defined below).
ARTICLE I.
FORMATION OF LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
The Member hereby forms the Company under the provisions of the Delaware Limited
Liability Company Act (5 Del. C. §18 -101, et se . (such act as heretofore and hereafter amended is
herein called the "Act ") and, except as herein otherwise expressly provided, the rights and liabilities
of the Members shall be as provided in the Act.
ARTICLE II.
NAME
The name of the limited liability company formed hereby is SFI Naples Reserve LLC, or
such other name as the Member shall hereafter designate. Geoffrey M. Dugan is hereby designated
as an "authorized person" within the meaning of the Act, and has executed, delivered and filed the
Certificate of Formation of the Company (the "Certificate of Formation ") with the Secretary of State
of the State of Delaware on June 2, 2009. Upon the filing of the Certificate of Formation with the
Secretary of State of the State of Delaware, his powers as an "authorized person" ceased, and the
Member thereupon became the designated "authorized person" and shall continue as the designated
"authorized person" within the meaning of the Act. The Member shall execute, deliver and file any
other certificates (and any amendments and /or restatements thereof) necessary for the Company to
qualify to do business in any jurisdiction in which the Company may wish to conduct business.
ARTICLE III.
PURPOSE
The purpose and business of the Company shall be to engage in any lawful activity for which
limited liability companies may be organized under the Delaware Act.
Packet Page -3403-
ti
E
N
N
r
0
N
N
ti
ARTICLE IV.
NAMES AND BUSINESS ADDRESSES OF MEMBERS
The names and business addresses of the Members are the same as to which notices should
be directed as set forth in Section 19.07 hereof. Upon its execution of a counterpart signature page to
this Agreement, iStar Financial Inc. is hereby admitted to the Company as a member in the
Company.
ARTICLE V.
TERM
The Company shall have a perpetual existence unless sooner dissolved and terminated as
hereinafter provided.
ARTICLE VI
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS
The principal place of business of the Company shall be c/o iStar Financial Inc., 1114
Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10036 or such other place or places as the Member
may, from time to time, designate. The address of the registered office of the Company in the State
of Delaware is c/o Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware, 19801.
The name and address of the registered agent of the Company for service of process on the Company
in the State of Delaware is the Corporation Trust Company, Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange
Street, Wilmington, Delaware, 19801.
ARTICLE VII.
CAPITAL AND CONTRIBUTIONS
7.01 The Member has made the capital contribution set forth opposite such Member's
name in Exhibit A,
7.02 No additional capital contribution shall be required from any Member provided,
however, the Member in its sole discretion, without creating any right in favor of any third party,
may contribute such additional contributions to the Company as the Member shall, in its sole
discretion, determine.
7.03 An individual capital account (herein called a "Capital Account ") shall be
maintained for each Member. Such Member's Capital Account shall be comprised of (i) the amount
of such Member's cash contribution actually contributed to the Company's capital, plus (ii) the value
of the capital contributions described in Section 7.01, plus (iii) all income, profit and gains allocated
to such Member pursuant to this Agreement, and shall be decreased by the amount of (x) all losses
and expenses allocated to such Member pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and (y) all
distributions to such Member by the Company pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
7.04 Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement (i) no Member shall be entitled to
withdraw any amount on account of its Capital Account, to demand or receive any property from the
Partnership other than cash, or to receive any interest on, or payment in respect of, its Capital
K
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Account, and (ii) no Member shall be required to contribute any additional money or property to the
capital of or lend money to the Company.
ARTICLE VIII.
DISTRIBUTIONS
When in the opinion of the Member there is cash available for distribution from any source
whatsoever, all of such funds shall be distributed to the Member. Notwithstanding any provision to
the contrary contained in this Agreement, the Company shall not be required to make a distribution
to the Member on account of its interest in the Company if such distribution would violate Sections
18 -607 and 18 -804 of the Act or any other applicable law.
ARTICLE IX.
ALLOCATIONS OF PROFITS AND LOSSES
All items of Company income, gain, loss, deduction, or credit for federal or state income tax
purposes shall be allocated to the Member.
ARTICLE X.
BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND RECORDS
The books and records of the Company shall at all times be maintained at the principal
offices of the Company by the Member on behalf of the Company or at such other location as the
Member may determine from time to time.
ARTICLE XI.
FISCAL YEAR
The fiscal year of the Company shall end on the thirty-first day of December in each year.
ARTICLE XII.
COMPANY FUNDS
The Company's funds shall be deposited in such bank account or accounts, or invested in
such interest- bearing or noninterest- bearing investments, as :,hall be designated by the Member from
time to time. All withdrawals from, or closing of, any such bank accounts shall be made by the
authorized agent or agents of the Member from time to t�° e.
ARTICLE Y- -
[INTENTION/ ...,Y OMITTED]
ARTICLE; XIV.
POWERS, RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF MEMBER
14.01 Subject to the express terms of this Agreement, the Member shall have exclusive
authority to manage the operations and affairs of the Company and to make all decisions regarding
the business ofthe Company. Pursuant to the foregoing, it is understood and agreed that the Member
3
Packet Page -3405-
shall have all of the rights and powers of a member as provided in the Act and as otherwise provided
by law, and any action taken by the Member shall constitute the act of and setve to bind the
Company. in dealing with the Member acting on behalf of the Company, no person shall be required
to inquire into the authority of the Member to bind the Company. Persons dealing . with the Company
are entitled to rely conclusively on the power and authority of the Member as set forth in this
Agreement.
14.02 Subject to the express terms of this Agreement, the Member is hereby granted the
right, power and authority to do on behalf of the Company all things which, in its sole judgment, are
—� necessary, proper or desirable to carry out the aforementioned duties and responsibilities.
ti
14.03 The Member may, from time to time, appoint officers (the "Officers ") of the
E Company in its sole discretion as the Member deems necessary, appropriate, advisable or convenient.
= The Officers of the Company may include, without limitation, a chief executive officer, a chief
financial officer, a president, one or more vice presidents, executive vice presidents an d senior vice
N
presidents, a treasurer, one or more assistant treasurers, a secretary, and one or more assistant
secretaries. Pursuant to the foregoing, the Member hereby appoints the Officers listed in Exhibit B.
NEach Officer shall hold office until the Officers death, resignation or removal in the manner
hereinafter provided. In its sole discretion, the Member may leave unfilled any office. Appointment
of an Officer or agent shall not of itself create contract rights between the Company and that Officer
or agent. Any Officer or agent of the Company may be removed by the Member if in its sole
judgment such removal is necessary, appropriate, advisable or convenient. Any Officer of the
Company may resign at any time by giving written notice of the resignation to the Member. Any
resignation shall take effect at the time specified therein or, if the time when it shall become effective
is not specified therein, immediately upon its receipt. The acceptance of a resignation shall not be
necessary to matte it effective unless stated in the resignation.
14.04 To the fullest extent permitted by law, neither the Member, any Officer of the
Company, nor any officer, partner, director, stockholder or agent of the Member shall be liable,
responsible or accountable in damages or otherwise to the Company or any Member for any action
taken or failure to act on behalf of the Company within the scope of the authority conferred on the
Member by this Agreement or by law unless such act or omission was performed or omitted
fraudulently or in bad faith or constituted gross negligence.
14.05 The Member shall be the "tax matters member" for purposes of Sections 6221 -6233
of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1996, as amended from time to time (the "Code ").
The Member may enter into any settlement agreement pursuant to the Code; provided, however, that
the Member shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, not be liable, responsible or accountable in
damages or otherwise to the Company or any Member with respect to any audit of the Company for
income tax or other purposes. All costs and expenses incurred by the "tax matters member" in
connection with an audit of the Company's income tax return shall be borne by the Member.
14.06 To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Company shall defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the Officers of the Company, the Member and its officers, partners, directors, stockholders
and agents from and against any loss, expense, damage or injury suffered or sustained by any of them
by reason of their acts, omissions or alleged acts or omissions arising out of its activities on behalfof
the Company, including any judgment, award, settlement, attorneys' fees and other costs or expenses
incurred in connection with the defense of any actual or threatened action, proceeding or claim, if the
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
acts, omissions or alleged acts or omissions upon which such actual or threatened action, proceeding
or claim is based were for a purpose reasonably believed to be in the best interests of the Company
and were not performed or omitted fraudulently or in bad faith or as a result of gross negligence by
such party.
14.07 The Member may have other business interests and may engage in other activities in
addition to those related to the Company. Neither the Company nor any Member shall have any right
by virtue of this Agreement or the limited liability company relationship created hereby in or to such
other ventures or activities or to the income or proceeds derived therefrom, and the pursuit of such
ventures and activities, even if such other ventures or activities are competitive with the business of
the Company, shall not be deemed wrongful or improper.
ARTICLE XV.
TRANSFER OF INTERESTS
15.01 Any assignee or transferee shall not automatically become a substituted Member
unless the assignee is the assignee of the Member and upon such assignee's execution of a
counterpart signature page of this Agreement.
ARTICLE XVI.
DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY
16.01 The Company shall be dissolved, and its affairs shall be wound up upon the first to
occur of the following: (i) upon the unanimous written consent of the Members, and (ii) the entry of
a decree of j udicial dissolution under Section 18 -802 of the Act.
16.02 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the Bankruptcy (as defined
below) of the Member shall not cause the Member to cease to be a member in the Company, and
upon the occurrence of such an event, the business of the Company shall continue without
dissolution. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, to the fullest extent permitted
by law, the Member waives any right it might have under Section 18- 801(b) of the Act to agree in
writing to dissolve the Company upon the Bankruptcy of the Member or the occurrence of any other
event that causes such Member to cease to be a member in the Company. `Bankruptcy" means,
with respect to the Member, if the Member (i) makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors, (ii)
files a voluntary petition in bankruptcy, (iii) is adjudged a bankrupt or insolvent, or has entered
against itself an order for relief, in any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding, (iv) files a petition or
answer seeking for itself any reorganization, arrangement, composition, readjustment, liquidation,
dissolution or similar relief under any statute, law or regulation, (v) files an answer or other pleading
admitting or failing to contest the material allegations of a petition filed against it in any proceeding
of this nature, (vi) seeks, consents to or acquiesces in the appointment of a trustee, receiver or
liquidator of the Member or of all or any substantial part of its properties, or (vii) 120 days after the
commencement of any proceeding against the Member seeking reorganization, arrangement,
composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under any statute, law or
regulation, of the proceedings has not been dismissed, or if within 90 days after the appointment,
without the Member's consent or acquiescence, of a trustee, receiver or liquidator of the Member or
of all or any substantial part of its properties, the appointment is not vacated or stayed, or within 90
days after the expiration of any such stay, the appointment is not vacated. With respect to the
Packet Page -3407-
ti
E
a�
N
O
N
d-
N
ti
Member, the foregoing definition of `Bankruptcy" is intended to replace and shall supersede the
definition of "bankruptcy" set forth in Sections 18- 101(1) and 16 -304 of the Act.
16.03 In the event of dissolution, the Company shall conduct only such activities as are
necessary to wind up its affairs (including the sale of the assets of the Company in an orderly
manner), and the assets of the Company shall be applied in the manner, and in the order ofpriority,
a
set forth in Section 18 -804 of the Act.
1 6.04 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the bankruptcy (as defined in
the Act) of a Member shall not cause such Member to cease to be a member of the Company, and
upon the occurrence of such an event, the Company shall continue without dissolution.
ARTICLE XVII.
ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING
DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY
17.01 In the event of the dissolution of the Company for any reason, the Member, or in the
event that the Member is not then a Member, the former Member shall be elected as the liquidating
trustee of the Company and the liquidating trustee shall wind up the affairs of the Company and
liquidate its investments. The Member shall continue to share profits, losses and cash distributions
during the period of liquidation in the same manner as immediately before the dissolution.
17.02 Following the satisfaction (by payment or reasonable provision for payment) of all
debts and liabilities of the Company and all expenses of liquidation in accordance with applicable
law, the remaining proceeds of the liquidation and any other legally available funds ofthe Company
shall be distributed in accordance with Article VIII hereof
17.03 The Member shall look solely to the assets of the Company for all distributions with
respect to the Company and for the return of its capital contribution and shall have no recourse
therefor against any other Member. The Members shall not have any right to demand or receive
property other than cash upon dissolution and liquidation of the Company or to demand the return of
their capital contributions to the Company prior to dissolution and termination of the Company.
17.04 Upon the completion of the liquidation of the Company and the distribution of all
Company funds in accordance with this Agreement, the Company shall be terminated, and the
Member (or such liquidating trustee) shall have the authority to execute and file a certificate of
cancellation of the Certificate of Formation of the Company as well as any and all other documents
required to effectuate the termination of the Company.
ARTICLE XVIII.
AMENDMENT
This Agreement may be amended at anytime by the written consent of the Member except as
otherwise provided in this Agreement or the Certificate of Formation.
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
ARTICLE XIX.
ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
19.01 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement among the parties. It supersedes any
prior agreement or understandings among them, and it may not be modified or amended in any
manner other than as set forth herein.
19,02 This Agreement and the rights of the parties hereunder shall be governed by and
interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware without regard to conflict of lays
principles.
19.03 Except as herein otherwise specifically provided, this Agreement shall be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their legal representatives, heirs, administrators,
executors, successors and assigns.
19.04 Wherever from the context it appears appropriate, each term stated in either the
singular or the plural shall include the singular and the plural, and pronouns stated in either the
masculine, the feminine or the neuter gender shall include the masculine, feminine and neuter. As
used in this Agreement, the terms "include", "includes ", "including", and any other derivation. of
"include" mean "including, but not limited to" unless specifically set forth to the contrary,
19.05 Captions contained in this Agreement are inserted only as a matter of convenience
and in no way define, limit or extend the scope or intent of this Agreement or any provision thereof.
19.06 If any provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to any person
or circumstance, shall be held invalid, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such
provision to persons or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid, shall not be
affected hereby.
19.07 All notices, demands, consents, requests, approvals, and other communications
required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given
if hand delivered, or if mailed (effective upon receipt or, if refused, upon the date of refusal) by
United States registered or certified mail, with postage pre -paid, return receipt requested, or if sent
by a nationally recognized private courier postage pre -paid, return receipt requested (effective upon
receipt or, if refused, upon the date of refusal) to the Members at the following addresses (or such
other address within the United States of America as shall be given in writing by any Member to the
other Members in accordance with this Section 19.07):
iStar Financial Inc.
1114 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10036
Attention: Chief Legal Officer
19.08 This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original, buf all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. In addition, this
Agreement may contain more than one counterpart of the signature page and this Agreement maybe
executed by the affixing of the counterpart signature page(s) containing the signatures of each of the
7
Packet Page -3409-
Members. All of such counterpart signature pages shall be read as though one, and they shall have
the same force and effect as though all of the signers had signed a single signature page.
19.09 The Member is not obligated to deliver or mail to any Member a copy of the
Company's Certificate of Formation or of any amendment thereto or restatement thereof.
19.10 Each Member irrevocably waives any right to maintain an action of partition with
respect to the Company's properties.
---3 19.11 The Members will execute and deliver such further instruments and do such further
acts and things as may be required to carry out the intent and purposes of this Agreement. Nothing
contained herein, however, shall require any of the Members to make any material representations,
aD warranties, or obligations except as specifically set forth herein or as clearly contemplated hereby.
V
0
N
d'
N
ti
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
IN WITNESS WIIEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Agreement as of the
day first set forth above.
MEMBER:
iSTAR FINANCIAL INC.,
a Maryland co oration
r
By:
Geoifre
General unsel, -orporat� and ecretary
6
Packet Page -3411-
Member
Member
ti
N
O
N
d'
N
ti
EXHIBIT A
Contribution
$100
Name
Jay S. Sugarman
Jay S. Nydick
Nina B. Matis
James D. Bums
Barbara Rubin
Daniel S. Abrams
Steven R. Bloniquist
Chase S. Curtis, Jr.
R. Michael Dorsch III
Barclay G. Jones III
Michelle M. Mackay
Vernon Schwartz
David DiStaso
Geoffrey M. Dugan
Alec Nedelman
Philip S. Burke
Andrew G. Backman
Cathy S. Blankenship
William D. Burns, Jr.
Gregory F. Camia
Collin L. Cochrane
Samantha K. Garbus
Alidad Govahi
Bert Haboucha
William W. Hyatt
Erin Kerrigan
Joseph L. Kirk, Jr,
John F. Kubicko
Lesley Love
Steven Magee
EXHIBIT B
Title
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
President
Chief Legal Officer & Chief Investment Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
Executive Vice President
Chief Accounting Officer
General Counsel, Corporate & Secretary
General Counsel, Structured Finance
Chief Information Officer
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President & Corporate Controller
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
Packet Page -3413-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
C. Gregory Newman
Senior Vice President
Thomas Pacha
Senior Vice President
Maty -Beth C. Roselle
Senior Vice President, Associate General Counsel &
Assistant Secretary
David Sotolov
Senior Vice President
Stephen M. Spencer
Senior Vice President
ti
Erich J. Stiger
Senior Vice President
E
Stephen Stinson
Senior Vice President
Nancy Sulse
Senior Vice President
N
Cynthia M. Tucker
Senior Vice President
NKelly
K. Wachowicz
Senior Vice President
NNancy
M. Zoeckler
Senior Vice President
~
Dan Allen
Vice President
Deborah Bacon
Vice President
Michael Battin
Vice President
Matthew Ballinger
Vice President
Christopher Beach
Vice President
Eiisha Blecluter
Vice President
Anthony Burns
Vice President
Julia Butler
Vice President
Mary Anne Carlin
Vice President
Carrie E. Crain
Vice President
Jeffrey Dewey
Vice President
Matthew Doerr
Vice President
Larsen Fusco
Vice President
Sabrina Gleizer
Vice President
Elizabeth Glover Wilson
Vice President
Matthew Gouvion
Vice President
Douglas Heyman
Vice President
Gray Hughes
Vice President
Lloyd Huie
Vice President
Sylvia Jacques
Vice President
Jason Longo
Vice President
Sandy Maclean
Jay R. Mancl
John Miller
Thomas Moore
Katie Morris
Donna Musial
Marie E. Paparella
Scott Quigle
Toni Anne Sanzone
J. Paul Sharp
Scott T. Smith
William T. Stabinsky
Troy Stephan
Lizbeth Stolces
Cheiyl Tam
Jennifer Tarlow
Shawn Wardlow
Tim Wcgner
Joseph F. Welch
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President & Assistant Controller
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Vice President
Packet Page -3415-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
ti
E
N
N
O
N
d'
N
ti
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/
PLANNING AND REGULATION
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Coker County
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.colliergov.net
PRE - APPLICATION MEETING NOTES
❑ PUD Rezone (PUDZ)
❑ PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDZ -A)
XPUD Amendment (PUDA)
PL#
Date- Time: � Firm:_ l � �f
Project Name: Size of Project Site � ! ` acres
%
Applicant Name: Phone
'Std
Owner Name: -7� iy16 4 —&/� 4&C Phone:
Owner Address: City State ZIP
Existing PUD Name and Number
Assigned Planner
Meeting Attendees: (attach Sign -In sheet)
Meeting Notes
C,-�up�
JUNE 2011
Packet Page -3417-
ti
r
E
N
(V
o
N
d'
N
I`
Co ier County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.colliergov.net
SCHOOL CONCURRENCY-
For information regarding the school concurrency application process, please contact the School District of Collier
County - Students, Staff Projections, Allocations and Reporting Department at 239 - 377 -0254.
PUD REZONE (PUDZ)
PUD to PUD REZONE (PUDZ -A)
PUD AMENDMENT (PUDA)
APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN
THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W /COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION.
NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
REQUIREMENTS
# OF
COPIES
REQUIRED
NOT
REQUIRE
STANDARD``REQUIREMENTS.
I Additional set if located in the Bayshore/ ateway Triangle
Redevelopment Area)
Copies of detailed descri tion o rriendfinent is necessary
Completed Application (download from website for current form)
PUD Document & Conceptual Site Plan 24" x 36" and One 812" x
11" coy
Revised Conceptual Site Plan 24" x 36 "and O " x 11" copy
Original PUD document and Master Pl 4" x 36" �1
ONLY IF AMENDING THE PUD (� ti
TMed
Revised PUD document with than es crossed thzu & u filer
i�
Revised PUD document w /amended Title page word #'s, LDC
10.02.13.A.2
❑
Deeds/Legal's & Survey (if boundary of original PUD is amend . -)
3
List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation
2
2
Owner /Affidavit signed & notarized
Covenant of Unified Control
2
1\6
Completed Addressing checklist
2
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) * or exem tior justification
2
--..
Digital/electronic copy of EIS (copy for Planner & Environmental)
2
Historical Survey or waiver request
4
Utility Provisions Statement w /sketches
4
Architectural rendering of proposed structures
4
JUNE 2011
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/
PLANNING AND REGULATION
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
6
Co er County
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.colliergov.net
Survey, signed & sealed
4
Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) or waiver (with applicable fees)
7
,n
of Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) on CDROM
3
/
-Copy
Aerial photographs (taken within the previous 12 months min. scale
1 "= 200'), showing FLUCCS Codes, Legend, and project boundary
5
Xl�i
Electronic copy of all documents in Word format and plans (CDRo
or Diskette)
Justification/Rationale for the Deviations (must be on a separate
sheet within the application material; DO NOT include it in the PUD
documents)
Copies of Official Interpretations and/or Zoning Verifications - t' (,
1
School Impact Analysis Application (residential components)
2
Y
1 set for Schoo District (residential com oven ) l
\ ►,i11Ti,�diL�l�ii Ti ���L�hi01f1► iR]illiil =YAYA W9
_ Affordable -- „Housing or Economic :DeveQlp nt Council
. EDC "Fast Track” must submit approved copy of official application
2
,n
❑Affordable Housing "Expedited" must submit copy of signed Certificate
/
of Agreement.
* *If project includes an Affordable Housing component, you are required to
schedule a meeting before the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee by
contacting the Collier County Housing and Human Services Department at
239 - 252 -2273.
❑ Check here if there are any Settlement Agreements associated with this property. Indicate type of
agreement and agreement number.
Agreement 4 ❑ Deltona ❑ Lely Barefoot Beach ❑ Port of the Islands Interlocal
Route package to: The Conservancy, Attn: Nichole Ryan
1450 Merrihue Dr., Naples, FL 34102
)�If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas
Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. Lacavera, State of Florida
Division of Forestry @ 239 - 690 -3500 for information regarding
"Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan", LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a.(b)i.c.
