Ex Parte - Saunders 01/24/2017 cJ/(1//uDO2—C CiJC1
LC 1 IMME.Qr — . ommissioner Saunders
COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA
01/24/2017
ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.A This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.
Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn
in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2004-41,
as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established 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 Rural
Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development
(RPUD) zoning district for the project known as Hamilton Place RPUD to allow
development of up to 66 single-family and/or multi-family dwelling units on
property located east of Livingston Road and south of Pine Ridge Road in
Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 9.75+/- acres; and by providing an effective date. [PUDZ-
PL20160001255]
NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM
SEE FILE ®Meetings _Correspondence e-mails Calls
Meeting with Rich Yovanovich, Wayne Arnold; received Staff Report.
CONSENT AGENDA
16.A.3 This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission
members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required
to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve for recording the minor final plat
of Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples Benvenuto Court Replat,
Application Number PL20160002720.
M NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM
SEE FILE ❑Meetings (Correspondence e-mails Calls
Z
a
7r
r.,
10 -4-,—co
CA
0 CA
• m O r N
0
CNI
N
s Nm.oN C
0
I
C., ,-N
LL != V N
ifl
O CO m oN N CU
0
D v0 N 6119 z
CO t"-VI ,1-
s ulNin.
ti F N
O
a.3
c
- mO.-Nm
plNmiONO
I
r
j ,
j
m
012VI
v X
O
CO E
S c
0) a
E
a
U ct
a
m m
t7
m
I
MI
a o
V l'
'
=
0 O a c
°' « u_
v
Nea
E 2 aa
I► u° o
O SII E Y
N n d 3
' Z a 3 a ,
LV d
aim
Q V N m
O
7 > ,5; 7,A ›- =� o
v
(6 N ,z x0 E./.1 rt
CO LL
O
CO Ol 0 r— (NJ N (Y) ' N l0 C
9.A.1
Co runt
Co y
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 15, 2016
SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20160001255 HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
d
PROPERTY OWNERS/APPLICANT/AGENT: a
Owners: Applicant (Contract Purchaser):
E
Maria Santos Edmund and Betty Poore WCI Communities, LLC
2316 Andrew Drive 7025 Nighthawk Drive 24301 Walden Center Drive
Naples, FL 34112 Naples, FL 34105 Bonita Springs, FL 34135
Elfrieda H Sutherland Trust Agent: a
c/o Gayle Ann Durrancece
2076 Sagebrush Circle D. Wayne Arnold, AICP
Naples, FL 34120 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. in
3800 Via Del Ray
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 d
E
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an
r
application to rezone property from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located east of Livingston Road and south of Pine Ridge Road in Section
18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
This petition seeks to rezone the property to RPUD to allow for the development of up to sixty-six
(66) single-family and/or multi-family dwelling units on 9.75± acres.
(See location map on page 2)
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 1 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 41
(andm eoe�d uowe : ) }i �{}} .
odae;g - ivauaua
yoe};y :;uauoelly
r +; ;�! H b6PPZ
N
D44
co
co
CL
ap ¢p U �� 0 a is
g„ gW a. g ,
3N1:10 1-11.30000 ,,,,,s0 BLDG 700 ,00.
j-‘,",,,,.7±_.H.J 'ILT_J s` ,,L.- i ._,j 0
0 Om
— —sk77
- a o �
i ?i Q J /+-teles 11M4* CD
® C
J J1141:1113Z
d ' s F� :`'._ g _r m
w
re
f7 i �� El Q 7
N OJ k
n
LO
AB
L
0 a N -0
It U 1 i 0 a 0 ‘-- E
o U gg CO O
a.----)-
r , ItILrd7R1,72i IpI tf1x1611°°SD rO
Ie1=--),pr r r c c r c 'V? a wJ
Z L1
I
k Z
Lc) 1 }, O
I , CO
I I ,
N
a
L k .
r' f , a O
} f fu� S� O
O
, co c.i
L . _- / f--r�__, 0
,-<.. z
17 ti
N
4___,..., 1 W �
f
�
" (�
Ct `,, Y ` -
bul n dJI - _` '_ „ ' ,
N ail II d- �
,
0
a
0
9.A.1
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
The subject project proposes a density of 6.77 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC). This section of
the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding
boundaries of the Hamilton Place RPUD:
North: Single-family residential, zoned Brynwood Preserve PUD (5.47 DU/AC)
East: Residential, zoned Arlington Lakes PUD (6.0 DU/AC)
South: Multi-family residential (condomimums), zoned Arlington Lakes PUD (6.0
DU/AC)
I
FS
West: Right-of-way for Livingston Road, farther west is vacant commercial, zoned
Hiwasse CPUD (291,000 square feet) a
a)
q`� [s.ATED GRO Pw <C
ilhil
I s als t i�( -. Zontng,PUD { t t 0: cn x - Q.
., 1 -x' & Q
•
• �t • , ----„-Th„ HIWASSE jti - BRYNWOOD VOW SPICE o'.wa , e_WA, -
4-...,-,----„,.0-4-.E20----..._- A' +ttCt•++ w PRESERVE '� >°` :::4:72,......,,,,,„t PU-a .t� c >.
i x� e �I tidn� MSK �` .�Zoning...CFPi1D °3 '
co
A N, g • _: zQ4R =I!? as rA .g )Y V
KENSMGTON a �t �'_ grlynw ooC kJ ='�'R i,� � `3ir,". KNOT ux • Prr 'C' s; amyRSF �� N
t �)� Zon ng i _,,, ,,,,4,,,,,,,4:,,,11,
i.,,.i.1.7 Ll. s
`m'` .¢ "1c! .CP O �(t- Zonn PL?D1DARLING TON U , �_�
f= 1 i .�RI LAKES
um `tit`G ' g # gI w��,n wnY.. .. r tf; _.w;w :'{+�r�. Ca'off9E�+ tu' Q
t..j
Ce
", r ' ! 41 f,{{ . i .t.A o d ml u c ate 4�
r v� . i W N gntl x DR WA,, fir Y.
y+n'4a t p.'A l ▪ to x1 e VHIPPv ORi'JI� r�I 1'
> o^ {a`o-dYL N ' a ,� 'ia t '1.14: wai t+Fi P, — q• <
H 1 Zon n9.:Pl(�-_c° il C lR 0����c oh� � 11 e-°-,.,,,, JC Yt�z` � �� S} ;y �
4.4
3 4 NCI& 'd .., - a= �, : e R a ti,n a• CST 3 » Zn ra:aUC 74,' .4:A 4111it ,-..c.:::} �{. '. 1.^.� PoP t no CiR y t fr �M ap P osiia __
41
E
{ �i ' •
EVaNS ,<, A e,. :2 t i iIR
\ 3 e7ti S ic.,-;
� Ri< fi if �,. NAPLES, n °'� 6' . ea CIR r.rass :r cH RCHof 'E' + ` IffEft[lt r3„e.ig,Roa! t
3 �. - f CHRISTt dy rreno CIR• - o
"PUD{' • s(
,��, x �. .z ,-4---a- X
6 Wil` g RAtfAORAI OxA'�L`N �+
de R €�{ �6 ;,O v c l'
+OM1 Zoning F `. #v . 1 .rt ••
PVR C
�< - -x- '1 Stnatl'erA
,� /." LI f 1" ,,say,` -C�Tz.,.,.<�.,.: a NIEENi +WHIPPOORWILL WO DSPI >✓
Aerial(County GIS) 0
co
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: a
Future Land Use Element(FLUE):
The subject property is located within the Urban designated area(Urban Mixed Use District,Urban
Residential Subdistrict), as identified on the Countywide Future Land Use Map of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP). The property is also located within a mile of the Pine Ridge Road - I-
75 Mixed Use Activity Center (MUAC#10).
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 3 of 13
December 5; 2016
Packet Pg. 43
9.A.1
The FLUE provision for the Density Rating System states,
If the project is within one mile of a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity
Center and located within a residential density band, 3 residential units per gross acre
may be added. The density band around a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange
Activity Center shall be measured by the radial distance from the center of the intersection
around which the Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center is situated. If
50% or more of a project is within the density band, the additional density applies to the
gross acreage of the entire project. Density bands are designated on the Future Land Use
Map and shall not apply within the Estates Designation or for properties within the Coastal
High Hazard Area.
More than fifty percent (50%) of the project is located within the density band, so the additional
density applies to the gross acreage of the entire project.
a.
The FLUE Consistency Review provides a more comprehensive analysis of how the proposed
project is consistent with the relative objectives and policies of the GMP (see Attachment 3 —
FLUE Consistency Review). In short, the proposed RPUD may be deemed consistent with the c
FLUE
E
Transportation Element:
In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement for consistency
with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP using the 2014 and 2015 Annual Update
and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Q.
Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states,
The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications,
conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element m
(FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development,
with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall
not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway
segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment
that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway
segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to
operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning co
period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application
has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following
occur:
a. For links(roadway segments)directly accessed by the project where project
traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume;
b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic
is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 4 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 44
9.A.1
c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the
point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service
volume.
Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the
applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the
project's significant impacts on all roadways.
The proposed rezoning to allow a maximum of sixty-six (66) multi-family units on the subject
property that will generate approximately 43 PM peak hour, peak direction trips on the
immediately adjacent roadway link, Livingston Road. Livingston Road is a six-lane divided
facility and has a current service volume of 3,100 trips,with a remaining capacity of approximately
1,624 trips between Pine Ridge Road/Golden Gate Parkway, and is currently at LOS B as shown
in the 2015 AUIR. Please note at the time of writing this report the 2016 AUIR was not yet adopted
by the Board of County Commissioners (Board); however, staff reviewed this road segment for a.
cc
the CCPC's consideration,finding a remaining capacity of 1,594 trips and the same LOS B. Staff, a)
therefore, finds that the proposed project does not significantly impact the adjacent roadway links, °
and there is sufficient capacity to accommodate this project within the five (5)-year transportation
planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the
Transportation Element of the GMP.
x
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME):
N_
Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the Conservation and Coastal
Management Element (CCME). A minimum of 0.97 acre of native vegetation is required to becu
a
retained for the RPUD.
GMP Conclusion: co
The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed rezoning.
Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency
with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or
denial of any rezoning petition. This petition is consistent with the GMP.
ANALYSIS: E
Applications to rezone to or amend RPUDs shall be in the form of an RPUD Master Plan of
development, along with a list of permitted and accessory uses and a development standards table.
The RPUD application shall also include a list of developer commitments and any proposed
deviations from the LDC. 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 Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the
"PUD Findings"), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission
Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's
recommendation. The CCPC uses the aforementioned criteria as the basis for their
recommendation to the Board, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 5 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 45
9.A.1
or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the
heading "Zoning Services Analysis." In addition, staff offers the following analyses:
Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD
Document to address environmental concerns. The location of the preserve was selected to retain
the highest quality wetlands on-site and to provide connectivity to existing preserves and flowways
on neighboring properties to the east. No listed species of wildlife were observed on the property.
Air plants (Tillandsia) have been observed on cypress trees within the RPUD and will be retained
or relocated in accordance with the requirements LDC Section 3.04.03.
This project does not require review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) since the
project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Chapter
2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances.
c
Landscape Review: The Master Plan shows that a fifteen (15)-foot wide Type "B" Buffer is a
proposed along the project's north property line, except in areas depicted as preserve, such as in 4)
the northeast corner of the site as well as along the RPUD's entire eastern boundary.
A thirty (30)-foot wide access easement runs along the entire southern property boundary. As
such, the south landscape buffer, proposed just north of this access easement, is depicted as either
es
a fifteen (15)-foot wide Type "A" Buffer or a ten (10)-foot wide Type "B" Buffer, depending on =
how the subject project is developed. rn
N_
A twenty (20)-foot wide Type "D" Buffer is proposed along Livingston Road.
°
Each single-family lot is required to provide at least one (1) canopy tree. The proposed right-of- re
way will be wide enough to accommodate trees in connection with a street tree program pursuant
to LDC Section 4.06.05.A.1 if it is determined that the lot sizes and building setbacks do not
provide enough room to accommodate the requisite trees. It should be noted, however, that this
type of detailed analysis to ensure compliance with the LDC will appropriately occur during a
subsequent development process.
School District: At this time there is sufficient capacity within the elementary and middle
concurrency service areas and in an adjacent high school concurrency service area of the proposed
development. At the time of SDP or platting,the project will be evaluated for school concurrency.
Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance co
with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project.
Utilities Review: Water and wastewater service will be provided by the Collier County Water-
Sewer District, which has adequate public utility facilities readily available along Livingston Rd.
All water distribution and wastewater collection systems shall be conveyed to the District. County
Utility Easements shall be dedicated for all utility facilities to be owned, operated, and maintained
by the District. Design, construction, and conveyance of the utility facilities shall conform to
current Collier County Utilities Standards and Procedures. Applicable system development
charges and connection fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of building permits.
