Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Ex-parte - Taylor 07/11/2017
Ex parte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 07/11/17 Board of Zoning Appeals 8.A. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex-parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Judith S. Palay and 92 other property owners within the Cocohatchee Bay Neighborhood Communities, filed an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals of the administrative approval of building separations, building widths, building dwelling units, and building heights in the Site Development Plan Amendment SDPA-PL20160002242 for Kalea Bay aka Kinsale Condominium Phases Il-VI. The subject property is located at the northwest and northeast corners of Wiggins Pass Road and Vanderbilt Drive in Sections 8, 16, 17 and 20, Township 48 South and Range 25 East, in Collier County, Florida. [PL20170002165] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls Meetings: Met on Wednesday, February 22, 2017 with Judi Palay and Diane Rupnow and on Tuesday, April 18, 2017 met with Diane Rupnow, Pat Bonser, Carl and Marilyn Stendhal, Barb and Mike Taylor, Peggy Ross and from Glen Eden on the Lakes; Jim and Kitty Shaw from Tarpon Cove; and Lou De Prisco and Dick Wilson from Arbor Trace. Brad Schiffer and Donna Reed Caron. Emails: Judi Palay, Diane Rupnow, & other members of the Cocohatchee Bay community, various constituents from the above mentioned communities on Kalea Bay and various personnel at the County Calls: Received telephone calls from former staff members Correspondence: Received a letter from Donna Reed Caron dated July 3, 2017 OVeC • GrecoSherry From: Fred Schuman <fs@jndmech.com> retSent: Monday, July 10, 2017 1:07 PM e Al To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Josh Willard (Josh.willard@manhattanconstruction.com); Nate Farnsworth Subject: Re; Petitioned opposition of Kalea Bay Tower 2 permit application Attachments: To Collier County Commissioners.docx Dear sir and madam Please review the attached abbreviated summery documenting J&D Mechanical's historical Kalea Bay man power activity. Thank you in advance for your consideration during the opposition deliberation process. Thanks Fred R Schuman Cell 239.770.2828 Office 239.288.5834 Email link fs@Indmech.com President J&D Mechanical LLC. CMC 1249359 The information contained in this email message, including all attached documents, is intended only for the professional /personal and confidential use of the designated recipients named above and may contain information that is legally privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, please be advised that any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. Anyone who receives this message in error should notify the sender immediately and delete it from his or her computer. J&D Mechanical LLC. 5021 Luckett Rd Fort Myers FL 33905 To: Collier County Commissioners. From:J&D Mechanical LLC. Re: Petitioned opposition of Kalea Bay Tower 2 permit application. AS the Mechanical Contractor for both Manhattan and CR Smith any opposition to permitting is Extremely Concerning for many reasons but our immediate concern is for our employees and their families. Below is data to illustrate the financial impact of not permitting Tower 2 on our small businesses employees, using Tower 1 as a benchmark given that tower 2 is very similar. Tower 2 activity for MEP trades was anticipated to begin on or about 12/1/17, listed are hours for J&D fulltime Kalea Bay field employees and our fabrication facility employees, whose times is also applied to Kalea activity's as shop, the applied hours stated are from our job costing data from 6/1/16 thru 5/31/17 to provide clear time line of 1 full year of activity for reference clarity. Please note that appropriate pay scale with full benefits including family health insurance applies to all full-time employees. • Over the 12-month time line above we posted 51,085 field applied hours or(25 full time employees) Tower 1. • Over the 12-month time line above we posted 13,637 shop applied hours or(7 full time employees)for pre fabrication, packaging and delivery from our fabrication facility to Tower 1. • Tower 1 alone employed 32 full time employees for referenced duration. Additional activity over the 12-month time line above we posted 21,873 hours, this time was applied to out-building facilities structures or additional(10 full time employees)for same referenced duration. Business office operations staff employed by J&D Mechanical to facilitate pre-construction planning through current activity for approximately 30 months to date, staff includes Management, project coordinator, estimators, cad-draftsmen, clerical and accounting. we have applied 3,500 business staff hours conservatively to date. Going forward activity for J&D Mechanicals service department upon completion of Tower 1 and out building facilities will include Service management, service technicians, dispatch and clerical for warranty repair service, 3 years contractually, 4,000 hours. Additional anticipated activity is preventative maintenance, this will employ minimally 1-2 full time employees initially to preform preventive maintenance tasks and none-warranty service to building 1 and it's 120 residences, common areas and out building facilities. Upon completion of Kalea Bay development the preventative maintenance and service tasks will employ 3-5 full time employees,potentially for the life of the structures. I hope that I have provide you with real world insight of how significantly Kalea tower 2 and this first-Class Development in its entirety is in supporting local small business as ours and their working-class families. J&D Mechanical is only 1 of hundreds of businesses this Development will financially impacts directly and/or indirectly today and for many years to come. Thank You Fred Schuman/President J&D Mechanical Nathen Farnsworth/Vice President J&D Mechanical GrecoSherry From: Nancy Farnsworth <nancy@acresplumbing.com> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 3:38 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: Kalea Bay Project Attachments: 20170710151854.pdf Dear Commissioners: Please find attached signatures from 22 of our staff who work construction in Collier County and many who live in the county. Several have worked directly on the Kalea Bay project and are scheduled to work on the upcoming building 2. If the Kalea Bay Project is halted or delayed due to the protesters against this already approved building, we will have to lay people off. Please stand strong against those few part time residents who are against this project. Nana' Nancy P.Farnsworth Vice President Acres&Son Plumbing, Inc. Serca Management, LLC 239-597-5031 239-597-3740 fax 1 Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala a(�colliergov.net AndySoliscolliergov.net BurtSaunders(a colliergov.net PennyTaylor@colliergov.net BilIMcDaniel(a colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincer'y, Signature Print Name Address Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala(a�colliergov.net AndySolis(a�colliergov.net BurtSaunders(c�colliergov,net PennyTaylor a(7colliergov.net BiilMcDaniel(a�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincere rfy Signature Print Name 3—/O onTh Address Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala a(�colliergov.net AndySolis aC�colliergov.net BurtSaunders(a colliergov.net PennyTaylorcolliergov.net BillMcDaniel(�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, Signature L J c.+. en 1-I '7'E'S Print Name Address i,, 3 4,/,-7 Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala aC�colliergov.net AndySolisna colliergov.net BurtSaundersna colliergov.net PennvTaylor(c�colliergov.net BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, ./ A110 l On Signa e 16t Print Name BOOP LA) Address eaki rPc --/p6,s Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFialana colliergov.net AndySolis@colliergov.net BurtSaunders(a colliergov.net PennyTaylor@colliergov.net BillMcDaniel a(�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely,Signature e/cmc //c rr2i lk-t Print Name ( 76! </S11 $ fi Address lloy1/-es Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFialacolliergov,net AndySoliscolliergov.net BurtSaundersCa colliergov.net PennyTaylor@collierdov.net BillMcDaniel colliergov,net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, t r) 'Ram.trtn— Signature Print Name kao Jd IC�� c-is Address Prig, Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala@colliergov.net AndySolis(c�colliergov.net BurtSaunders@colliergov.net PennyTaylor a(�colliergov.net BillMcDaniel(c�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, -§41445 ikG/e5- 17k/e•X Print Name g OIC °2-7 Si- S 61 Address Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala(a�colliergov.net AndySolis(a colliergov.net BurtSaunders(a colliergov,net PennyTaylor(a�colliergov.net BillMcDaniel(c�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against he opposition who are do not want this project built. in#1. Signayre ko puL5 Chck. iAick) Print Name 20.81 McLAv \\ kN) \\cI- Address (&)) 1 k Ck. kti \ . So I sH Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFialana colliergov.net AndySolis@colliergov,net BurtSaunders(a colliergov.net PennyTaylor ancolliergov.net BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, Signat e Print Name t3o'-i 4f lei. r Address fe-v-tC" //ares f i '336)34 Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala(c�colliergov.net AndySolis(a�colliergov.net BurtSaunders(c�colliergov.net PennyTaylor(u�col liergov.net BillMcDaniel(a�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, u Signature Print Name S)O t Ss-4-41 S 5 Address Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala@colliergov.net AndySolis(c�col liergov.net BurtSaunders(a colliergov.net PennyTaylorcoliiergov.net BillMcDaniel(a�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sin - -ly, nu. Sign., re - `r e S A c.c.CT G-6 Print Name 'fir r M. vv. 04-v E Address Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFialaacolliergov.net AndySolis@,colliergov.net BurtSaundersna colliergov,net ; PennyTaylor@,colliergov.net BillMcDanielcolliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerer i / ssisi %I/ice Signature 171/9 I P-fAx- S: Print Name 30 ( s7 Address 1 a c �� � lk .14 Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala a�?colliergov.net AndySolis(a�colliergov.net BurtSaunders@colliergov.net PennyTaylorcolliergov.net BillMcDaniel(a�colliergov,net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. S i n 40r —--.._ Ir `'isnature ce7 /aniii s/ Print Name / /030 Address / vv•-\--C\ S r-`k by rL 3/3 ; Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala@colliergov.net AndySolis(c�colliergov.net BurtSaunders(a,colliergov.net PennyTavlorc colliergov.net BillMcDaniel(c colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, Signature r Print Name Address Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala©colliergov.net AndySolis(a�colliergov.net BurtSaundersCa�colliergov.net Pen nyTaylor(a�colliergov.net BitlMcDaniel(c�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. &(,\/ ty Si• - or/ 1) ir-e 2--6) fTk2iccJ Ad ress 1 fL4i( Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFialaAcolliergov,net AndySolisAcolliergov.net BurtSaunders(c�colliergov.net PennyTaylor ancolliergov.net BjllMcDaniel p(�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Since frir ure Prin I ame 07-6 441 11`16 Addres` Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 Don na Fiala(a�col liergov,net AndySolis(a�colliergov.net BurtSaunders@a,colliergov.net Pen nyTaylorcolliergov.net BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood andmy family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Si cerely, 115-Inat. e -11) n16761 Print Name VIOL M\11 Add, �Li �31 g- Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala(@,colliergov.net AndySolis@colliergov.net BurtSaunders aC�colliergov.net PennyTaylorCc�colliergov.net BilLMcDaniel@colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may .-rmitted buildingat Kalea Bay is not allowed to be adversely be affected i the already , bui Please stand fir against the opposition who are do not want this project built. ll I �`.eirely, 0 • 4ff : /i ir ii 1 to I i f) ' A 1' atureI/44We ��� 'tint Name A.dres-j ) Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala aC�colliergov.net AndySolis@colliergov.net BurtSaundersc colliergov.net PennyTaylor@a,colliergov.net BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, / / ' .. J_ , ,c- Signature jr7" (--09i p 42_0 z orc�Zr Print ame //113 P wi1/srLe CoV C/7=7 Z Address JVgpLes ;, 31/113 I i Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala( colliergov.net AndySolis(a�col liergov.net BurtSaundersCc�colliergov.net PennyTaylor agcolliergov.net BillMcDaniel(c�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sinc ely, ,ehir ( / 4r,--- Signature Pedro MO 4ClIvo Print Name (0 01 cx( y i-ko 11 ou L V\ Address < 1 i I i Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala a(�colliergov.net AndySolis(a�colliergov.net BurtSaunderscolliergov.net PennyTaylor@colliergov.net BillMcDaniel(a)colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Si cerely,., Sig. re 11 • Cs, 40 f--\ ,2101S0 Print Name 2. g 5-LOA dr s Collier County Board of County Commissioners 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 DonnaFiala@colliergov.net AndySglis(a�colliergov.net BurtSaunders(a�colliergov,net PennyTavlor@colliergov.net BilIMcDaniel(a�colliergov.net RE: Hearing regarding the continued construction at Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners: I work in the construction industry in Collier County. My livelihood and my family may adversely be affected if the already permitted building at Kalea Bay is not allowed to be built. Please stand firm against the opposition who are do not want this project built. Sincerely, Signature Print Name v7 l -C-c..-Coltaftik a(- Address 5D,o, eAi / .S J�GG�✓ s czr¢ 31-/jar' GrecoSherry From: Karen Laureano <KLaureano@allenconcrete.