❑ If located within 1/2 mile of City of f Naples. send copy of submittal package to:
Robin Singer, Planning Director
City of Naples, 295 Riverside Circle, Naples, FL 34102
JUNE 2011
Packet Page -3419-
ti
E
_N
N
O
N
N
t`
r
Coen County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252 -6358
www.colliergov.net
PLANNER, CHECK MARK BELOW FOR ADDITIONAL REVIEWS:
SCHOOL DISTRICT (residential
PARKS & REC — VICKY AHMAD
components) Amy Taylor
SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS
IMMOKALEE WATER/SEWER
DISTRICT
DR /EM1 — EMER. MGMT — Dan
UTILITIES ENGINEERING: PAULO
Summers
#
MARTINS
CITY OF NAPLES, Robin Singer,
BAYSHORE/GATEWAY TRIANGLE
Planning Director
REDEVELOPMENT Executive Director
CONSERVANCY, Nichole Ryan
IRE REVIEW: RICCO LONGO
EMS — ARTIE BAY
ENGINEERING: JACK MCKENNA
TRANS. PATHWAYS: ALISON
COMP PLANNING: (SEE SIGN -IN
BRADFORD
SHEET FROM PRE -APP MEETING)
ENVIRONMENTAL:
SEE SIGN -IN
SHEET FROM PRE -APP MEETING)
Fees
Application Fee: ❑ $10,000 (PUD Rezone) + $25 per acre (or fraction of thereof)
❑ $8,000 (PUD to PUD) + $25 per acre (or fraction thereof)
$6,000 (PUD Amendment) + $25 per acre (or fraction of an acre)
® Fire Code Review — New PUD Rezone $150, PUD to PUD Rezone $125, PUD Amendment $125
® $2,250.00 Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review
® $500.00 Pre - application fee (Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the
last pre -app meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre -
application meeting will be required.
® $925.00 Legal Advertising Fee for CCPC meeting
® $500.00 Legal Advertising Fee for BCC meeting (advertising costs are to be reconciled upon receipt of
In f
voice ram Naples Daily News).
nvironme Impact Statement review fee
fwd i76�sted-ta-P or tested Species survey review fee (when an EIS is not required)
'` Property Owner Notification fees. Property Owner Notifications $1.50 Non - certified; $3.00
Certified return receipt mail (to be paid after receipt of invoice from Dept. of Zoning &
Development Review)
Attach a Separate Check for Transportation Fees, (Refer to Exhibit A):
❑ $500.00 Methodology Re3wFee, if required Additional Fees to be determined at
Methodology Meeting. t� Cc)rJT �( s c A W o t-4 A10
S'[ loos W. ��1-b3�a (A `ia '
YJ
Fee To $
��E 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
co Ater County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION/ NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
PLANNING AND REGULATION (239) 252 -2400 FAX (239) 252.6358
www.colliergov.net
PaLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS LDC 10.03.05 F.
Applicant must conduct at least one Neighborhood Informational Meeting (NIM) after initial staff review and
comment on the application and before the Public Hearing is scheduled with the Planning Commission.
Written notice of the meeting shall be sent to all property owners who are required to receive legal notification
from the County pursuant to Section 10.03.05.8.8.
Notification shall also be sent to property owners, condominium and civic associations whose members are impacted
by the proposed land use change and who have formally requested the County to be notified.
A copy of the list of all parties noticed, and the date, time, and location of the meeting, must be furnished to the
Land Development Services Department and the Office of the Board of County Commissioners no less than ten (10)
days prior to the scheduled date of the NIM.
The applicant must make arrangements for the location of the meeting. The location must be reasonably convenient
to those property owners who are required to receive notice and the facilities must be of sufficient size to
accommodate expected attendance.
The applicant must place an advertisement of the meeting in that portion of the newspaper where legal notices and
classified advertisements appear stating the purpose, location, time of the meeting and legible site location map of
the property for which the zoning change is being requested. The display advertisement must be one -fourth page,
in type no smaller than 12 point and must be placed within a newspaper of general circulation in the County at least
seven (7) days prior to, but no sooner than five (5) days before, the NIM.
The Collier County staff planner assigned to the project must attend the NIM and shall serve as the facilitator of the
meeting; however, the applicant is expected to make a presentation of how it intends to develop the subject
property.
The applicant is required to audio or video tape the proceedings of the meeting and provide a copy to the Land
Development Services Department.
As a result of mandated meetings with the public, any commitments made by the applicant shall be reduced to
writing and made a part of the record of the proceedings provided to the Land Development Services Department.
These written commitments will be made a part of the staff report of the County's review and approval bodies and
made a part of the consideration for inclusion in the conditions of approval.
RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (specify name) at its expense shall
record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or
Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the
land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in
the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the
recording requirements of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided
to the Collier County Planned Unit Development Monitoring staff within 15 days of recording of said
Memorandum or Notice.
JUNE 2011
Packet Page -3421-
ti
E
a�
N
O
N
"I-
N
ti
tx
i
0
V1
W
Q
Z
E'
U.
0
ul
Q
v
0
o:
a�
o'
m
v
'a
c
a
c
0
N
0
C
i
a
m
C�a
az
LL!
Z
z
d
Q
Lu
Z
C7
N
t/1
a
n�
m
0
V
v
a
_
v
c
N
H
'Cf
Q
'a
ail
d`
r
i
C
i
Ot
M
a.
v
Z
m
O
Z
N
N
O
0
Q
_J
Q
LL
W
Co
G
D
Z
LU
O
d
L
AU
O�
0 -0
Z
O
v
uj
Z
Packet Page -3423-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
p
M
N
N
O
t`
O
a
d
0
co
ti
c�
U
C
t4
z
W
W
2
CO
_Z
Z
C7
y
C
N
E
U
O
n
C:
c�
ti
r
N
N
r
O
N
d'
N
ti
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
ADDRESSING DEPARTMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
AOVR- ESSINQ CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and fax to 4he Addressing Department at 238- 659 -5724 or submit in
Addressing Department at the above address, person to the
Form must be signed by addressing personnel prior to pre - application meeting. Not all items will a I to eve
Items in bold type P- required. Forms older than 8 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing
Department,
PETITION TYPE (check ped on type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type)
❑ EL (Blasting Permit)
❑ BD (Boat Dock Extension)
❑ Carnival/Circus Permit
❑ CU (Conditional Use)
❑ EXP (Excavation Permit)
❑ FP (Final Plat
❑ LLA (Lot Line Adjustment)
❑ PNC (Project Name Change)
❑ PPL (Plans & Piet Review)
❑ PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat)
® PULE Rezone
❑ RZ (Standard Rezone)
❑ SDP (Site Development Plan)
❑ SDPA (SDP Amendment)
❑ SOPI (insubstantial Change to SDP)
❑ SIP (Site Improvement Plan)
❑
SIP[ (Insubstantial Change to Sip)
❑ SNR (Street Name Change)
❑ SNC (Street Name Change – Unplatted)
❑ TOR (Transfer of Development Rights)
0 VA (Variance)
❑ VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit)
❑ VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site f=it► Permit)
❑ OTHER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy aflangthy description may be attached)
All of section 1, Township 51 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida
FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description +f more than one)
007238SOOG2
STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable if already assigned)
90097 Greenway Road
• • LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of prajectlsite in relation to nearest public road right of -uray
SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties)
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
Naples Reserve C Olr Cl —b
PROPOSED STREET NAMES (ifapplicable)
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/Sites only)
SDP - or AR#
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST - PAGE TWO Page 1 of 2
Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application; indicate
whether proposed or existing)
Please Check One: ® Checklist is to be Faxad back ❑ Personally Picked Up
APPLICANT NAME: RWA, Inc.
PHONE 239- 597-0575 FAX 239 - 597.0578
Signature on. Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and /or Street Name approval and is
subject to further review, by the Addressing Department.
FOR STAFF USE oNLY
Primary Number b. c�"T z.3q g 00
Address Number
Addres'g Number
Address Number
Approved by: Date:
Updated by: Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORAM SUBMITTED
G:ICurrentlApp){cation FormsV4ddressing checkW rev 020207.doc
Packet Page -3425-
Page 2 of 2
ti
E
N
N
T-
C)
N
It
N
ti
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
ADDRESSING DEPARTMENT
a
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and fax to the Addressing Department at 239 -659 -5724 or submit in person to the
Addressing Department at the above address.
Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre - application meeting. Not all items will apply to every project.
Items in bold type are required. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing
Department.
PETITION TYPE (check petition type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type)
❑ BL (Blasting Permit)
❑ BD (Boat Dock Extension)
❑ Carnival/Circus Permit
❑ CU (Conditional Use)
❑ EXP (Excavation Permit)
❑ FP (Final Plat
❑ LLA (Lot Line Adjustment)
❑ PNC (Project Name Change)
❑ PPL (Plans & Plat Review)
❑ PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat)
® PUD Rezone
❑ RZ (Standard Rezone)
❑ SDP (Site Development Plan)
❑ SDPA (SDP Amendment)
❑ SOPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP)
❑ SIP (Site Improvement Plan)
❑ SIPI (insubstantial Change to SIP)
❑ SNR (Street Name Change)
❑ SNC (Street Name Change — Unplatted)
❑ TOR (Transfer of Development Rights)
❑ VA (Variance)
❑ VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit)
❑ VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit)
❑ OTHER
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
All of section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida
FOLIO (Property 1D) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
00723880002
STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned)
90097 Green way Road
• LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right -of- -way
• SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties)
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
Naples Reserve Cliolf C_(-L,-b
PROPOSED STREET NAMES Cif applicable)
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projectslskes only)
SDP - orAR#
Packet Page -3427-
ti
E
N
0
N
It
N
r—
ADDRESSING CMiECKLIST - PAeE TWO
Page 1 of 2
Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application; indicate
whether proposed or existing)
Please Check One: M Checklist is to be Faxed back ❑ Personalty Picked Up
APPLICANT NAME: RWA, Inc.
PHONE 239 -597 -0575 FAX 239 - 597 -0578
Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and /or Street Name approval and is
subject to further review by the Addressing Department.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Primary Number-C�-a"l 7.3q'r Low
Address Number
Address Number
Address Number
Approved by. an- n , j 6XQ w� Date: t �t
Updated by: Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
Page 2 of 2
GACurrenMpp iration FormslAddressing Gheckltst rev 020207,doe
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
NAPLES RESERVE RPUD
NARRATIVE AND BASIS FOR APPROVAL
Naples Reserve, formerly known as the Naples Reserve Golf Club, is located one mile north of
US 41 and 11/2 miles east of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 95 1) at 10097 Greenway Road, in Section 1,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. On November 13, 2007, the Collier
County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved Ordinance 07 -71, amending the
Naples Reserve Golf Club RPD to include 1154 dwelling units, golf course and recreation area
and repealing Ordinance 99 -42.
Ownership of the 688± acre property has changed and a revised development intent is being
pursued through this Petition. The Project proposes to remove the golf course and all related
golf course uses, and revise the internal layout of the development without any changes to the
boundaries of the Preserve Tract. The Project does not propose to increase the approved density.
There are refinements to development standards for land uses proposed in recreation areas to
improve compatibility with future residences.
The Project provides for the following:
• 1,154 residential dwelling units (See Statement of Compliance);
• 63.7 acres of Preservation
Open Space, including 87 ± -acres of stormwater management lakes, approximately 74 acres
of recreation lake, and three areas intended for community recreation and social space
identified as Recreation Areas on the RPUD Master Plan, Exhibit C. Other recreation areas
containing buildings and facilities may be developed in Residential Tract R, subject to
compliance with the same development standards for Tract RA as contained in Exhibit B of
the RPUD Ordinance Exhibits.
The proposed Project allows for the full range of residential land uses. It is currently intended to
be developed primarily with single- family homes, with the potential of having some multi - family
land uses. The market will determine the actual residential land uses to be constructed. The
residences will be oriented around an expansive lake system that has been specifically designed
to provide for recreation as well as for stormwater management. The recreation lakes will be
separated from the stormwater management lakes in accordance with the rules of the South
Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). All residential areas within the PUD have
pedestrian connection to greenways that will provide multi -use paths for the enjoyment of the
intended natural and man -made amenities throughout the project. While the property does have
an Environmental Resource Permit (11- 00090 -S -02) and a Dredge and Fill Permit from the U.S.
Arrny Corps of Engineers (Permit #199900619 IP -SB), those permits must be modified to reflect
the removal of the golf course and changed plan of development.
A special purpose local government enabled by Chapter 190, F.S., known as the Naples Reserve
CDD, may provide a mechanism for the funding, construction and operation of the Naples
Reserve RPUD's infrastructure.
03/12/2012 Page 1 of 3
0:\2004 \040125.11.02 Naples Reserve (Star RPUD \0005 RPUD Rezoning Appliotion Support\Review 2 \Resubmittal k 2 \2012 -03-08 Narrative & Basis For Approval - Clean (rev 3).docx
Packet Page -3429-
—i
ti
E
a)
tf
N
T_
0
N
"'I-
C14
ti
It should be noted that given the subject RPUD's distant location from a major public roadway,
off -site signage was approved. These provisions for off -site signage are now contained in
Exhibit B.
Several of the conditions in the existing RPUD Ordinance are proposed for deletion based on
changed conditions in the community that warrant their removal.
Requested Deviations Contained in Exhibit E of the RPUD Ordinance Exhibits:
Many of the previously approved deviations have been found to be not appropriate in PUD
zoning instruments, but rather addressed through the development order review process.
Therefore, the majority of the deviations have been eliminated with the exception of Deviation
#1, below.
Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.5.c., that functionally limits the number
of model homes to allow one model home for each variant of the residential product proposed in
the project. In an effort to provide a variety of residence styles and floor plans within the
development, it is essential not to arbitrarily limit the opportunity of a home buyer to see the
creativity of the architecture proposed in a development. To do so could result in monotonous
tract housing reminiscent of the "new town" movement after the end of the World War II. This
deviation is appropriate, and does not negatively affect the health and safety, nor welfare of the
future residents of the development.
The Naples Reserve RPUD may have one model home representing each type of residential
product. The number of model homes may exceed five, but shall not exceed a total of fifteen.
Deviation 1 from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.5.c. that limits the total number of model homes in a
single development to five.
Deviation #2 Seeks relief from the Collier County Code of Ordinances, Part 1, Chapter 22,
Article IV Excavation, Section 22 -110 (a)(3)b. that limits the amount of excavated materials that
may leave the boundaries of a PUD. This relief is requested to provide a. public benefit that may
be defined in a Developer Contribution Agreement. The limitation of up to 10 percent (to a
maximum of 20,000 cubic yards) may be exceeded only to provide fill material for the .County
and State projects. The amount of excavated material that may be transported off -site shall be
determined at a later date, or may be defined in a Developer Contribution Agreement.
Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02 B.6. that allows ground/residential entrance
signage only on -site within residential zoning districts, to allow ground/residential entrance
signage outside of the residential zoning district that the signage will serve. This off -site
ground /residential entrance signage shall be permitted within the median of Naples Reserve
Boulevard in close proximity to the US -41 Right -of -Way. The Naples Reserve RPUD is located
approximately 1/3 of one mile north of the intersection of Naples Reserve Boulevard and US -41.
In an effort to appropriately identify the Naples Reserve development to the public traveling on
US -41, the signage permitted by said section of the LDC should be allowed to be proximate to
the US -41 Right -of Way in accordance with the locational development standards of the LDC.
03/12/2012 Page 2 of 3
0: \2004 \040125.11.02 Naples Reserve i5tar RPUD \DDDS RPUD Rezoning Application Support\Review 2 \11esubmittal N 2 \2012 -03 -08 Narrative & Basis for Approval -Clean (rev 3).do"
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
The off -site, ground/residential signage shall be limited in height and sign area as restricted by
LDC Section 5.06.02 B.6.
03/12/2012 Page 3 of 3
0: \2004 \040125.11.02 Naples Reserve (Star RPUD \0005 RPUD Rezoning Application Support\Review 2 \Resubmittal # 2 \2012 -03 -08 Narrative & Basis For Approval -Clean (rev 3).dou
Packet Page -3431-
ti
E
N
N
O
N
d
N
ti
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
NAPLES RESERVE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) was found to be consistent
with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) by Ordinance 07-
71, and this proposed amendment to remove the golf course and revise the Conceptual Master
Site Plan does not diminish this consistency. The development of approximately 688 acres of
property in Collier County, Florida as a RPUD to be known as the Naples Reserve shall comply
with the goals, objectives and policies of Collier County GMP for the following reasons.
1. The subject property proposed for development consists of 310.94 acres designated Urban -
Mixed Use District, Residential Fringe Subdistrict and 377.16 acres designated
Agricultural/Rural - Rural Fringe Mixed Use District ( RFMUD), Receiving Lands as
identified on the Future Land Use Map, as provided for in Objective 1 of the Future Land
Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP.
2. The RPUD is planned to provide for a density of up to 1154 dwelling units, which is
consistent with the existing RPUD approved by Ordinance 07 -71. In order to achieve this
density, 612 TDR credits will be utilized to increase the residential density of the project to
1.677 dwelling units per acre (DU /A). The RPUD will employ the density blending
provisions of the GMP and Land Development Code (LDC) to allow for the distribution of
density throughout the project. The density blending provisions enables Naples Reserve
RPUD to provide a unified plan of development and preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and
other natural features.
The primary purpose of the TDR process within the RFMUD is to establish an equitable
method of protecting and conserving the most valuable environmental areas, including large
connected wetland systems and significant areas of habitat for listed species, while allowing
property owners of such areas to recoup lost value and development potential through an
economically viable process of transferring such rights to other more suitable areas. Within
the RFMUD, residential density may be transferred from lands designated as Sending Lands
to lands designated as Receiving Lands on the Future Land Use Map, subject to criteria.
The base residential density allowed in the designated Receiving Lands is one (1) unit per
five (5) gross acres (0.2 DU /A). The maximum density achievable in Receiving Lands
through the TDR process is one (1) dwelling unit per acre. The portion of the development
located in the Urban designated areas is 2.5 DU /A.
A total of 612 TDRs shall be severed from qualifying Sending Lands to achieve the
maximum density. The number of TDR credits required shall be determined at time of site
development plan or plat approval.
Page 1 of 2
0:\2004 \040125.11.02 Naples Reserve iStar RPUD \0003 RPUD Rewning Application Preparation\2011 -7 -27 Stint of Compliance.docz
Packet Page -3433-
ti
E
a�
N
C
N
d'
N
ti
The increased density will be achieved by TDRs as follows:
Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict
TDR Credits must come from Sending Lands within one mile of the Urban Area at a
maximum density increase of one (1) unit per gross acre.
Maximum Density 1.5 DU /A x 310.94 acres = 466.41 DUs
TDRs from Sending Lands + 1 TDR/A (1DU /A) x 310.94 acres = 310.94 DUs
located w /in 1 mile of Urban
Area
TOTAL (2.5 DU /A) = 777.35 DUs
Agricultural /Rural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Receiving Lands
Base Density 0.2 DU /A x 377.16 acres = 75.43 DUs
TDRs from Sending Lands + 0.8 TDR/A x 377.16 acres= 301.73 DUs
(max. density 1 DU /A w /in
Requested Project Density
TOTAL (1 DU /A) = 377.16 DUs
1.677 DU /A x 688.1 acres = 1,154 DUs
3. The development standards contained in the RPUD Ordinance Exhibits, combined with the
requirements of the LDC will insure that the proposed development will be compatible with
and complementary to existing and planned surrounding land uses as required by Policy 5.4
of the FLUE.
4. The development commitments and standards contained in this Document, as well as the
requirements of the LDC will assure compliance with Policy 3.1 of the FLUE.
5. The Naples Reserve RPUD is consistent with and furthers Policy 5.5 of the FLUE in that it
is using land designated for urban uses.
6. The Naples Reserve RPUD implements Policy 5.6 of the FLUE in that more than 70% of
the project's Receiving lands, and 60% of the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict will be
open space or reserved for conservation purposes.
7. The RPUD Master Plan, with its extensive natural area, lakes and open space areas, and with
its low residential density, will insure that the developed project will be an attractive and
enjoyable residential development.
S. The project shall comply with the concunency provisions of the LDC, and therefore, it will
implement and further Objective 2 of the FLUE.
OA 00410401 25.11,02 Naples Reserve iStar RPUD \0003 RPUD Rezoning Applicai ion Preparation'2101 1 -7 -27 Stmt of Compliame.doex
Page 2 of 2
Naples Reserve
Conceptual Water Management Report
Prepared for:
SFI Naples Reserve LLC
2727 E. Imperial Way
Brea., CA 92821 -6713
Prepared by:
"DA"X ! A INC.
CONSULTING
.AL `t V lrl 1
-Planning -visualization
Civil Engineering • Surveying & Mapping
6610 Willow Park Drive
Suite 200
Naples, FL 34104
July 2011
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Prepared By: E.JA
Reviewed By: J.A.Z.
Date: July 28, 2011
Revised: October 5, 2011
0:\:004 \0401 25.11.02 Naples Reserve iStar RPUD10005 RPUD Rezoning Application Support URevie I Toncept _ Water_Mn6l_10 -05 -1 I OR Rev2 (clean).doc (clean)
Packet Page -3435-
INTRODUCTION
This document presents the Conceptual Water Management Report for the proposed Naples Reserve
RPUD which is located approximately one (1) mile north of Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) and one
and a half (1.5) miles east of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 95 1) encompassing 688 + /- acres within Section
1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Only residential units are proposed to
be constructed within the project site.
The project site has an existing permits with both the South Florida Water Management District
ti
(Permit #11- 00090- 5 -02), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Permit #199900619 IP -SB).
EXISTING CONDITIONS
N The subject property is bounded to the north by State of Florida lands, to the west by agricultural
N
lands which are zoned "Winding Cypress PUD" for golf course and residential subdivision, to the
east by Greenway Boulevard, and to the south by a residential subdivision called Reflection Lakes at
N Naples.
ti
The site belongs to the "U.S. 41 Outfall Swale No. 1 Basin ". Historically, the site was used for
agricultural purposes. The general flows for the site are north to south based on general LIDAR
topography. The site runoff is isolated from surrounding lands by a perimeter berm constructed for
agricultural operations. A network of irrigation and water management canals were developed to
irrigate the agricultural land and generally control water levels. These ditches and canals are an
artifact of past truck farming operations. The site is currently not in active vegetable agricultural
production. The natural runoff sheetflows to the ditches and canals, which discharge to onsite and
offsite wetlands. The offsite wetlands discharge to the Tamiami Canal (S15 -03) which flows west
along U.S. 41 and ultimately to Henderson Creek Canal.
The soils onsite are generally classified as fine sands with "Holopaw" and "Pineda" being the
primary units. Soils classifications are taken from the National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS),
certified July 9, 2010. These fine sands, representative of soils covering the entire project, are
classified as poorly draining with Hydrological Soil Group designation "D" (HSG D).