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 6 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 46
9.A.1
Zoning Services Review: Staff analyzed the proposed uses and associated development standards.
The abutting development to the north, Brynwood Preserve PUD, has been developed with single-
family detached dwellings. The PUD Document for this PUD also allows for two-family dwellings
and multi-family dwellings. To the south and east,the Arlington Lakes PUD allows single-family
detached dwellings, single-family attached dwellings, zero-lot-line, patio dwellings, and multi-
family dwellings. The Arlington Lakes PUD also allows Group Care Facilities (category I and II),
care units, nursing homes, and the like. The uses proposed in the Hamilton Place RPUD (i.e.,
single-family detached, single-family attached, single-family variable lot line, and multi-family
dwellings) are comparable and compatible to the uses approved in the aforementioned PUDs.
With respect to development standards, staff evaluated the standards of the proposed RPUD and
compared them with the standards of the Brynwood Preserve PUD and the Arlington Lakes PUD.
The Brynwood Preserve PUD has been developed with single-family detached homes. The
Arlington Lakes PUD to the south has been developed with condominium buildings. Staff
determined the proposed development standards are comparable and compatible with the
ce
development standards of the aforementioned PUDs.
as
PUD FINDINGS:
0
LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make
findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria in addition to the
findings in LDC Section 10.02.08":
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, a
drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
The subject site fronts on Livingston Road. Water and wastewater facilities are located
within the right-of-way, and each has enough capacity to serve the proposed RPUD.
Drainage solutions would be evaluated in connection with SDP/platting and construction
permits.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly
as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing
operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or
maintained at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application,which were reviewed by the County Attorney's
Office, demonstrate unified control of the property.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,objectives,and
policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of conformity with the
relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP Consistency portion
of this staff report (or within an accompanying memorandum).
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 7 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 47
9.A.1
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.
As described in the Analysis section of this staff report, staff is of the opinion that the
proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes
the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
The RPUD is required to provide at least sixty percent (60%) of the gross area for usable
open space. No deviation from the open space requirement is being requested, and
compliance would be demonstrated at the time of SDP or platting.
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time,
i.e.,GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation
Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first =
development order (SDP or Plat). Additionally, the project's development must comply
with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development N
approvals are sought.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate a.
expansion.
The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, such as wastewater disposal systems and
potable water supplies,to accommodate this project based upon the commitments made by
the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will continuously be
addressed when development approvals are sought.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations,or as to desirable modifications of such regulations
in the particular case,based on determination that such modifications are justified as
meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such
regulations.
No deviations are proposed in connection with this request to rezone to RPUD. a
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 8 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 48
9.A.1
Rezone Findings:
LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and
recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show
that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the
following when applicable":
1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals,objectives,and policies
of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan.
Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals,
objectives, and policies of the FLUM and other elements of the GMP.
2. The existing land use pattern.
The existing land use pattern (of the abutting properties) is described in the Surrounding
Land Use and Zoning section of this staff report. The proposed use would not change the cc
existing land use patterns of the surrounding properties.
a
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
There are no other RPUDs located within the immediate vicinity of the subject property;
however, the proposed project relates well to the surrounding projects, particularly those
containing residential land uses.
N_
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change. 0.
The rectangular shape boundary of the RPUD logically follows the external boundary of
the parcels assembled for the rezoning.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning
necessary.
The proposed change is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance with
the LDC provisions to seek such changes.
44
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the a)
neighborhood.
The proposed RPUD is not anticipated to adversely influence 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 roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time,
i.e.,GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 9 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 49
Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first
development order (SDP or Plat). Additionally, the project's development must comply
with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development
approvals are sought.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
The proposed rezoning request for up to sixty-six (66) residential units is not anticipated
to create drainage problems in the area, provided the project's stormwater management
system is designed to discharge into the Whippoorwill Flowway. Stormwater Best
Management Practices, treatment, and storage on this project will be addressed through
Environmental Resource Permitting with the South Florida Water Management District,
and County staff will evaluate the project's stormwater management system, including
stormwater calculations, at time of SDP and/or plat.
e!
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
It is not anticipated this RPUD would reduce light or air to the adjacent areas.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent
areas. f°
This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or N
external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including
zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination a
is driven by market value.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development
of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations.
w
The Hiwasse CPUD is currently vacant and staff does not anticipate this proposed RPUD
would serve as a deterrent to its improvement.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. a)
.c
If the proposed development complies with the GMP through the proposed amendment,
then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are a
consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does
not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined
to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public
interest.
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 10 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 50
9.A.1
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the
proposed design standards cannot be achieved without rezoning to an RPUD.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the County.
It is staff's opinion the proposed uses and associated development standards and developer
commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the
community.
15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use. a.
ce
The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not
specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition.
0
16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which
would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses
under the proposed zoning classification.
N_
Any development anticipated by the RPUD Document would require considerable site
alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state,
and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, and again ce
later as part of the building permit process.
C7)C
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and
services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth
Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. 47.3
The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00
regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF), and the project will need to be consistent with
all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except
as may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by County staff
responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and
those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted
with the commitments contained in the RPUD Document. The concurrency review for
APF is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this amendment
will have no impact on public facility adequacy in regard to utilities.
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 Board during its advertised public hearing.
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 11 of 13
December 5, 2016
Packet Pg. 51
9.A.1
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) REVIEW:
This project does not require review by the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) since the
project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Chapter
2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The applicant conducted a NIM on September 27, 2016 at the Naples Church of Christ in Naples,
Florida. The meeting commenced at 5:37 p.m. and ended at approximately 6:11 p.m. The NIM
meeting minutes are included in Attachment 2 —Application and Support Material. Many of the
questions dealt with the proposed density, buffering, recreation/amenities, and location of access
point.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
a
The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report on November 28, 2016. CD
RECOMMENDATION: c
Staff recommends the CCPC forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of
approval.
Attachments: (31
1) Proposed Ordinance
2) Application and Support Material a
3) FLUE Consistency Review
4) Density Map
CO
5) Legal Notifications c
6) Emails_Letters from Public
Q
CD
t
Q
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 12 of 13
December 5. 2016
Packet Pg. 52
is
PREPARED BY:
/Z t //65
ERIC JOHN AICP, CFM, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE
ZONING DIVISION
REVIEWED BY:
^A:
r Ji
r P
RAYMON iV. ELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DATE
TE
ZONING DIVISION
a.
c
0
-2i - IV
MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE
ZONING DIVISION N
t
0
0.
w
APPROVED BY:
—111.1rr
-w /� —/ ` /gyp
J MES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
C;;2•4
c
t .c
1
DAVID S. W KISON DATE
DEPARTMENT HEAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
PUDZ-PL20160001255 Hamilton Place RUPD Page 13 of 13
Packet Pg. 53 I
ORDINANCE NO. 17-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41,
AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE,
WHICH ESTABLISHED 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 RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONINGa.
DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 66 SINGLE-FAMILY AND/OR
MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED EAST c
OF LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SOUTH OF PINE RIDGE ROAD IN .2
SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.75+/- ACRES; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ-PL20160001255]
N
WHEREAS, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor & Associates, Inc. representing
developer, WCI Communities, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change
the zoning classification of the herein described property.
a
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 2
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: a
N
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 18,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida is changed from a Rural Agricultural
(A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a
9.75+/- acre project to be known as the Hamilton Place RPUD to allow up to 66 single family
a
and/or multi-family dwelling units in accordance with the RPUD Documents, attached hereto as
Exhibits "A" through "F" and incorporated herein by reference. The appropriate zoning atlas
map or maps as described in Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly.
[16-CPS-01571] 79
Hamilton Place RPUD
PUDZ-PL20160001255
12/19/16 1 of 2
Packet Pg. 54
9.A.2
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of , 2017.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
a
ce
By: By:
as
Deputy Clerk , Chairman
Approved as to form and legality: a)
N
Heidi Ashton-Cicko
Managing Assistant County Attorney
0
CU
N
Attachments: Exhibit A—Permitted Uses o
Q.
Exhibit B—Development Standards a
Exhibit C —Master Plan
Exhibit D—Legal Description
Exhibit E—List of Deviations
Exhibit F—Developer Commitments
ca
ca
[16-CPS-01571] 79
Hamilton Place RPUD
PUDZ-PL20160001255
12/19/16 2 of 2
Packet Pg. 55
9.A.2
EXHIBIT A
FOR
HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
Regulations for development of the Hamilton Place RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of
this RPUD Document and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect
at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate. Where this RPUD
Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the
LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply.
PERMITTED USES:
A maximum of 66 residential dwelling units shall be permitted within the RPUD. No building or
structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for a.
other than the following:
RESIDENTIAL c
A. Principal Uses: cu
1. Dwelling Units — Multi-family, single family detached, single family attached and
single family variable lot line.
cu
2. Any other principal use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of c
permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA") or
O
the Hearing Examiner.
d
N
0
B. Accessory Uses: c
a
1. Customary accessory uses associated with the principal uses permitted in this �+
RPUD, including but not limited to garages, carports, swimming pools, spas,
screen enclosures and utility buildings. .c
co
2. Model homes and model home centers including sales trailers and offices for a
project administration, construction, sales and marketing.
3. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature
trails, gazebos and picnic areas.
4. Any other accessory use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses
and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this PUD as determined by the
Board of Zoning Appeals or the Hearing Examiner.
AMENITY AREA
A. Principal Uses:
Hamilton Place RPUD,PL20160001255 Page 1 of 8 12/15/2016 Packet Pg. 56
9A.2
1. Clubhouses with cafes, snack bars and similar uses intended to serve residents
and guests.
2. Community administrative and recreation facilities. Outdoor recreation facilities,
such as a community swimming pool, tennis/pickle ball courts and basketball
courts, parks, playgrounds, pedestrian/bikeways, and passive and/or active
water features (private intended for use by the residents and their guests only).
3. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature
trails, bikeways, landscape nurseries, gazebos, boat and canoe docks, fishing
piers, picnic areas, fitness trails and shelters to serve residents and their guests.
4. Tennis clubs, health spas, fitness facilities and other indoor recreational uses
(private, intended for use by the residents and their guests only).
re
d
C.)
B. Accessory Uses: a
1. Model homes and model home centers including sales trailers and offices for
project administration, construction, sales and marketing.
2. Any other accessory use, which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses
and consistent with the permitted accessory uses of this PUD as determined by the
Board of Zoning Appeals or Hearing Examiner.
PRESERVE
0
A. Allowable Uses:
1, Nature trails and boardwalks that do not reduce the amount of required preserve a
area to be retained.
2. Mitigation for environmental permitting.
3. Passive Recreation areas, as per LDC requirements.
4. Water management as allowed by the LDC,
a
d
E
s
r
a
Hamilton Place RPUD, PL20160001255 Page 2 of B 12/15/2016
Packet Pg. 57
9.A.2
EXHIBIT B
FOR
HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Exhibit B sets forth the development standards for land uses within the Hamilton Place RPUD
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.
STANDARDS SINGLE-FAMILY VARIABLE LOT SINGLE FAMILY MULTI-FAMILY AMENITY
DETACHED LINE FOR SINGLE ATTACHED CENTER
FAMILY
FS
Minimum Lot Area 5,000 SF 4,000 SF 3,500 SF 1 acre 10,000 SF
Minimum Lot Width *3 50 feet 40 feet 35 feet 100 feet N/A C"
fY
Minimum Lot Depth 100 feet 100 feet 100 feet 100 feet N/A cu
ca
Minimum Front Yard *1,*6 20 feet*2 20 feet*2 20 feet*2 20 feet N/A a
Minimum Side Yard 5 feet 0-10 feet*4 0 or 5 feet 10 feet N/A p
2
Minimum Rear Yard *6 E
Principal 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet N/A =
v
Maximum Height er
csi
Zoned (not to exceed 2 stories) 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet
Actual (not to exceed 2 stories) 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 8
c
ca
Minimum Distance Between 12 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet N/A c
Principal Structures *5 O
Floor Area Min. (S.F.) 1500 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF N/A m
PUD Boundary 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet o
Preserve 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet o
L
te , �8 I tt-5x .
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES h rkid!? 6,;` 0 ke c i
Front *2 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet cu
Side 5 feet 0 feet 0 feet 10 feet 10 feet E
t
Minimum Rear Yard *6 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet N/A ,a
PUD Boundary 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet 40 feet Q
Preserve 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet m
Minimum Distance Between 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet 10 feet E
Structures u
a
12c
Maximum Height Q
Zoned (not to exceed 2 stories) 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet
Actual (not to exceed 2 stories) 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet
Minimum lot areas for any unit type may be exceeded. The unit type, and not the minimum lot area, shall define the development standards to b(
applied by the Growth Management Department during an application for a building permit. For variable lot single family and single family attache(
' units, a conceptual exhibit showing typical building configurations, including building setbacks and building separations, shall be submitted to the
Growth Management Division with the application for the first building permit for the platted development tract. Verification of ingress/egress fo
maintenance shall be provided for variable lot line single-family units.