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 8:26 AM To: McDanielBill; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Cc: Chris Allen; Susie Allen; Katie Wallace Subject: Kalea Bay Project Attachments: Kalea Bay.pdf Gentlemen and ladies: Please see attached letter from Mr.Allen in reference to the Kalea Bay project. Thank you, CCONCileNciiE MASONRY . KarenLaureano 6301 Shirley Street Naples, FL 34109 239.566.1661 Ext. 216 239.254.8515 Fax klaureano@allenconcrete.com www.allenconcrete.com 1 GrecoSherry From: Inga Lodge <inga@kaleabay.com> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 3:15 PM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.neT; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; SolisAndy; FialaDonna Subject: Kalea Bay To Collier County Commissioners: It is with great disappointment that I have heard there is to be a hearing on the future status of Kalea Bay. I am currently the Broker at the sales office at Kalea. We have had to deal with the harassment of many names on this list. They enter the sales office and complain we have illegally started building,they loudly complain we don't have permits etc. They do this in front of customers. Diane Rupnow even started a web page that we had our legal department shut down. Out of the 120 condo's in Tower 100, 60% are new buyers to Naples. They have the same dream as everyone else that would like to make Naples home. They have had plenty of opportunities to purchase in other existing high rises and chose to wait for Kalea Bay. There is nothing that says financial stability in Collier County then starting a high rise community. The last high-rise to be completed was Moraya Bay in 2009. Our new buyers are majority cash buyers paying an average of$1,800,000 to live at Kalea. Naples is poised to have a 4.9% increase in Economic Growth in the next year. How does that happen if a few people can dictate what can and can't be built? It seems that the citizens have more power than the Collier County Commissioners. The Commissioners that we vote for. 80% of our new residents at Kalea Bay are not homestead, that means these new homeowners will pay the highest property tax. That will be over $2,160,000 in property tax paid a year just on Tower 100! Of the list of 93 names presented for the appeal are you aware that 29% of the people on the list are not full- time residents? They can not vote for the County Commissioners, but they are allowed to dictate whether 300 full-time residents continue to work in North Naples. We are not just building the Kalea Bay community, we are building FOR THE COMMUNITY, for those people that work and live in North Naples. Thank you for your attention on this matter. Warm Regards, INGA W. LODGE BROKER/VP SALES & MARKETING 13910 Old Coast Rd Naples, FL. 34110 (o)239.793.0110(c)239.560.1171 Wilson&Associates Exclusive listing agent KALEA 0 1 GrecoSherry From: Andy Cathey <acathey@rosenmaterials.com> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 7:58 AM To: McDanielBill;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Subject: Kalea Bay Phase 2 To the Collier County Commissioners, I have been a resident of Collier County since 1987 and part of the Construction industry since 1989. It has come to my attention that there is some opposition to the 2"d phase of Kalea Bay. My company, Rosen Materials, supplies building materials and supplied Kalea Bay Phase 1. During that time we added additional employees that have supported Collier County in many other areas. I am concerned with any decision to stop this project as it will continue to provide our employees (currently at 32) continued employment. The construction industry as well as SW Florida have been through some very tough times in recent years and it is encouraging to see and be part of a positive outlook and growing economy. Thank you for your time! Andy Cathey Regional Manager-West Florida 239-253-8529 acathey@rosenmaterials.com ROSEN MATERIALS 1 GrecoSherry From: BrownleeMichael Sent: Friday,July 7, 2017 3:33 PM To: BrownleeMichael; FilsonSue; GoodnerAngela; GrecoSherry; LykinsDave Subject: Hand Delivered item re: item 8A Attachments: 20170707153154508.pdf In addition to the email sent this afternoon, Katherine English's office (Pavese Law Firm) hand delivered the attached this afternoon at 3:25pm. Michael Brownlee Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Donna Fiala, District#1 W. Harmon Turner Building- Bldg "F" 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite#303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (239) 252-8601 F: (239) 252-6578 MichaelBrownlee@colliergov.net Cot County Subscribe to Commissioner Fiala's Newsletter here. 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 electronic maiL to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 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 electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 PAVESE KATHERINE R.ENGLISH Pm firer• II:_JL/:\, Irv;;r 1EI1 ,J\'I Direct dial:( lve 336-6244 Email:t\�rtrr-rrnr.}'rr n{Sch1rna��r.r{a,rnni 1833 Hendry Street, Fort Myers,Florida 33901 I P.O. Box 1507, Fort Myers, Florida 33902-1507 I(239)334-2195 I Fax(239) 332-2243 O t!a E l!. II l`J lig July 7,2017 al JUL 0 7 2017 Board of County Commissioners Mr. Matthew McLean By Collier County,Florida Engineering Services- 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Growth Management Division Naples,FL 34112 Collier County 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,FL 34104 Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager Collier County Collier County 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34112-5749 Naples, FL 34112-5746 Re: Cocohatchee Bay PUD Administrative Appeal by Judith S. Palay,et al. Kalea Bay Phases 2-6 PL20160002242 Ladies and Gentlemen: Our firm represents Lodge/Abbott Associates, LLC and Lodge/Abbott Investments Associates,LLC. (collectively,"Lodge/Abbott"),the owners of Cocohatchee Bay PUD.We are co-counsel with Margaret Cooper, Esquire,of Jones Foster Johnston&Stubbs who handled the earlier litigation resulting in the 2008 Settlement Agreement regarding this project. I will be appearing at the appeal hearing on July 11, 2017 on behalf of Lodge/Abbott.Also appearing for Lodge/Abbott will be Karen Bishop of PMS Inc.of Naples,Inc.Ms.Bishop is the project entitlement facilitator. This appeal arises from a challenge to Lodge/Abbott's request for an amendment to a previously issued site development plan(SDP Amendment)for the project authorizing Buildings 2,3 and 5. The original 2008 SDP for which an amendment is sought was approved by staff in the regular course of business. The Appellants make much of the fact that the County and the land owner entered into the Settlement Agreement resolving a dispute over the appropriate approach to a bald eagle management plan for the project. The Settlement Agreement and its provisions are not relevant to the appeal challenging the present amendment to the SDP. The SDP Amendment subject to this appeal is limited in scope and includes only issues normally addressed by staff in the regular course of business. 4632 VINCENNES BOULEVARD,SUITE 101 4524 GUN CLUB ROAD,SUITE 203 CAPE CORAL,FLORIDA 33904 WEST PALM BEACH,FLORIDA 33415 (239)542-3148 (561)471-1366 Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A.Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr.Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 3 neighborhood open space/conservation areas that would not be otherwise attainable. It was the increase in preservation/open.space which garnished the approval of criteria noted in the PUD specifically utilizing the more desirable clustered design type development.By encouraging site design that located most of the units in the five towers, rather than single family or low density multi-family homes, the end result was more open space,golf course, and preservation areas which now constitute approximately 90% of the 532 acres in the property. The project's preservation commitment is extraordinary. The project's preserve areas total 431.37 acres, including uplands, wetlands and submerged lands. The preservation provided by the project west of Vanderbilt Drive completes the connection for a wetland/waterway preservation area that stretches from Bonita Beach Road to Bluebill Avenue and connects to the State owned lands along the coast. Initial Reliance of Lodge/Abbott. The original applicant for the PUD Ordinance was a contract purchaser,Vanderbilt Partners II,Ltd. Lodge/Abbott later bought Vanderbilt Partners'contract in reliance on passage of the PUD at a purchase price in excess of$32 million was set in reliance upon the passage of the PUD. Lodge/Abbott has also invested substantial time and money toward active development. Also,Collier County required Lodge/Abbott to provide monies ($3,000,000,) for improvements to the bridge, dedicate easements,and provide rights of way on Vanderbilt Drive. Right-of-way was also provided for Wiggins Pass Road as a condition of the PUD. PUD Requirement for a Bald Eagle Management Plan. At the time of PUD approval,a pair of bald eagles had nested in a dead slash pine tree located on the westerly portion of the Subject Property. The LDC and GMP required a Bald Eagle Management Plan which had to comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the USFWS and FFWCC. Collier County GMP and LDC on Species Protection—Deference to State and Federal Permitting. Collier County's GMP(addressing protected species)called for deference to state and federal agency guidelines and their decisions. County staff had no expertise in such matters.The County policies referred to the standards contained in the USFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan and the USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. For bald eagles,the Habitat Management Guidelines called for protective zones around the nest and restricted development activities during the nesting season. In Collier County once there has been a specific ruling by the USFWS and FFWCC,subparagraph(3)of GMP Policy 7.1.2.became the operative standard and deference to the specific ruling is mandated. Similarly,the County Land Development Code§3.04.02(2005),mandated the owner use the guidelines found in the USFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan and Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle. The Code repeated the GMP deference to the specific rulings of the state and federal agencies on individual properties, on a case-by-case basis. There was never a proposal to harm the eagles or even to cut down the nest tree. SDP Application. After getting state and federal approvals,Lodge/Abbott submitted site development plans("SDP")for the clubhouse and residential dwelling units to Collier County. The SDP application called for modifications to the site plan and moving of units from the golf course to the tower buildings. Also, the PUD document had a setback requirement between principal structures,calling for half of the sum of the height Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A.Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo F. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr. Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 5 The Settlement Agreement approved the PUD amendments to change the location of the units into one R zone and to amend the Master Development Plan. Original PUD Rl zone 480 units 44.0 acres R2 zone 90 units 9.7 acres Golf Course 20 units 170.39 acres 590 units total Amended PUD * R Zone 588 units 53.7 acres Golf Course 2 units 170.39 acres 590 units total *See Amended PUD Paragraph 2.3 and Table I The Settlement Agreement did not address or include approval of the SDP changes calling for the requested reduced setbacks.The Settlement Agreement was,however,contingent upon staff's timely approval of the three SDPs. The County recognized and understood that the review and approval of those three SDPs, including subsequent modifications to those SDPs were considered normal exercises of administrative staff level functions. In other words,approvals of SDPs were not,nor have they ever been matters for the BCC.See paragraph 3 of the Settlement Agreement! Contrary to Appellants'assertion,the Settlement Agreement did not require or otherwise provide for BCC review of future SDP amendments. It only required BCC approval of changes to the Settlement Agreement itself,which relates to the bald eagle management plan,not site development plans.See paragraph 21 of the Settlement Agreement.3 The Settlement Agreement approved the Amended Bald Eagle Management Plan and removed the requirement that any future amendment to the BEMP required County EAC review.See paragraph 6.9.F. How the County has implemented Settlement Agreement. Since 2008 both the County and Lodge/Abbott have implemented the Settlement Agreement exactly as it reads and as they understood it—that SDP review and approval is a staff administrative matter. This is exactly how every other project in Collier 2 3. The settlement shall be contingent upon three site development plans("SDPs")that Lodge has submitted being approved by the County as well as the development standards set forth in the original PUD and may be varied by the express terms of this Agreement and Release. These three SDPs are identified as AR5282,AR 5283,and AR5284. 3 21, This Agreement and Release may be amended only by a written instrument specifically referring to this Agreement and Release and executed with the same formalities as this Agreement and Release.This Agreement and Release supersedes all prior discussions and representations and contains all agreements of the parties. Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr. Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 7 separated,there would be a need to further impact areas previously set aside as preserves to accommodate the development. Standing and Status of Appellants The location of the proposed buildings is significant.They are located as far west into the interior of the property as possible, abutting the westerly wetlands and preserves,to provide the greatest distance from the Vanderbilt Drive right-of-way.The property is bounded on the west by Wiggins State Park and Barefoot Beach County Park and the wetland preserve buffers for those parks. To the east of the project's 159+/- acre golf course parcel is Tarpon Cove PUD. Wiggins Bay PUD,is located south of the golf course parcel and Wiggins Pass Road.To the north of the golf course parcel is Glen Eden,Falling Waters,Bentley Village and Audubon. To the south of the high-rise parcel on the west side of Vanderbilt Drive are the existing mid- to high-rise projects of Aqua, Pelican Isle Yacht Club,Marina Bay,Anchorage,and the Dunes PUD. To the north of the western parcel is Arbor Trace PUD and Egrets Walk. Most of the Appellants live north of the Cocohatchee PUD.Due to their specific locations within their own development projects,the existing substantial landscaping buffers for those projects provide visual screening so that they are not impacted visually by this project. The building separation modification is internal to the Kalea Bay project and addresses the buildings' physical proximity to each other, not to other developments. Moreover the north to south alignment of the buildings means that changes in the building separation as proposed has no visual impact of the vistas from the property to the north. Internal setbacks anticipated by a clustering site design are truly an internal matter — not a development aspect that burdens any adjoining property owner or neighbor. Pursuant to Section 250-58,an affected property owner or an aggrieved or affected party may appeal a site development plan. An affected property owner is an owner of property located within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the interpretation is effective. An aggrieved or affected party is a person or group of persons who will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan,Land Development Code,or Building Code(s). While the alleged adverse interest for an aggrieved or affected party may be shared in common with other members of the community at large,it must exceed the general interest in the community good common to all persons(emphasis added). The Appellants have failed to provide justification for their standing to raise this appeal, either as an affected property owner or an aggrieved or affected party. Prior to hearing the basis of the appeal, as filed, Appellants must establish their standing to bring the appeal either due to proximity to the project or an interest which exceeds the general interests in the community good of all persons. To the extent that one,some or all of the Appellants cannot establish their status as an affected property owner or an aggrieved or affected party,their individual claims should be dismissed for lack of standing. Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr.County Manager Mr.Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 9 Substantive Arguments Issue 1. Public Hearing Appellants assert that the Settlement Agreement requires a public hearing and BCC approval before amendment to SDP plans.It does not.In fact,the Settlement Agreement did not call for the BCC to approve the 2008 SDP plans—but only made the Settlement Agreement contingent upon staffs review and approval of the 2008 SDP plans.The Settlement Agreement only modified the PUD Document vis a vis the Eagle Management Plan.Paragraph 21 deals with amending the Settlement Agreement only—not amending future SDPs.The PUD document specifically requires SDP amendments to be reviewed and issued by staff and clearly allows modification to building setbacks to facilitate clustering by staff's administrative action. Issue 2.Building Separation Appellants rely heavily on the Collier County Planning Commission("CCPC")suggestion in 2008 to eliminate the staff's discretion to consider reduced building setbacks to facilitate clustering.This suggestion by the CCPC was not accepted by BCC and is not part of the Settlement Agreement the BCC approved. Contrary to Appellants claims that the buildings are too close,the Collier County LDC specifically sets forth definitions for"cluster"and"cluster development"that provide for closely grouping buildings in order to provide environmental benefits. Indeed, the definitions for those words include the rationale for allowing closely grouping buildings in order to increase open space and reduce impacts to native vegetation and habitat areas while reducing the costs of providing services. 4 Next Appellants argue that staff abused its discretion in approving the reduction of building separation by large percentages and that reductions should be limited to small percentages of the overall building separation requirements. The Amended Cocohatchee Bay Community Development Standards for the "R" District set forth in Table II of the amended PUD states that the distance between principal structures is 0.5 times the sum of the building heights, subject to Note 3 which states: Where buildings with a common architectural theme are angled, skewed or offset from one another, and the walls are not parallel to one another, the setbacks can be administratively reduced. The plan language of the PUD clearly states that the building separation can be administratively reduced. Further,since the BCC in reviewing and adopting the amended PUD as part of the Settlement 4 LDC Section1.08.02 Cluster:Concentrating or grouping buildings more closely than in conventional arrangements,locating such buildings on a limited portion of a development site,in order to allow for open space or preservation of natural features. Cluster development:A design technique allowed within residential zoning districts or where residential development is an allowable use.This form of development employs a more compact arrangement of dwelling units by allowing for,or requiring as the case may be,reductions in the standard or typical lot size and yard requirements of the applicable zoning district,in order to: increase common open space;reduce the overall development area;reduce alterations and impacts to natural resources on the site;to preserve additional native vegetation and habitat areas;and,to reduce the cost of providing services,including but not limited to central sewer and water. Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A.Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr.Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 11 Issue 5. Building Height This is a non-issue. The locating amenities on the roof area of each tower were previously addressed. There is no amenity located on the roof that affects calculation of the building height. The current amenities located on the roof tops are limited to a recreational area that is not enclosed in an air-conditioned space. By code,these amenities are not sufficient to constitute an additional floor for height calculations. Issue 6. Garage Dwelling Unit The proposed building manager's living area in the SDP Amendment is not within the garage,but in a separate building that is part of the common area for the Project. It is an accessory use, not a unit offered separately for sale,to assure housing for on-site management. Staff's approval of the building manager's living area in the separate building as an accessory use has no effect on the calculation of building height for Buildings 2, 3 and 5. The approval is authorized by the PUD provision regarding accessory uses. See Section 3.4.B.3.6 Furthermore,the manager's unit does not count toward density under the applicable LDC regulations and the PUD as an accessory use. Issue 7. Restrictive Covenant This has nothing to do with the amended SDP approval under appeal.Lodge/Abbott is in compliance with all PUD requirements relative to restrictive covenants. An assertion that the project is not in compliance should not be addressed by the BCC under the guise of an administrative appeal of SPD amendment. Issue 8. Invasive Control. This has nothing to do with the amended SDP approval under appeal. Lodge/Abbott is in compliance with all PUD requirements relative to invasive control. An assertion that the project is not in compliance should not be addressed by the BCC under the guise of an administrative appeal of SPD amendment. Issue 9. Ten Foot Pathway This has nothing to do with the amended SDP approval under appeal.Lodge/Abbott is in compliance with all PUD requirements relative to the ten foot pathway. An assertion that the project is not in compliance should not be addressed by the BCC under the guise of an administrative appeal of SPD amendment. 6 3.4.B.3 Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature to the foregoing uses and which the Planning Services Department Director determines to be compatible in the"R"Districts. GrecoSherry From: Sandy Smith <SandySmith@Paveselaw.com> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 2:30 PM To: McLeanMatthew; KlatzkowJeff; OchsLeo; FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: BosiMichael; ralf@ralfbrookesattorney.com; mcooper@jonesfoster.com; Karen Bishop (karenbishop@pmsnaples.com); Katherine English Subject: Request for Party Intervenor Status.July 7, 2017 Attachments: Request for Party Intervenor Status.July 7 2017.pdf Ms. English requested the attached pdf document be forwarded to you for your information and review. Hard copies will be hand delivered shortly. Please contact us at your convenience if you have any questions or cannot open the attachment. Sandy Smith Legal Assistant to Katherine R. English PAVESE 1833 Hendry Street(33901) lAw Post Office Drawer 1507 Fort Myers,FL 33902 Direct 239.336.6249 Fax 239.332.2243 sandysmithApaveselaw.com Visit our website: www.paveselaw.com Confidentiality Note: The information contained in this transmission is legally privileged and confidential, intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you receive this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone call to (239) 334-2195 and delete the message. Thank you. This law firm acts as a debt collector. This e-mail may be an attempt to collect a debt. If so, all information obtained will be used for that purpose. Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd. 1 PAVESE KATHERINE R.ENGLISH Partner Directdial:(239)336-6249LAW FIRM Email:KatherineEnalishapaveselaw.com 1833 Hendry Street, Fort Myers, Florida 33901 1 P.O. Box 1507, Fort Myers, Florida 33902-1507 1 (239)334-2195 1 Fax(239) 332-2243 July 7,2017 Board of County Commissioners Mr. Matthew McLean Collier County, Florida Engineering Services- 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Growth Management Division Naples,FL 34112 Collier County 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Leo E. Ochs, Jr., County Manager Collier County Collier County 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34112-5749 Naples,FL 34112-5746 Re: Cocohatchee Bay PUD Administrative Appeal by Judith S. Palay, et al. Kalea Bay Phases 2-6 PL20160002242 Ladies and Gentlemen: Our firm represents Lodge/Abbott Associates, LLC and Lodge/Abbott Investments Associates,LLC. (collectively,"Lodge/Abbott"),the owners of Cocohatchee Bay PUD.We are co-counsel with Margaret Cooper, Esquire,of Jones Foster Johnston&Stubbs who handled the earlier litigation resulting in the 2008 Settlement Agreement regarding this project. I will be appearing at the appeal hearing on July 11, 2017 on behalf of Lodge/Abbott.Also appearing for Lodge/Abbott will be Karen Bishop of PMS Inc.of Naples,Inc.Ms.Bishop is the project entitlement facilitator. This appeal arises from a challenge to Lodge/Abbott's request for an amendment to a previously issued site development plan(SDP Amendment)for the project authorizing Buildings 2,3 and 5. The original 2008 SDP for which an amendment is sought was approved by staff in the regular course of business. The Appellants make much of the fact that the County and the land owner entered into the Settlement Agreement resolving a dispute over the appropriate approach to a bald eagle management plan for the project. The Settlement Agreement and its provisions are not relevant to the appeal challenging the present amendment to the SDP. The SDP Amendment subject to this appeal is limited in scope and includes only issues normally addressed by staff in the regular course of business. 4632 VINCENNES BOULEVARD,SUITE 101 4524 GUN CLUB ROAD,SUITE 203 CAPE CORAL,FLORIDA 33904 WEST PALM BEACH,FLORIDA 33415 (239)542-3148 (561)471-1366 Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr. Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 3 neighborhood open space/conservation areas that would not be otherwise attainable. It was the increase in preservation/open space which garnished the approval of criteria noted in the PUD specifically utilizing the more desirable clustered design type development.By encouraging site design that located most of the units in the five towers, rather than single family or low density multi-family homes, the end result was more open space, golf course, and preservation areas which now constitute approximately 90% of the 532 acres in the property. The project's preservation commitment is extraordinary. The project's preserve areas total 431.37 acres, including uplands, wetlands and submerged lands. The preservation provided by the project west of Vanderbilt Drive completes the connection for a wetland/waterway preservation area that stretches from Bonita Beach Road to Bluebill Avenue and connects to the State owned lands along the coast. Initial Reliance of Lodge/Abbott. The original applicant for the PUD Ordinance was a contract purchaser,Vanderbilt Partners II,Ltd. Lodge/Abbott later bought Vanderbilt Partners' contract in reliance on passage of the PUD at a purchase price in excess of$32 million was set in reliance upon the passage of the PUD. Lodge/Abbott has also invested substantial time and money toward active development. Also,Collier County required Lodge/Abbott to provide monies ($3,000,000.) for improvements to the bridge, dedicate easements,and provide rights of way on Vanderbilt Drive. Right-of-way was also provided for Wiggins Pass Road as a condition of the PUD. PUD Requirement for a Bald Eagle Management Plan. At the time of PUD approval,a pair of bald eagles had nested in a dead slash pine tree located on the westerly portion of the Subject Property. The LDC and GMP required a Bald Eagle Management Plan which had to comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the USFWS and FFWCC. Collier County GMP and LDC on Species Protection—Deference to State and Federal Permitting. Collier County's GMP(addressing protected species)called for deference to state and federal agency guidelines and their decisions. County staff had no expertise in such matters.The County policies referred to the standards contained in the USFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan and the USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. For bald eagles, the Habitat Management Guidelines called for protective zones around the nest and restricted development activities during the nesting season. In Collier County once there has been a specific ruling by the USFWS and FFWCC,subparagraph(3)of GMP Policy 7.1.2.became the operative standard and deference to the specific ruling is mandated. Similarly,the County Land Development Code§3.04.02(2005),mandated the owner use the guidelines found in the USFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan and Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle. The Code repeated the GMP deference to the specific rulings of the state and federal agencies on individual properties, on a case-by-case basis. There was never a proposal to harm the eagles or even to cut down the nest tree. SDP Application. After getting state and federal approvals,Lodge/Abbott submitted site development plans("SDP")for the clubhouse and residential dwelling units to Collier County. The SDP application called for modifications to the site plan and moving of units from the golf course to the tower buildings. Also,the PUD document had a setback requirement between principal structures,calling for half of the sum of the height Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr. Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 5 The Settlement Agreement approved the PUD amendments to change the location of the units into one R zone and to amend the Master Development Plan. Original PUD Rl zone 480 units 44.0 acres R2 zone 90 units 9.7 acres Golf Course 20 units 170.39 acres 590 units total Amended PUD * R Zone 588 units 53.7 acres Golf Course 2 units 170.39 acres 590 units total *See Amended PUD Paragraph 2.3 and Table I The Settlement Agreement did not address or include approval of the SDP changes calling for the requested reduced setbacks.The Settlement Agreement was,however,contingent upon staff's timely approval of the three SDPs. The County recognized and understood that the review and approval of those three SDPs, including subsequent modifications to those SDPs were considered normal exercises of administrative staff level functions. In other words,approvals of SDPs were not,nor have they ever been matters for the BCC.See paragraph 3 of the Settlement Agreement.2 Contrary to Appellants'assertion, the Settlement Agreement did not require or otherwise provide for BCC review of future SDP amendments. It only required BCC approval of changes to the Settlement Agreement itself,which relates to the bald eagle management plan,not site development plans.See paragraph 21 of the Settlement Agreement.3 The Settlement Agreement approved the Amended Bald Eagle Management Plan and removed the requirement that any future amendment to the BEMP required County EAC review.See paragraph 6.9.F. How the County has implemented Settlement Agreement. Since 2008 both the County and Lodge/Abbott have implemented the Settlement Agreement exactly as it reads and as they understood it—that SDP review and approval is a staff administrative matter. This is exactly how every other project in Collier 2 3. The settlement shall be contingent upon three site development plans("SDPs")that Lodge has submitted being approved by the County as well as the development standards set forth in the original PUD and may be varied by the express terms of this Agreement and Release. These three SDPs are identified as AR5282,AR 5283,and AR5284. 3 21. This Agreement and Release may be amended only by a written instrument specifically referring to this Agreement and Release and executed with the same formalities as this Agreement and Release.This Agreement and Release supersedes all prior discussions and representations and contains all agreements of the parties. Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr. Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 7 separated,there would be a need to further impact areas previously set aside as preserves to accommodate the development. Standing and Status of Appellants The location of the proposed buildings is significant.They are located as far west into the interior of the property as possible, abutting the westerly wetlands and preserves, to provide the greatest distance from the Vanderbilt Drive right-of-way.The property is bounded on the west by Wiggins State Park and Barefoot Beach County Park and the wetland preserve buffers for those parks. To the east of the project's 159+/- acre golf course parcel is Tarpon Cove PUD. Wiggins Bay PUD,is located south of the golf course parcel and Wiggins Pass Road.To the north of the golf course parcel is Glen Eden,Falling Waters,Bentley Village and Audubon. To the south of the high-rise parcel on the west side of Vanderbilt Drive are the existing mid- to high-rise projects of Aqua, Pelican Isle Yacht Club, Marina Bay,Anchorage, and the Dunes PUD. To the north of the western parcel is Arbor Trace PUD and Egrets Walk. Most of the Appellants live north of the Cocohatchee PUD.Due to their specific locations within their own development projects,the existing substantial landscaping buffers for those projects provide visual screening so that they are not impacted visually by this project. The building separation modification is internal to the Kalea Bay project and addresses the buildings' physical proximity to each other, not to other developments. Moreover the north to south alignment of the buildings means that changes in the building separation as proposed has no visual impact of the vistas from the property to the north. Internal setbacks anticipated by a clustering site design are truly an internal matter — not a development aspect that burdens any adjoining property owner or neighbor. Pursuant to Section 250-58,an affected property owner or an aggrieved or affected party may appeal a site development plan. An affected property owner is an owner of property located within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the interpretation is effective. An aggrieved or affected party is a person or group of persons who will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Land Development Code,or Building Code(s). While the alleged adverse interest for an aggrieved or affected party may be shared in common with other members of the community at large,it must exceed the general interest in the community good common to all persons (emphasis added). The Appellants have failed to provide justification for their standing to raise this appeal, either as an affected property owner or an aggrieved or affected party. Prior to hearing the basis of the appeal, as filed, Appellants must establish their standing to bring the appeal either due to proximity to the project or an interest which exceeds the general interests in the community good of all persons. To the extent that one,some or all of the Appellants cannot establish their status as an affected property owner or an aggrieved or affected party,their individual claims should be dismissed for lack of standing. 5 Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr.Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 9 Substantive Arguments Issue 1. Public Hearing Appellants assert that the Settlement Agreement requires a public hearing and BCC approval before amendment to SDP plans.It does not.In fact,the Settlement Agreement did not call for the BCC to approve the 2008 SDP plans—but only made the Settlement Agreement contingent upon staffs review and approval of the 2008 SDP plans.The Settlement Agreement only modified the PUD Document vis a vis the Eagle Management Plan.Paragraph 21 deals with amending the Settlement Agreement only—not amending future SDPs.The PUD document specifically requires SDP amendments to be reviewed and issued by staff and clearly allows modification to building setbacks to facilitate clustering by staff's administrative action. Issue 2. Building Separation Appellants rely heavily on the Collier County Planning Commission("CCPC")suggestion in 2008 to eliminate the staff's discretion to consider reduced building setbacks to facilitate clustering.This suggestion by the CCPC was not accepted by BCC and is not part of the Settlement Agreement the BCC approved. Contrary to Appellants claims that the buildings are too close,the Collier County LDC specifically sets forth definitions for"cluster"and"cluster development"that provide for closely grouping buildings in order to provide environmental benefits. Indeed, the definitions for those words include the rationale for allowing closely grouping buildings in order to increase open space and reduce impacts to native vegetation and habitat areas while reducing the costs of providing services. 4 Next Appellants argue that staff abused its discretion in approving the reduction of building separation by large percentages and that reductions should be limited to small percentages of the overall building separation requirements. The Amended Cocohatchee Bay Community Development Standards for the "R" District set forth in Table II of the amended PUD states that the distance between principal structures is 0.5 times the sum of the building heights, subject to Note 3 which states: Where buildings with a common architectural theme are angled, skewed or offset from one another, and the walls are not parallel to one another, the setbacks can be administratively reduced. The plan language of the PUD clearly states that the building separation can be administratively reduced. Further,since the BCC in reviewing and adopting the amended PUD as part of the Settlement 4 LDC Section1.08.02 Cluster:Concentrating or grouping buildings more closely than in conventional arrangements, locating such buildings on a limited portion of a development site,in order to allow for open space or preservation of natural features. Cluster development:A design technique allowed within residential zoning districts or where residential development is an allowable use.This form of development employs a more compact arrangement of dwelling units by allowing for,or requiring as the case may be,reductions in the standard or typical lot size and yard requirements of the applicable zoning district,in order to: increase common open space;reduce the overall development area;reduce alterations and impacts to natural resources on the site;to preserve additional native vegetation and habitat areas;and,to reduce the cost of providing services,including but not limited to central sewer and water. Board of County Commissioners Jeffrey A. Klatzkow,County Attorney Leo E. Ochs,Jr. County Manager Mr.Matthew McLean July 7,2017 Page 11 Issue S. Building Height This is a non-issue. The locating amenities on the roof area of each tower were previously addressed. There is no amenity located on the roof that affects calculation of the building height. The current amenities located on the roof tops are limited to a recreational area that is not enclosed in an air-conditioned space. By code,these amenities are not sufficient to constitute an additional floor for height calculations. Issue 6. Garage Dwelling Unit The proposed building manager's living area in the SDP Amendment is not within the garage,but in a separate building that is part of the common area for the Project. It is an accessory use, not a unit offered separately for sale,to assure housing for on-site management. Staff's approval of the building manager's living area in the separate building as an accessory use has no effect on the calculation of building height for Buildings 2, 3 and 5. The approval is authorized by the PUD provision regarding accessory uses. See Section 3.4.B.3.6 Furthermore,the manager's unit does not count toward density under the applicable LDC regulations and the PUD as an accessory use. Issue 7. Restrictive Covenant This has nothing to do with the amended SDP approval under appeal. Lodge/Abbott is in compliance with all PUD requirements relative to restrictive covenants. An assertion that the project is not in compliance should not be addressed by the BCC under the guise of an administrative appeal of SPD amendment. Issue 8. Invasive Control. This has nothing to do with the amended SDP approval under appeal.Lodge/Abbott is in compliance with all PUD requirements relative to invasive control. An assertion that the project is not in compliance should not be addressed by the BCC under the guise of an administrative appeal of SPD amendment. Issue 9. Ten Foot Pathway This has nothing to do with the amended SDP approval under appeal. Lodge/Abbott is in compliance with all PUD requirements relative to the ten foot pathway. An assertion that the project is not in compliance should not be addressed by the BCC under the guise of an administrative appeal of SPD amendment. 6 3.4.B.3 Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature to the foregoing uses and which the Planning Services Department Director determines to be compatible in the"R"Districts. 1 ORDINANCE NO.2017- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING AN IMPACT FEE INSTALLMENT PAYMENT PILOT PROGRAM FOR THE IMMOKALEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AREA; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF OCTOBER 1,2017. WHEREAS, the costs of housing within Collier County, and especially affordable housing, continues to be an area of great concern to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, enhancing and expanding economic activity within Collier County is also a matter of great concern to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, Collier County has some of the highest impact fees within the State of Florida; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is concerned that these impact fees may be negatively impacting both the costs of housing and inhibiting economic activity within Collier County; and WHEREAS the Board of County Commissioners would like to do a pilot program to ascertain whether allowing the payment of impact fees by an installment program, as a voluntary alternative to paying the fees in a single, up-front payment, will have a positive effect on both the costs of housing and economic growth; and WHEREAS, to ensure payment, the Board of County Commissioners believes that payment of impact fees by installments should be an obligation that runs with the land meaning that as owners of the property change, the obligation will continue. In this manner, everyone who owns the property that is being benefitted by the improvements made by the impact fees will share in the cost of the impact fees; and WHEREAS, to prevent unintended consequences, the Board will annually review this Pilot Program,with staff preparing regular updated reports that any Commissioner can review; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners believes that (1) the area comprising what is known as the Immokalee CRA is an ideal area to test this pilot program; (2) the program will foster the Community Redevelopment Plan for that area; and(3)the program will reduce blight in that area. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,that: SECTION ONE: A new Article H, subsection(h) in Section 74-201 of Collier County Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended, is hereby created to read as follows: (h) Impact Fee Installment Payment Pilot Program. (1) The purpose of this Program is to establish an impact fee installment payment pilot program which is intended to provide the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, 1 of (6) Any person seeking an agreement shall file with the county manager an application and the agreement shall be fully executed and recorded prior to issuance of a temporary or final certificate of occupancy or payment of impact fees. (7) Prior to May 1 of each fiscal year, the feepayer of a parcel assessed hereunder shall have the right to pay the outstanding and unpaid balance(s) owed without a prepayment penalty. (8) Pursuant to the Uniform Assessment Collection Act, non ad-valorem assessments levied pursuant to this section shall remain liens, coequal with the lien of all state, county, district and municipal taxes, superior in dignity to all other liens,titles and claims, until paid. (9) For purposes of this subsection the following conditions shall apply: (a) A feepayer must be the legal owner of the property, or designated agent of the owner, and shall provide written and notarized proof of authorization from the owner when requesting to pay impact fees under this subsection; and (b) The feepayer and/or owner must be current on property taxes on the subject property and any other real property owned in Collier County by feepayer and/or owner; and (c) The feepayer and/or owner cannot be in bankruptcy nor can the property be an asset in any bankruptcy proceeding; and (d) The subject property cannot be in foreclosure and cannot have any federal income tax lien,judgment lien or similar liens encumbering the property. (10)As an alternative method to the repayment of impact fees by special assessments under this section, the county administrator or designee may elect to lien the feepayer's property to secure repayment of impact fees paid under this section and is authorized to take any necessary action, including the development of any rules, procedures, agreements and forms to effectuate this method, at the same term and interest rate as set by the Board of County Commissioners. (11) To prevent unintended consequence, the Board will annually review this Pilot Program, with staff preparing regular updated reports that any Commissioner can review. (12) Prior to the third anniversary of this ordinance, the County Manager shall prepare and present a report to the Board of County Commissioners detailing what effect, if any, this program has had on housing costs and economic development, with a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on whether to amend, expand, or discontinue this pilot program. SECTION TWO: Conflict and Severability. In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. 3 of 4 RECEIVED To: L, 11�� '3•,/e(.��`2 P iy 7-41/4-612_ JUL 0 3 2017 From: Donna Reed Caron OFFICES OF COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Date: July 2, 2017 District I District 2 Re: Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement and PUD District 3 District 4 District 5 In a thinly veiled attempt to justify actions antithetical to good planning, staff issued a memorandum dated April 28, 2017 trying to explain the application of development standards for the Cocohatchee Bay PUD. The staff approval letter spends a great deal of time trying to clarify their actions and quoting the "clear language" of Florida Statutes. Critical to the discussion currently being brought forward by citizens is that staff is not following the Settlement Agreement and all of it's component parts in the reviewing process. The following is attempt to detail submitted changes in both clear language and unambiguous facts. Building One is 50 feet wider than shown on the original SDPs. The apparent intent is to make buildings 2-5 each 50 feet wider, thus adding the equivalent of another whole building to the plan and further exacerbating the building separation issue. Clear and unambiguous. The developer has added twelve guest suites as accessory units. However, the PUD lists guest suites and cabanas as permitted uses and they are to be counted as part of the total number of residential units: 590. Four 20 story buildings each with 120 units equals 480 units. One 17 story building adds 102 units. Plus twelve guest suites brings the total unit count to 594. So as of this date, staff appears to be allowing the developer to exceed the maximum number of units allowed. Clear and unambiguous. Plans are in progress to add an additional story to each of the buildings by enclosing certain accessory roof-top structures such as the pool, community meeting room, and fitness center. According to the PUD, building height shall be the vertical distance measured from the first habitable finished floor elevation to the upper most finished ceiling elevation of the roof structure. Also County Land Development Code staff and Zoning & Land Development staff issued an official clarification on the issue of roof-top accessory structures: SC 2004-05, "... the language in question was intended to allow accessory uses which would not have the visual effect of increased height, and refers to unenclosed, unroofed, and un-air conditioned space for recreational use." Clear and unambiguous. A housing unit (a habitable structure) has been added to the garage level, conflicting further with the definition of building height as defined in the PUD. Clear and unambiguous. The plans that exist at the County are inconsistent with those submitted to South Florida Water Management - - - preventing any factual analysis to be conducted. For example the SFWMD plans show the addition of two four-plex units, further exceeding the allowed unit count. Nothing clear or unambiguous about this. Building separations are less than code minimums of 1/2 the sum of the building heights, and less than the already reduced and adjusted separations (as per PUD footnote #3) shown on the SDPs attached to the PUD and Settlement Agreement. To quote from the CCPC review that was accepted and approved by Board action, "However, as a result of language in the PUD, the CCPC recommends reference to building separation be removed from the Settlement and the applicants rely upon the interpretation of the PUD with the understanding that the separations would not be less than those shown on the SDPs reviewed by the CCPC. As an alternative to the reduction in separation, greater distances could be provided by moving alternating towers closer to Vanderbilt Drive." Those separations are as follows: building 1 to 2, 153 feet; building 2 to 3, 126 feet; building 3 to 4, 127 feet; building 4 to 5, 341 feet. The Settlement Agreement, PUD, Bald Eagle Management Plan, recommendations from the Planning Commission, and three SDPs reviewed and approved by staff were approved by the Board of County Commissioners on April 22, 2008. This action was taken in total as part of the Summary Agenda. Again, The Board approved all documents as presented without objection from the County Attorney, County Manager, county staff, the petitioner, the petitioners agent or citizens. Clear and unambiguous. Staff cites several examples of supposed historical application of the administrative reduction of building separations. However, only one of the examples represents a high rise tower project and it is a side yard set back not a building separation situation. In this instance, staffs action was understandable since the Waterpark Place building is not next to another high rise but rather a four lane tree lined parking area leading to a tram to Pelican Bay beach. There are no past projects analogous to the Cocohatchee/Kalea Bay project. Clear and unambiguous. Besides the clear and unambiguous language of Florida statutes being an important tenet, ignoring any portion of an ordinance or law or reducing the language to an absurdity is equally important. Staffs interpretation that there is no limit to reducing building separations because of clauses such as `footnote #3', is not a credible interpretation. Additionally, staff cannot ignore the fact that the CCPC recommendation was included with the PUD, Settlement Agreement and Bald Eagle Management Plan on the Summary Agenda and was approved by The Board on April 22, 2008. The citizens of Collier County harbor serious concerns that must be addressed in a timely fashion. Upholding the Settlement in it's entirety is not only reasonable and proper, but critical to the community's continued trust in the rule of law, our ordinances, the sanctity of contracts and settlements, and of course to the integrity of and respect for our system of county governance and the people elected and appointed to assure equal treatment for all. Thank you. Donna Reed Caron 790 Wiggins Bay Drive ✓? �� "� Naples, FL. 34110 239-514-2780 239-280-6857 GrecoSherry From: Lisa Darcy <lisad2727@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 5:36 PM To: FialaDonna; HillerGeorgia; HenningTom; TaylorPenny; NanceTim Subject: Cocohatchee Bay Preserve - DENY Please consider denying variance on originally approved plan by Lodge Abbott for Cocohatchee Bay Preserve/Kalea Bay. Developers should not be encouraged to modify originally approved plans.This practice needs to be stopped. If developer agreed to leave land as a preserve, that is the way it should remain.We all know they never planned on leaving any preserve.This is the developer with a history of pulling down eagle's nests. Do the right thing. Lisa d'Arcy GrecoSherry From: SheffieldMichael Sent: Thursday,July 6, 2017 10:08 AM To: BrownleeMichael; GoodnerAngela; LykinsDave; GrecoSherry; FilsonSue Subject: 7/11 BCC Meeting - Cocohatchee Bay/ Kalea Bay Appeal It is expected that we will receive phone calls from the public asking about this item, 8a, (below) on the 7/11 BCC agenda (Appeal - Cocohatchee Bay/ Kalea Bay). Please advise the caller that the item will be heard at 1:30 time certain and if they would like to speak, they are to fill out/turn-in a speaker slip to Troy Miller before the item begins. Thank you, Mike 8 A ***This item to be heard at 1:30 p.m.*** This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex- parte disclosure be provided by Commission members.Judith S.Palay and 92 other property owners within the Cocohatchee Bay Neighborhood Communities,filed an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals of the administrative approval of building separations, building widths, building dwelling units, and building heights in the Site Development Plan Amendment SDPA-PL20160002242 for Kalea Bay aka Kinsale Condominium Phases II-VI. The subject property is located at the northwest and northeast corners of Wiggins Pass Road and Vanderbilt Drive in Sections 8, 16, 17 and 20, Township 48 South and Range 25 East,in Collier County,Florida. [PL20170002165] 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 electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. GrecoSherry From: Carole Wielosinski <carole@wielo.org> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 5:56 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: 175 acres on Vanderbilt Dr Dear Penny Taylor: Please preserve the land across from Kalea Bay on Vanderbilt Dr as a green space forever as promised. Please keep a quality of life for our wild animals and for our human population.We and the earth all need green space. Stop the insanity of thinking every natural preserve must be destroyed for development.The Kalea Bay development is enough desecration. Sincerely, Carole Wielosinski Collier County Homeowner. 1 GrecoSherry Subject: 2008 Cocohatchee Bay settlement agreement - Diane Rupnow and Judi Palay (update on new developments) Location: your office Start: Wed 2/22/2017 2:30 PM End: Wed 2/22/2017 3:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny 402-580-1545 GrecoSherry From: Marilyn Stendahl <msten767@sysmatrix.net> Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 12:40 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: 2008 Cocohatchee Settlement an PUD March 20, 2015 Dear Commissioner Taylor, As an elected Collier County Commissioner, one of the 5 chief legislators of our county, and someone we trust to listen to the people of Collier County and represent their interests, I appeal to you to VOTE NO on reopening the legal 2008 Cocohatchee settlement and PUD. Please hold the developer accountable to the legal settlement that was agreed to by both parties in 2008. Three words stood out to me this morning as I looked at the collier.net website. These words are directly from the mission statement under guiding principles (values) for the Collier County Commissioners. Knowledge: Please personally look at the land you are voting on, the east parcel on Vanderbilt Drive and Wiggins Pass Road. Then look at Lodge Abbot's Kalea Bay currently under development on the west parcel of the Cocohatchee PUD. You can't miss it. The parcel has been clear cut, and is mostly barren in preparation for many years of construction for 5 high rise condo buildings resulting in 582 additional units in this coastal high hazard flood area. Stewardship: The land in question, the east parcel of the Cochohatchee PUD, is one of the few remaining natural preserve parcels. Careful and responsible management of this natural resource is effectively entrusted to your care. Accountability: As a representative of the people of Collier County, please hold the developer accountable to the terms of the 2008 settlement and represent the constituents as you vote. In 2008, the developer agreed to the terms of the settlement resulting in leaving the east parcel of the PUD "FOREVER AS GREEN OPEN SPACE" if his then proposed golf course was not built on that land. In exchange, he was allowed to add extra units to his 5 high rise buildings on the west parcel of the PUD. According to his own website, Kalea Bay will have 582 residential waterfront units. He now proposes to build 64 units on the east parcel. He already had them added to the west parcel in 2008. 