Under natural conditions, the seasonal high water table is within a depth of 12 inches below ground
surface. The average existing elevation is 4.9 +/- ft NAVD, based on the Pickett Aerial Survey
completed in August 1999. Based on the above information, and ecological evidence gathered onsite,
the control elevation will be 4.7 ft NAVD. This control elevation is equal to the elevation approved
in the active, existing surface water management permit.
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
The proposed surface water management plan will incorporate best management practices including
water management areas for water quality treatment and quantity storage prior to discharge into the
existing swales and wetlands along the south side the property.
O:' @004 \040125.11.02 Naples Reserve iStar RPUDMO RPUD Rezoning Application Support\Re%dew I \Concept Water Mngt_10 -OS -11 EJR Rev2 (clean).doc (clean)
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
The proposed Naples Reserve RPUD water management system will be located on the 688 +/- acre
parcel. The system will be designed as a wet detention system incorporating a series of
interconnected lakes for quantity attenuation and water quality treatment. The wet detention system
will be designed to provide stormwater treatment for 150% of fhe required water quality volume. The
required water quality is the first inch of runoff, or 2.5 times the percent impervious; whichever is
greater.
The development will contain a large surface water lake that will be used for recreational purposes.
This lake and any other recreational lakes will not provide water quality treatment but will provide
water quantity attenuation. All water quality treatment will be provided in the water quality
treatment and water management lakes which are depicted on the conceptual water management plan
submitted as part of this application. Discharge from the water quality treatment and water
management lakes will be controlled through discharge structures that will be set at the water quality
elevations necessary to detain the water quality treatment volumes, as indicated in the paragraph
above. Once water quality treatment is attained, the water quality and water management lakes will
discharge into the recreational lakes which will provide the final water quantity attenuation prior to
discharge to offsite receiving water bodies.
The operation of the proposed storm water management system includes the collection of surface
water runoff by catch basins and closed pipe systems that convey the runoff to the wet detention
areas. Once water quality treatment has been achieved, the treated surface water will discharge to the
recreational lake. From the recreational lake, discharge will be permitted to flow over the crest of the
weir of the control structure without exceeding the allowable offsite discharge rate of 24 CSM (0.04
cfs /acre). The allowable offsite discharge rate is based on the recommendations of the Belle Meade
Area - Master Stormwater Management Plan. The allowable offsite discharge rates comply with
Ordinance 90 -10, which limits offsite discharge to 0.15 cfs /acre. All discharge will flow into the
offsite wetlands, towards the Tamiami Canal (S 1 S -03), through a single control structure located at
the southwest corner of the project.
Minimum finished floor elevations for the buildings will be dictated by the greater of the peak stage
of the 100 -yr 3 -day storm routing analysis performed using XP- SW1\4M software or by the FEMA
flood zone base flood elevation in effect at the time of the final Development Order. The project site
is currently split into two flood zone elevations. The north portion is Flood Zone "X" and the
southern portion is in Flood Zone "AE EL 5 ". The base flood elevation for the southern portion of
the site is 5 ft. NAVD according to the effective FIRM Map for the project area. Minimum
pavement/parking lot elevations will be set equal to or above the 25 -year 3 -day storm elevation. The
perimeter berm will be set above the 25 -year 3 -day storm elevation.
All construction activities will employ best management practices, limiting the potential for pollutant
discharge in accordance with the United States Environmental Protection Agency — National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System.
0P3004 \040135.11.02 Naples Reserves iStarRPUD\0005 RPUD Rezoning Application Suppon\Review I \Concept Wata_Mngt_10 -05 -11 EJR Rev? (clean).doc (clean)
Packet Page -3437-
M MM
r
E
Qi
N
r
O
N
d'
N
ti
/strict Schoo/
G
0V1�
-,,_Collier
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Collier County School District
School Impact Analysis Application
Instructions: Submit one copy of completed application and location map for each new
residential project requiring a determination of school impact to the Planning Department of
the applicable local government. This application will not be deemed complete until all
applicable submittal requirements have been submitted. Please be advised that additional
documentation /information may be requested during the review process.
For information regarding this application process, please contact the Facilities Management
Department at 239377 -0267.
Please check [J] type of application request (one only):
[4] School Capacity Review [ ] Exemption Letter
[ ] Concurrency Determination [ ] Concurrency Determination Amendment
For descriptions of the types of review please see page 3,
I. Project Information:
Project Name: Naples Reserve RPUD Municipality: Unincorporated
Parcel ID #: (attach separate sheet for multiple parcels): 0072388002
Location /Address of subject property: 10097 Greenway Road Jsee attached location map)
Closest Major Intersection:
41
2.15
ll. Ownership /Agent Information:
Uwner /Contract Purchaser Name(s): SFI Naples Reserve LLC
AgentlContact Person: Dwight Nadeau AICP• RWA Inc
(Please note that if agent or contact information is completed the District will forward all information to that person)
Mailing address: 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples Florida 34109
Telephone #: 239.597.0575 Fax: 239.597.0598 Email: dhn(a)consult- rwa.com
I hereby certify the statements and /or information contained in this application with any attachments submitted
herewith are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
( \' y Samantha K. Garhus [ 1's,
Owner or Authorified Agent Signature Date
III. Develo ment Information
Project Data (Unit Types defined on page 2 of applicatio n
Current Land Use Designation:
Urban -Mixed Use and Residential f=ringe
Proposed Land Use Designation:
Urban -Mixed Use and Residential Fringe
Current Zoning:
RPUD
Proposed Zoning:
RPUD
Project Acreage: 688.1 acres
`MN :;` . :C :: `. _`:;,`.: ;G..:..: `..
Un 'if;T...:.::.::: :.:.:::,:..`.; :::.. =. ..
sr.
171' ::. :, :`:
Total Units Currently Allowed by Type:
1,154
Xal Units Proposed by Type:
1,154
Is this a phased project: Yes or No Yes If yes, please cam lete page 2 of this application.
Date /time stamp:
Packet Page -3439-
r
C
Qi
N
r
O
N
d'
N
ti
Z7
N
N
(B
Q
O
..o
0
U
U
O
CL
N
4-
.�1
C
O
C
co
U
.Q
Q
Q
N
_U
Q
E
O
N
O
a)
L
cr
a)
CD
N
L
O
E
c�
�
N
.r
..
0
O
� 00
N
U
cad
Cw bA O
O
O
'
'
N
i
En
w II
II
0
O
00
O
O
O
N
O
N
h
O
N
�
O
O
4zz�
�
O
O
w
w
x
c
N
N
M
O
O
h
N
�.
O
kn
O
ti
h
kn
r~
cs
O
b
cz
cd
C7
vi
�
N
..
0
N
� 00
0
N
U
cad
Cw bA O
O
W
a
'
'
En
w II
II
cd
0
N
0
N
'
'
0
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
4zz�
O
w
w
x
c
O
O
'CS
cd
N
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Types of Reviews:
School Impact Analysis:
This review should be divided into two categories:
- School Capacity Review (land use and rezonings), and;
- Concurrency Determinations (site plans and subdivisions).
School Capacity Review is the review of a project in the land use and rezoning stage of development. It is a
review of the impact of the development on school capacity and is considered long range planning. This may
be a review resulting in mitigation being required. In situations where the applicant may be required to
mitigate, capacity may be reserved dependent on the type of mitigation.
Concurrency Determination is the review of residential site plans and subdivisions to determine whether
there is available capacity. When capacity is determined to be available a School Capacity Determination
Letter (SCADL) will be issued verifying available capacity to the applicant and the local government. If a
project exceeds the adopted level of service standards, the applicant is afforded the option of a negotiation
period that may or may not result in an executed /recorded mitigation agreement Mitigation at this stage is
expressed as a Proportionate Share Mitigation Agreement. For those residential developments that may have
an impact but are otherwise exempt from concurrency, an exemption letter will be prepared for the applicant
upon request. For those residential developments that are determined to not have an impact, a letter of no
impact will be prepared for the applicant upon request.
Exemption Letter:
An applicant may request an Exemption Letter as documentation for the local government. These are projects
that would be exempt from school concurrency review or projects that do not impact the public schools.
Exemptions from school concurrency are limited to existing single family or mobile home lots of record;
amendments to previously approved site plans or plats that do not increase the number of dwelling units or
change the dwelling unit type; age restricted communities with no permanent residents under the age of 18; or
residential site plans or plats or amendments to site plans or plats that generate less than one student; or are
authorized as a Development of Regional Impact (Chapter 380, F.S.) as of July 1, 2005.
Concurrency Determination Amendment:
An applicant may request an amendment to a previously issued School Concurrency Determination or to an
application being processed. This review may require additional staff time beyond the initial concurrency
determination review and results in a modified determination being issued. An amendment could result in a
negotiation period and /or a mitigation agreement being issued or a pr=:viously approved determination being
modified and reissued.
Packet Page -3441-
ti
E
Clq
O
ti
STAFF REPORT
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION, PLANNING AND REGULATION
HEARING DATE: JUNE 7, 2012
SUBJECT: PUDA- PI,2011 -1168, NAPLES RESERVE RPUD (RESIDENTIAL
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT)
APPLICANT:
SFI Naples Reserve, LLC
2727 East Imperial Way
Brea, CA 92821 -6713
REQUESTED ACTION:
AGENTS:
Mr. Dwight Nadeau, AICP
RWA, Inc.
6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200
Naples, FL 34109
Mr. Richard D. Yovanovich
Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, P.A.
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an
amendment to the Naples Reserve Golf Club Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), to
remove a golf course from the RPUD; to provide for amendments to permitted uses; to provide for
amendments to development standards; to provide for amendments to master plan; to provide for
amendments to list of requested deviations from LDC (Collier County Land Development Code);
to provide for amendments to list of developer commitments; and to provide an effective date.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 1 of 20
Packet Page -3443-
M
u
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
a
Ii
V
z
zl
O
N
4
�P ¢
~
4
� U
c N�P �
�•
N
tiP•�
c
Z
m�
r
d
O
w—
f-
w �
_a
�a
O
m U
O
� U
J
O
a J
O
a.
�g
WH
<
=
W
}
;
Y+
N
IFS �
I
I
w
a
U
a.a�
D U-
z°
Wz
0
M
u
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
a
Ii
V
z
zl
O
N
nv�s of IDN 7
MW
�P ¢
~
� U
c N�P �
�•
N
tiP•�
c
m�
r
d
nv�s of IDN 7
MW
Packet Page -3444-
z
O
U
O
m�
r
�
w �
�a
O
� U
O
a J
O
�g
WH
<
=
W
0
p
a�
g°
NIPEs
,
o
aavn
M .3MM
t
S�
lz .1
Fled
o1
--r ln08 U91MM
use ro'sl
i4
Packet Page -3444-
z
O
U
O
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Proposed Master Plan
Packet Page -3445-
�
JII
BiSl
y
i., �pgj
R i
�
4 N
N
Obbb
^
d
4N
uo
LLJ¢ -
ro
a d N i d
i Iyy� pp
�W
I I I \ I I I
I I
a a a a -\ ��
101
' - - ---
l l
it I\ i 1 i
`'' i I
d` a By
R
�..,•
Rai
\ — —
"
— — - -
— - --? - --
4/
E
rd�
a
.
ff
2
�L4
` --
cc
FA
E
♦
� �
3
a i "_�^ _ 1,I � _�__'ri - r•a � .•' ,'f .a �i �ppS� g�� 9
I a -- ^� '; / a � � � �� WY e e 9 �
� ,•,\ d, 6�� �
c�j�yci k
I
f
AM
�
g�tl s�wx�oramua tssaiana Mb 8 «� �� - a z
e
@ �
Proposed Master Plan
Packet Page -3445-
iiii i7eiiiii 7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Y A A 1 T
e� ��N /rs�z/ l nsx00 and 11b7d N9LSl�IN alld2i I M�+� '° � ,,:
i W
077 3nxJssds3-7dYu
__
Le
rv_J�
�N•
a.
3
iI
o
w
3
rc
U
U U V
0 i!glgx7
��� � , wa »= A 31•, •�•.auoivaonn L.vM3ban� � _ _ , u
ssmb.0 a.n�.x, macaw
Packet Page -3446
Cur, U1My uHp, vc -
vu waster Plan
6
z
LO
Li
vii Pb g €ns, PEP �
Rio
J .nV5 0 4
.50., "'
— dv0 MN33l1�
�LL 3ab
:s
gE 8�3
6`J
sB
E
a
I
1
i
g
, i
$7 _ it
o =w
qF�i;
a
is
�zNz zz�w
gg
a25kg8
,�d`o
O
O
W
i
,�O
41CZ�
gW zo 0
__
Le
rv_J�
�N•
a.
3
iI
o
w
3
rc
U
U U V
0 i!glgx7
��� � , wa »= A 31•, •�•.auoivaonn L.vM3ban� � _ _ , u
ssmb.0 a.n�.x, macaw
Packet Page -3446
Cur, U1My uHp, vc -
vu waster Plan
6
z
LO
Li
vii Pb g €ns, PEP �
Rio
J .nV5 0 4
.50., "'
— dv0 MN33l1�
�LL 3ab
:s
gE 8�3
6`J
sB
E
a
I
1
i
g
, i
$7 _ it
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject 688± acre PUD (Planned Unit Development) is located approximately one mile north
of Tamiami Trail East (US -41) and 1.3 miles east of Collier Boulevard (CR -951) in Section 1,
Township . 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the location map on the
previous page.)
PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The Naples Reserve RPUD project was approved in Ordinance Number 07 -71 on November 13,
2007. (Please see Attachment B: Ordinance number 07 -71.) The petitioner is seeking to remove
the golf course, all related golf course uses, and revise the internal layout of the development
without any changes to the boundaries of the Preserve Tract. The Project does not propose to
increase the approved density. There are refinements to development standards for land uses
proposed in recreation areas to improve compatibility with future residences.
The Project provides for the following:
• 1,154 residential dwelling units
• 63.7 acres of Preservation
Open Space, including 87± acres of stormwater management lakes, approximately 74± acres of
recreation lakes, and three areas intended for community recreation and social space identified
as Recreation Areas on the RPUD Master Plan, Exhibit C of the RPUD Ordinance Exhibits.
Other recreation areas containing buildings and facilities may be developed in Residential
Tract R, subject to compliance with the same development standards for Tract RA as contained
in Exhibit B of the RPUD Ordinance Exhibits.
According to the petitioner, the proposed Project will allow for the full range of residential land
uses. It is currently intended to be developed primarily with single - family homes, with the
potential of having some multi - family land uses. The residences will be oriented around an
expansive lake system that has been specifically designed to provide for recreation as well as for
stormwater management.
The petitioner seeks to repeal Ordinance number 07 -71 by adopting a new Ordinance allowing the
changes noted previously. The petitioner is also revising the property development standards as
explained later in this report, the removal of an earlier affordable housing payment commitment,
and the approval of two deviations that have been revised slightly from the 2007 zoning action.
The Master Plan for the proposed amendment depicts generalized areas of development and traffic
circulation.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Picayune Strand State Forest, with a zoning designation of Agriculture (A)
East: Agriculture and disturbed lands with a zoning designation of Agriculture (A)
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 5 of 20
Packet Page -3447-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
South: Preserve areas within a residential development, vacant land and then agriculture, with a
zoning designation of Walnut Lakes PUD and Agriculture (A).
West: Residential development with a zoning designation of Winding Cypress DRI (Development
of Regional Impact)
A :.RL4,L PHOTO
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY•
Future Land Use Element: 7-.z� subject project straddles two land use designations: 310.94±
acres is designated Urban (T_', ban-Mixed Use District, Residential Fringe Subdistrict) and the
remaining 377.12± P.-=- is designated Agricultural /Rural (Rural Fringe Mixed Use District,
Receiving Lanes), as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan.
Relevant to this petition, the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict permits residential development
at a maximum density of 1.5 Dwelling Units per Acre (DU /A) or up to 2.5 DU /A via the transfer
of up to 1 DU /A from lands designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending. The base
residential density allowable for designated Receiving Lands is one unit per five gross acres, with
a maximum density of one unit per gross acre achievable through the Transfer of Development
Rights (TDR) process.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- Pl-2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 6 of 20
Paci<et Page -3448-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
The Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD was approved on June 8, 1999 by Ordinance number 99 -42,
and deemed consistent with the GMP. An extension of the PUD was later granted through
Resolution number 04 -219. The Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD was subsequently amended on
November 13, 2007 by Ordinance number 07 -71, and deemed consistent with the GMP. The
subject PUD is eligible for a maximum gross density of 2.5 DU /A or 777 DUs (dwelling units) for
that portion of the project located within the Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Residential Fringe
Subdistrict) designated area; and the portion of the project located within the Agricultural/Rural
designation is eligible for a density of 1 DU /A or 377 DUs. (TDRs from lands designated Sending
are required in order to achieve these maximum densities.) The approved Ordinance allows a
maximum of 1154 DUs or 1.67 DU /A, of which a minimum of 612 TDR credits shall be obtained
in order to achieve the allowed maximum density.
Relevant GMP provisions and policies are stated below (in italics); each policy is followed by staff
analysis (in bold).
Policy 2.2. of the Public School Facilities Element (PSFE)
"The County shall consider the following residential uses exempt from the requirements of school
concurrency: "... "C. Any amendment to any previously approved residential development order
that does not increase the number of dwelling units or change the dwelling unit type (e.g. single -
family to multi family). " (The proposed amendment does not increase the number of dwelling
units or change the dwelling unit type. Therefore, the proposed PUD amendment is exempt
from the requirements of school concurrency.)
OBJECTIVE 1 of the Housing Element (HE)
"The number of new affordable-work
force housing units shall increase by at least fifteen percent
of the units approved to be built in the County per yeas, but not less than 1,000 units per year
averaged over a five-year period in an effort to continue meeting the current and future housing
needs of legal residents with very -low, low and moderate incomes, including households with
special needs such as rural and farmworker housing in rural Collier County. " (Staff notes that
based upon a recent compilation of existing restricted units (restricted by regulatory
requirements, e.g. Affordable Housing Agreement) prepared for the Evaluation and
Appraisal Report (EAR) using best available data, the County currently has an inventory of
7,649 (plus 3,864 units approved but not yet built) restricted affordable housing units. The
proposed amendment seeks to eliminate the financial commitment to the Collier County
Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Staff notes that the affordable housing County's inventory
will be impacted by the proposed amendment. Staff acknowledges that the Evaluation and
Appraisal Report -based GMP amendments may lessen or eliminate the figure in the
Objective. Staff also acknowledges that due to current economic conditions, including drop
in housing prices, there is a perception that there is no longer a need for affordable housing
as market rate housing is now affordable. However, staff is concerned that there remains a
need for affordable housing for those at the low and very low income levels.)
FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with the surrounding area. Please refer
to the Zoning and Land Development Revise section of this Staff Report for a review of the
petition request.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 7 of 20
Packet Page -3449-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petitioner's Traffic
Impact Statement (TIS) and has determined that the adjacent roadway network currently has
insufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the build -out planning period extended to
2019, in the current roadway condition. However, pre - payment of impact fees is proposed through
a companion DCA (Developers Contribution Agreement) (See Attachment E) , which provides
mitigation deemed `sufficient' for the project to be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the
Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The pre - payment of impact fees
is anticipated to provide additional seed funding to initiate Tamiami Trail East improvements that
are proposed under the current FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation) work program.
Tamiami Trail East (US -41) Impacts:
The first concurrency link that is impacted by this project is Link 95.0, Tamiami Trail East (US-
41) between Collier Boulevard (CR -951) and San Marco Drive (CR -92). The project generates
522 net new p.m. peak hour, peak direction trips, which represents a Significant and Adverse
impact of 48.6% by the project build -out anticipated in 2019. This segment of Tamiami Trail East
(US -41) currently has a remaining capacity of 93 trips, and is currently at Level of Service "C"
(LOS "C ") as reflected by the 2011 AUIR (Annual Update Inventory Report).
As a result of the significant and adverse impact, mitigation measures are required. The applicant
is working with FDOT and Collier County to support the widening of this road though the Bre-
a ment of a substantial portion of Naples Reserve's transportation impact fees, which are defined
in a companion Developers Contribution Agreement (DCA). (See Attachment E.)
Previous developer commitments that were conditions of the original PUD largely remain
unaffected, and continue to be contributing factors to the mitigation measures used to find
consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element.
Operational Notes:
When analyzing 2019 p.m. peak (project build -out) conditions, there are operational concerns at
the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US -41) and Naples Reserve Boulevard.
Under existing geometric conditions, the turn lanes at the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (US-
41) at Naples Reserve Boulevard are anticipated to operate at an acceptable level of service for
some time. Collier County Transportation Staff will monitor the need for signal warrants and turn
lane extensions as the development proceeds through the multiple Plan and Plat phases.
Once the development indicates that the intersection or turn lanes are anticipated to operate below
the minimum acceptable Level of Service (LOS) for turning movements, turn lane extension shall
be required. When signalization warrants are met, the appropriate signalization will be required.
All signalization or turn lane extension at this intersection will be coordinated with Collier County
and shall be at the discretion of FDOT District 1 permitting authority. If at all possible,
intersection improvements are recommended to occur in conjunction with (or subsequent to) the
Tamiami Trail East (US -41) widening to six -lanes.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 8 of 20
Packet Page -3450-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME): Environmental Services Staff
reviewed this petition and determined that the proposed amendment to be consistent with the
Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME).
Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed petition request
consistent with the FLUE.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria
upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 10.02.13.B.5,
Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings "), and
Subsection 10.03.05.I, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as
"Rezone Findings "), which establish the legal bases to support the CCPC's recommendation. The
CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC, who in turn use
the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these
subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning and Land Development Review
Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses:
Environmental Review: Environmental Services Staff reviewed this petition and determined that
the proposed amendment will not have any impact on environmental issues. Similarly, the
Environmental Advisory Council did not review this petition because the proposed changes do not
have any impact on environmental issues.
Transportation Review: Transportation Division staff has reviewed this petition and recommends
approval subject to the adoption of the Transportation Development Commitments provided in
Exhibit F of the attached PUD Ordinance.
Utility Review: The Utilities Department Staff has reviewed this petition and recommends the
following:
The owner shall reserve four areas to potentially be dedicated to the Collier County Water -Sewer
District for raw water well easements with dimensions of 100 -foot by 100 -foot each, along with
utility /access easements that shall be 20 feet wide, or less if the well site is contiguous to a public
right -of -way. The approximate locations of these four proposed easements are depicted on the
proposed Master Plan. One of these four wells may be used as a test well and converted to a
production well. The test well will not be converted into a production well until the water
management lakes proposed near the test well are constructed in accordance with the 50 foot
setback standard. No additional production wells will be installed until the project's water
management lakes have been constructed or the year 2027, whichever is earlier.