All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted.
*1—Front yards shall be measured as follows:
A. If the parcel is served by a public right-of-way,setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line.
B. If the parcel is served by a private road,setback is measured from the back of curb(if curbed)or edge of pavement(if not curbed).
Hamilton Place RPUD,PL20160001255 Page 3 of 8 12/15/2016 Packet Pg. 58
9.A.2
C. If the parcel has frontage on two sides, setback is measured from the side with the shortest frontage with the other frontage
designated as a side yard.
*2—Front entry garages must be a minimum of 20', and a minimum of 23'from a sidewalk, Porches, entry features and roofed courtyards may bE
reduced to 15'.
*3—Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20%for cul-de-sac lots provided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained.
*4—The side setback may be variable between zero feet(0')to ten feet(10')as long as a 10-foot minimum separation between principal structures i!
maintained. If the variable lot line for single-family option is utilized,the owner shall provide with the building permit application,the setback of the
principal structures on the abutting lots of all sides.
*5—Building distance may be reduced at garages to a minimum of 0'where attached garages are provided and a 10' minimum building separation is
maintained,if detached.
*6— No front building setback is required from the 30' wide access easement, which extends along the southerly boundary of the Hamilton PlacE
PUD. However,a landscape buffer shall be required.
Note: nothing in this RPUD Document shall be deemed to approve a deviation from the LDC unless it is expressly stated in a list of deviations.
CL
Lt
a
C
O
E
x
v
N
O
t)
C
(13
C
I-
L
Q
EU
0
0.
O
0
N
C
w
E
V
Q
r+
C
G1
E
C)
E6
4.0
4-.
a
Hamilton Place RPUD, PL20160001255 Page 4 of 8 12/15/2016
Packet Pg. 59
09 '6d ;a)Pedr a o
ZONED:ARLINGTON LAKES PUD11 Q q,k
z�` ui USE:PRESERVE 0 w 0 0 0 Z o i. n-8 .
Rj a s ¢ 0 w fh-
CO` ' NN-
UX OI0U� n„ ,,0 = mZoisn000. .- (0(0 ¢
W O
+I� �N
va W
>- �_ w -W
4 Icc CN
—
Q S i 3 i > i i Z
03 i > i i i , i 4 < Z CC>X
0 0
I 4 4 i i > a 4 I w <
.-J Ili a Co 0y rnimO i ' i ' i 'P.2ERVEi > i > 9 i ¢waII)
O JNo O>- I �Z> W� WZOO1- WOZCoWWW 00 W W
0.W I jar aj , > iji 3 3a i i a (n ww NNw w0
1.
CI
O Jm¢a�wm
a c(S ) (rr (rr (rr •/r ( F F w- a 1 3
r r r r ' rr � CO o �� a 0. m�
rr ”`
�'�ir �ird7i f' w
Ij �f1 I e
Z � Q 1
B i o W �
K Qa I WW
W LL
01 I d d
W - I U7 r
3 mD I I Jnr ZQ �
ww caJ S.
N Qa >• a I I Qin a .,1I a
o o tog I II oo YQ
°�° � I § § Zz 9 ,
gQ 1.. I I o � p � �_
az I � cn c
a oo I , I � � � 5 =
H '— til =
0 >DO IL W
I WI s I Q j C.
W ICC 3 .g
F
� I
0 3.; 1 w w I O 1 O {' 0 I ESMT W s
I 0 W cn 1 (SEE NOTE#3) D m ® I`• 's
W z I Q C 0 cn 9 l5 1
'" m � w Il a i�~�
I s
O LL V m
w N
Z I I m o
! „
I ;{ W g d
Z d N 0 O
CD O I OZ IpX:1
" I I W U Ile 0 O I g Z
Q 2 w W 0 r rn 8Is', i
O W d Z U Q o
Lu liJr
sD_ LE W b Z� 8_
�i ¢
' >' "'f I wwzHIi
0 p
a# i I Z?
i ; I wa
---... :,ti...,-5,--1-n: -,,,,,,,,,-:,--,-,--,:,L ... ,- w
.YL
OWWOZ
u'>w¢Aj
ZOcOZ_w
GVO2.1 NOISONIAII J w w 0 a
cra
-O 0 W-
-- - - - - - - W¢O m o
=00D0
cn f- rn
�J Co rr•)0)
Z'V•6 ZI N
9.A.2
EXHIBIT D
FOR
HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(PER COMMITMENT NUMBER: 1062-3504066)
THE EAST 264.00 FEET OF THE WEST 528.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA.
a
(PER COMMITMENT NUMBER: 1062-3504081)
THE WEST 264 FEET AND THE EAST 264 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF CD
THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18,TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. a
C
0
(PER COMMITMENT NUMBER: 1062-3504087)
THE EAST 264.00 FEET OF THE WEST 792.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,
FLORIDA.
AND
C
THE EAST 264.00 FEET OF THE WEST 1056.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST O
1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, -a
FLORIDA. o
a
0
L
C
E
V
ar
rC..
01
E
ld
r.+
Hamilton Place RPUD, PL20160001255 Page 6 of 8 12/15/2016 Packet Pg. 61
9.A.2
EXHIBIT E
FOR
HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
LIST OF DEVIATIONS
No Deviations requested.
a
ea
c
O
E
x
rn
C)
C
CO
C
0
d
N
0
0.
O
L
a
N
C
d
E
V
4-
C
C,
E
C)
4-
r
Hamilton Place RPUD, PL20160001255 Page 7 of 8 12/15/2016
Packet Pg. 62
9.A.2
EXHIBIT F
FOR
HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
1. PUD MONITORING
One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close-out of
the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of
the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is WCI Communities, LLC, 24301 Walden
Center Drive, Bonita Springs, FL 34135. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring
and commitments to a successor entity, then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that
needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing
Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the a.
successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the m
Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the cc]
commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with
the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its
responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer '-
responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments.
2. MISCELLANEOUS N
a. Issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of
the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on c
the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or
fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a 0
violation of state or federal law.
0
b. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the a
development
N
C
G1
3. ENVIRONMENTAL .
c1
c.1
.r
a. The RPUD shall be required to preserve 15% of native vegetation, 6.46± acres of native vegetation
exists on-site requiring a minimum preservation of 0.97± acres (6.46 x .15 = 0.97) of native d
vegetation to be retained. s
U
ca
b. Preserves may be used to satisfy the landscape buffer requirements after exotic removal in
accordance with LDC Section 4.06.02 and LDC Section 4.06.05.E.1. Supplemental plantings with
native plant materials shall be in accordance with LDC Section 3.05.07.
4. WATER MANAGEMENT
The project's stormwater management system shall be designed to discharge to the east into the
Whippoorwill Flowway.
Hamilton Place RPUD, PL20160001255 Page 8 of 8 12/15/2016 Packet Pg.63
9..AA
�:o -� Zoi rnty
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
ZONING DIVISION
CONSISTENCY REVIEW MEMORANDUM
To: Eric Johnson, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section
From: Corby Schmidt,AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section
Date: November 8, 2016
d
Subject: Future Land Use Element(FLUE) Consistency Review(2"d memo)
PETITION NUMBER: PL-20160001255 — REV: 2
E
PETITION NAME: Hamilton Place Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD). ca
REQUEST: To rezone a ±9.75-acre property from the A, Agricultural zoning district to the Hamilton Place Residential
Planned Unit Development to allow residential development (up to 66 multi-family or single-family units) with N
associated amenities (recreational uses) and open space uses.
LOCATION: The ±9.75-acre property is located approximately one-half mile south of Pine Ridge Road, on the east
side of Livingston Road,south of the Brynwood Preserve and north of Positano Place at Naples (AKA Arlington Lakes)
residential PUDs, in Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is located within the Urban designated area y
(Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict), as identified on the Countywide Future Land Use Map of
the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The property is also located within a mile of the Pine Ridge Road —I-75 Mixed
Use Activity Center (MUAC #10).
Relative to this petition, the Urban Residential Subdistrict allows residential uses at a base density of 4 dwelling units u-
per acre (DU/A). Also, as explained below, this site is eligible for a 3 DU/A density bonus for mostly lying within the v
residential density band surrounding Activity Center#10,yielding a total eligible density of 7 DU/A.
cu
and is eligible for a 3 DU/A density bonus for lying within the residential density band surrounding Activity Center
#10, yielding a total eligible density of 7 DU/A). ca
FLUE provisions for the Density Rating System state, "If the project is within one mile of a Mixed Use Activity Center
or Interchange Activity Center and located within a residential density band, 3 residential units per gross acre may be y
added. The density band around a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center shall be measured by the
radial distance from the center of the intersection around which the Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity
Center is situated. If 50% or more of a project is within the density band, the additional density applies to the gross
acreage of the entire project. Density bands are designated on the Future Land Use Map and shall not apply within
the Estates Designation or for properties within the Coastal High Hazard Area". More than 50%of the project is within
the density band, so the additional density applies to the gross acreage of the entire project.
This PUD provides for residential uses at a density of 6.77 DU/A, recreational uses and open space.
The Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Policy 5.4 requires new developments to be compatible with the surrounding
land area. [Comprehensive Planning leaves this determination to the Zoning Services staff as part of their
review of the petition in its entirety. However, staff notes that in reviewing the appropriateness of the
requested uses/intensities on the subject site, the compatibility analysis is to be comprehensive and include a
review of both the subject property and surrounding or nearby properties with regard to allowed use
Packet Pg. 64
9A.4
intensities and densities,development standards(building heights,setbacks,landscape buffers,etc.), building
mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location,
traffic generation/attraction, etc.]
In order to promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the
following FLUE policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable.
Each policy is followed by staff analysis in [bold text].
Objective 7:
In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places: The Community Character Plan
for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, and adhere to the existing development character of Collier
County, the following policies shall be implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where
applicable.
Policy 7.1: z
a
The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and ce
arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of
the Land Development Code. [This site fronts Livingston Road,a minor arterial roadway. Exhibit C, RPUD Master
Plan, depicts a single, direct access to Livingston Road.]
Policy 7.2:
The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby x
collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Exhibit C, RPUD Master Plan,depicts a private
hammer-head cul-de-sac street inside the project. All vehicular traffic accesses Livingston Road directly at a N
single access point.]
Policy 7.3:
All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points
with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type.The interconnection of local streets
between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [The site abuts a road on one
side — Livingston Road on the west. Properties located to the north and south are fully developed, with no
interconnection points proposed. A preserve area inside the Arlington Lakes PUD abuts the site along the east
side, where no interconnection is proposed.] V
Policy 7.4:
The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common
open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [As to walkable communities, the PUD does
not request Deviations from the Land Development Code (LDC). The project will be subject to LDC
requirements for provision of sidewalks. c
Non-vehicular interconnections are not proposed with the abutting properties. Pedestrian/bike connections
are provided to Livingston Road.
As to a blend of densities and a range of housing prices and types,the PUD provides single-family detached & E
attached, multi-family and single-family flexible lot line residences.
Common open spaces and civic facilities are provided by more than 4.5 acres of open space including water
management lakes, recreational/amenity areas and other open spaces.]
Based upon the above analysis,the proposed PUD may be deemed consistent with the FLUE.
PETITION ON CITYVIEW
cc: Michael Bosi,AICP, Director,Zoning Division
David Weeks,AICP, Growth Management Manager, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section
Raymond V. Bellows, Manager,Zoning Division,Zoning Services Section
G: Comp\Consistency Reviews\2016
G:ICDES Planning Services\Consistency Reviews120161PUDZ\PUDZ-PL2016-1255 Hamilton Place R2 drft.docx.
Packet',Pg. 65
9.A.5
4
a Kraft LN
4
sts". ga
Related Group PUD ;,
,i kit r PUD °PUD
Density:6.99 � ID
.
A
*AI I OW '
--',",-430. .1*_.; -0.7,,,.. ,, I r- -- ‘ .
'- ' ': 7,- 141161," T, it: kiliC''--- -.aarc r
. [` '3441: �_ �
. .z..,,,,.., ,,,,,.„ ,,
„ I .,,_, .,.. . , : _ .. _ ,..,;, .., 1,10,
. .,:.:., .
.f, „ , .. ., 44v-4114241141r
404, f . ' ►Zoning:SU[ -1.--::-.-t=. 3
Btynwood Preserve m o
I Density 5 47 a
* ''',- 4)lriiiiir::i:, °PUD, �- SUBJECT PROPERTY: cc
EZ
HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
-Zora
r
iA, ' '44' - ' ---. C . ”--3,.-,r—Pos it
z._ Nr MO a.
oninq
h�
Kensington Park , , i
Density:1� s ,j j Raffina CT i :� ca
� —
,
.x
�,
,� p
E - _•
Arlington.Lakes ' . -
�, - ' ' Density`6 Q �'
., CPUD c i Zoning: PUD
1
"*1 j i Biscayne CTS ;
y
co
#E SI � W's � -7514411t''
� �
'� 96 �. s ` may I
3 # € 777
•, Y s:. ,. '"*4rWilir.fCTc h R p�AM"' bs 1'!R#9RR i9' 'f};9f .