Upon request of the Collier County Water- Sewer District, the owner shall convey to the Collier
County Water- Sewer District the requested utility /access easements and raw water well easements
within 60 days, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. The Collier County Water- Sewer
District shall pay the owner $15,930 per acre for those easements that are conveyed to the Collier
County Water- Sewer District. If all or some of the conveyances have not been requested by the
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 9 of 20
Packet Page -3451-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Collier County Water- Sewer District at the earlier of Site Development Plan ( "SDP ") and/or final
construction plans and plat ( "PPL ") approval or within six years of approval of this Ordinance,
then the reserved areas shall be deemed released.
At the time of the SDP and/or PPL submittal, the owner shall show the well site reservations
applicable to the area within the SDP and/or plat. During the review of the SDP and /or PPL, the
Collier County Water- Sewer District shall decide at that time whether it will request the
dedication of the utility /access easement. Failure to request the utility /access easement shall be
deemed a release of the utility /access easement and the final SDP and/or PPL shall be approved
without the utility /access easement.
This recommended language has been incorporated into Utilities Engineering Item A in Exhibit F:
List of Developer Commitments.
Zoning and Land Development Review: Relationship to Existing and Future Land Uses. A
discussion of this relationship, as it applies specifically to Collier County's legal basis for land use
planning, refers to the relationship of the uses that would be permitted if the proposed zoning
action is approved, as it relates to the requirement or limitations set forth in the FLUE of the GMP.
The proposed change as noted previously is to remove a golf course and all related golf course
uses; revise the internal layout of the development; reduce the total acreage for the Residential
areas; increase the total acreage of the Recreational areas of the PUD; and eliminate the financial
contribution commitment towards affordable housing. No changes to the approved maximum
density are being proposed as part of this amendment request.
Along with minor grammatical changes, the specific revisions are listed below along with some
Staff Comments written in italics to offer clarification:
1. Decrease residential acreage area from 609.2 acres to 592.8acres.
2. Increase recreation acreage area from 15.2 acres to 31.6 acres.
3. Remove "Golf courses and related facilities" from Permitted Uses.
Staff comment: Acknowledged and accepted as the primary purpose of this PUD
amendment is to remove the golf course and related facilities.
4. "Commercial excavation" language has been revised in the list of Permitted Uses.
The currently approved language states: "Commercial excavations — surplus fill
material generated by commercial excavation depths may be transported off -site
only for use in the US -41 improvement project associated with this zoning
approval."
Staff comment: The proposed language in the PUD Ordinance states:
"Commercial excavations (subject to Exhibit F: List of Developer Commitments,
Transportation Item D);"
A reference to Deviation number 2 has been added to the Signs referenced in
Exhibit B Development Standards.
Staff comment: Please see the Deviation Discussion section of this Staff Report for
further information.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 10 of 20
Packet Page -3452-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
6. Residential Development Standards for Clubhouse/Recreation Building front, side
and rear yards have been added along with a minimum distance between structures.
7. The minimum lot area for single - family detached and patio home and villas has
been increased from 2,250 s.f. per unit to 6,000 and 5,000 per unit, respectively.
8. Development Standards Note number 3 has been removed. It stated: "The LDC
standards for cluster residential design, as set forth in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District, shall apply to residential land uses within this RPUD........"
Staff comment: Acknowledged and accepted. This standard is redundant with LDC
requirements and does not need to be restated in the PUD.
9. Development Standards Note number 6 has been removed. It stated: "For all
residential units, garages shall be located a minimum of 23 feet from the back of the
sidewalk closest to the garage, except for side load garages, wherein a parking area
23 feet in depth must be provided perpendicular to the sidewalk to avoid vehicles
being parked across a portion, or all of the referenced sidewalk.
A new note stating "Residences with side loaded garages may have a minimum of
15 -foot front yard" has been added.
Staff. Comment: Staff acknowledges and accepts the new note as a minimum of 23 —
foot clearance between the garage and sidewalk can still be maintained with a side
loaded garage in a I S foot front yard setback.
10. Deviation numbers 1, 2 and 4 have been removed with this amendment as they are
no longer needed.
11. Deviation number 1 has been revised to allow a maximum 15 model homes instead
of 10. Please see the Deviation Discussion section of this Staff Report for further
information.
12. Deviation number 2 has been added. Please see the Deviation Discussion section of
this Staff Report for further information.
13. Transportation Developer Commitments A thru F have been removed as they are
redundant with the LDC.
14. Utilities and Engineering Commitment A has been revised. It stated: "The
developer shall reserve four areas to be dedicated to Collier County Water & Sewer
District for raw water well easements with dimensions 100 -foot by 100 -foot each,
and utility /access easements that shall be 20 feet wide unless the well site is
contiguous to a public right of way. The approximate locations of these proposed
easements are depicted on the RPUD Master Plan. The dedication shall occur at the
time of site development plan, or fmal plat approval for the area within the
development phase that contains the respective well sites.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 11 of 20
Packet Page -3453-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
At the time of the SDP (Site Development Plan) and /or plat submittal, the developer
shall provide the well site easements that meet the standard setback requirements
for water wells. If the surface water management lakes for the subdivision are
installed prior to the installation of production wells for the SERWTP Wellfield,
anticipated for 2012, a setback of 50 feet shall be required. If the surface water
management lakes are installed after the production wells, a 300 -foot setback shall
be required.
The County has further requested a test well at one of the proposed well sites. The
County agrees that the desired test well will not be converted into a production well
until the water management lake proposed near the test well is constructed in
accordance with the 50 -foot setback standard. No additional production wells will
be installed until the project's water management lakes have been constructed or the
year 2012, whichever is earlier."
Staff comment: Revised language regarding the well sites has been provided.
Please see Utilities Engineering Commitment A in Exhibit F.• List of Developer
Commitments.
15. Planning Developer Commitment A has been removed. It stated: "One TDR credit
shall be required for every five (5) gross acres of RFMUD land area utilized as part
of the golf course, including the clubhouse area, rough, fairways, greens, and lakes,
but excluding any area dedicated as conservation that is non - irrigated and retained
in a natural state."
Staff comment: Acknowledged and accepted as the purpose of this PUD
amendment is to remove the golf course and related facilities.
16. Planning Developer Commitment C regarding contribution to the Affordable
Housing Trust Fund has been removed.
Staff comment: Acknowledged and accepted as the current housing market
provides affordable housing opportunities.
17. Proposed Planning Commitment B has been added to address the Managing Entity
responsibilities.
Staff comment: Staff requested that this commitment be added.
18. Proposed Transportation Commitment D has been added to "Exhibit F: List of
Developer Commitments." It states: "Excavated material in an amount up to ten
percent (to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards) of the total volume excavated may be
removed from the development with no prohibition as to the destination of the material.
Excavated material in excess of up to ten percent (to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards) of
the total volume excavated, may be removed from the development and be transported off -
site only for use in the US -41 roadway widening project from the intersection of US 41 and
Collier Boulevard to the intersection of US 41 and CR 92, and subject to the excavation
provisions from the Code of Ordinances as may be amended, however the following
paragraph will continue to apply:
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 12 of 20
Packet Page -3454-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
"Issuance of commercial excavation permits. Applications for commercial excavation
permits shall be reviewed by the community development and environmental services
administrator, or his designee, and by the environmental advisory council for
recommendation and approved by the board. When a request is made to remove surplus fill
material from a previously approved development excavation, the requirement for review
by the environmental advisory council shall be waved, but dependent on haul route and
amount of fill to be hauled, staff may require approval by Collier County Planning
Commission. ""
Staff comment:
The commitment is to allow the off -site removal of fill in excess of ten percent and
20, 000 cubic yards for the construction of intersection improvements at US -41 and
Collier Boulevard and the US -41 roadway widening from Collier Boulevard (CR
951) to San Marco Road (CR 92). There will be a benefit to the public in that fill
for the roadway projects would not be hauled from throughout the county.
[underlining added for emphasis]
Staff supports this commitment and recommends that this commitment is moved
from Planning Commitments and placed under the Transportation Commitments.
For further information, please see Attachment D: Excavation Ordinance, and
Attachment E: DCA (Developer's Contribution Agreement).
This PUD amendment does not propose any changes that would affect environmental, buffer,
or drainage issues. Two deviations from the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC)
are being sought with this amendment. Please see the Deviation Discussion section of this
Staff Report for further information.
PUD FINDINGS:
LDC Subsection 10.02.13.13.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the Planning
Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following
criteria:"
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water,
and other utilities.
The development to the south, Walnut Lakes PUD (aka Reflection Lakes) is developed with
a mix of multi - family and single - family dwellings. The proposed single- family and multi-
family uses of this project will be compatible with the existing residential uses.
This development is located off of Naples Reserve Boulevard, a local roadway, with access to
US -41 (Tamiami Trail East) a principal arterial roadway. The petitioner has committed to
several transportation - related improvements, as previously noted above and incorporated
into "Exhibit F: List of Developer Commitments" of the RPUD ordinance. The project
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 13 of 20
Packet Page -3455-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
would also be required to comply with County regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water
and other utilities. Therefore, the site is suitable for the proposed development.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract,
or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to
arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such
areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney's
Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be
required to gain platting and/or site development approval. Both processes will ensure that
appropriate stipulations for the provision of and continuing operation and maintenance of
infrastructure will be provided by the developer.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and
policies of the GMP.
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals,
objectives and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on
that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall
GMP.
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include
restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
The currently approved development, landscaping and buffering standards were determined
to be compatible with the adjacent uses and with the use mixture within the project itself
when the PUD was approved. Staff believes that this amendment will not change the
project's compatibility, both internally and externally, with the proposed re- allocation of
residential dwelling units.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The existing open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the
LDC.
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Currently, the roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project
at this time, i.e., the GMP is consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the
GMP Transportation Element consistency review. In addition, the project's development
must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when
development approvals are sought.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 14 of 20
Packet Page -3456-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
This proposed PUD Amendment will not adversely impact the previous BCC finding that the
subject property and surrounding areas can accommodate expansion.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the
particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.
The petitioner is seeking two deviations to allow design flexibility in compliance with the
purpose and intent of the Planned Unit Development Districts (LDC Section 2.03.06A). This
criterion requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations
proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the
most similar conventional zoning district. Staff believes that one of the two deviations
proposed can be supported, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the
petitioner has demonstrated that "the elements may be waived without a detrimental effect
on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the
petitioner has demonstrated that the deviations are "justified as meeting public purposes to a
degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations." Please refer to the
Deviation Discussion portion of the staff report for a more extensive examination of the
deviations.
REZONE FINDINGS:
LDC Subsection 10.03.05.I. states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners... shall show
that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the
following when applicable." (Staff's responses to these criteria are provided in non -bold font):
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and
future land use map and the elements of the GMP.
The Comprehensive Planning Department has indicated that the proposed PUD amendment
is consistent with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the
Growth Management Plan (GMP).
2. The existing land use pattern.
This amendment will not affect the existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern
will remain the same.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
Not applicable. The districts are existing and established.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the
property proposed for change.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 15 of 20
Packet Page -3457-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Not applicable. The districts are existing and established.
S. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
necessary.
The proposed change is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the
LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to remove a golf course
and all related golf course uses.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood.
The amendment will not add more dwelling units, but will only allow for the removal of a
golf course and all related golf course uses. Therefore, Staff is of the opinion that the
proposed change will not adversely impact the living conditions in the neighborhood.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create
types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or
projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the
development, or otherwise affect public safety.
The proposed amendment will not adversely impact traffic circulation.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed amendment will not affect drainage. Furthermore, the residential sites are
subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management
District.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas
If this petition were approved, any subsequent development would need to comply with the
applicable LDC standards for development or as outlined in the PUD document. This
project's property development regulations do not indicate that exceedingly tall structures
(zoned building height is 35 feet for residential development and 40 feet for the clubhouse)
would be included in the project; therefore the project should not significantly reduce light
and air to adjacent areas; thus the development proposed, if approved, should not negatively
affect light and air permeation into adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
Staff is of the opinion this PUD amendment will not adversely impact property values.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 16 of 20
Packet Page -3458-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Properties around this property are already partially developed. The basic premise
underlying all of the development standards in the Land Development Code is that their
sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and /or
subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in
deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed
zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The proposed PUD amendment does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency
with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions
consistent with plans are in the public interest.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with
existing zoning.
The property already has a PUD zoning designation and could be developed within the
parameters of that zoning ordinance; however, the petitioner is seeking this amendment in
compliance with LDC provisions for such amendments. The petition can be evaluated and
action taken as deemed appropriate through the public hearing process. Staff believes the
proposed rezone meets the intent of the PUD district and further, believes the public interest
will be maintained.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county.
Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD amendment is not out of scale with the needs of
the neighborhood.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however,
this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a PUD amendment.
The petition was reviewed on its own merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC; and
staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be
required to make the property usable for any of the range - f potential uses under the proposed
zoning classification.
Any development anticipated by the PUD document -,'ould require site alteration and these
residential sites will undergo evaluation relative to ;::r federal, state, and local development
regulations during the building permit process.
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1188
May 22, 2012
Page 17 of 20
Packet Page -3459-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services
consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and
implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance.
The development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00
regarding Adequate Public Facilities for and the project. It must be consistent with all
applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This
petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of
the GMP as part of the rezoning process, and that staff has concluded that no Level of
Service will be adversely impacted.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem
important in the protection of the public health, safety and welfare.
To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing.
Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking two deviations from the requirements of the LDC.
The deviations are found in PUD Exhibit E "List of Requested Deviations from the LDC."
Deviation # 1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.5.c., that limits the number of model
homes to allow one model home for each variant of the residential product proposed in the project.
The number of model homes may exceed five for each phase or community within the project, but
shall not exceed a total of 15.
Petitioner's Rationale: There are three distinct communities within the Naples Reserve RPUD,
and the developer seeks five models that are representative of each community, for a total of
fifteen models.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: This deviation was previously approved in the 2007 zoning
action when the request was for 10 model homes now the request is for 15 model homes Zoning
and Land Development Review staff recommends approval finding that in compliance with LDC
Section 10.02.13.A.3 the petitioner has demonstrated that "the eleprcmt may be waived without a
detrimental effect on the health safety and welfare of the c -_ nmunity" and LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviatio• is "justified as meeting_ public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of su _h regulations."
Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02 B.6. thz .Mows ground/residential entrance
signage only on -site within residential zoning districtF .o allow ground/residential entrance
signage outside of the residential zoning district th- the signage will serve. This off -site
ground/residential entrance signage shall be permitt, _. in close proximity to the US -41 right -of-
way within the Walnut Lakes PUD. This deviation may only be implemented upon such signage
being allowed by the Walnut Lakes PUD.
Petitioner's Rationale: This deviation will allow ground /residential entrance signage outside of
the residential zoning district that the signage will serve. This off-site ground /residential entrance
signage shall be permitted in close proximity to the US -41 Right -of -Way within the Walnut Lakes
PUD. The Naples Reserve RPUD is located approximately 1/3 of one mile north of the intersection
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 18 of 20
Packet Page -3460-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
of Naples Reserve Boulevard and US -41. In an effort to appropriately identify the Naples Reserve
development to the public traveling on US -41, the signage permitted by said section of the LDC
should be allowed to be proximate to the US -41 Right -of Way in accordance with the locational
development standards of the LDC. The off -site, ground/residential signage shall be limited in
height and sign area as restricted by LDC Section 5.06.02 B.6. This deviation may only be
implemented upon such signage being allowed by the Walnut Lakes PUD.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: This deviation was approved in the previous zoning action.
However, Staff notes that this deviation was approved in error. A deviation can only be sought _ on
property that one owns. In this case, the site of the off -site signage is not located within Naples
Reserve PUD, but within the Walnut Lakes PUD. An amendment would have to be requested for
the Walnut Lakes PUD, not the Naples Reserve RPUD. Therefore, Staff recommends denial and
removal of Deviation number 2 from the PUD document.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The applicant duly noticed and held the required meeting on December 6, 2011 at 5:30 p.m. at the
Edison College Campus Auditorium. Approximately 2 people from the community along with the
applicant, agent and County Staff attended the meeting. For further information please see
Attachment C, `Naples Reserve Neighborhood Information Meeting" (NIM) synopsis prepared by
the applicant.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney's Office has reviewed the staff report for Petition PUDA- PL2011 -1168,
revised on May 18, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION:
Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning
Commission forward Petition PUDA- PL2011 -1168 to the Board of County Commissioners with
a recommendation of approval of this amendment subject to the following condition of approval:
Deviation # 2 shall be removed from the PUD document.
Attachments:
A.
Ordinance
B.
Ordinance number 07 -71
C.
NIM Synopsis
D.
Excavation Ordinance
E.
DCA Agreement
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 19 of 20
Packet Page -3461-
PREPARED BY:
VJA/VW\ ///ht1'uA6k,,
NANCY G" LAC�H
J , AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
REVIEWED BY:
RAYM6ND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
- a)
A&LIAM D. LORENZ A�, P.E., DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
APPROVED BY:
NICK CtAg`ALANCz bk, ADMN STRA`I'OR
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
D,' TE
-16- (L.
DATE
c) _ /(- z-':!tz
DATE
-2-� IL
DATE
Tentatively scheduled for the July 24, 2012 Board of County Commissioners Meeting
Naples Reserve PUD, PUDA- PL2011 -1168
May 22, 2012
Page 20 of 20
Packet Page -3462-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Naples Reserve Neighborhood Information Meeting
Date: December 6, 2012
Time: 5:30pm
Location: Edison College Campus Auditorium
Dwight Nadeau, Planning Manager of RWA began the NIM meeting at 5:30pm
Dwight introduced himself; (Applicant /Developer) James Cullis, SFI Naples Reserve, LLC.; Richard
Yovanovich, from Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.; Alicia Dixon from Passarella & Associates;
Emilio Robau, RWA and Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner with Collier County Community
Development and Environmental Services.
Nancy Gundlach provided the current status of the project with respect to future hearing dates for
adoption and also explained the process of notifying the surrounding property owners of the
Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM).
Dwight presented a general project overview which included pertinent development information related to
the Naples Reserve Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) petition. He stated ownership of the
property had recently changed and that a revised development intent was being pursued through this
petition. He explained that the applicant proposes to remove the golf course and all related golf course
uses, and revise the internal layout of the development. The preserve and open space are to remain the
same and offered the following information.
The Project provides for the following:
• 1,154 residential dwelling units
• 63.7 acres of Preservation
• Open Space, including 87 f -acres of stormwater management lakes that are separated by 74 acres of
recreation lakes that will allow for canoeing and enjoyment of the water. The water is isolated from
the water management portion of the lake. However, when treatment occurs there could be mixing of
the waters. Treatment of the lakes will be subject to the District Rules.
Dwight stated, any questions related to the water management issues should be relayed to
Emilio Robau, Professional Engineer of the project who may be able to answer those questions.
Dwight stated, effectively the project has been broken into 3 communities. Each will have their own
pedestrian and multi -use paths above and beyond the project amenities that will follow through to the
recreation areas where they could be exercise pads, outdoor recreation areas, etc.
Jim Cullis, indicated they currently have a secondary entrance where they will be splitting the traffic on
Greenway Road.
Packet Page -3463-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Jim Cullis, also made mention of the 346 acre site they currently have which is native vegetation.
Dwight added it is our mitigation piece.
The following questions were raised by the property owners and addressed by the panel.
Roy Page -14346 Manchester Drive (Reflection Lakes) — What will be the price point?
Dwight stated, it would be market drive and primarily single family home community and comparable to
Reflection Lakes or similar.
Roy Page - 14346 Manchester Drive (Reflection Lakes) — Will it all be permitted at once?
Dwight stated, Environmental will be done by Emilio Robau and Alicia with The Army Core of Engineer
at once. The property will not be platted at once. Core infrastructure and development area will be
platted subsequently.
Roy Page -14346 Manchester Drive (Reflection Lakes) — Will there be a gate?
Dwight stated, there would be a resident gate (indicated on the plan on Naples Reserve Blvd) and a
secondary gate on Greenway Road.
Roy Page - 14346 Manchester Drive (Reflection Lakes) — Will there be a construction entrance?
Dwight stated, we are not committing to, but are considering Greenway Road as the construction access.
Nancy Gundlach, suggested Dwight mention the land use for the commercial excavation
Dwight stated, because we have a lot of lakes on the project we have the opportunity to dig to a
commercial excavation depth which is 20 feet or more, as opposed to a development excavation which is
not as deep, and is limited to no more than 10% of the fill that is generated by the lakes that could go
offsite.
Roy Page -14346 Manchester Drive (Reflection Lakes) — Where will you be relocating the fill?
Dwight stated, it is still to be determined. We are in the process of an agr.,ement with the County related
to the improvements slated for 951141 that may extend out to Greenway I sad and beyond. Some of the fill
maybe be used for the County project.
Roy Page - 14346 Manchester Drive (Reflection Lakes) - Pm con .reed about the truck on the road
transporting the fill and the congestion. Dwight stated, it is probal- the fill will not be trucked around
the County. We will be using Greenway Road.
Roy Page - 14346 Manchester Drive (Reflection Lakes) - Nho will be responsible for maintaining the
Naples Reserve Road Entrance? Dwight, deferred to Jim ho further stated, SFI would be responsible.
Dwight thanked everyone for their attendance. Meeting was adjourned at approximately 6 pm.
Packet Page -3464-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
NAPLES RESERVE
Prepared for:
SFI Naples Reserve, LLC.
Prepared by:
Tindale - Oliver and Associates, Inc.
Prepared under the supervision of:
Fabricio A. Ponce, P.E.
Registration No.: 67433
March 2, 2012
640001 -00.11
Signature:
Date: 3/2/2012
Packet Page -3465-
Naples Reserve
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
Table of Contents
Introduction ...................................................................................... ...............................
. .............. ................1
ti
Traffic Generation ...................... 2
................................................ ...............................
Traffic Distribution and Assignment ............................................................................. ............................... 3
NStudy Network Identification .......................................................................................... ..............................3
T
o Committed Roadway Improvements ............................................................................. ............................... 6
N
NExisting Conditions ......................................................................................................... ..............................6
ti Background Traffic Growth Estimate ............................................................................ ............................... 8
2019 Operating Conditions .......................................................................................... ............................... 11
MitigationStrategy ...................................................................................................... ............................... 16
SiteAccess Evaluation .................................................................................................. .............................17
Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................................. .............................20
List of Figures
Figure1. Project Site Location ....................................................................................... ..............................1
Figure 2. Project Traffic Distribution and Assignment ......... ...............................
Figure 3. Study Network Identification Map .................................................................. ..............................5
Figure 4. 2011 Existing Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .................................................... ............................... 7
Figure 5. 2019 Background Peak Hour Traffic Volumes .............................................. .............................10
Figure 6. 2019 Total Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ....................................................... ............................... 13
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Page i Naples Reserve PUD
Allarch 2, 2012 Traffic Impact Study,
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
List of Tables
Table 1. Trip Generation Estimate .................................................................................. ..............................2
Table 2. Study Network Identification ............................... ............................... 5
Table 3. 2011 Existing Conditions Generalized Level of Service Analysis .................. ............................... 6
Table 4. Average Annual Growth Rates by Sew „ P„ t ..................................................... ..............................9
Table 5. 2019 Total Conditions Generalized Level of Service Analysis ..................... ............................... l l
Table 6a. 2019 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Summary .............................. .............................12
Table 6b. 2019 Unsignalized Inersection Level of Service Summary ........................ ............................... 14
Table 6c. 2019 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Summary – With Traffic Signal ........................15
Table 7a. 2019 Total Conditions Generalized Level of Service Analysis - With Improvements Scenario 15
Table 7b. 2019 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Summary – With Improvements Scenario.... 16
Table 8. Proportionate Share Percentage Estimate ...................................................... ............................... 17
Table 9a. Turn Lane Length Requirements – (Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41): Two -Lane Undivided) ........ 19
Table 9b. Turn Lane Length Requirements – (Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41): Six -Lane Divided) ............. 20
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Methodology Correspondence
Appendix B – FSUTMS Plot of Project Traffic Distribution
Appendix C – Study Network Identification
Appendix D – 2011 Existing Operating Conditions
Appendix E – Existing Count Data
Appendix F – Historical AADT Trends
Appendix G – Future Traffic Volume Forecast
Appendix H – 2019 Future Total Capacity Analysis Worksheets
Appendix I – 2019 Future `Total with Improvements" Capacity Xnalysis Worksheets
Appendix J– Turn Lane A -lysis
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Irtc. Page ii Naples Reserve PUD
llaf ch 2, 2012 Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3467-
W
E
N
N
r
O
N
d'
N
ti
Naples Reserve
Traffic Impact Study
Introduction
-The Naples Reserve site is a proposed planned unit development (PUD) of 1,154 residential dwelling
units. it is located 0.40 miles north of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41), approximately 2.15 miles east of
Collier Boulevard (S.R. 951) in Collier County, Florida (Figure 1). Access to Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41) will be provided via two connections, one through Naples Reserve Boulevard and the other one
through Greenway Road. The site is currently vacant. The development is estimated to build out in
approximately 2019.
Figure 1
Proiecf Sits I n'-MG""
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc.
March 2, 2012 Naples Reserve PUD
1 Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
This transportation analysis examines development at build -out, for which specific approval is desired,
and it is based on the requirements of Collier County's Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) Guidelines and
Procedures. The proposed development generates more than 100 net new total 2 -way p.m. peak hour
trip -ends, and significantly impacts one or more roadway facilities, and therefore meets Collier County's
"Major Study" criteria.
Prior to undertaking this analysis, a traffic impact study methodology statement was prepared and
submitted to Collier County on April 6, 2011. The transportation methodology correspondence is
provided in Appendix A.
Throughout this report, the term service capacity has been used to indicate the traffic volume a road may
carry before exceeding an adopted level of service. This term has been used to avoid the confusion
sometimes encountered in discussing traffic volumes and service volumes.
Traffic Generation
Traffic generated by Naples Reserve is estimated in Table 1. The trip generation estimate was based on
fitted -curve equations obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation (8th
edition, 2008).
Table 1
Trip Generation Estimate
Daily AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak HourTrips
ITE land Use, Code, and Size Trips In Out Total In Out Total
Single - Family Detached Housing 210 (fitted Curve) 1,154 du 9,867 205 613 818 598 351 949
Source: ITE Trip Generation, 8`I' Edition, 2008
As shown in Table 1, the proposed development is estimated to generate 9,867 daily trips, 818 new trip
ends per hour (205 inbound, 613 outbound) during the AM peak hour of adjacent street traffic, and 949
new trip ends per hour (598 inbound, 351 outbound) during the PM peak hour of adjacent street traffic.
Trip generation for the PM peak hour is proposed for use in this analysis because that time period
provides for the worst -case traffic scenario for the adjacent roadway system. AM peak hour conditions
are analyzed only at the site access connections to Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41).
Tindale - Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 - 2 - Ti-affic Impact Study
Packet Page -3469-
No reductions were made for internally captured trips or pass -by capture, as the site is proposed to be
entirely residential in nature.
Traffic Distribution and Assienment
Development traffic was distributed and assigned to the study network using Collier County's FSUTMS
model. This model was specifically developed by the Collier County MPO's consultant to be used for the
I -75 at Everglades Boulevard Interchange Justification Report. It includes socio- economic data projections
E corresponding to the mid -range population projections of the University of Florida's Bureau of Economic
and Business Research for the year 2019. The FSUTMS model was assigning project traffic to Manatee
N Road and Barefoot Williams Road to "avoid" Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41); therefore, manual adjustments
0 were made and this traffic was removed from these roads and reassigned to Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41).
N
N
The distribution, manual adjustments, and assignment of development trips is summarized in Table 2 and
~ shown in Figure 2. A plot of the FSUTMS model output substantiating the assignment and socioeconomic
data included as background are provided in Appendix B.
Study Network Identification
The transportation study network for Naples Reserve was identified based on policies adopted by Collier
County. These policies require that all regionally significant roads where traffic from the development
consumes two percent or three percent of the adopted service capacity of the "existing and committed"
road should be included in the study network. The two percent significant impact threshold applies for
the first two road segments as traffic leaves or approaches the site, and the three percent threshold applies
to segments beyond the first two segments.
The net external p.m. peak hour development trip -ends on individual road segments, estimated as
described above, were divided by roadway service capacities determined and published in Collier
County's "2011 Annual Update and Inventory Report" (AUIR) for roadways, for existing and committed
roads, to identify the transportation study network. This analysis is summarized in Table 2 and is
illustrated in Figure 3. Road segments denoted by gray shading in Table 2 are on the study network.
Additional details of the study network identification are provided in Appendix C.
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc.
March 2, 2012 Naples Reserve PUD
3 Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
m
' N
o.airt'v U-
� z
�4
LL
/Fy dZ W
6 [�
N
GREENWAY RD FIDDLERS rt
CREEK CIR V , +
CREEK Z
NAPLES RESERVE BLVD
Q4
°z
ui O
M1 u
Lim
u
MM
tl o nj 1°
C.R 95?ICOLLIER BLVD c
0 1,71 3 0.7k 59%
S.R.8517CDLLIER BLVD co
LU 0
_c J
Ic
2 b
TRIANGLE z
BLVD
ry
fry w
AIRPORT PULLING RD
b
SAYSMORE DR W
a
o z z
Z ° s
N z an
m
p W CI a..
h U' V a
J W
J W 4
Z?4
w > F goo
o
Ir a
a o
a
X
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 - 4 - Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3471-
r
E
N
N
T_
O
N
":t
N
Table 2
Study Network Identification
.,,
g
Roaciwa{
Pro ect,
1
%ofServ: Cap.
I
` t"'nif`ica rte
Threshold)
rraffit
Consu -cl
(11
Distrib.
_
Un -..
_
tiB /EB SBJWB
_.
Tamiami Tr. East
lGo odlette -frank Rd.
Davis Blvd.
3%
14.3%
2.2%
1.3%
NO
NO
Tamiami Tr. East
Davis Blvd.
Airport Rd.
3°
13.4%
2.9%
1.7%
NO
NO
Tamiami Tr. East
tit 66rt Rd.
� lesil2lk� i��tn Ro.
23 e��
nNg
TM
;- y "N
Tamiami Tr. East
Rattlesnake Liam. Rd.
Trian e Elvd _,_�
_314
_ 3%
47.2%
8_1%r
4.7%
Tamiami Tr zza5t
iTrian I rikd�
vlha
Collier Blvd. _
231
-:2%
47.79;
.....
8.99A1
5.2,;.,
V c
Tamiami Tr East
Collier Blvd,
"" R!!s serve Blvd.
-
£7.33.
48.6
%i 28.S%
YES
Tamiami Tr. East jjN1its Reserve Blvd.
�. >. %;
is.i:b
5.99E
6.4np
Y;-: S
Tamiami Tr. Ease,:,; >:, ; ,
Greenwa Rd.
San Marco Dr.
2%
12i7 Y .s,.
.;:4,1 %;
. ,.,lyb
f ir, ,
Collier Blvd
Davis Blvd
rP0tt . sn )LF Ham. I:d-
�3 ";
11.3%
2.1%
NO
0
NO
�� .:�_ _ ' a111< Ra.
�Wal
I F Miami Tr. East
%g =
79 KU
4.1%
"YE5
"
S.R.951
Tamiami Tr. East
-Nlart Dr.
2%
1.7%
0.4%
0.3%
NO
NO
S.R.951
Wal -Mart Dr.
Manatee Rd.
3%
0.7%
0.1%
0.2%
NO
NO
S.R.951
Manatee Rd.
Mainsail Dr.
3%
5.9%
1.4%
0.8%
NO
NO
d Stoa }k.
Ba shore Dr.
Tamiami Tr. East
3 °I°
5.9%
S.4%
3.2%
yE5
YES
Rattlesnake Ham. Rd. I
Charlemagne Blvd.
County Barn Rd.
3%
0.4%
0.1%
0.1%
NO
NO
Rattlesnake Ham. Rd. lCounty
Barn Rd.
Polly Ave.
31%/,
6.9%
1.8%
1.0%
NO
NO
Rattlesnake Ham. Rd.
Polly Ave.
Collier Blvd.
3%
4.2%
0.8%
0.5%
NO
NO
"
"
Shadowlawn Dr.
Tamiami Tr. East
Davis Blvd.
3%
2.6%
1.2%
2.0%
NO
Ba shore Dr.
Tamiami Tr. East
Thomasson Dr.
3%
4.9% 1
0.9%
1.5%
_N0A
NO I
NO
(1) Significant if project consumes 2% or more of the service capacity in adjacent roadway segment + one roadway segnent and
3% on remaining roadway segments
(2) Not included in Collier County 2011 AUIR, LOS and service volumes assumed to be the same as Thomasson Dr.
Figure 3
_ Study Network Identification Mao
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, hic. Naples Reserve PUD
A9arch 2, 2012 - 5 - Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Committed Roadway Improvements
Adopted capital programs of Collier County and the FDOT, current at the time of this analysis, were
reviewed. No "committed" road improvement projects (those with construction funding scheduled within
three years) were identified on any study network roads. However, according to a "Developers
Contribution Agreement" by the U.S.41 Developer's Consortium, at -grade intersection improvements at
Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Collier Boulevard (S.R.951) are being designed, and were assumed as a
"committed improvement" for purposes of this study. These at -grade intersection improvements will
implement the draft FDOT PD &E Study which recommends triple -left turn lanes and triple through lanes
on each approach at the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Collier Boulevard (S.R.951) intersection.
In addition, FDOT is in the design phase of an project to six -lane US 41 from Collier Boulevard (S.R.
951) eastward past the Naples Reserve site. The construction funding for this improvement remains
uncertain at this time, and thus it is not considered a committed improvement. The schedule for this
improvement has an effect on site access provisions, as is discussed later.
Existin! Conditions
Existing 2011 PM peak hour, peak season directional traffic volumes were obtained from Collier
County's 2011 AUIR. Existing (2011) roadway operating conditions on the identified study roadway
network are summarized in Table 3. Additional details of the Existing (2011) roadway operating
conditions analysis are provided in Appendix D. As shown in Table 3, all roadway segments on the study
network currently meet Collier County performance standards.
Turning movement counts (TMC's) at the study intersections were collected during p.m. peak hour
conditions (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.); in addition, a.m. peak hour conditions (7:00 am. to 9:00 a.m.) TMC's
Table 3
2011 Existing Conditions Generalized Level of Service Analysis
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 - 6 - Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3473-
MR
r{
x
_
ENEE-i - E
Tamiami Tr. East
Airport Rd.
Rattlesnake Ham. Rd.
3,200
2,068
1,437
0.65
0.45
Tamiami Tr. East
Rattlesnake Ham. Rd.
Triangle Blvd.
3,500
1,926
1,284
0.55
0.37
Tamiami Tr. East
Triangle Blvd.
Collier Blvd.
3,200
1,299
1,107
0.41
0.35
Tamiami Tr. East
Collier Blvd.
Naples Reserve Blvd.
1,075
550
528
0.51
0.49
Tamiami Tr. East
Naples Reserve Blvd.
Greenway Blvd.
1,075
550
528
0.51
0.49
Tamiami Tr. East
Greenway Blvd.
San Marco Dr.
1,075
550
528
0.51
0.49
Collier Blvd.
Rattlesnake Ham. Rd.
Tamiami Tr. East
3,370
1,413
982
0.42
0.29
Thomasson Dr.
Bayshore Dr.
Tamiami Tr. East
760
356
291
0.47
0.38
Manatee Rd IS.R.951
JTamiami Tr. East
760
358
201
0.47
0.26
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 - 6 - Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3473-
r
Q)
N
vl-
O
N
d'
N
3 v..
Eli 2
LL
Z
eP
P
I J O
u
['/1] Z -1 ry'�r �2 Rui
`ybry1 GREENWAY RD CREEKCIR
.J
!hhf�o O
.p
NAPLES RESERVE BLVD U
o
►y *,h/� W A
ti
W 1/
C.R.95VCOLLtER BLVD
o .983 -(7737) 4 ui
Y ff�oe ! -(72 t) � Q.
S.R.95MOLLIER BLVD
w wy Z V /
Q
TRIANGLE x
ryya' BLVD N w
w'1y N
W r�
LL O
W 04
*% z
ryp F=
U
AIRPORT PULLING RD 8
1 tr
!? { N h-
f3AYSHORE OR ?
��c o O
o A z
Wa
e _ w �
J a a <
Q O
Z 0 LL k
�a$
W °r4
W
n
0 0 0 o g
7{ XX XX W �,.j
mr
X X X X ~
Tisdale- Otiver arid Associates, Inc.
March 2, 2012
- 7-
:Naples Reserve PUD
Traffic Impact Studv
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
were collected at the intersections of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41)/Naples Reserve Blvd. and Tamiami Trail
East (U.S.41) /Greenway Rd. (Project Driveways). Existing count data is shown in Figure 4 and provided in
Appendix E.
Background Traffic Growth Estimate
Traffic growth was estimated using infori- _,Y„n from die above- referenced Collier MPO FSUTMS model
traffic assignments (2019 horizon year) and historical traffic count data collected by Collier County and the
Florida Department of Tra_rportation (FDOT). To estimate future year total traffic volumes, a traffic
assignment was made using Naples Reserve development plus the 2019 countywide socio- economic data
discussed above.
The Naples Reserve traffic volumes and background traffic volumes were identified using the "select zone"
assignment procedures of the FSUTMS model. 2019 daily background AADT volumes were forecasted by:
(a) subtracting the Naples Reserve select -zone traffic volumes from the total traffic volumes,
(b) interpolating between 2000 validation model volumes and the 2019 volumes to estimate 2011
model- based, background peak season volumes,
(c) detennining the annual traffic growth rate from the interpolated 2011 volumes to 2019 based on
the model volumes above for a "Method A" estimate,
(d) determining the difference in 2019 and 2011 model -based volumes (taking into consideration
the MOCF of 0.85) to be used for a "Method B" estimate,
(e) applying the growth rate and the volume difference to the actual 2011 AADT counts to create
two ( "Method A" and "Method B ") estimates of 2019 AADT,
(f) examining the differences between the Method A and Method B estimates and usually
averaging the two to develop a 2019 background AADT estimate. Averaging was chosen in
most cases because the two methods produced very similar volumes.
The annual growth rates obtained by the method described above were compared against historic trends and
the higher of the two was uF-d in the analysis except in the segment of Thomasson Drive were a 7.3%
annual growth rate was t_s,�d (obtained from the FSUTMS model) since _:ie historical growth rate of 29.9%
is based on only two years of available historical traffic counts. In ad _lion, in instances where the resulting
annual growth rate was lower than 2 percent a minimum annual owth rate of 2 percent was used. The
annual growth rates used in the analysis are summarized in T Ac 4, the 2019 background volumes are
shown in Figure 5, and the analysis followed to estimate them � provided in Appendix F.
Tisdale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 - 8 - Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3475-
7
ti
E
N
N
O
N
d'
N
ti
Table 4
Average Annual Growth Ratan hit
(This space intentionally left bla,,Tlz)
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc.
March 2, 2012 Naples Reserve PUD
9 Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
m
VI
LL
Z ,Y
eP
4 D
f�.
[4] 3
(711 22 � hh
11� bh GREENWAV RD FIDDLERS
t• �1 CREEK CIR
/w
NAPLES RESERVE BLVD Lu
pw•
D
"Z `"`x —j
r� �c o L)
bhef� W ly�o, \Jl� r` o�lSl LL
LL
K.
C.R.9511COLLIERBLVD .f~ '7�,y ¢ �j pvs ^� M
45 2 97
— 978 -�
o
S.R.951tCOLLIER BLVD
c 0
Y t,'
z ^�����• w0 iii
W uj
a TRIANGLE
5 5 BLVD
tiry
,6
ry9
AIRPORT PULLING RD
BAYSWORE DR
�a� o a < z
W W 7 Z
e �
Q < 0 0 8
a
a = U U a O
h
J. LL LL
Y
o Q
z ❑ o m
U = 0 W
O O N g
m
K
z
Y
m
rn rn rn o= M
N r N
y X X
Tindale- Oliver and Associates. Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
Alarch 2, 2012 - 10- Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3477-
2019 Operating Conditions
2019 operating conditions were screened by comparing the estimated 2019 p.m. peak hour volumes with the
2011 AUIR roadway service capacity volumes. The peak direction of background traffic on each segment
was based on existing traffic flow patterns. P.M. peak hour background traffic volumes and the p.m. peak
hour development traffic volumes were added to estimate total traffic volumes for the 2019 p.m. peak hour.
Total traffic volumes are shown in Figure 6 and Naples Reserve traffic assignments for 2019 are
summarized in Table 5.
ti
The total traffic volumes estimated as described above were compared against the roadway service volume
E
estimates of Collier County's AUIR to establish a screening of locations where below standard operating
N conditions might occur, and where development traffic would meet or exceed the thresholds of significance.
O
N
\ 5 Table provides a summary N P of estimated 2019 conditions at the significantly impacted locations. Only one
ti road segment was estimated to operate below level of service standard conditions:
• Tamiami Tr. East from Collier Blvd. to Naples Reserve Blvd.
Detailed intersection level of service and capacity analyses were undertaken at the intersections contained in
this segment and the site access points:
• Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Collier Boulevard (S.R.951)
• Tamiami Trail East (U.SA1) at Manatee Road
• Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Naples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway)
• Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Greenway Rd (Project Driveway)
Table 5
2019 Total Conditions Generalized Epvpl nf Qan,i^,n n.,.,,.,�.,.
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc.
March 2, 2012 Naples Reserve PUD
1I Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Intersection turning movement volume forecasts are included in Appendix G.
Levels of service were calculated using the following methodologies:
• Signalized Intersections Synchro Version 7 (2000 HCMProcedures)
• Unsignalized Intersections Highway Capacity Software Version 5.6 (2000 HCMProcedures)
Capacity analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix H.
Tables 6a through 6c summarize the results of the capacity analysis. As noted above, the roadway segment
of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) from Collier Boulevard to Naples Reserve Boulevard is anticipated to fail
during 2019 p.m. peak hour conditions; therefore, a mitigation strategy needs to be identified.
Table 6a shows that the signalized study intersections are anticipated to operate at/above the adopted
performance standards during 2019 p.m. peak hour conditions; therefore, no improvements are required at
the signalized study intersections. It is necessary to note that, as mentioned in the Committed Roadway
Improvements section, the at -grade intersection improvements at Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Collier
Boulevard (S.R.951) included in the "Developers Contribution Agreement" by the U.S.41 Developer's
Consortium were included in the analysis.
Table 6a
2019 Signalized Intersections Level of Service Summary
Tindale - Oliver and Associates. Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 -12- Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3479-
MLE
Collier Blvd
V/C
0.61
0.57
0.31
0.26
0.62
0.42
0.84
0.66
0
0.7
0.6
0.10
n/a
at
PM
Delay
Peak
53.1
39.7
36.5
56
45.6
43.8
49.7
37.2
28.0
53
44
37.5
43.2
Tamiami
[sec]
Hour
Los
D
D
D
E
D
D
D
D
C
D
D
D
D
Trail
Tamiami
V/C
n/a
0.93
0.05
0.67
0.69
n/a
0.71
n/a
0.1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Trail
PM
Delay
Peak
n/a
26.8
5.5
36
7.3
n/a
50.6
n/a
37
n/a
n/a
n/a
21.3
at
[sect
Hour
LOS
n/a
C
A
D
A
n/a
D
n/a
D
n/a
n/a
n/a
C
Manatee Rd
Tindale - Oliver and Associates. Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 -12- Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3479-
E
_a)
N
,VI-
C:)
N
IZI-
N
ti
a
LL
Z
�P
ti
�P
P^
th y °ham 1�1 d
[421 25
[553 298
`�ry719 GREENWAY RD CREEK C R (n
`n LU
6� c
1� fti C
NAPLES RESERVE BLVD D
o
h
0 u.
N
C.R.951 /COLLIER BLVD o 11149.
–978
y fir-
—696 3
Y
vY7e � 5.R.95t1COLLIER BLVD
x
tU
W I9 Q'
TRIANGLE
< bq ' BLVD
s
Jg�
•A/
ba
ry
AIRPORT PULLING RD
BAYSHORE DR l�l
' U I
= y N
T N d Q ZE g 8
Q
_ > ? O
W h O O
LL LL ✓3
Z r D F
r F w zE�.