# Density:1 [ sac Balmoral' lilt
i� ,.*Avian() DR Density
� ,.
5
,.. _ �. .. lir -;' x — Carrington CIR C
N
GROSS DENSITY UNITS PER ACRE (UPA)
FOR HAMILTON PLACE CPUD AND 50 300 °°Feet
SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
Packet Pg. 66
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Steve <VirtualNeff@outlook.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2016 12:25 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: carriefilthaut@centurylink.net
Subject: Hamilton Place
a
Dear Mr. Johnson,
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place. a
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that
meeting WCI agreed to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
ea
Iupon Nt is understanding that density is usually based nei neighboring The pur ose of this
email is to request that this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of
adjoining neighborhoods, which would limit it to 6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I
would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development. N
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it o
becomes available regarding Hamilton Place. o
Thank you for your consideration,
Stephen & Maria Neff
1681 Serrano Circle E
0
Naples, Florida
w
J
N
I
W
to
C
d
co
r
C
d
E
co
1
Packet Pg. 67
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Vigilante Family <familyvigilante@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 7:07 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: Carrie J. Filthaut
Subject: Hamilton Place
a
Dear Mr.Johnson,
c)
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place.
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that meeting WCI agreed to limited the
building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
However,they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
rn
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request that this project
be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods,which would limit it to 6 units per acre to
match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible,I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development. c
N
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available regarding
Hamilton Place.
a)
Kind regards,
Anthony&Kathleen Vigilante
1419 Serrano Circle
Naples,FL 34105
239-567-9800 a
FamilyVigilante@gmail.com
0
L
L
a)
.0
U
fC
(.)
Packet Pg. 68
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Debra Neal <debran42@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 8:21 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: carrie Filthaut
Subject: Arlington Lakes
as
Dear Mr. Johnson, a
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place.
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that
meeting WCI agreed to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'. a)
N_
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email N
is to request that this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining
neighborhoods, which would limit it to 6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I would
prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development.
(13
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it
becomes available regarding Hamilton Place. a
E
Kind regards, °
Debra Neal L
J
I
E
W
t0
1
C
E
U
tC
4-
4-
c
E
4-
Packet Pg. 69
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Jerry Ferguson <fergiforms@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 3:53 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: Carrie J. Filthaut (carriefilthaut@centurylink.net)
Subject: Hamilton Place
0
a
a)
Dear Mr.Johnson,
a
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place. _
0
r
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that meeting WCI agreed to limited the
building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
Dear Mr.Johnson, ..
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place. N
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that meeting WCI agreed to limited the a
building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
However,they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request that this project 0
be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods,which would limit it to 6 units per acre to
match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible,I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development.
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available regarding
Hamilton Place.
a
Kind regards, o
However,they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request that this project J'
be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods,which would limit it to 6 units per acre to
match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible,I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development.
E
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available regarding
Hamilton Place.
Kind regards, a)
Jerry Ferguson
c
w
E
t
.r
1
Packet Pg. 70
9,k6
JohnsonEric
From: Peter Garbarino <peter@simplejane.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 3:50 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: carriefilthaut@centurylink.net
Subject: Hamilton Place development
0
Dear Mr. Johnson, a
CC
as
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place.
F.
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that meeting WCI agreed to
limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
E
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request that this
project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, which would limit it to 6 units per N
acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development.
co
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available regarding c
Hamilton Place. N
N
N
Kind regards,
d
Peter Garbarino 0
N
V
.0
a
E
0
L
CD
J
N
I
E
W
Co
C
d
E
C,
R
Q
:.7
C
d
t
V
co
Q
1
Packet Pg.71
9 6 r t
JohnsonEric
From: Rumley, Jeffrey <JRumley@bcbsm.com>
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 9:45 AM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: paulg@sandcastlecm.com
Subject: Hamilton Place RPUD-Dec 15th Hearing
F
a
Good Morning Mr. Johnson:
co
I am presently a Michigan resident with a seasonal home at Brynwood Preserve anticipating full time Florida residency. I a
am unable to be present at the scheduled Dec 15th hearing but wanted to take the opportunity to express a concern I
have.
ca
One of the primary reasons I purchased a home in Brynwood was because of the privacy it afforded from adjacent
properties.The preserve, of course, presents one insulator and there appears to be a sufficient barrier between our
association's homes on the north side from the commercial properties at Pine Ridge and Livingston Rd. My concern is
the sufficiency of the proposed barrier between Hamilton Place and the south side of Brynwood Preserve Association. co
The site plan provided by the builder makes reference to a "Type B" barrier. I do not know what that is and how it is N
distinguished from the Type A or D barriers proposed on the road side of Hamilton or the south side of Hamilton. In any N
event, a substantial part of the value proposition of Brynwood is the interior lakes and surrounding natural habitat. d
I do not object to the construction of tasteful residential units on adjoining property. What I do want to see though is an o
appropriately deep boundary that preserves as much as possible the natural surroundings.This is not only a value to the
residents of Brynwood but also a value that should be recognized by putative purchasers of Hamilton Place residences. V
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. n'
Jeffrey Rumley rn
12858 Brynwood Preserve Lane
d
I
The information contained in this communication is highly confidential and is intended solely for the use of the (13
individual(s) to whom this communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby w
notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited. Please notify the co
sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original message without
making any copies.
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan are nonprofit corporations and
independent licensees of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.
E
U
1
Packet Pg. 72
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Nicola Vincent <VincentN@rollsecure.com>
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 8:35 AM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: Please DO NOT APPROVE Hamilton Place RPUD
a
Mr Johnson,
co
a
My name is Nicola Vincent and I reside at 12873 Brynwood Way in Naples. I am extremely opposed to Hamilton c
Place RPUD. I purchased my home in Brynwood Preserve almost 7 years ago because I found it to be a quiet little
neighborhood. My home is at the end of the street and with only one neighbor it offers a lot of privacy which added to ca
my decision. That is unless they build this monstrosity of a neighborhood next door to me, then I can say"bye bye"to
my private, quiet, peaceful home. Not only will I have new homes next door in what I considered a preserve (hence the cam,
name Brynwood Preserve) but they will stare directly into my home. Not only will I have to put up with annoying
construction all day for the foreseeable future, once done I will go from having one neighbor to several overnight. It will co
also drastically decrease my property value. c
All the above is just the affect to me personally. Building this new neighborhood will also have a catastrophic N
effect to traffic. If you come from Pine Ridge heading into Brynwood Preserve, we have to make a U-turn at Kensington/
Postitano to get home.The new neighborhood would be the same. Please, go check this out at 5pm any weekday, it's a p
nightmare.Traffic is already backed up something awful, I honestly don't know how there are no accidents most days, cis
let's not add a whole neighborhood of extra drivers to that mess.
..r
While I will try my best to attend the meeting on December 15th, I work so I am not sure I will be able to. Please, V
Please DO NOT approve this new development. Leave some trees, some preserve, some nature in this town!
Thank you for your time,
Nicola Vincent
12873 Brynwood Way
Naples, FL 34109 yl
E
w
co
Nicola Vincent
239-594- 1616
as
a)
a
1
Packet Pg. 73
A.,49
=
REStitirtrfik
I
OWING OIL Snick itt
co
cr)
et
C•1
CNI
CNI
C.3
O.
a)
z
a)
cal
(.0
*e.
.c
_c
•rt
2
Packet Pg. 74
JohnsonEric
From: Frank Philipone <frankphilipone@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2016 5:55 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: Fwd: ***Update to Hamilton Place Information***
Hamilton Place cc
Dear Mr. Johnson,
0
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place.
ca
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that meeting WCI agreed =
to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
<0
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request that c
this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, which would limit it to (4
6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our N
development. c.)
as
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available o
regarding Hamilton Place.
..r
Kind regards
a
0
w
a7
J
I
E
w
(0
C
C,
E
t
V
ca
4-
C
d
E
v
ca
1
Packet Pg. 75
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Frank Campoamor <frankcampoamor@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 5:55 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: Opposition Letter - Hamilton Place RPUD
a.
au
C)
co
Dear Mr. Johnson, a
0
I am a property owner in the adjoining neighborhood, Brynwood Preserve (12856 Brynwood Way, Naples, FL 34105). I
live there year-round and work full-time in Naples.
I am very concerned about the effects that Hamilton Place will have on the existing, adjoining neighborhoods and traffic 7
on Livingston Road.
1. It is already extremely difficult and dangerous to access Brynwood Preserve heading south on Livingston Road and N
having to do a U-turn at the median cut through where Positano Place and the back entrance to Kensington are located. N
It is already a mess, and I have seen road rage incidents occur with the existing 3 neighborhoods trying to use that C)
median cut through. Adding a fourth neighborhood with 66 units, which could realistically mean another 100 cars,
would be dangerous to the existing residents and unfair.
03
2. Then accessing Brynwood Preserve heading north on Livingston Road will be equally dangerous because the ingress
and egress for Hamilton Place will be right next to where the turn in is for Brynwood Preserve.That is accidents waiting
to happen. It is my understanding that entrances to neighborhoods need to be 660 feet apart.The proposed entrance
for Hamilton Place will violate that ordinance because its entrance is less than 660 feet from the entrances of both o
Brynwood Preserve and Positano Place.
3. The proposed density is too great.The land under consideration is just too tight to put the density in there being
proposed when you already have Brynwood Preserve to the north and Positano Place to the south. (al
4. The proposed vegetation barrier between Brynwood Preserve and Hamilton Place is wholly inadequate. Not only will w
it not act as a sufficient sound barrier, the proposed height of the structures will leave no privacy to our community and ca
their community. Further,there should be more of a buffer distance between the homes in Brynwood Preserve and the
residences proposed for Hamilton place.
.c
In my opinion,the vacant land between Brynwood Preserve and Positano Place is unfit for the development being
proposed. It just does not make sense, will put the residents of the adjoining neighborhoods and general public using
Livingston Road in danger from a traffic standpoint, and does not provide adequate barriers between the adjoining
neighborhoods.
Thank you for your consideration.
Frank Campoamor
Owner in Brynwood Preserve
Packet Pg. 76
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Marcia Azar <marciaazar@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2016 10:44 AM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: Carrie
Subject: Hamilton Place
a
Dear Mr. Johnson, a
0
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place.
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that
meeting WCI agreed to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
N
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre. co
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email
is to request that this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining d
neighborhoods, which would limit it to 6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I would
prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development.
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it
becomes available regarding Hamilton Place. a
E
0
L
Kind regards, I
w
as
i
Marcia Azar
E
w
Sent from my iPhone
d7
s
ca
1
Packet Pg. 77
9.AF6
JohnsonEric
From: Joan Kellner <jk349@comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2016 7:12 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: PUDZ-PL20160001255 - Submission against Hamilton Place Zoning change
Attachments: Letter to CCPC regarding Hamilton Place zoning request 12-04-2016.docx
Mr.Johnson;
is
I am respectfully submitting this email communication as I will be unable to attend the hearing scheduled for Thursday, a
December 15, 2016 at 9:00am.This communication was transmitted on December 4, 2016—in excess of the stated 7
days required as per the notice I received.
ca
I ask that a receipt be forwarded to me (email is acceptable), that this communication has been received in a timely
manner and will be submitted into the final package of documents to be considered by the CCPC concerning this zoning v
request. N
co
Thank you
N
N
Joan Kellner
12860 Brynwood Way
Naples FL 34105
Jk349@comcast.net co
Ta
a
E
2
.4+
C,
J
I
E
W
co
C
d
E
t
4-
r
C
d
E
.0
V
to
1
Packet Pg. 78
8.A:6_.
DATE: December 4, 2016
TO: Collier County Planning Commission
FROM: Joan I. Kellner
RE: Zoning Proposal PUDZ-PL20160001255— Hamilton Place
a
cc
In accordance with the notification I received dated November 23, 2016; pertaining to the public hearing
ea
scheduled for 9:00am, Thursday, December 15, 2016 for consideration of:
An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending
Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended,the Collier County Land Development Code, which
established the comprehensive zoning regulation for the unincorporated area of Collier
County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the qtr
zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) N
zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for the
Cos
project known as Hamilton Place RPUD to allow development of up to 66 single family
and/or multi-family dwelling units on property located east of Livingston Road and N
south of Pine ridge Road in Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida, consisting of 9.75+/-acres, and by providing an effective date. {PUDZ- a)
PL20160001255}.
Please find the following: `r
I am a permanent,full-time resident of Brynwood Preserve,the development located just north of the
subject property. My property is located approximately at the midpoint along the southern border of a-
my association and would be directly affected by the proposed zoning change and subsequent c
development.