J O O 4 Z On
rn rn m F
N N N
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, fine. 1'aples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 - 13- Traffic Impact Studv
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Table 6b shows the level of service analysis of the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Naples
Reserve Blvd. and at the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Greenway Rd. (Project Driveways). As is
indicated in Table 6b, the side - street approach to the intersection of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Naples
Reserve Blvd. is anticipated to operate below the adopted performance standard during the 2019 a.m. and
p.m. peak hntir "total trall-l' ^- nditions if U.S. 41 remains a two -lane highway. Therefore, signalization at
the Tamiami Tr,., east (i'.S. +1) Xa;,:�;s Reserve Blvd. will likely be required upon meeting signal
warrau,s. '.:,cording to ..;l "rules of thumb ", it is anticipated that this intersection will meet warrants
when Naples Reserve reaches approximately 28 to 45 percent of its total development quantities (based on
side - street warranting vu.u.,, , _ ,,QUO to S,vuu i_). Therefore, at this point in tune, further study will
be required to determine if the signal is warranted. Signalization of this intersection will need to be
coordinated with Collier County and FDOT District 1. Table 6c shows good levels of service will result in
2019 if a signal is installed.
At the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) / Greenway Rd. intersection, no additional improvements are proposed
due to the low volumes and volume- to- capacity ratios (V /C) being less than 1.0 for the northbound left and
southbound left movements (28/22 a.m. /p.m. and 40/29 a.m. /p.m.).
Table 6b
2019 Unsignalized Intersections Leval e%f ca�.,:,.e c.........._..
Tamiami Trail AM
at Peak
Naples Reserve Blvd I Hour
Tamiami Trail PM
at Peak
Naples Reserve Blvd I Hour
Tamiami Trail AM
at Peak
Greenway Rd I Hour
Tamiami Trail PM
at Peak
Greenway Rd Hour
Note 1: unODDOSPrl Mn %1PMP t
V C
0.20
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
0.45
n/a
1.22
Delay
143.3
[sec]
9.8
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
68.7
n/a
LOS
A
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
F
n/a
F
V/C
0.64
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
2.60
n/a
-
0.74
Delay
34.1
[sec)
16.3
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
1467
n/a
LOS
C
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
F
n/a
0.30
D
note 2
V/C
0.02
note 1
note 1
0.00
note 1
not 2
0.15
0.00
0.00
note 2
Delay
(sec]
8 .4
note 1
note 1
8.3
note 1
note 2
27.1
19.8
11.0
note 2
19.5
note 2
LOS
A
note 1
note 1
A
note 1
note 2
D
C
B
note 2
note 2
C
0.44
note 2
note 2
V/C
0.14
note 1
note 1
0.01
note 1
note 2
0.23
0.00
0.01
Delay
[sec)
9.3
note 1
note 1
8.1
note 1
note 2
52.0
29.8
10.3
note 2
25.2
note 2
LOS
A
note 1
note 1
A
note 1
note 2
F
E
B
note 2
E
note 2
Note 2: movement occurs from shared lane
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc.
March 2, 2012 -14- Naples Resen e PUD
Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3481-
7
ti
_N
N
r
O
N
d'
N
ti
Table 6c
2019 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Summary
V/C
AM
0.50
Peak
Tamiami Tr.
0.84
East
Hour
at
n/a
Naples Reserve
n/a
Blvd.
PM
Delay
Peak
Hour
Table 6c
2019 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Summary
V/C
0.56
0.50
n/a
n/a
0.84
1 n/a
n/a
.n /a
n/a
0.09
n/a
0.81
0.81
Delay
[sec]
12.7
8.1
n/a
n/a
25.5
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
19.9
n/a
35.5
22.3
LOS
B
A
n/a
n/a
C
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
B
n/a
D
C
V/C
0.83
0.51
n/a
n/a
0.99
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0.17
n/a
0.20
0.85
Delay
[sec]
30.8
2.9
n/a
n/a
54.1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
37.2
n/a
37.5
30.4
LOS
C
A
n/a
n/a
D
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
D
n/a
D
C
Table 7a summarizes the results of the "with improvements" (if US. 41 is ivzdened to six lanes) capacity
analysis. The "with improvements" capacity analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix I.
Table 7a
2019 Total Conditions Generalized Level of Service Analysis
As can be observed in Table 7a, with the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) west of Collier Boulevard (S.R.951)
six- laning improvement in place, the roadway segment will operate at acceptable level of service.
Table 7b summarizes the intersection operations analysis with U.S. 41 as a six -lane facility.
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, 1rxc. Naples Reserve PUD
A9arch 2, 2012 -15- Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Table 7b
2019 Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Summary
With,VY- I,aninuofTIN 47
Note 1: unopposed movement
Note 2: movement occurs from shared lane
As can be observed in Table 7b, during the p.m. peak hour, the southbound left movement at the Tamiami
Trail East (U.S.41) at Naples Reserve Boulevard intersection is anticipated to operate with a LOS F but with
V/C significantly less than].0 (0.32). Due to the low volumes (42/25 a.m. /p.m.) at this southbound left turn
movement, no additional intersections improvements are proposed at this intersection. The Tamiami Trail
East (U.S.41) at Greenway Road intersection is anticipated to operate at acceptable level of service without
any improvements beyond the six- laning of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) west of Collier Boulevard
(S.R.951).
Mitigation Stratm
As identified above, improvements to Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) are required to maintain adopted level of
service standards. Transportation impact fees that would be paid by the development are estimated at
$7,077,482, using the transportation impact fee rates in effect in February, 2012 and assuming 100% single
family detached homes from 1,500 to 2,499 square feet. The FDOT - planned addition of four lanes (for a
total of six) from the Developer's Consortium funded intersection improvements at Collier Boulevard
(S.R.951), past the project entrance (Hacienda Lakes Boulevard), will add approximately 7,140 vehicle-
miles of capacity (vmc), Naples Reserve will consume 1,274 vmc of the total vmc added, approximately
17.8 percent. Based on preliminary estimates of the improvement costs, the proportionate share was
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 -16- Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3483-
wM
Tamiami Trail
V/C
0.17
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a 0.14
n/a
0.72
AM
Delay
at
Peak
8.9
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
18.0
n/a
19.9
Naples
Na p
]
Hour
LOS
A
note 11
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
C
n/a
C
Reserve Blvd
Tamiami Trail
V/C
0.53
Inote 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
0.32
n/a
0.41
PM
Delay
12.5
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
70.3
n/a
12.9
at
peak
Naples
sec]
Reserve Blvd
Hour
LOS
B
note 1
n/a
n/a
note 1
note 2
n/a
n/a
n/a
F
n/a
B
V/C
0.01
note 1
note 1
0.00
note 1
note 2
0.06
0.00
0.00
note 2
0.15
note 2
Tamiami Trail
AM
Delay
at
Peak
8.0
note 1
note 1
8.0
note 1
note 2
12.8
13.1
9.1
note 2
11.2
note 2
[sec]
Greenway Rd
Hour
LOS
A
note 1
note 1
A
note 1
note 2
B
B
A
note 2
B
note 2
0.12
note 1
note 1
0.01
note 1
note 2
0.07
0.00
0.01
note 2
0.22
note 2
Tamiami Trail
PM
at
Peak
8.7
note 1
note 1
7.8
note 1
note 2
16.7
16.9
8.9
note 2
12.2
note
VV/C
Greenway Rd
Hour
A
note 1
note 1
A
note 1
note 2F
C
C
A
note 2
B
note 2
Note 1: unopposed movement
Note 2: movement occurs from shared lane
As can be observed in Table 7b, during the p.m. peak hour, the southbound left movement at the Tamiami
Trail East (U.S.41) at Naples Reserve Boulevard intersection is anticipated to operate with a LOS F but with
V/C significantly less than].0 (0.32). Due to the low volumes (42/25 a.m. /p.m.) at this southbound left turn
movement, no additional intersections improvements are proposed at this intersection. The Tamiami Trail
East (U.S.41) at Greenway Road intersection is anticipated to operate at acceptable level of service without
any improvements beyond the six- laning of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) west of Collier Boulevard
(S.R.951).
Mitigation Stratm
As identified above, improvements to Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) are required to maintain adopted level of
service standards. Transportation impact fees that would be paid by the development are estimated at
$7,077,482, using the transportation impact fee rates in effect in February, 2012 and assuming 100% single
family detached homes from 1,500 to 2,499 square feet. The FDOT - planned addition of four lanes (for a
total of six) from the Developer's Consortium funded intersection improvements at Collier Boulevard
(S.R.951), past the project entrance (Hacienda Lakes Boulevard), will add approximately 7,140 vehicle-
miles of capacity (vmc), Naples Reserve will consume 1,274 vmc of the total vmc added, approximately
17.8 percent. Based on preliminary estimates of the improvement costs, the proportionate share was
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 -16- Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3483-
r'
^E
W
�J
N
0
N
d
N
ti
estimated to be less than the estimated impact fee, so it appears adequate traffic mitigation will be provided
by the impact fee. The computation of the proportionate share percentage is shown in Table 8.
Table 8
Proportionate Share Percentage Estimate
lsj,R'. �. A '. �p '4 }.� R ft +'
s�:ar^,�C- .7 a #} � ✓� �r �, �' ~1t a � � .� � �
Yi �r t #"� € r
-•�'0H " ,°���
f �' '�
d 7 �.3 #
5^ �' K Xo- 1 'Y�
° f�-� 'F� f °' �
`��
vkle
✓. � � .� asi"y s,"'�" � � ��
� f ^ w 4ab._
�.,1„� ea����t:�.-
t`a�f ,���g �`
- F�(I
v�� �'�,
i2�u✓}�aa �a...Ls�;£" (�r..�Li.�ds` .
'�•
1.x',1
09, rAM
-
11111�11111�
11
®®
®1111111;
+* •"
�Percent VMC Consumed by Naples Reserve
This project's applicant understands that Collier County is working to assemble funding for the construction
of the FDOT improvement; therefore, the applicant is currently working with FDOT and Collier County to
assist in that regard though the pre - payment of a portion of the estimated transportation impact fees. This
will assure that the development's proportionate share is paid tunely. The final amount and timing of the
payment will be defined as part of the discussions currently being held with FDOT and Collier County.
Site Access Evaluation
According to FDOT's Access Management Standards (Rule 14 -97), Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) is a Class
3- Restrictive roadway with the following space requirements: .
• Distance between full median openings: 2,640 feet
• Distance between directional median openings: 1,320 feet
• Distance between signals: 2,640 feet
• Distance between connections: 660 feet
The distance between the existing intersections of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41)/Manatee Road and Tamiami
Trail East (U.S.41)INaples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway) is approximately 2,470 feet,
approximately 94% of the minimum required distance between signals (2,640 feet). According to FDOT's
Median Handbook, a 10% deviation from the minimum required standards is acceptable when meeting the
minimum spacing standards pose a practical problem. Therefore, the proposed signalization of the Tamiami
Trail East (U.S.41)/Naples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway) intersection could potentially be
signalized after coordination with Collier County and FDOT.
Tindale - Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 -17- Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Turn Lane Analvsis (Tamiami Trail East (US 41)
The potential need for new and the adequacy of existing auxiliary turn lanes was evaluated to identify if
new turn lanes /modifications to existing turn lanes would be needed to serve the proposed development at
its access connections to Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41). This analysis was performed for two different
scenarios:
• Scenario A: Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41): Two -Lane Undivided
• Scenario B: Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41): Six -Lane Divided
Scenario A: Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) • Two -Lane Undivided
The potential need for a westbound to northbound right -turn lane at the project site access connections at
Naples Reserve Boulevard and at Greenway Road was evaluated assuming U.S. 41 remains a two -lane
highway using guidelines documented in the Florida Department of Transportation's Driveway Handbook
(March 2005).
The warranting threshold applicable to the existing section (two lanes undivided) of Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41) at Naples Reserve Boulevard and Greenway Road is 35 right -turns per hour, consistent with the
road's 60 mph speed limit and two -lane characteristics. The maximum estimated volume of right -turns
from Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) into the Naples Reserve Boulevard and Greenway Road is 44 vehicles
per hour and 50 vehicles per hour respectively. Based on this resource and the estimated volumes, a
westbound right -turn lane on Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) is warranted at the Naples Reserve Boulevard
and Greenway Road intersections. It is anticipated that these right -turn lanes will be warranted when
Naples Reserves reaches approximately 61 percent of its total development quantities.
There is an existing eastbound -to- northbound left turn lane (810 feet) at the Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41)/Naples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway) intersection and an existing eastbound -to-
northbound left turn lane (575 feet) at the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) /Greenway Road (Project Driveway)
intersection. The need for lengthening this turn lane was evaluated under different future operations (e.g.
signal control and unsignalized) and it will meet FDOT turn lane design standards under both of the future
operation options. The existing eastbound -to- northbound left turn lane at the Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41) /Greenway Road will meet FDOT turn lane design standards.
Table 9a surnmarizes the required turn lane lengths at Tamiar Trail East (U.S.41)/Naples Reserve
Boulevard (Project Driveway) and Tamiami Trail East (U.S.- .) /Greenway Road (Project Driveway)
intersections. Turn lane analysis worksheets are provided in A dondix J.
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
Alarclz 2, 2012 1 S - Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3485-
Scenario B: Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41): Six -Lane Divided
The potential need for a westbound to northbound right -turn lane at the project site access connection at
Naples Reserve Boulevard and Greenway Road (unsignalized intersections) was evaluated in
consideration of guidelines documented in the Florida Department of Transportation's Driveway
Handbook (March 2005).
The warranting threshold applicable to the "with improvements" section (six lanes divided) of Tamiami
ti
Trail East (U.S.41) in the vicinity of the proposed development is 55 right -turns per hour, consistent with
the road's 60 mph speed limit and multilane highway characteristics. The maximum estimated volume of
E
a) right -turns from Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) into the Naples Reserve Bouleverd is 44 vehicles per hour
N and 50 vehicles per hour into the Greenway Road. Based on this resource and the estimated volumes, a
T_
o westbound right -turn lane on Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) is not warranted at Naples Reserve Boulevard
N
d' or Greenway Road intersections.
N
ti
Table 9a
Turn Lane Length Requirements
Tarniarni Trail East (US. 41) — Two -Lane Undivided
(1) Source: Synchro Analysis (signalized intersections)
(2) Source: HCS Analysis (unsignalized intersections)
There is an existing 810 -foot long eastbound -to- northbound left turn lane at the Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41)/Naples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway) intersection and an existing eastbound -to-
northbound left turn lane (575 feet) at the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) /Greenway Road (Project Driveway)
intersection. Table 9b summarizes turn lane required length needs at the Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41)/Naples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway) and Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) /Greemvay Road
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 _19- Traffic Impact Study
. �
, �� eae..
`•�i-'i;n ���
��}� aper?��utafF � �
rftersz o1i,
mein
_
3Q�Fi
r p �e � n er;
�t� -�� "
� H :P ioa
*, a� a : numb .tip
�+nearesC` �
�rnEle • �'D! tarrc4 "� � egx��reii��h°
Tamiami Trail
AM Pk Hr
69
75
at
Naples
EBL
60
405
805
810
No
Reserve Blvd
PM Pk Hr
395
400
Tamiami Trail
AM Pk Hr
- 0.05
25
at
EBL
60
405
430
575
No
Greenway Rd
PM Pk Hr
0.49
25
(1) Source: Synchro Analysis (signalized intersections)
(2) Source: HCS Analysis (unsignalized intersections)
There is an existing 810 -foot long eastbound -to- northbound left turn lane at the Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41)/Naples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway) intersection and an existing eastbound -to-
northbound left turn lane (575 feet) at the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) /Greenway Road (Project Driveway)
intersection. Table 9b summarizes turn lane required length needs at the Tamiami Trail East
(U.S.41)/Naples Reserve Boulevard (Project Driveway) and Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) /Greemvay Road
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 _19- Traffic Impact Study
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
(Project Driveway) intersections. Turn lane analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix J. Based on
this analysis, with U.S. 41 as a six -lane highway, additional lengthening of the turn lanes is not required.
Table 9b
Turn Lane Length Requirements
Trn»inmi Trail Fn.ct aT ,i 41) _Vy -T.ane Divided
I ,
I
Rounded 1
e
'
Queue
I
Existing
Queue
Lan h ,,
Dac- 1fTaperi
Total,
Time
L nth "'
Ito the
Posted
I
Per fOD]'
Required`
Turn
Length_n ng
Intersection
I\iovement�
{}eriod
(nurnb —ofi
i
nearest65
speed
1
:ndex301
1 D.stanee
Lane
? I
Required.
tieh�cl= j
feet
m h'
I P ,
Ifeetl
'feet}
den `h
g
4
increment]
I
Itr -eti
�
i
Tamiami Trail
AM Pk Hr
0.61
25
at
EBL
60
405
505
810
No
Naples
Reserve Blvd
PM Pk Hr
3.27
100
Tamiami Trail
AM Pk Hr
0.05
25
at
EBL
60
405
430
575
No
Greenway Rd
PM Pk Hr
0.41
25
(1) Source: HCS Analysis (unsignalized intersections)
Summary and Recommendations
The Naples Reserve site is a proposed planned unit development (PUD) of 1,154 residential dwelling
units. It is located 0.40 miles north of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41), approximately 2.15 miles east of
Collier Boulevard (S.R. 951) in Collier County, Florida. Access to Tamiami Trail East (U.S. 41) will be
provided via Naples Reserve Boulevard and Greenway Road. The site is currently vacant. The
development is estimated to build out in approximately 2019.
Pursuant to these study findings, the Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) roadway segment from Collier Boulevard
(S.R.951) to Naples Reserve Boulevard is anticipated to operate below the adopted performance standard
during 2019 p.m. peak hour total conditions. As a result, mitigation is required. Transportation impact fees
to be paid by Naples Reserve are estimated to be greater than it's proportionate share of the required
improvement so adequate mitigation is assured. The applicant is working with FDOT and Collier County to
support the widening of this road though the pre pavmen of a substantial portion of Naples Reserve's
transportation impact fees. The final amount and timing of the payment will be defined as part of the
discussions currently being held with FDOT and Collier County.
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 -20- Traffic Impact Study
Packet Page -3487-
ti
E
N
N
T_
O
N
d'
N
t`
Under existing geometric conditions on Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) (two -lane undivided roadway), the
Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) at Naples Reserve Blvd. intersection is anticipated to operate below the
adopted performance standards during 2019 p.m. peak hour total conditions; and estimated future volumes
are adequate to meet traffic signal warranting conditions. Thus, signalization may be required when
warrants are met (estimated at approximately 28 to 45 percent of the development). Signalization of this
intersection will need to be coordinated with Collier County and FDOT District 1. With U.S. 41 as a two -
lane highway, westbound -to- northbound right turn lanes are warranted at Naples Reserve Boulevard and
Greenway Road (at approximately 61 percent of build -out). Because Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) may be
widened to six lanes soon; these improvements are not recommended immediately, since they will not be
needed when the widening occurs.
When Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41) is widened to six -lanes, the intersections at Naples Reserve Blvd. and at
Greenway Rd., are anticipated to operate at acceptable level of service without any improvements other than
the six- laning of Tamiami Trail East (U.S.41).
Tindale- Oliver and Associates, Inc. Naples Reserve PUD
March 2, 2012 -21- Traffic Impact Study
ry� V282q
ry�
3
\�9� bt E4Zw�O
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
N ORDINANCE NO. 07- 71
W
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
a COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
a' AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004 -41, AS
AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING
ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL
PROPERTY FROM A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(PUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR
THE PROJECT KNOWN AS THE NAPLES RESERVE GOLF
CLUB RPUD BY ADDING 602 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING
UNITS, FOR A TOTAL OF 1154 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED ONE MILE NORTH OF US 41 AND 1
1/2 MILES EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951), IN
SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 688+/ -
ACRES; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE
NUMBER 99 -42, THE FORMER NAPLES RESERVE GOLF
CLUB PUD; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 99-42
establishing the Naples Reserve Golf Club PUD; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 04 -219, the Board of County Commissioners extended
the PUD approval affecting Ordinance No. 99-42 until June 8, 2008; and
WHEREAS, Dwight Nadeau of RWA, Inc., representing Anthony Salce of Gulf Coast
Development Group, LC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning
classification of the herein described real property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 1,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)
Zoning District for the project known as Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD in accordance with
the Exhibits attached hereto as Exhibits A through F. The appropriate zoning atlas map or
maps, as described in Ordinance Number 2004 -41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly.
Page 1 of 2
Packet Page -3489-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
SECTION TWO:
Ordinance Number 99 -42, known as the Naples Reserve Golf Club PUD, adopted on
June 8, 1999, by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, is hereby repealed in
its entirety.
SECTION THREE
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super- majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this t3 day of Wee e-"V r , 2007.
,uuufo-l�l;,
DW (3HT 9.` K, CLERK
B�.
�.- Attest . ss to —F— Clerk
S 1gia3;t u. -e on) -
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
—MIA OVA,
Marjord . Student' Stirling
Assistant County Attorney
Exhibit A - List of Allowable Uses
Exhibit B - Development Standards Table
Exhibit C - Master Plan
Exhibit D - Legal Description
Exhibit E - List of Requested Deviations
Exhibit F - Development Commitments
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER CO TY, RIDA
By:
JA S COLETTA, CHAIRMAN
This ordinance filed with the
cary of State's Off ice-the
�L((jjTT'' ��day 0fj
and acknowledgem t of that
fiiin i this day
of
By Ue:pu k
Page 2 of 2
Packet Page -3490-
EXHIBIT A
Table I
PROJECT LAND USE TRACTS
TYPE UNITS/FT. ACREAGEt
TRACT "R&" RESIDENTIAL 1154 609.2
TRACT "RA" RECREATION AREA 0 15.2
TRACT "P" PRESERVE 0 63.7
I TRACT RG PERMITTED USES:
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in
whole or in part, for other than the following:
A. Principal Uses:
1) Single - family detached dwellings;
2) Single - family attached dwellings (including townhouses intended for fee
simple conveyance including the platted lot associated with the residence);
3) Villa/patio dwellings (detached single- family dwellings of a smaller scale
than the typical single- family detached dwelling);
4) Multi - family dwellings;
5) Model homes;
6) Golf courses and related facilities;
7) Commercial excavations — surplus fill material generated by commercial
excavation depths may be transported off -site only for use in the US41
improvement project associated with this zoning approval;
$j. Project sales, construction and administrative offices, which may occur in
i`esidential, and/or in temporary.
9) Any%ther principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning
Appeals (`13ZA ") by the process outlined in the Land Development Code
(LDC).
A -1
Packet Page -3491-
I
I
t/Z4 /1U12 Item 17.J.
B. Accessory Uses:
Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal
uses and structures, including, but not limited to:
1) Customary accessory uses and structures including, but not limited to,
private garages, swimming pools with, or without screened enclosures,
gatehouses, and other outdoor recreation facilities;
2) Polling place if deemed warranted by the Supervisor of Elections.
II TRACT RA PERMITTED USES:
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in
whole or in part, for other than the following:
A. Principal Uses Typically Accessory to Residential Development:
1) Structures intended to provide social and recreational space (private,
intended for use by the residents and their guest only).