L
d
I have attended the community information meeting which was held on September 27, 2016. In
essence, this meeting did not provide much information as at the time no final plans had been set.There Ji
were also concerned residents from Andalucia and Positano Place, two other communities which share `�
borders with the subject property. E
At the time of this meeting,the developers were not able to provide specifics on the allocation of co
building types (Single detached, Single attached, Multi-Family) or the projected sales price ranges of the
proposed units. Even the size of the units was not available for discussion.This concerns me as a
neighbor to the proposed development since the type and size of unit will dictate market pricing and in v
ea
turn could have an adverse effect on the value of my property. For example, Brynwood preserve has 85,
single detached homes, both one and two story with floor plans between 1,900--2,300sf. Houses in
the association are currently begin marketed and sold from the mid-$400M to low$500M. If the new
units being built adjacent to our property are less than 1,500sf, and are considered more
condo/apartment styled—the overall market value per unit will be substantially less and could adversely
affect the market prices in the immediate geographic area.
The contiguous developments: Brynwood, Andalucia, Positano; were constructed between 2003 and
2016 and have residential density ratios of under 6:1. The proposed development is in excess of this
ratio, and although the County regulations allow up to 7:1, I feel that the final density should not exceed
the lowest of the contiguous parcels.
Packet Pg. 79
9.A.6
Why you may ask?
The proposed building parcel is much smaller than its neighbors—with a 66 proposed units (in
combination of single detached, single attached, and multifamily units) on 9.75 acres with two proposed
water retention areas, a community area with a common area pool, tennis/pickle ball and basketball
court areas, a community building and related roadways. By comparison:
Brynwood contains 29 acres and has 85 single family homes. Each home is approximately 1/6
(.16) of an acre. There are essentially three floor plans of one or two story construction.The remaining
space is occupied by retention lakes, roadway, preserve area and some common area walk/jogging 42)
paths along the western edge. a
Andalucia has 78 acres with 167 single family homes. Other land use is in retention lakes,
preserve areas, roadways and a community center with a pool, pay area and common building
amenities.
Positano Place is a condominium association with 330 units in 15 building (22 units per building) o3
with three story construction. The property is divided into four smaller neighborhood associations and
each pay toward common amenities such as the community center, a pool and roadways.
With the exception of Positano, none of the closest developments to any of these properties (Aviano,
Kensington, Stratford Place etc.) do not exceed two stories. And should not—if only for aesthetic N
purposes. There are no other three-story buildings in the immediate area other than commercial.
Also—in a quick aerial view of the surrounding developments—there are significant areas of
vacant/non-developed land which surround each development—in the form of preserves, :°
environmentally protected areas and outright vacant land.There is little to no "line of sight" contact •
between developments. Permitting this construction would not only increase the density of the area, a
but contaminate the views of the owners of units along the borders of this property which were a major E
deciding factor in the purchase of these units and making them more desirable within the communities w
as reflected by sales and purchase prices. Developing this property will have an adverse effect on the i
market value of the closest units of the adjacent communities and a decreased enjoyment of these
properties by the owners.
Not only visual, but auditory issues will result. As I mentioned earlier, I am located on the southern side
of Brynwood Preserve—approximately halfway along the length of the subject property. At this time (01
with the full width of the property vacant and heavily vegetated, sounds from Positano Place (located to
the south of the subject property) pervade to our side of the association. Noises include car traffic, car 6.
alarms and closing doors, loud talking from the residents at Positano. Most recently the cries of victory
from Chicago fans at the end of the 7th game of the World Series this past November could be heard. I
cannot imagine the additional noise that will be generated from 66 units between us (Positano and f°
Brynwood) in the form of human interaction, general building noise (air handler/compressor units, pool
pumps, garage doors, entry doors), entertainment areas (common pool, tennis or basketball courts) andcu
general traffic. I cannot imagine that the proposed vegetation and/or water management areas that are
proposed will be able to alleviate the noise contamination when a fully wooded/vegetative area cannot.
I feel that I can categorically state that the proposed vegetation; 15' of Type B along the northern border Q
and 10' of Type A along the southern border will not be a sufficient for either bordering neighborhood.
If this plan were to be approved I would argue for the need of a significant wall barrier in addition to
heavier vegetation planting to attempt to muffle the increase in noise.
Packet Pg. 80
9.A=S
The proposed development also allows for a water management area along the property line it shares
with Brynwood. At the meeting previously noted, participants were informed that this will be @40' in
width (from north to south) and extend along the residential construction, approximately 800'-
850'along the shared property line. Currently there is no formal run-off for water to this area which will
require the construction of a "canal" or other such structure to contain excess rainwater and run-off
from the adjacent parcels (I'm assuming that this will include water flow from individual building
gutters, possible pool overflows, drainage from the interior roadway etc.). I'm concerned about the
capacity of the basin, purge capability, and water flow/stagnation issues that could result in overflow to a.
adjacent areas or mosquito or other insect larvae production so close to my home. At this time we do
not have a problem with drainage on this side of the property or adverse insect population effects but
any significant change in the ecosystem or topography of the immediate area could have negative
effects.
E
Additionally, noise is a concern for us along our roadway and as sound carries quickly without reduced ca
decibel levels across a liquid surface more readily than through a heavily vegetated area—all sounds
generated from Hamilton Place will be in excess of the levels currently heard from Positano. Residents at
rn
Andalucia had voiced their concern about the water management area at the rear of the project—their0,1
development has already experienced problems with drainage in the preserve areas and fear that co
additional water containment structures nearby will exacerbate their current issue.
N
The proposed construction includes moving the current driveway access from the southwest to the Cs'
northwest corner of the property—nearly in alignment with the "slip" lane which originates just north of o
our property line on Livingston Road for access to Brynwood's entry. Not only do I believe that the
proximity of these two driveway features will inherently create a heightened accident zone for residents
of Brynwood and Hamilton Place, but that Positano will also be adversely affected in their ability to
access Livingston Road easily. From personal experience, I normally access Brynwood by travelling
southward on Livingston and make the U-turn where Positano and Kensington entrances are across a
from one another.The knowledge of right-of-way eludes most drivers in the best of circumstances but
adding another property access into the immediate area will only increase the likelihood of collision
from entrance and egress of these properties as well as drivers travelling on Livingston Road itself.
Additionally, the location of the proposed entrance will cause an increase of vehicles taking this U-turn J
to access the subject property. The current slip/turn lane located southbound on Livingston will most N�
likely need to be elongated to support additional vehicles waiting to make this turn. as
Also, we were informed at the information meeting that there is a County requirement of 660ft
between driveways/entrances.The location of the Hamilton Place PUD entrance will be less than 660ft
from both Positano Place and Brynwood Preserve roadways, requiring TWO variances solely for d
driveway placement. Obviously this narrow parcel is not conducive for a high-access development.
V
As you are aware, WCI Communities Inc. is the current developer of record and has a relatively strong
record for building quality construction in this market and others. However, in September 2016, WCI
centered into a merger agreement with Lennar Homes Inc. Lennar will be the lead company and WCI will cu
become essentially a branding name with no management or decision-making authority. Lennar, unlike
WCI, does not have the same name in the construction business and instead has a high incidence of
consumer complaints with construction quality and warranties/guaranties—all of which can be viewed
via multiple BBB listings—complaints are organized by geographic area on the website. Furthermore, in
on November 30, 2016, a WCI shareholder has filed suit against the proposed merger—with further
details to be found via any internet search engine.
Packet Pg. 81
In summary, I am submitting my concerns, which affect numerous residents in three neighborhoods
contiguous with the proposed development. I hope that these arguments will bear consideration from
the Board who are also residents of Naples and purchased their homes with consideration of proximity
of other developments and the related auditory and visual benefits as well as ease of access from major
local roadways.
Furthermore, while I understand that development is inevitable, I do not believe that a higher density
project should be approved in the midst of three completed projects that are lower in density. The a.
developer has submitted this multi-story, high density plan as it is likely not financially feasible for them
develop it similarly to the two adjacent parcels of Brynwood or Andalucia which are of lower density and
do not contain multi-family units. If it is developed along the scope of Positano—the property values for a
the units of Brynwood that face this project will decline as it will not be favorably viewed by future
owners. .—
co
Respectfully I submit my concerns and views of this project to the Board. I ask that if approval is granted,
that additional concerns and consideration for the following will be addressed:
• A solid wall barrier along the shared property lines, or
• Extended vegetation coverage in excess of the proposed plan. c
• A two-story limit on all construction heights.
• A density level not to exceed the existing surrounding parcels of less than 6:1.
• An alternate plan for entrance/egress to the property.
• Extensive review of water retention areas and proposed management as well as geologic and
environmental impact on adjacent parcels.
co
Thank you for your time and attention. a.
E
Sincerely;
Joan I Kellner
12860 Brynwood Way .
Naples FL 34105 cn
E
w
t0
as
E
V
ca
c
w
E
t
V
co
r
Packet Pg.82
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: djosephmail@gmail.com on behalf of David Joseph <david@naplesluxurygroup.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2016 10:04 AM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: Hamilton Place
a
CL
Dear Mr. Johnson,
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place. 4,
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that meeting WCI agreed m
to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'. _
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request that co
this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, which would limit it to c
6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our
development. N
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available
regarding Hamilton Place.
co
Kind regards :;
.a
a
Please click HERE to visit the Andalucia Homeowners Association web site.
M..
N
L
C,
.Id
V.+
C,
J
I
N
E
W
Co
C,
E
t
rr
r-I
C
C,
E
t
t.,
c9
1
Packet Pg. 83
9A6
JohnsonEric
From: Julie <jvadas35@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2016 3:46 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: Carrie Filthaut
Subject: Hamilton Place
a
re
U
CD
Dear Mr. Johnson,
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place. '
ns
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that meeting WCI agreed =
to limiting the building height to 3 stories or less based on their approved height of 35'.
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
co
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request that
this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, which would limit it to N
6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our N
development. ai
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available o
regarding Hamilton Place.
Kind regards, '—
Julie Mehler
1469 Serrano Circle a
0
L
Please click HERE to visit the Andalucia Homeowners Association web site. w;
w
as
J
co
to
s0
1
Packet Pg. 84
9A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Vicki Mach <william.mach@frontier.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2016 12:19 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: Carrie Filthaut
Subject: Hamilton Place
Dear Mr. Johnson,
We are homeowners in Andalucia. We are one of the 7 homes most affected, as our home is directly behind the proposed co
Hamilton Place Development. We bought our lot specifically because of the privacy it afforded, due to being a preserve lot. We ET-
have
have concerns of privacy and noise due to the current proposal.
We were not able to attend the October informational meeting, but we did contact Sharon Upenhour at Grady Minor. It is
our understanding, after talking with her, that WCI agreed to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their 2
approved height of 35'.and that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
It is our understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to request csi
that this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, which would limit o
it to 6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, we would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our c
development.
N
N
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep us apprised of any additional information as it becomes available
regarding Hamilton Place.
w
0
Cn
ca
Regards,
a
Bill and Vicki Mach
I
N
40
t
ca
Q
cv
1
Packet Pg. 85
9A6
JohnsonEric
From: Ana Tereza <ana_avellar@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2016 1:00 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: Request
a
Dear Mr. Johnson,
ea
a
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and I writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place. c
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October and at that
meeting WCI agreed to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
N
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email
is to request that this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining co
neighborhoods, which would limit it to 6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. If it is possible, I would prefer
that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our development. N
N
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it
becomes available regarding Hamilton Place. ,�
0
Kind regards,
Ana Munro
a.
E
0
d
J
I
N
E
W
to
C
d
E
t,
to
r
r
Q
C
t
c)
cv
w
r
Q
1
Packet Pg. 86
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Sandra Raseta <sraseta@aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2016 11:51 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: Carrie J. Filthaut
Subject: HamiltonPlace
6
n
a
Mr. Johnson, ce
My husband, George Raseta, and I, Sandra Raseta, moved into our new home here at 1478 Serrano Circle in 0
Andalucia on 12/20/2011. We are full-time residents and have been very happy living here these past 5 years. If a
you allow the construction of 6.6 units per acre in Hamilton Place, our home will not be as ideal as it has been. c
I'm sure it is not your intention to make people unhappy to be living in Naples.
The best solution would be to locate Hamilton Place elsewhere, somewhere with more room. But if this is =
"impossible" please try to limit the impact on our environment by reducing the number of units to be squeezed •
v•
into that slender parcel of land. v
Thank you.
Sandra and George Raseta 0
0
N
Sent from my iPad N
CJ
au
0
0
U)
ca
0
a
E
0
L
U)
L
+
d
-J
I
N
E
W
(D
C
CD
E
.0
U
tC
Z1 a
C
E
V
a
Packet Pg. 87
9.A.S'
JohnsonEric
From: Budimir Zvolanek <budajz68@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2016 11:27 AM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: Hamilton Place development
Mr. Johnson,
a
I am a homeowner in Andalucia and am writing this email to you regarding Hamilton Place development. m
c)
It is my understanding that an informational meeting regarding the project was held in October 2016 and at that meeting WCI
agreed to limit the building height to 3 stories or less based on their approved height of 35'.
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
cc
I understand that density is based on neighboring developments. I am thus requesting that Hamilton Place be limited to no
greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, which would limit it to 6 units per acre to match c
Arlington Lakes. If possible, I would prefer that it be limited to 3 units per acre to match our Andalucia development where I live. CZ
Please confirm that you have received this email and keep me apprised of any additional information as it becomes available
regarding the Hamilton Place. N
N
Csi
Best regards,
Budimir (Bud) Zvolanek c
Homeowner
co
1340 Andalucia Way
Naples, FL 34105
a
E
2 L
yyah
d
J
W
I
E
W
co
C
E
t.,
4-
r
4-
d
E
co
a
1
Packet Pg. 88
9.A.6
JohnsonEric
From: Carrie J. Filthaut <cjfilthaut@napleslaw.com>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 4:45 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Subject: RE: Hamilton Place RPUD
If it helps, I will be happy to collect owner responses via email that back the Association request. a
CG
Carrie J. Filthaut
Real Estate Paralegal co
CHEFFY PASSIDOMO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. °
„L'RE:' ,T =;tip 821 5th Avenue South
Naples, FL 34102 =
(239) 436-1519 direct
(239) 261-9300 telephone csi
(239) 261-9782 facsimile co
cjfilthautPnapleslaw.com
www.napleslaw.com C`i
N
N
This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain information that is confidential or privileged.If this e-mail is tl
not addressed to you(or if you have any reason to believe that it is not intended for you),please notify the sender by return e-mail or by telephoning us(collect)at 239-261-9300 p
and delete this message immediately from your computer.Any unauthorized review,use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing or copying of this e-mail is G
strictly prohibited.Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the law firm.
to
10
a
E
From:JohnsonEric [mailto:EricJohnson@colliergov.net]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 4:42 PM
To: Carrie J. Filthaut<cjfilthaut@napleslaw.com>
Subject: RE: Hamilton Place RPUD Ni
76
Thank you for your email and comments. I will be sure to include it in the packets that will be reviewed by the w
decision makers.
CD
Respectfully, °'
Eric L.Johnson, AICP, CFM, LEED Green Associate a
Principal Planner
d
E
From: Carrie J. Filthaut [mailto:cjfilthaut@napleslaw.com]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 3:31 PM `9
To:JohnsonEric<Ericlohnson@colliergov.net>
Cc: Carrie Filthaut<carriefilthaut@centurvlink.net>
Subject: Hamilton Place RPUD
Hi Eric"
1
Packet Pg. 89
9A6
I am the President of Andalucia Homeowners' Association and I was at the informational meeting you attended last
week regarding Hamilton Place.
During that meeting WCI agreed to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'.
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to
request that this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, G
which would limit it to 6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes.
a
I look forward to your response.
Kind regards,
Carrie J. Filthaut
(a
Real Estate Paralegal
CHEFFY PASSCIX?MO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. N
as r ar lif t AT L AW 821 5th Avenue South
Naples, FL 34102 co
N
(239) 436-1519 direct N
(239) 261-9300 telephone
(239) 261-9782 facsimile o
cifilthautPnapleslaw.com c
www.napleslaw.com N
This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it.is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain information that is confidential or privileged.If this e-mail is V
not addressed to you(or if you have any reason to believe that it is not intended for you),please notify the sender by return e-mail or by telephoning us(collect)at 239-261-9300
and delete this message immediately from your computer.Any unauthorized review,use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing or copying of this e-mail is 0-
strictly
strictly prohibited.Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the law firm. E
O
L
w
rn
.V
J
N
I
Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send W
electronic mail to this entity. Instead,contact this office by telephone or in writing.
tC
a)
_
c)
tC
a)
2
Packet Pg,{90
9 A, .
JohnsonEric
From: Carrie J. Filthaut <cjfilthaut@napleslaw.com>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2016 3:31 PM
To: JohnsonEric
Cc: Carrie Filthaut
Subject: Hamilton Place RPUD
Hi Eric—
a)
I am the President of Andalucia Homeowners' Association and I was at the informational meeting you attended last
week regarding Hamilton Place.
During that meeting WCI agreed to limited the building height to 3 stories of less based on their approved height of 35'. as
However, they indicated that their approved density is 6.6 units per acre.
N
It is my understanding that density is usually based upon neighboring developments. The purpose of this email is to
request that this project be limited to no greater density than the highest maximum density of adjoining neighborhoods, o
N
which would limit it to 6 units per acre to match Arlington Lakes. N
N
I look forward to your response. p
Kind regards,
V
Carrie J. Filthaut
Real Estate Paralegal a.
CHEFFY PASSIDOMO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A.
S TTORNE 5 ST t. 821 5th Avenue South
Naples, FL 34102 °)
d
J
(239) 436-1519 direct N�
(239) 261-9300 telephone
(239) 261-9782 facsimile w
cjfilthaut@napleslaw.com
www.napleslaw.com
C
a)
This e-mail,along with any files transmitted with it,is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)and may contain information that is confidential or privileged.If this e-mail is 2
not addressed to you(or if you have any reason to believe that it is not intended for you),please notify the sender by return e-mail or by telephoning us(collect)at 239-261-9300 )
and delete this message immediately from your computer.Any unauthorized review,use,retention,disclosure,dissemination,forwarding,printing or copying of this e-mail is
strictly prohibited.Please note that any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the law firm.
r
C
a)
t
t)
1
Packet Pg. 91
(Anda eoeld uo;liweH : ti6t'Z) aa.odau pnoo wail swe i - L luauayaelld-:1uewgoe;ld
el:i. .4 , , - - ' --- ' ..- '..- - ''' t.- - ,.. ... - ---:- ' , .,- 574.11' fiiL- CD
_ N
• J
+PI' '
SF t.'M
P I to
i
.0 �' '� 3444._ � # '� � ado
y Jp
si
n, ,�
x e 8W OJ
co
o
cn
al*'''it'' ' ri ,-- .'.;"1.',.... iir. A. 4,„,„ , ...Jr -,,- 4. 1110.' '.4..;.'''' ii' ;
ilr
' 1
r ii . •
• yy{
v
)4014►#1.i,1i1% 1111's1 I " ;- Wit,
}.. ... ... I
*� •` I ._��.-• f 121 to 3
•
,i #� ` ,- I. I _.fit f C -
104,
A,
L . ..,„.
a -..„..,./, �
.,,„
..... „ .,
_, 1
,tea a 1
- :.
-..-
L NGSTON.. �,,.,w,..=s wA
r _. _
..•
r
'.i.
• , wn _ 44 ..?- t1.:+ ',kid~ }` iti)*t ' ;ti ik Y(2,1,) # 1
f , ''''' )''4‘. f s g
.
i
, 'I� . 3 I
.....
,
l
.„
it
ju
,,, 1ra
10, t.
, ..
'
tt t
u " ,.
a1. * i +w" ?
T• 't1 - - It
re
(andel e3eld uo;liweH : ti61Z) aapodaj pno3 wail swa;l - L;uewq e;;d :;uaLugoe;;y
n - y 3 ,l M
I
VcaO r
1.
3 _ „41, .1. • 07-1, 3_ 3 . ... . .. ,,. 0.
-'' '''' ... ' , . ,' 2 1 f ,, , 4:- , ,,,.# d_ ,.„.. ..-, „, 11
r =
' MIL x
$' 1.. * t.._ d
41.4!-' - ' ' - 1), * iii..*:. -..,..1--.- . ,00,s, 2-- (ng L.t,ic'
n
T
.01-,'- ',... ,„'.--,-!tf,, ,. ....0 -7-7,----,,--;-,-,-,?-,-ti,,,--- - , , ,i.,„,,, .„„,,,,. .: k, ,,,, ___
_ -_,,,-, ....,. ..,_ ',.. :1, .... - if II - - - .,_ -_ .-:, .3 ,...'::- -,,,..,' . ., , ';:t,:-.--, 1i. !
y. t -ix -
f
t lt• • • 0 I 1 •..y'•..
w T£ C
• Z
`
i#1.: 0 ap p irlsoti, .... 1,. I ,. „ ¢ii '
. { t i i 4 / _
iimmi
frookomarroisa.--,41110-ftwoork .411661. I t.
Atipsik- t..111111
v" . _ I t- I .,,1.5 -
`� Ir' s .. .,- 1 is
• . , ,_•
...,,,,
1,
. .. .
. . .. .
. , ,
'
, .,, . ,
. . . ..,,,,„,,,,,,.
. :: .,
_.,,, , ,
. iri
I : tt „• -
110-1041111 - "tr. a
I
f �#
1 i'-1,-.4:-.7r.fW ''' ' :
. 1
., r III I "� i tly 1i -:. 2 -
y^ III.
TT
it.Xa +t ,,. }
i9 �
ir '11.0r �.
_.
. .
,
aLugoelly :i.uaLutioellV
j7I
csi)
) ja .iodeuz.ino3 LUOJI sLuall - L lu , -
eid uoli!uieH : 176t.Z .,.....,
(a ndm 00
...,
4.', .
— ,.,
.4)
.. ....„
. . .
.
o ,
-'--- . ___,......*
...
#t
--- 4.
........,
•
.,..,,-
i II
. _
t • S
., .1. ; 1,:•//, 41-1--i•-...... ,
U
---7 ,.... ..
t
.,
, • ,
s, ,
''.
C.)
410 §
I
.7.......4...-7A ..,,,,,,ii.
,--
\
•.-i,L , ..,..
. -„
t,',./,,i,:• •-'—_, — 7,•'
t.t.-e.4%,.. ' ' °IT: ..•ii,..
e. .1
, .,. . .
- s•...,...-',..•' .
,.. ,
, ..„
1‘;',....,,,w' •-,-. -,y..
., .
,.= ,i, i t..
..0, , . -- ( ; .....,t ,
e '", ,....44,4:,..4",4•44',.4":4'4,"." 4
4 if
.S. ;-. 126''
47.77.51,74, •t
.r.
•4111,4 it '
. —
—-47 • —
, .
'-
•
- „
/ — - .i•—•••••1814/01iOW:'
-;,:. ' .7/7••• 2,
- t..
.,.,'.• —7, ,
t•
,,,•'-4/. 7.
_... •
---...-- —
/ , t
,.jr74.7.•,1,,i;''';'1;7
'1..;•tril`;‘4''' '
I
41 4
,..!.:4"..",,-,
....
-._.
._,.. i
....- ,
(andel aoeid uo;1iweH : 17617Z) Je iodeu pnoa woa; SW
a;l - , ;uewyoe�d :;uewyoe;;y
1 if a
aeF ami
w -� t- ate`"-' j ,r ^tom- f*
a.
CD
5 . ........
a-,4-:;a',.'"4,:*•,0(19_1, _
1 ' y
§ _
.
. -tt
t :
1.s -Msem-itV".• ,,4. ::".1.42
'+
NI
3
' ,, ,..-;:,
r ii t *
e i
0 e ,..:
` 4,'''* ` '•y" 'e" ;. ,t 4 I . ..,
4i -i
g 5.Vie` " K - - 1*-1'
.� to +€
•
IAS
i -hit' _ . f
z e�
4
. ,'• .4,„ ,'d 3,
ter: ,
t x
� � f
tg 41
_________
Pea; 1 cou .
o 14, BO
p,/ rv-e,
(
A up
eic,(t. 1.4
si
4Z41
E
/.•
cr)
•ct
CN1
0
•
re 0-
PP L
Pp
) ( pp
K K
E
4e;
A
NT
A
6"k)
e
14P .5e PP
1 ••
411
Co FMNIMTA
Hamilton Place PUD
Adjacent Development Densities
PUD Acres Dwelling Units Density
Arlington Lakes 98.36 590 6
Brynwood Preserve 29.26 170 5.47
Kensington Park 370 570 1.54 0
M
(2, Related Group 39.5 276 6.99 a.
a)
,' Whippoorwill Lakes 76.85 518 6.74Al
a
Whippoorwill Pines 29.54 180 6 c
r
Whippoorwill Woods 83.92 462 5.51
• Summerwind 29.6 368 12.43 ..
Nt
4 Cypress Glenn 29.70 208 7 N
Manchester Square 36.90 148 4 a�
t
Temple Citrus Grove 132.68 512 3.86 a°a)
1r
Oak Grove 131.30 525 4 t
Vineyards 1,930.16 5,608 3.02 ci
E
Citrus Gardens 98.6 396 4.01 0
Wilshire Lakes 246.41 552 2.24 g
m
w
Balmoral 58.95 236 4
r,
Livingston Village 149 590 3.9 e
E
o
ca
r
a
c
Eas
c)
as
a...