2) Outdoor recreation facilities, such as a community swimming pool, tennis
and basketball courts, playground improvements/facilities, and passive
and/or active water features.
3) Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning
Appeals ( "BZA'D by the process outlined in the LDC.
B. Accessory Uses:
Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and
structures, including, but not limited to:
1) Customary accessory uses or structures incidental to recreation areas and, or
facilities, including structures constructed for purposes of maintenance,
storage or shelter with appropriate screening and landscaping.
M DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. GENERAL: Development of The Naples Reserve RPUD shall be in accordance
with the contents of this Ordinance and applicable sections of the Collier County
LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any
development order, such as, but not limited to, final subdivision plat, final site
development plan, excavation permit, and preliminary work authorization, to which
such regulations relate. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental
standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the LDC shall apply.
rw
Packet Page -3492-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be
in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures.
Condominium, and/or homeowners' association boundaries shall not be utilized for
determining development standards.
There shall be no more than 1154 residential dwelling units permitted which
provides for a maximum gross density of 1.67 dwelling units pre acre. A minimum
of 612 Transfer of Development Rights Credits shall be obtained to achieve the
maximum gross density.
B. Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the
Residential PUD. Residential Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein
shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of
approval of the SDP or Subdivision plat.
W SIGNS
For the purposes of this RPUD, the LDC provisions from Section 5.06.02.A.6. are
applicable for off - premise signage.
A -3
Packet Page -3493-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT B
TABLE I
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
' DETi4�lEb ATTAGIED A VILLAS
U SHOUSE
:.. a •
TOWNHGCISR
=
FAMILX
RE GR6ATfON
.
BUILDINGS:..,.
TRUr,,T�1K,'#
T AREA
2,250 S F PER
O S.F. PER
2,250 S.F. PER
S.F. PER
10
T AREA
FFRONT
Acre
N/A
N/A
2,,0
NI1
T WIDTH
40 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
N/A
25 FEET
N/A
OR AREA
1,000 S.F
1,000 S•F
1,000 S.F
1,000 S.F. /D.U.
N/A
ARD
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
N/A
MN SIDE YARD
6 FEET
0 FEET or
3 FEET or
GREATER OF 10
N/A
MIN REAR YARD
15 FEET
6 FEET
15 FEET
9 FEET
i
FEET OR @H
15 FEET
15 FEET
N/A
MIN PRESERVE SETBACK
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN
STRUCTURES
12 FEET
12 FEET
12 FEET
GREATER OF 20
N/A
FEET OR '/2 THE
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT NOT
35 FEET
40 FEET
35 FEET
SUM BH
TO EXCEED
65 FEET
ET
50 FEET
ACTUAL
AC 124- 9pp>r �
L
. �S�'&7'R
FRONT
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
a ^_ -.. =ai•�;:<
20 FEET
SIDE
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
'h BH
REAR (ATTACHED)
5 FEET
5 FEET
5 FEET
5 FcET
DETACHED
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET
i 0 FEE
PRESERVE SETBACK
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
20 FEET
10 FEET
MINIMUM DISTANCE
12 FEET
12 FEET
12 FEET
12 FEET
EET WEEN STRUCTURE)
Greater of 15
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT NOT 1
35 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
feet or !h BH
TO EXCEED
35rEET
40 FEET
S.P.S. = Same as Principal Structures
SH = Building Height — unless otherwise noted, all building heights shall be "Zoned" building heights, as defined in the LDC.
Packet Page -3494-
M.
Notes:
PROPERTY
UNE
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
1) No structures are permitted in the required 20 -foot lake maintenance easement No setback is required
for structures adjacent to a lake maintenance easement.
2) Side yards — No side yard shall be required between units when more than one residential unit is in a
single structure (i.e.: attached single - family and townhomes). Varying side yards are provided to allow
side entry garages and to maintain the required separation between buildings.
3) The LDC standards for cluster residential design, as set forth in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District,
shall apply to residential land uses within this RPUD.
4) Terraced setbacks are permitted for either two or three story multi - family structures. Setbacks shall be
measured from that ground floor exterior wall of lesser height as long as a minimum 15 foot building
wall setback is provided as depicted in Figure I below.
5) Entrance features (i.e.: monumentation, clock towers and colonnades) shall be limited in height to no
greater than 50 feet which may be located at the project entrance.
b) For all residential units, garages shall be located a minimum of 23 feet from the back of the sidewalk
closest to the garage, except for side load garages, wherein a parking area 23 feet in depth must be
provided perpendicular to the sidewalk to avoid vehicles being parked across a portion, or all of the
referenced sidewalk.
I E__ 11
_1� 05 01
Figure 1
Packet Page -3495-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT C
MASTER PLAN
Packet Page -3496-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT D
Legal Description
All of Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida
Packet Page -3497-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT E
LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC
Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.(0), for "cul -de -sac and local streets, and LDC
Appendix B, Typical Street Section, B -2 and B -3, and Section III, Exhibit "A", Design Requirements for
Subdivisions C.13.e. of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual
adopted through Ordinance No. 2004 -66 that requires 60 feet, to allow 50 feet. A 50 -foot right -of -way is
permitted in this RPUD to provide for flexibility in development design, subject to providing easements
for required utilities generally parallel to the right -of -way. This is a reasonable deviation that has been
implemented in subdivisions throughout the County, and does not compromise health, safety, and welfare
issues related to civil engineering design.
All platted project streets shall have a minimum 50 -foot right -of -way. Deviation 1 from Sub - section
6.06.01(0) of the LDC, for cul -de -sac and local streets, and LDC Appendix B -2 and B -3 for cul-de -sac
and local streets respectively, and Section III, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements for Subdivisions C. 13.e.
of the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual adopted through
Ordinance No. 2004 -66 which requires 60 feet to allow 50 feet. (See Exhibit C, RPUD Master Plan).
These streets shall be private, and shall be classified as local streets.
Deviation #2 seeks relief from Section III, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements of Subdivisions C.13 j. of
the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual adopted through Ordinance
Number 2004-66, that requires tangents to be provided between reverse curves on all streets. This RPUD
will not require tangents between reverse curves in order to provide greater subdivision design flexibility.
All internal roads within the RPUD will be private, and have low posted speed limits, and will have a
curvilinear design that has been shown to act as traffic calming measures by reducing local traffic speeds.
Additionally, the flat terrain found on site does not warrant the need for tangents. This is a reasonable
deviation that has been applied throughout the County, and does not comprise a risk to public health,
safety and welfare.
Tangents between reverse curves are not required for any local street design in this RPUD. Deviation 2
from Section III, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements for Subdivisions C.13 j. of the Administrative Code
for Collier County Construction Standards Manual adopted through Ordinance No. 2004 -66.
Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.5.c., that functionally limits the number of model
homes to allow one model home for each variant of the residential product proposed in the project. In an
effort to provide a variety of residence styles and floor plans within the development, it is essential not to
arbitrarily limit the opportunity of a home buyer to see the creativity of the architecture proposed in a
development. To do so could result in monotonous tract housing reminiscent of the "new town"
movement after the end of the World War II. This deviation is appropriate, and does not negatively affect
the health and safety, nor welfare of the future residents of the development.
The Naples Reserve RPUD may have one model home representing each type of residential product. The
number of model homes may exceed five, but shall not exceed a total of ten. Deviation 3 from LDC
Section 5.04.04.B.5.c. that limits the total number of model homes in a single development to five-
E-1
Packet Page -3498-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Deviation #4 seeks relief from Section III, Exhibit "A ", Design Requirements of Subdivisions C. 131 of
the Administrative Code for Collier County Construction Standards Manual adopted through Ordinance
Number 2004 -66, limits cul -de -sac lengths to 1000 feet or less. This RPUD may have cul -de -sacs with
lengths greater than 1000 feet. The RPUD lands are relatively without topographic relief, so greater sight
distances would allow longer dead -end streets without jeopardizing the safety of the future residents.
Further, the turning radii of the terminal cul -de -sacs will meet or exceed applicable County and National
Fire Protection Association requirements.
Cul -de -sac lengths in the Naples Reserve RPUD may exceed 1000 feet.
E -2
Packet Page -3499-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT F
LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
TRANSPORTATION
The development of this RPUD shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions:
A. All traffic control devices, signs, pavement marking, and design criteria shall be in accordance
with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards
(MUMS), current edition, FDOT Design Standards, current edition, and the Manual On Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition.
B. Access Points shown on the RPUD Master Plan are considered to be conceptual. Nothing
depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any
property boundary. The number of access points constructed may be less than the number
depicted on the Master Plan; however, no additional access points shall be considered unless a
PUD amendment is approved.
C. Site- related improvements (as opposed to system -related improvements) necessary for safe
ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for
impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior
to commencement of on -site construction.
D. Nothing in any development order (DO) shall vest a right of access in excess of a right- inhight-
out condition at any access point. Neither shall the existence of a point of ingress, a point of
egress, or a median opening, nor the lack thereof, be the basis for any future cause of action for
damages against the County by the developer, its successor in title, or assignee. Collier County
reserves the right to close any median opening existing at any time which is found to be adverse
to the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based on, but
not limited to, safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity.
E. If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of existing County rights -of - -way or
easement(s), then compensating right -of -way shall be provided at no cost to Collier County as a
consequence of such improvement(s) upon final approval of the turn lane design during the first
subsequent development order (i.e.: site development plan/subdivision plat). The typical cross -
section may not differ from the existing roadway unless approved, in writing, by the
Transportation Division Administrator, or his designee.
F. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, traffic signal(s), other traffic control device, sign,
pavement marking improvement within a public right -of -way or easement, or site - related
improvements (as opposed to system related improvements) necessary for safe ingress and egress
to this project, as determined by Collier County, is determined to be necessary, the cost of such
improvement shall be the responsibility of the developer, its successors or assigns. The
improvements shall be paid for or installed, at the County's discretion, prior to the issuance of the
first CO.
F -1
Packet Page -3500-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
G. The RPUD Master Plan reflects a 100' wide reservation for dedication along the western
boundary of the RPUD. Should the County find that it is appropriate to improve that corridor,
the Developer, its successor, or assigns shall agree to be a part of a joint permit application with
Collier County for the specific purpose of modifying the existing conservation easement. All
costs associated with the potential conservation easement modification, including any required
mitigation shall be the responsibility of the County. The 100' reservation shall be dedicated to
the County at no cost, and in fee simple title within 180 days of the County's request. The
developer shall provide a storm water management system within the RPUD boundary for
treatment/retention of storm water from the 100 foot reservation area.
UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING
The development of this RPUD Master Development Plan shall be subject to and governed by the
following conditions:
A. The developer shall reserve four areas to be dedicated to Collier County Water & Sewer District
for raw water well easements with dimensions 100 -foot by 100 -foot each, and utility /access
easements that shall be 20 feet wide unless the well site is contiguous to a public right of way.
The approximate locations of these proposed easements are depicted on the RPUD Master Plan.
The dedication shall occur at the time of site development plan, or final plat approval for the area
within the development phase that contains the respective well sites.
At the time of the SDP and/or plat submittal, the developer shall provide the well site easements
that meet the standard setback requirements for water wells. If the surface water management
lakes for the subdivision are installed prior to the installation of production wells for the
SERWTP Wellfield, anticipated for 2012, a setback of 50 feet shall be required. If the surface
water management lakes are installed after the production wells a 300 -foot setback shall be
required.
The County has further requested a test well at one of the proposed well sites. The County agrees
that the desired test well will not be converted into a production well until the water management
lake proposed near the test well is constructed in accordance with the 50 foot setback
standard. No additional production wells will be installed until the project's water management
lakes have been constructed or the year 2012, whichever is earlier.
ENVIRONMENTAL.
The development of this RPUD Master Development Plan shall be subject to and governed by the
following conditions:
A. The Naples Reserve RPUD shall preserve 63.7 acres of vegetated areas consistent with the Land
Use Summary on the RPUD Master Plan.
F -2
Packet Page -3501-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
PLANNING
A. One TDR credit shall be required for every five (5) gross acres of RFMUD land area utilized as
part of the golf course, including the clubhouse area, rough, fairways, greens, and lakes, but
excluding any area dedicated as conservation that is non - irrigated and retained in a natural state.
B. In order to increase residential density above the base 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 Sending Lands within one mile of
the Urban Area.
C. Collier County and the Developer of the Naples Reserve RPUD have cooperated to address
affordable housing impacts associated with the Naples Reserve RPUD. The following financial
contribution shall be paid by the developer, or its successors and assigns, to the Collier County
Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
One thousand dollars ($1,000) per residential dwelling unit constructed within the project shall
be paid to Collier County within 7 days of the closing on each residential dwelling unit. The
amount set forth herein shall be reduced by any amounts paid by the developer on behalf of
Habitat for Humanity's pursuant to the Developer Contribution Agreement US 41 Developers
Consortium (DCA) to fund the shortfall after Habitat for Humanity's road impact fees are
applied pursuant to the DCA. .
The payment of the sums set forth in this Section shall reflect a credit to the project's obligations
to pay any fees that may be adopted in the future by the County relating to the provision of
affordable or workforce housing.
WATER MANAGEMENT
A. Constructed drainage facilities and structures shall be located outside the boundaries of
. conservation easements/preserves.
B. The project's stormwater management system shall be designed to fully contain the 100- year /72-
hour design storm event with a regulated discharge rate not to exceed 0.10 cfs/acre and no
increase in total volume of discharge.
C. All elevations shall be based on the North American Vertical Datum (NAVD).
PARKS AND RECREATION
The County and the developer will use their best efforts to determine with the US Army Corps of
Engineers the correct acreage for mitigation set forth in Permit Number 199900619(IP -SB) so as to be
able to remove the approximate 20 acres not needed for the mitigation area from this permit. The
referenced Corps permit will not be modified to exclude the surplus off -site mitigation acreage. This
area shall be conveyed to Collier County in fee simple for a County park This conveyance shall be made
to the County upon satisfactory resolution of the Corps off -site mitigation acreage issue.
F -3
Packet Page -3502-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do
hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct
copy of:
ORDINANCE 2007 -71
Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners
on the 13th day of November, 2007, during Regular Session. ANW
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 19th
day of November, 2007.
DWIGHT E. BROCK
Clerk of Courts and.Clerk
Ex- officio to Board of
County Commissioners
By: Ann Jennejohn,
Deputy Clerk
Packet Page -3503-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
ORDINANCE NO. 12 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 07 -71, THE NAPLES RESERVE
GOLF CLUB RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(RPUD), TO REMOVE A t-OLi .OUR'SE FROM THE RPUD;
PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO PERMITTED USES;
PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO MASTER
PLAN; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO LIST OF
REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC; PROVIDING FOR
AMENDMENTS TO LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. SUBJECT PROPERTY
IS LOCATED ONE MILE NORTH OF US 41 AND 1 -1/2 MILES
EAST OF COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951) IN SECTION 1,
TOWNSHIP 51. SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 688 + /- ACRES.
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2007, the Board of County Commissioners approved
Ordinance No. 07 -71, which established the Naples Reserve Golf Club Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD); and
WHEREAS, Dwight Nadeau, AICP, of RWA, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of
Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., representing SFI Naples Reserve, LLC, petitioned the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida to amend Ordinance 07 -71, the Naples
Reserve Golf Club RPUD.
NOW, THEREFOR'--.-, '_.E IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COT "',R COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION is AMEND 4ENTS TO EXHIBIT A, LIST OF ALLOWABLE USES, OF
ORDINANCE NUMBER 07 -71, NAPES RESERVE GOLF CLUB RPUD
The List of Allowah' Uses, previously attached as Exhibit A to Ordinance Number 07 -71,
the Naples Reserve Golf (Aub RPUD, is her: ,inended and replaced with a new Exhibit A, List of
Allowable Uses, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.
Naples Reserve / PL2011 -11 G8 Page 1 of 3
Rev. 4/20/12
Words Am& d r-eag# are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -3504-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
SECTION II: AMENDMENTS TO EXHIBIT B, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE, OF
ORDINANCE NUMBER 07 -71, NAPLES RESERVE GOLF CLUB RPUD
The Development Standards Table, previously attached as Exhibit B to Ordinance Number
07 -71, the Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD, is hereby amended and replaced with a new Exhibit B,
Development Standards, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION III: AMENDMENTS TO EXHIBIT C, MASTER PLAN, OF ORDINANCE NUMBER
07 -71, NAPLES RESERVE GOLF CLUB RPUD
The Master Plan, previously attached as Exhibit C to Ordinance Number 07 -71, the Naples
Reserve Golf Club RPUD, is hereby amended and replaced with a new Exhibit C, Master Plan,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION IV: AMENDMENTS TO EXHIBIT E, LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM
LDC, OF ORDINANCE NUMBER 07 -71, NAPLES RESERVE GOLF CLUB
RPUD
The List of Requested Deviations from LDC, previously attached as Exhibit E to Ordinance
Number 07 -71, the Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD, is hereby amended and replaced with a new
Exhibit E, List of Requested Deviations from LDC, attached hereto and incorporated by reference
herein.
SECTION V: AMENDMENTS TO EXHIBIT F, LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS, OF
ORDINANCE NUMBER 07 -71, NAPLES RESERVE GOLF CLUB RPUD
The List of Developer Commitments, previously attached as Exhibit F to Ordinance Number
07 -71, the Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD, is hereby amen 'cd and replaced with a new Exhibit F,
List of Developer Commitments, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.
SECTION VI: EFFECTIVE DATE
Except as amended herein, the remaining provisions within Collier County Ordinance No.
07 -71 remain in full force and effect. This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the
Department of State.
Naples Reserve / PL2011 -1168 Page 2 of 3
Rev. 4/20/12
Words kFtie th -,,ugh are deleted; words underlined are added
� .
Packet Page -3505-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super- majority vote by the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of 2012.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
By:
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
Steven T. Williams
15 f
Assistant County Attorney -qj
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
FRED COYLE, Chairman
Attachments: Exhibit A — List of Allowable Uses
Exhibit B — Development Standards
Exhibit C — Master Plan
Exhibit E — List of Requested Deviations
Exhibit F — List of Developer Commitments
11 -CPS- 01115/ 18
Naples Reserve / PL2011 -1168 Pa- e 3 of'
Rev. 4 /20/12
Words ^tn ^' are deleted; words underlined are added.
Packet Page -3506-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT A
PROJECT LAND USE TRACTS
Naples Reserve PL- 20110001168 06/07 %2012 Page I of 11
Packet Page -3507-
TYPE UNITS /FT. _ ACREAGE±
TRACT `R"
RESIDENTIAL, 11.54 592.8
TRACT "RA"
RECREATION AREA 0 31.6
"TRACT ".P"
PRESERVE 0 63.7
TOTAL: 688.1
I TRACT R PERMITTED USES:
No building or
structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Principal
Uses:
1)
Single - family detached dwellings;
2)
Single - family attached dwellings (including townhouses intended for fee simple
conveyance including the platted lot associated with the residence):
3)
Villa/patio dwellings (detached single- family dwellings of a smaller scale than
the typical single - family detached dwelling);
4)
Multi- family dwellings;
5)
Model homes;
6)
Commercial excavations for all takes identified as `L" on Exhibit C -- R.PUD
Master Plan (sul?ject to Exhibit F: List of Developer Commitments,
Transportation Item D);
7)
Project sales, construction and administrative offices, which may occur in
residential, and /or in temporary structures.
8)
Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing List of
pennitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA ")
by the process outlined in the Land Development Code (LDC).
Naples Reserve PL- 20110001168 06/07 %2012 Page I of 11
Packet Page -3507-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
B. Accessory Uses:
Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses
and structures, including, but not limited to:
1) Customary accessory uses and structures including. but not limited. to. private
garages, swimming pools with, or without screened enclosures. gatehouses,
and other outdoor recreation facilities;
2) Polling place if deemed warranted by the Supervisor of Elections.
1I TRACT RA PERMITTED USES:
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Principal Uses Typically Accessory to Residential Development:
1) Structures intended to provide social and recreational space (private, intended for
use by the residents and their guest only);
2) Outdoor recreation facilities, such as a community swinuning pool, tennis and
basketball courts, playground improvements /facilities, and passive and/or active
water features.
3) Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of
permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA'')
by the process outlined in the .LDC.
B. Accessory Uses:
Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses
and structures, including, but not limited to:
1) Customary accessory uses or structures incidental to recreation areas and. or
facilities, including structures constructed for purposes of maintenance, storage
or shelter with appropriate screening and landscaping.
Naples Reserve PL- 2011000I 168
Packet Page -3508-
06!07x''2012 Pane 2 of 11
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT B
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
GENERAL: Development of The Naples Reserve RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this
Ordinance and applicable sections of the Collier County LDC and GroNklh Management Plan (GMP) in
effect at the time of issuance of any development order, such as, but not limited. to, subdivision plat, site
development plan, excavation permit, and preliminary work authorization, to which such regulations
relate. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most
similar district in the LDC shall apply.
Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to
individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and /or homeowners'
association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards.
Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Residential .PUD Residential
Subdistrict (Tract "R "). Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable
sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of approval of the SDP or Subdivision plat.
MAXIMUM DENSITY:
There shall be no more than 1154 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.
SIGNS
For the purposes of this RPUD, the LDC provisions from Section 5.06.02.13.6. are applicable for off -
premise signage. Please see Deviation #2 in Exhibit E. This off -site signage opportunity may only be
implemented after such signage is allowed in the Walnut Lakes PUD.
Naples Reserve PL-20 1 10001168 06/07/2012 Page 3 of 11
Packet Page -3509-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
TABLE I
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
SINGLE FAMILY
SINGLE FAMILY
PATIO HOME
MULTI-
CLUBHOUSE/
MINIMUM LOT AREA
DETACHED ''
ATTACHED &
& VILLAS
FAMILY
RECREATION
SIDE
UNIT
TOWNHOUSE
UNIT
UNIT
BUILDINGS
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES
MINIMUM LOT AREA
6,000 S.F. PER
2,250 S.F. PER
5,000 S.F. PER
2,250 S.F. PER
10,000 S.F.
SIDE
UNIT
UNIT
UNIT
UNIT
1/2 BH
_
MAXIMUM LOT AREA
1 Acre
N/A
NIA
N/A
N/A
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH
40 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
N/A
MINIMUM FLOOR AREA
1,000 S.F
1,000 S.F
1,000 S.F
1,000 S.F. /D.U.