December 13,2016 Page 1 of 1
ril Grad Minor
t iia I 2Enef r •14,Rl S01,r,eu P.an nt`r�•1,n64-alt-Nit hitra to
Packet Pg. 97
1 U1 1GU 111 Uy
CO r I.A111r :
18A Monday,November 28,2016 Naples Daily News
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Collier County Planning
Commission at 9:00 A.M.,on Thursday,December 15th,2016,in the Board of County
Commissioners Meeting Room, Third Floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 East
Tamiami Trail, Naples FL.,to consider:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE O.
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 a
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING o
DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING 2
DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS HAMILTON PLACE RPUD TO ALLOW
DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 66 SINGLE-FAMILY AND/OR MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING =
UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SOUTH OF PINE
RIDGE ROAD IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER 'a'
rn
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.75+/- ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN
N
EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ-PL20160001255]
0
fl.
Pine Ridge RD
0
0
1-75
.= E
a. w
0 U)
a Green BLVD E
PROJECT
LOCATION rn '
> .+'
J C
All interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. Copies of the proposed .
ORDINANCE will be made available for inspection at the Collier County Clerk's office, co
fourth floor, Collier County Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, suite 401,
Naples, FL, one week prior to the scheduled hearing.Written comments must be filed
with the Zoning Division,Zoning Services Section,prior to Thursday,December 15th,
a)
2016. E
If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Collier County Planning
Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he will
need a record of that proceeding,and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings is made,which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to
participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of
certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division,
located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-
8380,at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing
impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners Office.
Collier County Planning Commission
Mark Strain, Chairman
November 28,2016 ND-1368601 I I
Packet Pg. 98
(andel aaew uomweH : PM) iapodej pno3 woaj MN! " L luawyaeny :1uewyae;4d
L w C
4I3)
t"' Z w c7 IO W --t
v z � zw = z 0
Lt .k i 3 10 CC w J V Z,
0.
1 �. -€ z w = z O i W w
\
N. w C0 O H m = 1=- o
a, CC w W = E-- >- < p
H = w �- J z W
Nj
w = F- p � J < w Z- ww J
V '' A °° t- >. < p a: c=i� Lu O ¢ = U
\ S' J Z Cl-. Q F- V) 0 F-
. - ¢ = Z ww J t� DC7 Z > Z
c Co 0 w F- _
m � W ww C Ow 0 0)CI o w
. .) m - CC of a ¢ z Q ¢
,� - `� w COwr� F- O J
Z < = L Q `nz F- ¢ ¢
1: ¢ o Q ,-. W aw a
¢ � coQJ w2E � � � m V3
.� ~ci) CO z 11.1~ COwm Lu >Z y,=-
-A.
O 5>< L J
Q co
� F-
NUp Uc 0Z � Zzw - L F- J � L
r = 0Q Oo00Z mO
` =
� 0 wNpwdF..v1-- V D: LL
r:. 1-1- cc F- J 0 LL . z Q p ZJ W
0
•� 0 CL C � u LL. O■.a. :� o w l O o u- W
J o = O
uj
�� ¢ mz '� Ou) J H '° oo ~ ~ W � cA F-
OLo Q O `moi N
orw V QO = c Uz O � O HO
V; o F- C O Ci) m Z >" J W
0 co Q = ¢rit E Zwcc 0
o Jw w O � !C)!L
m O � F-
E Z Q CC cwn w CC m 'a :Q }O = 0wC� U 0 `` 0° O 0O Q CD a13
mF- ~▪ �1.11 O F-
-Lu •
¢ pw ¢ .:6t>'1/4.1
O Z
a e. l 'a co> W � 0 w �'?` z � � Z ¢ U O
Q� oQ CUUJQ = Oz ~ Q � � o � m �
F-- w
C , z , cc - < 0 0 � zzm o• 0 O
ic:Cw -' < wF Q ►- W pJ Li
`„ < 0 °:1 -0,- m0 CC � m W wz D
up z �--- a- O �, re o O W
< I- W p -� LL ;'. o 0 X w 1-
o z F- 0=
05 Ili W pZ `� No ~ 0_ J
? � oO = w �O `J OJ O ~ a
J N z 1- E- w I- li `�' u c� F'" ZCO
• z � � w a 0 I. z � W � Z O 1
OU O O � Z `m zW H zS W
O wz O Z , Co wm 0 )
Z Z = w cnz O +� N o � > ` � c Q
co F— E-- = O P. J 2 W J
cu p f_ ��- w co O -�-�� F ¢ W a i
-, , O U J w J Ln = Z <
111 0a03 O
a. ce m z1• o ZC0 ~ C f: co O
CU tom, C
Z Q ,� C in w w O >- L
V hi
ra c O m = on
J >-
0= m a- Cr) d E Q- 0 <
C o cv w O �- a) cv am
cCD "1-3 L O Z
U z1
Q m Z CC
(afd2a3eId uo4IivaeH : �61�Z) iecoda2pno uoal swell - L luauay°e;;b :;uauayoe;;d ,,
_
0
4sw '< �`� W t-
Vi 0 L _-.. a
i
j ¢ Ow
zW Q 0 t
3 2 �.
W0 57._/5
.a W I-. > _� J
NCID- Q Ei F- > ce
J
Q Z < cr Z � a W
\ c � O 0 = U
<+Jv) z > z
�` mEr W wQ
21 m Et o �
a
� �0 � W
Za ww Q
kic Q-- W`' ir- Q coZO { - WQ� a
4`
C 0 t-1 IY m m I
Q IC: zJ co
W Q
k' '3 0E- � � o
Cr Qp
O 0
W
� O ~NUU
oOOZ CY OJ UW �
IoW °- aF--
•.... C orcf Z
fa.- zc5 a M „ w
Q Ocr -JL <
1.... _'J
USOO =w - f- Le CO 1-p
W d r . c�".) c -- O ° O F-
11=1101111 Eo \ zoQ cnw --�
"0 Q d O ¢mtn X00 ~
13
= Cr. - m0E- W ill
� O =
CDs- 0H0 _Z SOY Z
ICC ZLJ
QU
LLlF-
O m M m 0 ce
F--
� °- O
Mm W oz LI
CD
-
M-
C- = W 0O W
N . z w W
U O
Z -±, m W `nz 0
W ~ Z . W
r Og Ei > a wm o
CD :-, O ~ W J
a i_ Q of a.
ce
cu v � z Q J
cej
_ Cwo O a
CD CD N �-
CO C a) a, o z
ai E c U Q
Z ce
9A8
Ji
o Battu
NaplesNews.cor
Published Daily
Naples,FL 34110
Affidavit of Publication
State of Florida
Counties of Collier and Lee 0
a
Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Daniel McDermott who on oath says that IY
he serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News,a daily newspaper published at Naples,in Collier Coun- 23
ty,Florida;distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida;that the attached copy of the advertising was published tv
in said newspaper on dates listed. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published -
at Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published c
in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as
second class mail matter at the post office in Naples,in said Collier County,Florida,for a period of one year next pre- E
ceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid =
nor promised any person,or corporation any discount,rebate,commission or refund for the purpose of securing this ..
advertisement for publication in the said newspaper. ‘t'
c)
v.
Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.#
BCC/ZONING DEPARTMENT 1368601 PUBLIC HEARING 45-172052 c
w
to
V
Pub Dates
November 28,2016 C
z
To
aT
as
J
co
C
a)
E
.0
V
2
r
Zi
Jr
C
w
E
t
CU
t0
Qr
2 I otAfr-el) lei e,"-r.
(Sign ure of affiant)
— — — — — — — — — — —
Sworn to and subscribed before me sir"Y:k,, IVONNE GORI
This Decembe Ol,2016 irt,lsNotary Public-State of Florida
jc ;;
Commission s FF 900=
My Comm.Expires Jul 16.2019
,, • W.00 Bonded through National Notary Assn.
(Signatur of affiant) '
Packet Pg. 101
9.A.8
MMA Monday.November 28.2016 Nat>tas Daily News
Army's advance in Aleppo "
displaces thousands
C Rebel defenses collapse Syrian state TV broadcast a vide.,Sat-
mday showing a teary reunion between a
before govemment attack soldier and his family after nearly five
E years apart according tothe report.tt said PHILIP!SSA ASSOCIATED PRESS the family had been trapped in Malsakem
Haan. I AWE YOUR
tv Thousands of residents fled Sunday The Lebanese Al-Manar TV channel re- MOTHER-IN-LAW
0. amid simultaneous advances by Syrian ported from the neighborhood Sunday -
C) CD government and Kurdish-led forces into morning,showing workers and soldierst A modern introit from Wilson Lighting
Q Z eastern Aleppo clearing debris against a backdrop of gumuntml to imp all your giants.Latus
Rebel defenses collapsed as govern- bombed-out buildings on both sides of a 1040 you prep tor thr holdups today(
('J) mein forces pushed IMO the city's Sakhour wide thoroughfare.Al-Mahar is operated
C neighborhood,coming within about half a by Hezbollah,the Lebanese militant group
Q mile of commanding a corridor in eastern aligned with the Syrian government
C W Aleppo for the first time since rebels The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic
N = swept into the city a 2012,according to Forces'advance into Busted al-Lsasha
Syrian state media and the Syrian Obser- dealt the opposition a further blow.
votaryH
y forllamas Rights monitoring Rebels and opposition figures have
in Q U group. long accused the SDF and its predecessor
d ....i Kurdish-led forces operating whom- groups of conspiring with the government
a. DD m mously of the rebels and the government, to quash a nationwide revolt. 515,I9-5
63Q , = meanwhile,seized the Bosun al-Basha Araj denied there was any coordination
!1�
neighborhood in northern Aleppo,allow- between government and Kurdish-let NAPLES•2165 Trade Coto,homy-2395926006 I t� _
Z Z Q O. ing thousands of civilians to flee the deli. forces,
SPRINGS-3133 Renavaxcr Blvd-239.94-9000
No.,Ls-Thu.rd,9 to 6•Filoy 9u 5 i Saturday 10 to y
mated district,according to Ahmad Hiso ' were responding to calls fmmresi-
Araj,anofFtcialwith theSyrias Democrat- dents in Boston al-Bashto secure the a rt s ns tri.tit(„.1 au I r r.n 1 t•rt M
is Forces. neighborhood.”he said.He&Wedthe SDF Q.
i-. The government's push,backed by had entered the area)windily as rebel mil-
U) thousands of Shute militia fighters from damsfled -......„,,i IY
0 Lebanon,Iran and Iran,and under the oc- Aleppo used to be Syria's largest city -. ( PLANTATION cu
C casiaal cover oftheRusaian air force,has and commercecapitalbefae its neighbor- UM aw�a
C laid waste to Aleppo's eastern neighbor- hoods were devastated by the country's ter law i.
took and trapped some 250.0[10 people. more than five-Year-long civil war xr No k :x SH UTTERS ca
N Food supplies are running perilously The UN's child agency warned Sun- ter. r
n low,the U.N.warned Thursday and a re- day that nearly 500,000 children were now — = — 1 Q.
Modem air assault by government forces living under siege in Syria,cm off from m ARE C
has damaged or destroyed every hospital food and medical aid,mostly in areas un- 0
L: in the arra der government control.That figure has _ JUST T H E
Q) � Residents m east Aleppo said m dic doubled in less than a year. - i=_
fn -- -Q tressed messages an social media that Many are now spending their days ton- _ 1 2 BEGINNING
thousands of people were fleeing to the derground, as hospitals, schools and •E
O — -U city's government-controlled western homes remain vulnerable to aerial bom- -
neighborhoods,away from the govern- bardment
• U meet's merciless assault,or deeper into "Children are being killed and injured, Ptamation Shutters I Binds&Snaoes=Hurricane Fabric I Impact Windows&Doors I
-o N 0 opposition-held eastern Aleppo. too afraid to go to school or even play,our- Exterior Bahamas&Colonials 1 Roadown&Accordion Shutters ,,
Q Q "The situation in besieged Aleppo(k) viving with little food and hardly any Visit our Showroom Today or Call to Schedule Your Its-Home Estdmate
very very bad,thousands of eastern rest- medicine,"Labe."This
is
ytoDmec-
dents are moving to the western side of the tor Anthony lake."This is noway in live—city,"said Khaled Khatib,a photographer and too many are dying." , 'f Save$300 d'
for the Syrian Civil Defense search-and- Activists also reported civilian casual-mtirn `�� 1S0 sora t or of
more v
rescue group,also known as the White ties Sunday from apresumed goyenen[ of Ramon,shame
Helmets or Russian airstrdte on a village outside - - harem ado ante
"Aleppo is going to die,"he posted on Aleppo. of estimate. _
Twitter. The Local Coordination Committees ay,ys,a_i- coanaaeeo,vO rd
C Syrian state media reported govern- activist network in Syria reported 15 civil- iVif NAPLES_SHUTTER artsotersp
O
mens forces had seized the Jabal Badro fans killed i,aRussian lledby the the oil. ,„ ;Y- www.napl esshutter.com F"""'"'"6
th neighborhood and entered Sakhour Sum- lege of the ,controlled by the opposi- +'a
CV day after it took control of the Masaken tion in the western Aleppo countryside, 1025 Power St.,Naples,FL 34104 1 Mon-Fri 8:30am-SCIOpm O
Hanan neighborhood Saturdayand tens of others wounded. C.)