N/A
MIN FRONT YARD
20 FEET*
20 FEET
20 FEET
20 FEET*
25 FEET
MIN SIDE YARD
6 FEET
0 FEET or
3 FEET or
GREATER OF 10
GREATER OF
6 FEET
9 FEET **
FEET OR '/2 BH
15 FEET OR 1/2
BH,
MIN REAR YARD
15 FEET
15 FEET
15 FEET
15 FEET
GREATER OF 15
FEET OR 1/2 BH
MIN PRESERVE SETBACK
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
25 FEET
MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN
12 FEET
12 FEET
12 FEET
GREATER OF 20
GREATER OF 15
STRUCTURES
FEET OR 'h THE
FEET OR 1/ BH
SUM OF BH
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT NOT
35 FEET
40 FEET
35 FEET
55 FEET
50 FEET
TO EXCEED (ZONED)
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT NOT
45 FEET
50 FEET
45 FEET
65 FEET
60 FEET
TO EXCEED (ACTUAL)
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
FRONT
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
20 FEET
SIDE
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
S.P.S.
1/2 BH
REAR (ATTACHED)
(DETACHED)
5 FEET
20 FEET
5 FEET
20 FEET
5 FEET
20 FEET
5 FEET
20 FEET
10 FEET
20 FEET
PRESERVE SETBACK
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
10 FEET
MINIMUM DISTANCE
BETWEEN STRUCTURES
12 FEET
12 FEET
i 2 FEET
12 FEET
Greater of 15
feet or 1/2 BH
MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT NOT
TO EXCEED (ZONED)
35 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
35 FEET
40 FEET
r0 �AX. BUILDING HEIGHT NOT
EXCEED (ACTUAL)
45 FEET
45 FEET
45 FEET
45 FEET
50 FEET
S.P.S. = Same as Principal Structures
BH = Building Height — unless otherwise noted, all building heights shall be "zoned" building heights, as defined in the LDC.
*: Residences with side loaded garages may have a minimum 15 foot front yard
* *: A three (3') foot setback shall be permitted only where nine (9') feet is provided on the adjacent lot.
Naples Reserve PL- 20110001168
Packet Page -3510-
06/07/2012 Pave 4 of I I.
PRO"
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Notes.
1) No structures are permitted in the required 20 -foot lake maintenance easement. No setback is required
for structures adjacent to a lake maintenance easement.
2) Side yards — No side yard shall be required between units internal to a structure, when more than one
residential unit is in. a single structure (i.e.: attached single - family and. townhomes). Varying side
yards are provided to allow side entry garages and to maintain the required separation between
buildings.
3) Terraced setbacks are permitted for either two or three story multi - family structures. Setbacks shall be
measured from that ground floor exterior wall of lesser height as long as a minimum 15 foot building
wall setback is provided as depicted in Figure 1 below.
4) Entrance features (i.e.: monuments, clock towers and colonnades) may be located at the project
entrance and shall be limited to a maximum height of 50 feet.
5) For all residential units, garages must be located a minimum of 2' ) feet from the back of the sidewalk
located in the street rights -of -way closest to the garage, except for side load garages, wherein a parking
area 23 feet in depth must be provided perpendicular to the sidewalk to avoid vehicles being parked
across a portion, or all of the referenced sidewalk.
Naples Reserve PL-20110001168
Figure 1
IPacket Page -3511-
06/07/2012 Pa-e 5 of I 1
K011
11101
Lz
son
............
--A A
I O'S'
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
. 4111111-
SL
71
Mtn
jib..
7 all
tilts
OREbNWAY ROAD
px
F;
N
77
Sir! 111 rr
y is
A
Napies.Reserve PL-20110001168
Packet Page -3512-
06/07/2012 Page 6 of 11.
EXHIBIT C
MASTER PLAN
, ot
l
A
Pik
x!�
Lz
son
............
--A A
I O'S'
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
. 4111111-
SL
71
Mtn
jib..
7 all
tilts
OREbNWAY ROAD
px
F;
N
77
Sir! 111 rr
y is
A
Napies.Reserve PL-20110001168
Packet Page -3512-
06/07/2012 Page 6 of 11.
EXHIBIT D
Legal Description
All of Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Co
Naples Reserve PL- 20110001.168
Packet Page -3513-
06/07/2012 Page 7 of 11
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT E
LIST OF .REQUESTED .DEVIATIONS FROM LDC
Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.5.c., that limits the number of model homes to
allow one model home for each variant of the residential product proposed in the project. The number of
model homes may exceed live for each phase or community within the project, but shall not exceed a
total of fifteen.
Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02 13.6. that allows ground /residential entrance signage
only on -site within residential zoni, - c +s, to allow ground /residential entrance signage outside of the
residential zoning district that the signage will serve. This off-site _round /residential entrance signage
shall be permitted in close proximity to the LJS -41 Right -of -Way within the Walnut Lakes PUD. This
deviation may only be implemented upon such signage being allowed by the Walnut Lakes PUD.
Naples Reserve PL -201 10001 168
Packet Page -3514-
06/07/2012 Page 8 of 11
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
EXHIBIT F
LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
TRANSPORTATION
The development of this RPUD shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions:
A. The RPUD Master Plan reflects a 100' wide reservation for dedication along the western
boundary of the RPUD. Should the County find that it is appropriate to improve that corridor, the
Developer, its successor, or assigns shall agree to be a part of a joint permit application with
Collier County for the specific purpose of modifying the existing conservation easement. All
costs associated with the potential conservation easement modification, including any required
mitigation shall be the responsibility of the County. The 1.00' reservation shall be dedicated to
the County at no cost, and in fee simple title within 180 days of the County's request. The
developer shall provide a storm water management system within the RPUD boundary for
treatment/retention of storm water from the 100 foot reservation area.
B. The Developer agrees to provide mitigation for traffic impacts as detailed in the companion
Developer's Contribution Agreement [DCA] in order to provide consistency Willi policy 5.1 of
the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan." The DCA provides for
improvements to the intersection of US -41 and Collier Boulevard, and /or US -41 east of Collier
Boulevard.
C. If warranted and approved by the County, the developer shall be responsible for the proportionate
fair share cost of a traffic signal, or turn lane extension /expansion, at the intersection of Naples
Reserve Boulevard and US41 Tamiami Trail. If Naples Reserve Boulevard should become a
Public Roadway in the future, then the proportionate share requirement shall apply to this
development's entrance where it intersects with Naples Reserve Boulevard. Upon completion of
the installation, inspection, burn -in period and final approval /acceptance of traffic signal at either
location mentioned in the previous paragraph, ownership and maintenance of the signal shall be
turned over to Collier County. Any negotiations relevant to fair share payments or
reimbursements from. any and all other neighboring developers property owners that directly
benefit from said traffic signal, will be determined based upon the percentage of usage /impact."
D. Excavated material in an amount up to ten percent (to a maximum of 20,000 cubic yards) of the
total volume excavated may be removed from the development wiih no prohibition as to the
destination of the material. Excavated material in excess of up to te.n percent (to a maximum of
20,000 cubic yards) of the total volume excavated, may be remw d from the development and be
transported off -site only for use in the US -41 roadway widenir project from the intersection of
US 41 and Collier Boulevard to the intersection of US 41 ,;id CR 92, and subject to the
excavation provisions from the Code of Ordinances as may 1 amended, however the following
paragraph will continue to apply:
'Issuance of commercial excavation permits. Applicatio, for commercial excavation permits
shall be reviewed by the community development and e ironmental services administrator, or
his designee, and by the environmental advisory council ` recommendation and approved by the
board. When a request is made to remove surplus fi'. material from a previously approved
development excavation, the requirement for review by . ie environmental advisory council shall
be waved, but dependent on haul route and amount of fiii to be hauled, staff may require approval
by Collier County Planning Commission."
E. At project buildout, a secondary access point for resident use shall be provided off of Greenway
Road.
Naples Reserve PL- 20110001168
Packet Page -3515-
06,107!2012 Page 9 of 11.
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
ENVIRONMENTAL
The development of this RPUD Master Development Plan shall be subject to and <"overned by the
following conditions:
A. The Naples ,reserve &"Uu shall preserve 63.7 acres of vegetated areas consistent with the Land
Use Summary on Exhibit C RPUD Master Plan.
PLANNING
A. In order to increase residential density above the base 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 Sending Lands within one mile of
the Urban Area.
B. One entity (hereinafter the Manacrina
Entity) shall be responsible for PU:D monitoring anti]. close-
out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfi,ing all PUD commitments lose -
close -out of the PUD. At the time of this .PUD approval, the Managing until
Reserve, LLC. Should the Managingl Entity � Entity is SFl Maples
a successor entity,, t3 desire to transfer the monitoring and commitarlents to
t}, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be
approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Mana�r
will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by bang Entity
successor entity shall become the Managing 5 County staff,, and the
Managing .Entity shall provide written notice totCountys that includes and lan ack:powled(ye tracts the
commitments required by the 'PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement toncor ,ply
with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing L Entity shall not be
relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD are closed -out, then. the
Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of 1'L1D
commitments.
C. Construction of the clubhouse will commence prior to the issuance of the Certificate of
Occupancy (CO) for the 231" residential dwelling unit.
WATER MANAGEMENT
A. Constructed drainage facilities and structures shall be located outside the boundaries of
conservation easements /preserves.
B. The project's stormwater anana�7
hour design stone event with�attiegulated discharge drate�notl to exlceed HS the
cfs /acr0e' and no
increase in total volume of discharge.
C. All elevations shall be based on the North American Vertical Datum (NAVD).
UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING
A. The owner shall reserve four areas to potentially be dedicated to the Collier County Water -Sewer
District for raw water well easements with dimelisions of 100 -foot by 1.170 -foot each, along with
utility /access easements that shall be 20 feet wide, or less if the well site is contiguous to a public
right -of -way. The approximate locations of these four proposed easements are depicted on the
Naples Reserve PL 20110001168
06/07,'2012 Page 10 of 11
Packet Page -3516-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
proposed Master Plan. One of these four wells may be used as a test well and converted to a
production well. The test well will not be converted into a production well until the water
management lakes proposed near the test well are constructed in accordance with the 50 foot
setback standard. No additional production wells will be installed until the project's water
management lakes have been constructed or the year 2027, whichever is earlier.
Upon request of the Collier County Water- Sewer District, the owner shall convey to the Collier
County Water- Sewer District the requested utility /access easements and raw water well.
easements within 60 days, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. The Collier County
Water- Sewer District shall pay the owner $15.93) 0 per acre for those easements that are conveyed
or dedicated to the Collier County Water- Sewer District. If all or some of the conveyances have
not been requested by the Collier County Water- Sewer District at the earlier of Site Development
Plan ( "SDP ") and/or final construction plans and plat ( "PPL ") approval or within six years of
approval of this Ordinance, then the reserved areas shall be deemed released.
At the time of the SDP and /or PPL submittal, the owner shall show the well site reservations
applicable to the area within the SDP and/or plat. During the review of the SDP and /or PPL, the
Collier County Water- Sewer District shall decide at that time whether it will request the
dedication of the utility /access easement. Failure to request the utility /access easement shall be
deemed a release of the utility /access easement and the final SDP and /or PPL shall be approved
Without the utility /access easement.
Naples Reserve PL- 2011.0001168
Packet Page -3517-
06/07/2012 Paae I i of 11
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
DEVELOPER AGREEMENT
NAPLES RESERVE
THIS DEVELOPER AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement ") is made
and entered into this of , 2012, by and among SFI NAPLES RESERVE, LLC, a
foreign limited liability company (hereinafter referred to as the "Developer ") and COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as
"County "). All capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in
the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, Ordinance No. 2001 -13, as amended.
RECITALS:
WHEREAS, the Developer is seeking to amend the Naples Reserve Golf Club PUD,
Ordinance No. 99 -42, as amended by Ordinance No. 07 -71; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into this Developer Agreement as a companion
document to the amended PUD for the limited purpose of defining certain transportation impact
fee issues, as more particularly set forth below; and
WHEREAS, the County is willing to enter into this Agreement in order to assist in the
improvement of the intersection of Collier Blvd. and US 41, which project is presently scheduled
to commence in 2014; and
WHEREAS, the Transportation Administrator of the County has recommended to the
Board of County Commissioners that the Road Project set forth in this Agreement is in the
confonnity with the contemplated improvements and additions to the County's transportation
network; and
WHEREAS, after reasoned consideration by the Board of County Commissioners, the
Board finds and reaffirins that:
a. The Road Project is in conformity with the contemplated improvements
and additions to the County's transportation system;
b. The Road Project, viewed in conjunction with other existing or other
proposed plans, including those from other developers, will not adversely impact the cash
flow or liquidity of the County's road impact fee trust accounts in such a way as to
frustrate or interfere with other planned or ongoing growth- necessitated capital
improvements and additions to the County's transportation system; and
C. The Road Project is consistent with both the public interest and with the
comprehensive plan, the Long Range Transportation Plan and complies with the
requirements of the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance.
Packet Page -3518-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
WITNESSETH
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars (10.00) and other good and
valuable consideration exchanged amongst the parties, and in consideration of the covenants
contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. All of the above r —ITAL5 are true and - _sect anct are hereby expressly
incorporated herein by referee -„ as if set forth fully below.
2. Dovcioper agrees to prepay road impact fees totaling $4,000,000 in two installments
of $2,000,000 each. Separate installn,c .` 0-11 ` nn;tl r,, Cr %lliPr County on January 15, 2013
and January 15, 2014. By written agreement signed by both parties, the installment timing may
be adjusted in order to align with the County's construction schedule for the intersection
improvements at US 41 and Collier Boulevard, currently scheduled to commence in 2014.
3. To assure payment, no later than 15 days following approval of the PUD
amendment, Developer shall provide County with a Letter of Credit in the form set forth in
Exhibit A. The Letter of Credit must be by a financial institution acceptable to Collier County.
4. On June 14, 2011, the Board adopted Ordinance No. 2011 -20, which amended the
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance to provide that a COA in perpetuity will be issued upon
payment of thirty -three percent of the estimated road impact fees. The Road Impact Fee Credit
in the amount of $4,000,000 surpasses thirty -three percent of the estimated road impact fees
based on current rates for the 1,154 dwelling units authorized in the amended PUD document.
Developer shall receive a Certificate of Adequate Public Facilities ( "Certificate ") vesting the
Development to construct the approved 1,154 dwelling units for the purposes of meeting the
County's Transportation Concurrency requirements.
5. The following conditions shall apply:
A. Developer will be required to pay all road impact fees to obtain
building pen-nits for the first 300 d,�- elling units.
B. Commencing with the 3015 dwe? :Ig unit, the Developer may apply
the prepaid road impact fees t( and the road impact fees due for
building permits until the prepa' .1 amount of $2 "'00,000 is utilized by
the Developer.
C. "'ace the prepaica ,_ punt of $4,000,(' i is fully exercised, the
developer will pay any reil, of 'i -111? �-.ld impact fees to
obtain further building peer...,.
6. The credit for Road Impact Fees identif d herein shall run with the Development
and shall be reduced by the entire amount of each Re 1 Impact Fee due for each Building Permit
issued thereon until the Development project is eit' .;r completed or the credits are exhausted or
otherwise no longer available, or have been Essigned by operation of or pursuant to an
assignment agreement with County. The foregoing reduction in the Road Impact Fees shall be
Packet Page -3519-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
calculated based on the amount of the Road Impact Fees in effect at the time the Building Permit
is issued. The credits set forth herein shall be applied solely to Road Impact Fees, and shall not
offset, diminish or reduce any other charges, fees or other Impact Fees for which Developer, its
successors and assigns are responsible in connection with the development of their lands. It is
expressly understood that the Impact Fee Credits will be utilized in the order in which the
Building Permits are reviewed by the Impact Fee Administration, irrespective of whether
Developer assigns all or part : I _.e Development. rinal calculation of the remaining road and
other impact fees . will be based on the impact fee schedule in effect at the time of the
submittal of . .)uilding permits and shall be paid in full prior to issuance of each building
permit.
7. In the event that upon build -out of the Development the Road Impact Fee Credits
are still unspent, the remaining balance of such estimated fees may, at Developer's election (1)
be transferred to another approved project within the same, or adjacent transportation impact fee
district, provided any vested entitlements associated with the unspent and transferred impact fee
credits are relinquished and the Certificate is modified to delete those entitlements, or (2) be
promptly returned to Developer. Such reimbursement shall be made over a period of five years
from the date of completion of the development as determined by the County, subject to annual
appropriation by the County.
Legal Matters
8. This Agreement shall not be constructed or characterized as a development
agreement under the Florida Local Government Development Agreement Act.
9. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this
Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement.
10. Developer acknowledges that the failure of this Agreement to address any permit,
condition, term or restriction shall not relieve either the applicant or owner or its successors or
assigns, of the necessity of complying with any law, ordinance rule or regulation governing said
permitting requirements, conditions, terms or restrictions.
11. In the event state or federal laws are enacted after the execution of this
Agreement, which are applicable to and preclude in whole or in part the parties' compliance with
the terms of this Agreement, then in such event this Agreement shall be modified or revoked as
is necessary to comply with such laws, in a many which best reflects the intent of this
Agreement.
12. oveloper shall execute this Agreement prior to it being submitted for approval
by the Board of County Commissioners. 'Inis Agreement shall be recorded by the County in the
Official Records of Collier County, Florida, within fourteen (14) days after the Effective Date.
Developers shall pay all costs of recording this Agreement. The County shall provide a copy of
the recorded document to the Developers upon request.
13. In the event of any dispute under this Agreement, the parties shall attempt to
resolve such dispute first by means of the County's then- current Alternative Dispute Resolution
Packet Page -3520-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
Procedure, if any. Following the conclusion of such procedure, if any, either party may file an
action for injunctive relief in the Circuit Court of Collier County to enforce the teens of this
Agreement, and remedy being cumulative with any and all other remedies available to the parties
for the enforcement of the Agreement.
14. Except as otheru7ige provided herein, this Agreement shall only be amended by
mutual written consent or the parties here`- _ oy their successors in interest. All notices and
other communications required or permitted hereunder (including County's option) shall be in
writing and shall be ,__.:';1y Certified Mail, return receipt requested, or by a nationally recognized
overnight delivery service, and addressed - -
To County
Collier County Manager's Office
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202
Naples, FL 34112 -5746
Phone: (239) 252 -8383
To Developer:
SFI Naples Reserve LLC
1114 Avenue of the Americas 39th Floor
c/o Istar Financial
New York, NY 10036
Phone:
15. This Agreement, together with the amended PUD, constitutes the entire
agreement between the parties with respect to the activities noted herein and supersedes and
takes the place of any and all previous agreements entered into between the parties hereto
relating to the transactions contemplated herein. All prior representations, undertakings, and
agreements by or between the parties hereto v,,ith respect to the subject matter of this Agreement
are merged into, and expressed in, th ;s Agreement, and any and all prior representations,
undertakings, and agreements by and between such parties with respect thereto hereby are
canceled.
16. Nothing contained 1 rein shall be deemed or construed to create between or
among any of the parties any,; ✓ enture or partnership nor otherwise grant to one another the
right, authority or power to biro . y other party hereto to any agreement whatsoever.
REI , DER r AGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
S' ATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW
Packet Page -3521-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
by their appropriate officials, as of the date first above written.
Attest: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
.0
AS TO DEVELOPER:
By:
, Deputy Clerk FRED COYLE, Chairman
Signed, sealed and delivered
in the presence o£
Signature
Printed Name
Signature
Printed Name
STATE OF FLORh?A
COUNTY OF Cr SLIER
SFI NAPLES RESERVE LLC a foreign limited
liability company
By:_
Name:
Title:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before rie this day of
2012, by as of SFI Naples Reserve LLC, a foreign
limited liability company, who is personally :;mown to me
or has produced
as identification.
Approved as to form ai. i
legal sufficiency
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,
County Attorney
:votary Public
My Commission Expires:
Packet Page -3522-
7/24/2012 Item 17.J.
NAPLES DAILY NEWS (( VVednesday,July4,2012 (( 25D I
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, July 24; 2012, in the Boardroom, 3r8 Floor,
Administration Building, Collier County Government Center; 299 Tamiami Trail
East, Naples, Florida, the Board of County Commissioners will. consider enactment
of a County Ordinance. The meeting will commence at 9,00 A.'K The title of the
proposed Ordinance is as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY .COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO, 07=71, .THE NAPLES RESERVE GOLF
CLUB RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD), TO REMOVE A GOLF
COURSE FROM THE RPUD;-PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS:TO'PEAMITTED =USES;
PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT.STANDARDS, PROVIDING FOR
AMENDMENTS TO MASTER PLAN; PROVIDING FOR `AMENDMENTS TO LIST :OF
REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM LDC; PROVIDING FOR AMENDMENTS TO LIST OF
DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS; AND PROVIDING -AN EFFECTIVE DATE. SUBJECT
PROPERTY IS LOCATED ONE MILE NORTH OF US 41 AND 1 -1/2 MILES EAST OF
COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951) IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26
EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 698 +/- ACRES.
Copies of the proposed Ordinance are on file with the Clerk to the Board and 'are
available for inspection. NJ interested parties are invited to attend and be.heard..
NOTE: All persons wishing to.speak on any agenda item must register with the
County administrator prior to .presentation of the agenda item to be addressed.
"Individual'speakers will be limited to 3 minutes on any item. The selection of an
individual to speak on behalf of. an organization or group is encouraged.. if
recognized by the Chairman, a 'spokesperson for a.group or organization may be
allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item.
Persons wishing`to haveiwritten or graphic materials included in the Board agenda.
packets must submit. said material a minimum ,of 3. weeks prior to the respective
public hearing, In any case, .written materials intended to be consr'_red by the
Board shall be submitted, to the appr,:priate Ccunty staff a minimum f seven.' daps
pprior to the public hearing. All mate -.al. used in presentations before ,e.8oard will
become a permanent partof the recc -d.
Any - person who decides to appea' decision of the Board will nee 3 record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto ,; therefore, may need to ensw hat a verbatim
record of the proceedings is Ade, which record includes t , testimony and
evidence upon which the appe -<<_ed.
If you are a person with v,.,o needs any accomrjdation.in order to
participate in the proceed' are eniitled; at no cost to you, to the. provision
of certain assi<.tance. PI ontact the Collier County Facilities Management
Department, located at Tamiami Trail East, Suite 1C1, Buildi -- w;. ` Naples,
Florida 34112, (239) 25-,-', j. Assisted listening devices `:;r the ' _aring impaired
are available in the County .. ;mmissioners' Off ice.
BOARD OF r,'
SSIC '
COLLIER,- r,URID"
FRED CJYLE, Ci!^;Ir'
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK,
9jr: Ann Jennejohn; Deputy Clerk
(SEAL)
A44.201? No. 195463Z
Packet Page -3523-