✓ Os
O X
CO U NOTICE EA
CO NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE 0
COQ Q ALLERGIES? Z
_ Notice is given that a Ws will be the Cosier County Planning
P Z M Commission at9:D0 AM.,on Thursday,December 1Sth,2016,in the Board of County Q
Commissioners Meeting Room,Third Floor,Collier Government Center,3299 East )ASTHMA?
ETanana Trail,Naples FL,to consider. d
HEADACHES? COUNTYNFLORIDAA AMENDINGCE OF THE ORDINANCE D OF NO,COMMISSIONERS004.41-AS AMEND COWER
t
N Z COLDER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CODE. WHICH A THE CO
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF +s
COWER COUNTY FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS
-0 a. MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN
E C >. DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL(A)ZONING E
2 I— DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT(RPUD)ZONING
t_ W A bliti1111311116�T DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS HAMILTON PLACE RPUD TO ALLOW .0
Z G) 6 O ` DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 66 SINGLE-FAMILY AND/OR MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING V
-6 to) N 0 UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED EAST OF LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SOUTH OF PINE
Q C Cl) 0
(((''���\ RIDGE ROAD IN SECTION 18.TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST,COWER
-�E L:\..._. EFFECTIVET FLORIDA CONSISTING OF 9Jsa/-ACRES:AND BY PROVIDING AN ..
DATE(PUOZ-PL2016000125.51 d.Q
I CO
Additional Services lnclude LCensed&Insured C
cU
.AJC CleaningAir Handler Cleaningfor your Dro action! Pne Ridge RD
' aCAC1816190 E
•Sanitizing*Duct Repairs MYSR51•MRSA75
I*Certified Mold Removal s l-5 v
CD
L*Before&After Inspection
.*State-of-the-Art Uv Purification
1 a °a"•w Q
♦/� vao4esr F-'
W Systems women p i
I •
0 Lowest Pace F R E E rr1 rt
AR interested parties are invited to appear and be heard. codes of the proposed
N Ever! A ORDINANCE w6 be made available for vlepectim at me Collier County Gerle's office,
trifourth floor Collier County Government Center(3299 East Tamiam Tad suite 401,
,,��ww cc Naples.FL,one week poor to a scheduled hea ng.Witten comment sit be filed
+-� E CO �P`*9911 Mold ;i I web the Zoning Dimon.Zoning Sery les Section,prior to Thursday.December 15th,
�] N :i Inspection �`J r `' ,K m 2016.
tit Sam (Reg. .i Wlth Ni1N R a person.decides to appeal any decision reads by the Collier County Planning
yr I
Re t1, Commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing,he WI
�j � Unlimitedii Cou on p��S, v` need a record of that proceeding,and for such purpose he may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceeding.s made,which record induces the testimony and
y Vents! 99} Only. k, evidence upon wish the appeal o tc be based.
�� ;(includes 1 main;; w,m aoaeaara.oyt i j ,�itf,,v _ R you are a person with a disability avho noels any accommodation n oma to
participate-n this proceeding.you are emitted.at no coat to you,to the provision of
�& Q, &Return} ;' i i t certain assistance-Please contact the Collier County Facikbea Management Division,
tz: 4 O re 11011 ce;p CON.4 a t f.7 t�t 9 locates at 3335 Tamami Trail East,Sate 101,Naples,FL 34112-5356,(2391 252-
j.El� € 8380 at least two days prior to bre meeting.Assisted listening devices for the hearing
252-
r;I,
To I I Free: 888-458-9428 mpaaed are availabb m the soars of Carly Commissioners Dints.
"!^� Collier County Planning Commission
Mark Strain,Chairman
tilt, 1/r�� Naples: 239-530-0�J�j 104 Noyemoer 28.2016 ND-1368601
Virrint
MK V
C
1at 2 Packet Pg. 102
941
Petition No. PUDZ-PL20160001255
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE FOR PROVIDING INDIVIDUAL MAIL
NOTICE TO AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS
1. I hereby certify that pursuant to Subsections 10.03.05.B.8 and
10.03.05.B.10 of the Collier County Land Development Code, I did give
notice of the public hearing before the Collier County Planning
a.
Commission scheduled for December 15, 2016 by U.S. mail to the
as
affected property owners at the addresses provided to me by the Collier co
a.
County Property Appraiser's Office on November 23, 2016. A copy of
the list of addresses from the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office E
x
is attached to this Affidavit. ••
N
2. Copies of the letters mailed to the affected property owners are attached to
0
this Affidavit. 03
0
Dated this day of ,L/ //�2016.
a)
as
op
d} �
co
Sig a re Q
(( 551.
Pnnt Nameco
a
Pnnt Title
I of
Packet Pg. 103
9A:8'
STATE OF FLORIDA )
) ss
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
DBEFORE ME. a duly authorized notary of the State of Florida, personally appeared
Crit t S � ,who is personally known to me or produced Iv
) (fI'1se as identification, and under oath stated that the above is true and correct
and to the best of his/her knowledge.
DATED this 3 day of i0einnC.r.r ,2016. w
/ J c
�f o
`G��aO‘DIAAf04,OGNotary, State of Florida
SION4 ,i
�� � ► i`a mond
*• ''. '*• = Notary Printed Name
$ WFF998114 `,�
a .
o9o••44iatS�O•• . �� c
•
„. iclsi-NN
My commission expires: U
co0
z
d
J
C
a)
E
.0
V
t0
C
d
E
wo
w
2 oft
Packet Pg. 104
COLLIER COUNTY
Growth Management Department
November 23, 2016
Dear Property Owner:
This is to advise you that because you may have interest in the proceedings or you own property located within 500 feet
(urban areas) or 1,000 feet (rural areas) of the following described property, that a public hearing will be held by the Collier
County Planning Commission at 9:00 A.M., on December 15, 2016,in the Board of County Commissioners meeting room,
third floor, Collier Government Center, 3299 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL., to consider:
An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as
amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the G
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 Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Residential
Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for the project known as Hamilton Place RPUD to allow development of
up to 66 single-family and/or multi-family dwelling units on property located east of Livingston Road and south of Pine Ridge a
Road in Section 18, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 9.75+/- acres; and by c
providing an effective date. [PUDZ-PL20160001255]
E
You are invited to appear and be heard at the public hearing. You may also submit your comments in writing.
v
NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK v
ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10 MINUTES TO N.
SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN. PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC c
MATERIALS INCLUDED IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM OF 10 DAYS o
PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE, WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE a
CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE COUNTY STAFF MEMBER NOTED BELOW,A MINIMUM
OF SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC
WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE Z
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE. ifs
m
-J
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Collier County Planning Commission will need a record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which
record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, m
at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management a
Department, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two days ..
r
prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available in the Board of County Commissioners d
Office. E
t
This petition, and other pertinent information related to this petition, is kept on file and may be reviewed at the Growth
Management Department building located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. Please contact the staff
member noted below at (239)-252-2931 to set up an appointment if you wish to review the file.
Sincerely,
Eric L. Johnson,AICP, CFM,LEED Green Associate
Principal Planner
Packet Pg. 105
(andel a3eId uo;iivaeH : P6PZ) suol;e3!Ji;oN ie6ai - 8;uaimipel4d :;uauay3e;1b
to 0
d z a ®11111111 II1111® flim® - Y
;u m O U
os
g,3 0 LL N G .1. ¢ 11�1�' b °-
.NO H1HV30000
„7 ��,i° oeoc
°88 80,,
e.Nr wournu3zrwz P
I 8w D
_ °woo /'1
,�...$, ® � r , \ n.
w8� � a o CO
CL n 4k
4 04'41 r
o
0 — R-;- ~ liala — C
n —f- <8 8 Z0
7 ''j 'e_ 1 a
J=::
_ I— .4—
La mil LO
in
o i o a N
a x
W Q ug V CO O
du lal
) J ..,. w O V
r 2 ,2-2 .222 9, e'2 . . . GF '• )t�2 N1--).
i m
H
E O
I fl r,," S = 6
y _ v Lo
; � N
CO
7 ‘....„-;:r1 `.. -- a-:, o
L{) N
I.
I
N
2
4 UO�S6U.. , -F-, o
CO N
—-l
7/ 0 0 -
0 a)
I— Z m
;t ,, / 0 v p J ami
C) W H CC
— V —
51 a O 0
�, CD 2
C
N G J 6U!alnd-p.aoda!y a 1-5
E
U
O
0
-9.AA9
Other Public Notices Other Publ cNotice
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE
Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, January 24,2017, in the
Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Third Floor,
Collier Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples FL.,
the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) will consider the
enactment of a County Ordinance. The meeting will commence
at 9:00 A.M.The title of the proposed Ordinance is as follows:
The purpose of the hearing is to consider:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004- a
41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT n
CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING a
REGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER tY
COUNTY, FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE d
ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING THE ZONING c)
co
CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY
N FROM A RURAL AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT TO A n'
p RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING a
DISTRICT FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS HAMILTON PLACE RPUD
TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 66 SINGLE-FAMILY AND/ E
a- OR MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED
m EAST OF LIVINGSTON ROAD AND SOUTH OF PINE RIDGE ROAD Z
a IN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER ••
aJ COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9.75+/- ACRES; AND BY
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PUDZ-PL20160001255] o)
A copy of the proposed Ordinance is on file with the Clerk to the d
m Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are w
invited to attend and be heard.
A N
o NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must 0
register with the County manager prior to presentation of as
`' the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be 13
c
Z, limited to 3 minutes on any item. The selection of any individual
.a to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. a
a )
If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or Q
0 organization may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item. •
v
a+ Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in Q
the Board agenda packets must submit said material a minimum ii
z of 3 weeks prior to the respective public hearing. In any case,
written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall
i be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of �;
seven days ptior to the public hearing. All materials used in c
presentations before the Board will become a permanent part a)
of the record.
t
Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board 0 co,,
will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and Q
therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is based.
If you are a person with adisabilitywho needs any accommodation
in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at
no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please
contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division,
located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 101, Naples, FL 34112-
5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two days prior to the meeting.
Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available
in the Board of County Commissioners Office.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA
DONNA FIALA,CHAIRMAN
DWIGHT E.BROCK,CLERK
By: Ann Jennejohn
Deputy Clerk(SEAL)
January 4,2017 No. 1424132
Packet Pg. 107
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME—FIRST NAME—MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY,OR COMMITTEE
Saunders, Burt Collier County Board of County Commissioners
MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 300 WHICH I SERVE ISAUNIT OF:
CITY COUNTY ' 0 CITY ItfCOUNTY 0 OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
Naples Collier NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED Collier County
January 24, 2017 MY POSITION IS: of ELECTIVE 0 APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of
interest under Section 112.3143,Florida Statutes.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143 FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on
a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained
(including the parent, subsidiary, or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained);to the special private gain or loss of a
relative;or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies(CRAs)under
Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited
from voting in that capacity.
For purposes of this law, a"relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law.A"business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner,joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder(where the shares of the corporation
are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange).
♦ ! f M t • ♦ 4 • k rt M t Y t k
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above,you must disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are
abstaining from voting;and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting,who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise
participating in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision,
whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
• You must complete and file this form(before making any attempt to influence the decision)with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting,who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2)
CE FORM 86-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 1
Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
• A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
• The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
• You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating.
• You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting,who must incorporate the form in the minutes.A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the
agency,and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
Burt Saunders hereby disclose that on January 24, 20 17
(a)A measure came or will come before my agency which(check one or more)
inured to my special private gain or loss;
_ inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, ;
my former clients, including Orange Tree Utility its principals and affiliates
inured to the special gain or loss of , by
whom I retained; or -,,2 ails No hwy.- /2/ors/04 (loto/ J fr,CU /%7 41 i, �y
enfp /-�✓'� m ' -,ats N./ ?'Df ina4J `�
inured to the special gain os of7 � ,which
is the parent subsidiary, or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me.
(b)The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
On January 24, 2017, BCC Agenda Item 9B, the Board will consider a recommendation to approve by resolution
an integration agreement incorporating the terms of the settlement of a lawsuit against Orange Tree Utility
Company, Orange Tree Utility Associates and related parties and to approve the transfer documents required to
transfer water and wastewater assets to the County. I will abstain from voting on this item pursuant to Sections
112.3143 and 286.012, Fla. Stat. to avoid any perceived prejudice or bias as I previously represented Orange
Tree Utility Company, its principals and affiliates in this matter.
If disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attorneys, a public officer,
who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way
as to provide the public with notice of the conflict.
,/ f/d.:17
January 24, 2017
Date Filed Signature
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED$10,000.
CE FORM 85-EFF. 11/2013 PAGE 2
Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.