1 GrecoSherry From: Carl stendahl <cps2004@embarqmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 5:48 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: 2008 Settlement with Lodge Abbot Attachments: Documentl.docx Dear Commissioner Taylor, Please open and read the attachment, a letter to you on the subject of opening the 2008 settlement agreement with Lodge Abbot and Collier County. Thank you, Carl Stendahl 14813 Glen Eden Dr. Naples, FL 34110 (239) 514-7929 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 5:43 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: April 11th BCC Meeting Dear Commissioner Taylor, It was disappointing that we were not allowed to speak at the BCC meeting yesterday. We hosted an informational meeting at our clubhouse April 2nd and 91 constituents from 10 residential communities were in attendance. We decided collectively to attend the BCC meeting to ask for a public hearing. We want this put on a BCC agenda so what has happened with Kalea Bay's Building 1 will not also happen with Buildings 2--5. Building 1 is already built and County staff made decisions they should not have made. Unfortunately, those bad decisions can't be fixed because the building is almost finished. Now there is an amendment under review by County "staff' for Buildings 2--5. More bad decisions are going to be finalized and approved. We want the Commissioners to tell County Staff to NOT approve that amendment. We think this should be discussed among Commissioners WITH the community BEFORE the amendment is approved. We went to the April 11th BCC meeting to inform our County Commissioners that terms of the 2008 Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement have been violated. Paragraph 2 states ". . .This Agreement and Release expressly states the acceptable deviation in development standards from the original PUD. Absent an express term in this Agreement and Release, the original PUD will control. County "staff" allowed the Building 1 SDP to be changed making the width of that building and all the other buildings to be increased 50' from 260' to 310'. That substantial change should have been done with the same formalities as the Settlement Agreement and gone to the BCC for approval. Paragraph 4 states that the County will expedite the review of three SDPs and all future building permit applications submitted by Lodge. Those SDP's gave detailed descriptions of the buildings at Kalea Bay so that County staff, Commissioners and neighbors who are stakeholders in the final result could envision what the development would look like. County "staff' changed Building 1 SDP and allowed Building 1 to be slid one-third closer to Aqua, reducing the buffer from 166' to 106' That is a substantial change to the SDP approved in the Settlement Agreement and that change request should have gone to you, the BCC. 1 Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 3 11111111111111111111...11* GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 4:02 PM To: HillerGeorgia Cc: OchsLeo; CasalanguidaNick; KlatzkowJeff Subject: Cocohatchee Bay Golf Course Permit Is a Sham Attachments: paragraph 8.png; Kalea Bay golf.png; Overhead shot of cleared land on eastern parcel.png Dear Commissioner Hiller, Since you are a Collier County Commissioner I want you to be aware of a situation that I consider to be a violation of the 2008 Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement. I have sent the following message to: Leo Ochs,Nick Casalanguida,Matt McLean,Daryl Hughes,Jack McKenna,Paula Brethauer,Michelle Scavone and Summer Brown Araque. "As per terms in the Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement and Release signed by Collier County Commissioners and Lodge Abbott on June 9, 2008 and recorded in the official records of Collier County by Dwight Brock on June 10, 2008, the land on the NE corner of Wiggins Pass Road and Vanderbilt drive is limited in use to a golf course or a preserve in perpetuity. (See screen shot of paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement in attachment 1) Richard Corace(one of two developers making up Lodge Abbott)has made statements like, "golf courses are a liability"and Richard Grant(developer's attorney)has said, "golf courses are not as popular or as profitable as they one were." It is no secret that there are already plenty of golf courses in both Collier and Lee counties and some of them are struggling to make a profit. Because of this, some are asking to convert golf courses to residential zoning. All of the above would cast doubt on the likelihood that a savvy developer would build a new golf course in today's market and economy. Therefore, those of us who live adjacent to this "golf course parcel"were surprised when big machines moved in there last fall and clear-cut two large areas on the property and then hauled in hundreds of truckloads of fill from Kalea Bay. In September of 2015 and again in November, I sent a message to Matt McLean's office expressing our concerns about Lodge Abbott cutting down trees on property that should remain a preserve in its natural vegetative state if a golf course is not to be built. We were assured that Lodge Abbot's extension of a 2004 permit to build a golf course made his activities legal and possible. I also contacted Daryl Hughes, director of permits and Steve Nagle with Southwest Florida Water Management about our concerns and both reported back that all activity was allowed by the golf course permit. Please go online to the Kalea Bay website and read the entire section on amenities that will be provided to condo owners in the 5 towers and you will find no mention about a golf course being built. Don't you think promotional materials would include information 1 Respectfully, Michelle Scavone, GMD Operations Coordinator" The plans are illegible to me--very tiny and when I enlarge them the text is too fuzzy to read. Basically, I have questions for which I've received no answers. Needless to say,I am not happy that the county allowed Lodge Abbott to extend an old 2004 golf course permit which basically gives him permission to get the golf course parcel ready for whatever project he really intends to put there. . . This is clearly not the intent of the terms of the 2008 Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement. Lodge Abbott has no intention of building a golf course so it is wrong.to allow him to clear the land. What good is a Settlement Agreement if county officials do not enforce its terms? Would the general public think that Lodge Abbott is taking advantage of a flaw in the county's permit system and violating terms of the 2008 Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement? I just wanted you to have an update on this situation which is not going to go away quietly. See attachments below Respectfully, Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 Under Florida Law,e-mail addresses are public records.If you do not want your e-mail address released in response t 3 July 7, 2017 Dear Commissioner Taylor, I am a Collier County resident living in District 2. I live in Glen Eden on the Lakes; our community shares the longest border with the golf course portion of the Kalea Bay development, on the East side of Vanderbilt Drive. I am asking for your help, and for your vote in the March 24, 2015 meeting of the Board of County Commissioners. I and several of my fellow residents have tried to speak with Commissioner Hiller, our elected representative, who has refused to take our calls or respond to our emails. She directed County Attorney Jeffrey Klatzkow to contact my neighbor, Emily Kearns, who left multiple phone messages and emails for Commissioner Hiller not to call her anymore because Commissioner Hiller wishes to "remain impartial." This is ironic because in May, 2014 Commissioner Hiller arranged for and held joint meetings in her offices on Orange Blossom Drive with leaders of the various communities surrounding Kalea Bay, County Staff, and representatives of the developer, Lodge Abbot. In another instance my neighbor, Dr. Cressy, sent a letter to Commissioner Hiller about the opening of the 2008 Settlement and the PUD. On January 22, 2015, Commissioner Hiller forwarded the email to County Attorney Jeffery Klatzkow directing him to, "Please immediately correct Mr. Cressy's understanding, and copy me, and all who he copied. Please also copy the developer." County Attorney Kaltzkow's answer to Dr. Cressy was technically correct, but it did not answer the questions asked. Lodge Abbot has not shown trustworthiness in its many past dealings with Collier County, and we see no reason to believe them today when they say that they all want is to build 62 homes on the golf course land. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. With the 2008 Settlement and the PUD open they will be able to ask for anything they wish, and if turned down by the BCC, as they were in 2005, they would sue the citizens of Collier County again. I see no upside for the Citizens of Collier County if the 2008 Settlement and PUD are opened. GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:32 AM To: TaylorPenny; GrecoSherry Subject: Our meeting today at 1:00 Good Morning Commissioner Taylor and Ms. Greco, I am looking forward to our meeting today at 1:00 and appreciate the opportunity to be heard. There will be 13 of us coming to the meeting today: Pat Bonser, Carl and Marilyn Stendhal, Barb and Mike Taylor, Peggy Ross and myself from Glen Eden on the Lakes; Jim and Kitty Shaw from Tarpon Cove; and Lou De Prisco and Dick Wilson from Arbor Trace. Brad Schiffer and Donna Reed Caron are also coming with us. Some of those who had signed up to speak last Tuesday have already headed north. . . We are going to gather outside at 12:45 and enter together. We will not fit into that small room on the 1st floor where we are supposed to check in and get approval before coming upstairs. I was wondering if I could call you directly and get permission to come up or could you somehow facilitate this for us?? I have some photos on my laptop that I would like to show Commissioner Taylor and I was wondering if you have the technology in place to allow them to be projected on a TV or screen or wall so all in our group could see. Thank you. Please call with your response to my questions. Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane(cr�,gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 GrecoSherry Subject: Diane Rupnow - Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement etc. Location: conf rm Start: Tue 4/18/2017 1:00 PM End: Tue 4/18/2017 2:00 PM Recurrence: (none) Organizer: TaylorPenny 402-580-1545 Attendees for mtg Pat Bonser, Carl and Marilyn Stendhal, Barb and Mike Taylor, Peggy Ross and myself from Glen Eden on the Lakes; Jim and Kitty Shaw from Tarpon Cove; and Lou De Prisco and Dick Wilson from Arbor Trace. Brad Schiffer and Donna Reed Caron are also coming with us. Some of those who had signed up to speak last Tuesday have already headed north. . . i Our meeting today at 1:00 1 GrecoSherry From: Chris.Brasher@Ferguson.com Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 1:39 PM To: McDanielBill;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; SolisAndy; FialaDonna Subject: FW: Kalea Bay Bld #2 To the Collier County Commissioners, I understand that there is some opposition to the second phase of Kalea Bay. I am a concerned citizen who is heavily involved in the construction industry as I work for Ferguson Enterprise which employees 700+associates(quality jobs+ benefits) in Florida in our plumbing division alone. A job like this provides significant opportunity not just to our company but to the many trades that are fortunate enough to participate. Projects like these help not only our industry, but benefit the overall community for many years with the jobs that it creates and all the outlying businesses that are affected not only by the construction but the livelihoods that are affected by the wages and benefits of those employed by Kalea Bay. Our company will be directly affected with the decisions that are made regarding this project. Ferguson is very involved in both our communities and by providing quality opportunities, as well as teaching, coaching,training, and furthering developing people's skills. Our industry as well as SW Florida have been through some very tough times in recent years and it is encouraging to see and be part of a positive outlook and a growing economy. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Chris Brasher Ferguson a Wolseley Company Director of Branch Management- Florida District 10355 S Orange Ave. Orlando,Fl 32824 0: (407)856-5161 M: 239-823-0935 Ferguson Online -Always Open! http://www.ferqusononline.com 1 GrecoSherry From: Judi Palay <judi@palay.org> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 5:13 PM To: TaylorPenny; OchsLeo Cc: SolisAndy Subject: FW:TIME CERTAIN REQUEST for ADMIN APPEAL KALEA BAY: PL201700002165 Judith Palay Appeal Ad Attachments: TIME CERTAIN REQUEST for Administrative Appeal Kalea Bay.pdf Per Attorney Klatskow,we are requesting a time certain for the Administrative Appeal Kalea Bay because our attorney has a conflict for the morning of July 11.Would you please help us to assure that we may have legal representation with time and date certain. Thank you- Judi Palay Note new email address please Judi Palay judi@palay.org 239-513-9141 805-824-6615 Forwarded message From: Ralf Brookes<ralfbrookes@gmail.com> Date:Thu,Jun 15, 2017 at 4:50 PM Subject:TIME CERTAIN REQUEST for ADMIN APPEAL KALEA BAY: PL201700002165 Judith Palay Appeal Ad To: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net> Cc: VelascoJessica <JessicaVelasco@colliergov.net>, SmithCamden <CamdenSmith(a@colliergov.net>, BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>, CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>, OchsLeo <LeoOchs@colliergov.net>,AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Thank you Jeff Please find letter attached to County Manager and BCC Chair regarding a request for advance time certain (delivered per email below). Can you please deliver this letter to them via email because per the recent proposed Fla Bar rules, I would like to communicate through you on this matter and I do not have the email for the BCC Chair. PS- I am available July 11 after 1 pm and also available anytime July 12 the following day as you note may happen given the number of expected items on this agenda. Thanks again, Ralf Jeff Can you please provide me with assurance in writing in advance regarding not starting this item until I am able to be present on July 11th - I can be there anytime after 1 pm on July 11. I would prefer that the notice of hearing change 9:00 am to "1:00 pm or as soon thereafter as can be heard." [I also hope this would avoid confusion for the many citizens we expect to attend the hearing and allow them to comfortably arrive in the afternoon rather than be there all day in reliance on the official notice that they will read in the newpaper.] Also " "Notice of Intent to Consider a Resolution" should be removed and replaced with "Notice of Intent to Consider an Administrative Appeal" Many thanks in advance, Ralf Ralf Brookes Ralf Brookes Attorney 1217 East Cape Coral Parkway#107 Cape Coral Florida 33904 Phone (239) 910-5464 Fax(866) 341-6086 RalfBrookes@Rmail.com Ralf@ RalfBrookesAttorney.com Board Certified in City, County and Local Government Law by The Florida Bar Please visit my website at: www.RalfBrookesAttorney.com On Thu,Jun 15, 2017 at 2:57 PM, SmithCamden <CamdenSmith@colliergov.net>wrote: 3 Wanda Rodriguez, .ACP .Advanced Certified Paralegal- Office aralegal- Office of the County.Attorney (2,q)2S2-8400 From: Martha S.Vergara [mailto:Martha.Vergara@collierclerk.com] Sent:Thursday,June 15, 2017 2:25 PM To: RodriguezWanda <WandaRodriguez@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>; 'Velasco,' <Jessica@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay<RayBellows@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; SmithCamden <CamdenSmith@colliergov.net> Subject: PL201700002165 Judith Palay Appeal Hello All, Attached is the revised ad proof per the petitioners changes. Let me know if there are any other changes. Thanks, Martha 0.4.901555. 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 electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 5 GrecoSherry From: OchsLeo Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 3:09 PM To: TaylorPenny Cc: WillerSpectorLee; CasalanguidaNick Subject: FW: Lodge Abbott Commissioner, Please find below the staff response to the concern expressed by Mr. Cressy. VR, Leo Leo E.Ochs,Jr. Collier County Manager leoochs@colliergov.net 239.252.8383 From: McLeanMatthew Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 2:54 PM To: David A. Cressy Cc: FrenchJames; WilkisonDavid; CasalanguidaNick; OchsLeo; ScavoneMichelle; McKennaJack Subject: RE: Lodge Abbott Mr. Cressy, Thanks for taking my return call earlier today to discuss the Kalea Bay Project. As we discussed on the phone, the developer has approved site permits to construct a golf course on their eastern parcel. In speaking with our County Engineer,Jack McKenna, his inspection team has confirmed that fill dirt material is being brought into the permitted Golf Course (SDP AR-5282) which has been planned for the Eastern parcel. His inspection team met with the contractor to confirm that the dump trucks require covered tarping when transporting loads. We appreciate your concerned call and hope that the additional information provided answers your raised concerns. Co $r County Matt McLean, P.E. Principal Project Manager Collier County Growth Management Department Development Review Division-Manager 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Phone:239-252-8279 Fax:239-252-6945 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 11:07 PM To: Judi Palay; Donna Reed Carom;jodiebert@reagan.com; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna Subject: Fwd: Cocohatchee Bay Golf Course Is a Sham Now we've heard from Commissioners Nance and Henning. . . I'm betting we won't get a response from our District 2 Commissioner. Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 Forwarded message From: NanceTim <TimNance@colliergov.net> Date: Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:31 PM Subject: RE: Cocohatchee Bay Golf Course Is a Sham To: Diane Rupnow<rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Cc: FlanaganJim<JimFlanagan@colliergov.net> Ms. Rupnow; I very clearly explained to area citizens, and in my public comments at the hearing, that this would occur. To expect that no development would happen on this property was simply wishful thinking on your part. You had an excellent proposal that would have preserved a great deal of beautiful and environmental property for ever. The proposed development of a few single family residences would have been the best situation. You objected and got what you asked for. I am sorry for Florida, not short sighted citizens. With Sincere Regrets at this completely predictable result, Tim Nance—District#5. 1 about a golf course IF they planned to build a golf course?(See screen shot of the text of the Kalea Bay amenities description in Attachment 2.) Recently I went to the Kalea Bay Sales office with a visitor from out-of-state who is truly interested in purchasing a condo on the gulf. During a 20 minute discussion, the Kalea Bay sales agent repeated three times that there are no plans to build a golf course with the Kalea Bay project. They have detailed pricing sheets to give to prospective buyers, but there is no mention of golf course memberships. From our perspective it is wrong for the county to allow this developer to extend an old 2004 golf course permit without providing updated and detailed plans regarding its design and estimated time of completion. True intent is the issue here. . . In 2015, he cleared two large portions of the land while building Tower 1. How much more of this land that is supposed to be retained as a preserve in its natural vegetative state will be destroyed in 2016-17 when Lodge Abbott breaks ground on Tower Two? Will there be anything left to preserve after he completes all five towers? This is just not right and we would like someone in county government to respond to our concerns and address this issue." Michelle Scavone sent me this reply: • "Thank you for your correspondence dated April 4, 2016. Staff has again reviewed the site progress and have not found any work which is inconsistent with the approved construction plans and zoning (settlement agreement). While staff understands your concern,Collier County Growth Management does not regulate promotional advertising of developments. As long as the developer continues to construct under the requirements of the approved permits,we have no ability to find fault with the current construction occurring on the subject site. In reference to your question regarding clearing limits related to the proposed tower buildings,attached is the Site Development Plan approval that identifies the location of the proposed towers along with the areas to remain as native/preserve. We appreciate your concerns related to this project. On behalf of Matt McLean, P.E., Principal Project Manager and Jack McKenna P.E., County Engineer Michelle Scavone, GMD Operations Coordinator Thank you again for reaching out to staff. 3 GrecoSherry From: WillerSpectorLee on behalf of TaylorPenny Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 11:22 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: FW: PUD in Naples Daily News Today: Protect Our Future From: jennifer.rupnow@gmail.com [mailto:jennifer.rupnow@gmail.com] On Behalf Of PreserveThePUD@gmail.com Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 4:43 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: PUD in Naples Daily News Today: Protect Our Future Letter: Protect our future 4:23 PM, Mar 23, 2015 letters to the editor Marilyn Stendahl,Naples Protect our future Three words stood out to me as I looked at the colliergov.net website. They come from the mission statement of guiding principles (values) for the Collier County commissioners. Knowledge: Please personally view the land whose future you will determine. It is the east parcel of the Cocohatchee Bay PUD on Vanderbilt Drive and Wiggins Pass Road. Contrast it to Kalea Bay, currently under development on the west parcel of the PUD. It is mostly barren in preparation for 10 or more years of constructing five high-rise condo buildings resulting in 582 luxury waterfront units added to this coastal high hazard flood area. Stewardship: This east parcel is one of the few remaining natural habitats and preserves in this area. Careful and responsible management of this natural resource is effectively entrusted to your care. Our hope is for it to remain a natural resource. Accountability: Please hold Lodge/Abbott accountable to the terms of the 2008 court settlement agreeing to leave the east parcel of the PUD "forever as green open space" if the then-proposed golf course was not built on that land. In exchange, extra units were allowed to be added to the five high rise-buildings on the west parcel of the PUD. Now the developer proposes to build an additional 62 units on the east parcel. Those units already have been added to the west parcel in the 2008 settlement agreement. Commissioners, as elected chief legislators of Collier County, and our representatives, please do not open this settlement. 1 RALF BROOKES, ATTORNEY Board Certified in City, County and Local Government Law June 15, 2017 Re: TIME CERTAIN REQUEST for Administrative Appeal Kalea Bay "Notice of Intent to Consider an Administrative Appeal" - JUDITH S.PALAY AND 92 OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN COCOHATCHEE BAY NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITIES,FILED AN APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF BUILDING SEPARATIONS, BUILDING WIDTHS,BUILDING DWELLING UNITS,AND BUILDING HEIGHTS IN THE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT SDPA-120160002242 FOR KALEA BAY... Dear County Manager and BCC Chair Penny Taylor (c/o County Attorney): Please find this request for an advanced time certain of 1 pm (or as soon thereafter as can be heard) for an upcoming July 11, 2017 or anytime on July 12 because: • I am not able to attend in the morning, but can be there anytime after 1 pm; • We expect that many of the 92 appellants will attend in person and more interested citizens will also be in attendance and we would like to minimize the amount of time that is spent waiting for the item to be heard when seats are needed for other persons attending other items on the agenda during morning hours; • Some of the appellants and interested citizens are flying in to RSW specifically to attend the hearing from out of state and will be arriving on morning flights. Thank you for considering our request for a time certain for this administrative appeal in advance. Best regards, /s/ Ralf Brookes Attorney Attorney for the 93 Appellants 6111 CERTIF ED FIcsida Bar pr. N LOC LGWE�MIENT Ralf Brookes Attorney 1217 E Cape Coral Parkway#107 Cape Coral, Fl 33904 Phone (239) 910-5464; fax (866) 341-6086 RalfBrookes@gmail.com 1 GrecoSherry From: TaylorPenny Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 8:34 PM To: WillerSpectorLee Subject: Fwd: Preserve The PUD; preserve the land. Penny Taylor Commissioner-Elect, District 4 3299 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34112 239-252-7447 Begin forwarded message: From: Patricia Massey<amassey@alum.mit.edu> Date: March 30, 2015 at 6:33:09 PM EDT To: TaylorPenny<PennyTaylor@colliergov.net> Subject: Preserve The PUD; preserve the land. Reply-To: "amassey@alum.mit.edu" <amassey@alum.mit.edu> Dear Ms. Taylor, Thanks for your support on March 24th and your vote not to rezone the Lodge Abbot land, Kalea Bay, on Vanderbilt Drive, east. The decision ended a long fought battle on the language in the County Settlement Agreement of 2008. Our trust in government is reinforced by your vote. We know that this is just a battle in a war that can erupt again, but for now the land will remain green open space. Alan and Patricia Massey 14668 Glen Eden Drive 239-591-4862 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 10:12 PM To: Andy Solis For Collier Campaign Cc: TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; McDanielBill; Ralf Brookes; BertSaunders@colliergov.net Subject: Golf Course Conversion Amendment Dear Commissioner Solice, Neither Judi Palay nor I will be able to attend the March 14, 2017 BCC meeting regarding the Golf Course Conversion Amendment. You are aware of our concerns that the Cocohatchee Bay PUD developer will somehow attempt to use the Golf Course Conversion Document to facilitate the rezoning of the "Golf Course Parcel"to residential. On January 19, 2017 I attended the Planning Commission meeting and expressed my request that language be included in the document that would limit its implementation ONLY to golf courses that were FULLY CONSTRUCTED AND IN BUSINESS prior to the the April 12, 1016 moratorium on golf course conversions. As your District 2 constituent, I ask that you consider adding that language to the Golf Course Conversion Amendment to restrict its usage to those golf courses for whom it was intended. Thank you! Diane Rupnow Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday,April 19, 2017 4:52 PM To: OchsLeo Cc: KlatzkowJeff;TaylorPenny; Ralf Brookes; Brad Schiffer AIA; Donna Reed Caron; Judi Palay; Carl Stendahl; David Cressy Subject: Confirmation Dear Mr. Ochs, This message will confirm our meeting with you on April 28th at 11:00. Even though I will be unable to attend in person, I hope to be able to join the meeting via phone. Carl Stendhal and David Cressy from Glen Eden and Brad Schiffer and Donna Reed Caron will be there to meet with you and are totally aware of our issues and concerns. Jeff Klatzkow just informed me that he will also be attending that meeting so I have informed our attorney, Ralf Brooks of the date and time to see if he can also attend. Commissioner Taylor's assistant called me this morning with the message that "no further changes would be approved for Kalea Bay without input from neighbors." I take that to mean that you have directed County staff to not move forward with approval of the amendment for Buildings 2--5 which is currently under their review AND that neighbors will be notified and have a chance to discuss our concerns regarding proposed changes in a public meeting. Please confirm that my understanding is correct. Thank you. Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 5:19 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: County"staff" Dear Commissioner Taylor, Building five Kalea Bay towers 310' wide and only 100' apart is going to have a direct and observable negative impact on all of us FOREVER. I find it troubling that important decisions are made by County"staff'with complete anonymity and; therefore, no accountability or recourse. . . Since the separation of high-rise buildings is important to the ambience of an entire community, could we obtain a written review of the staff process to allow the administrative reduction to one half of the intended minimum separation? Also, we would like to know what staff members are responsible for the administrative review on this issue. Thank you! Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 GrecoSherry From: Aris Dougherty <adougherty1530@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 1:19 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: KALEA BAY 2 Hello, My name is Aris Dougherty, I reside in Collier County and work in the construction industry. My job will be directly affected in a very negative way if Kalea Bay 2 is halted. I don't understand why anyone wants to hold back Naples' growth and economy. Please consider the hundreds of people that will be affected if this project is halted. Thank you very much for your consideration, Aris Dougherty Naples, FL 1 GrecoSherry From: Jessica Judd <jessicajudd@crsmithllc.com> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 9:54 AM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.neT; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; SolisAndy; FialaDonna Subject: Kalea Bay Bid #2 Attachments: PastedGraphic-1.tiff To the Collier County Commissioners, I have just been informed that there is some opposition to the second phase of Kalea Bay. I am a concerned Naples local (over 31 years in Naples and two generations before) who is heavily involved in the construction industry as I work for C.R. Smith which contracts and manages over 50+ subcontractors that employ hundreds of workers in Florida in our contracting alone. A job like this provides significant opportunity not just to our company but to the many trades that are fortunate enough to participate. Projects like these help not only our industry, but benefit the overall community for many years with the jobs that it creates and all the outlying businesses that are affected not only by the construction but the livelihoods that are affected by the wages and benefits of those employed by Kalea Bay. Our company will be hugely affected with the decisions that are made regarding this project. The construction industry as well as SW Florida have been through some very tough times in recent years and it is encouraging to see and be part of a positive outlook and a growing economy. Thank you for your time! Jessica Judd Assistant to Chad Smith/Office Manager lessicajudd@crsmithllc.com P: (239) 596-8003 F: 239.288.0575 C.A. SMITH. LLC C[7N8TRwGT+QN 1 GrecoSherry From: Charlie Bauman <Charlie@acresplumbing.com> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 12:47 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Ron Bowling; Nancy Farnsworth Subject: Kalea Bay Building #2 Dear Collier County Commissioners, I am currently an employee of Acres and Son Plumbing, Inc. , a Collier County company for some 40 years. I have worked for Acres and Son Plumbing for over 8 of the past 15 years. I personally worked at the Kalea Bay job site full time as an assistant project manager from 04/01/16 until 12/31/16. Presently our staff at Kalea Bay site is only 20%of what it was because Building#2 has not yet started. Acres and Son Plumbing has already been negatively impacted because Building#2 has not started. If building 2 is not constructed,Acres will be even more seriously harmed as will my work with the company. In addition to Acres, many other subcontractors are being negatively affected. Hundreds of construction industry jobs are at risk if Kalea Bay Building#2 and further buildings are not allowed to be constructed. I sincerely ask for your consideration to allow the construction of Building #2 and further buildings at Kalea Bay to proceed. Thank you for your consideration. Kind Regards, Charlie Bauman Acres&Son Plumbing, Inc. 5701 Houchin Street, Suite 1 Naples, FL 34109 239-597-5031 Cell 239-734-0804 Charlie@acresplumbing.com 1 GrecoSherry From: Kevin Jensen <kevin@jensenunderground.com> Sent: Sunday,July 2, 2017 2:19 PM To: 'BillMcDaniel@colliergov.neT'; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net; 'BurtSaunders@colliergov.net'; 'AndySolis@colliergov.net; 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net Subject: Kalea Bay Buildings#2,3,4,5 Dear Collier County Commissioners, I understand that there is some opposition to the second phase of Kalea Bay. I am a concerned business owner who is heavily involved in the Kalea Bay project.This project has been on our books for over a year and in our projection of work for our employees. If this project were to be cancelled it would put a hardship on Jensen Underground Utilities, therefore possibly causing layoffs within our company. We currently employ 95 wonderful people who have families. Not only do we provide a pay check to our employees,we also provide 100% health insurance coverage. Many of the employees purchase health insurance for their families through their hard work a pay checks that they have earned. A job like this provides significant opportunity not just to our company but to the many trades that are fortunate enough to participate. Projects like these help not only our industry, but benefit the overall community for many years with the jobs that it creates and all the outlying businesses that are affected not only by the construction but the livelihoods that are affected by the wages and benefits of those employed by Kalea Bay. Jensen Underground Utilities is very involved in both our communities and by providing quality opportunities, as well as teaching, coaching,training, and furthering developing people's skills. Our industry as well as SW Florida have been through some very tough times in recent years and it is encouraging to see and be part of a positive outlook and a growing economy. Thank You For Your Consideration, Kevin Jensen JENSEN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, INC. 5585 Taylor Rd. Naples, FL 34109 239-597-0060 Ext. 5 239-597-0061—Fax 239-825-1638—Cell Email: Kevin@jensenunderground.com Website: www.jensenunderground.com 1 GrecoSherry From: Teena Cowan <cowankt@cogeco.ca> Sent: Saturday, May 6, 2017 8:32 PM To: TaylorPenny;JeffKlatzkov@colliergov.net; OchsLeo; SolisAndy; DonnaFialla@colliergov.net; McDanielBill Subject: Kalea Bay Condos I am writing to express concern about the proposed development of buildings 2-5 of Kalea Bay. From the beginning we were concerned with how this would impact the area as we live at Gulfbreeze and are impacted by the sight of the building and proposed buildings. Too many and too big. Now we learn that they violated the regulations when building the first building. How typical of the developer to disregard the rules . We watched a displaced eagle as they started to bulldoze the area. I understand they have donated land or money?to help build the bicycle trail on Vanderbilt Drive. I hope that was not a pay off to do what they want and to get approval for buildings 2-5. Please limit the building of this far too large complex. Sincerely, Teena & Ken Cowan 21 Bluebill Ave. 602 Naples, Florida 1 GrecoSherry From: Ira Rubenstein <irar@me.com> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2017 3:48 PM To: SolisAndy Subject: Kalea Bay Development Dear Commissioner, We are full time residents at 445 Cove Tower Dr in Wiggins Bay Community and are very concerned about the continuing development and what seems like runaway growth in our community. The volume of traffic pressures on our infrastructure and yes, the view on the waterfront will be severely affected by the building of the towers known as Kalea Bay along Vanderbilt Drive. I urge you to vote against any changes in the approved plans for these towers that would increase the size of these structures and allow them to be closer to each other. Thank you for your consideration. Ira S. Rubenstein 445 Cove Tower Dr Apt 903 Naples FL 34110 239-597-3141 845-341-3099 Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 GrecoSherry From: Laraine D. <latkeleah@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 7:18 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Kalea Bay non compliance The Settlement Agreement and PUD must be upheld per the agreement. Why should this developer break all of the rules each time he makes another development- yet the rights of hundreds and maybe thousands of citizens don't count? Please do your job and protect us. Stewardship, Laraine Deutsch Naples 1 GrecoSherry From: John Wilkinson <John@sunmasterinc.com> Sent: Friday,June 30, 2017 3:10 PM To: McDanielBill; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Subject: Kalea Bay To whom it may concern, I am a business owner that employs approx. 50 people Our company is heavily reliant on the construction industry for our living. Projects like Kalea Bay are the lifeblood of our revenue. So when we hear about a project such as Kalea Bay it allows us to more confidently invest in other areas of our economy as consumers. I have lived my whole life (48 years) in Naples so I do understand the idea of pushback against new developments such as this. But typically it doesn't come from natives, it comes from folks that took advantage moving into past developments that some may have been opposed to when they were going in. It makes me shake my head when I think about the "close the door behind me" mentality that happens. As I understand it the Kalea Bay development of 5 condo buildings has already been cleared but there are those who are trying to have it stopped. I sincerely hope you all take into consideration the trickle down effect that will happen if you stop the movement forward of this project. We are a small company but at least 1/3 of my people are currently involved with the workings of this project.Their jobs may not exist without it. When I go to jobsite meetings I see hundreds of people being employed on this site that again would be unemployed if it is shut down. Thank you for taking the time to read this. Please make the right choice for us. Sincerely, John Wilkinson President Sunmaster of Naples 900 Industrial Blvd Naples, FL 34104 239-261-3581 ofc. 239-261-7499 fax. 239-253-4773 cell. www.sunmasterinc.com 1 GrecoSherry From: pureplumbingl4 <pureplumbing14@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 2:00 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Kalea Bay To the Collier County Commissioners, I have just been informed that there is some opposition to the second phase of Kalea Bay. I am a concerned Naples Resident/Business Owner, whom is heavily involved in the construction industry. I work for C.R. Smith, LLC., which contracts and manages over 50+ subcontractors that employ hundreds of workers in Florida in our contracting alone. A job like this provides significant opportunity not just to our company, but to the many trades that are fortunate enough to participate. Projects like these help not only our industry, but benefit the overall community for many years with the jobs that it creates. All the outlying businesses that are affected by the construction as well as the livelihoods that are affected by the wages and benefits of those employed by Kalea Bay. Our company will be hugely affected with the decisions that are made regarding this project. The construction industry as well as SW Florida have been through some very tough times in recent years. It is encouraging to see and be part of a positive growing economy. Thank you for your time!" Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone 1 GrecoSherry From: Ron Bowling <ron@acresplumbing.com> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 12:23 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: Kalea Bay Dear Collier County Commissioners, I wanted to send my personal concerns in reference to possible delays in the construction of the next building at the Kalea Bay project. I work for a plumbing company that is currently working on the Kalea Bay project.With the planned start of building#2 we are able to keep our staffing working anticipating the next building to start. If it does not,there will be layoffs due to lack of work. I personally have struggled as many others for the last 8 to 9 years trying to survive the hardships in the most drastic down turn in construction this area has seen. It was a long, slow recovery and we are just now becoming hopeful in our futures in the construction trade and regaining some ground. I am very sensitive in concern with growth and over-development and believe our local government has found a balance for everyone in my personal experience of living herefor over 40 years. I was fond of the Wiggins Pass area in the 70's when there was little more than a Marina and some small developments. That is not the case these days and much of that area is built on and believe the very people complaining reside in the adjacent areas probably have not been here for very many years. Nor do they likely reside here year round or earn a living here. Kalea Bay has already been approved and site developed for the future construction of these buildings.The potential opportunities for our working residents and the revenue to local business will be felt county wide and will effect hundreds upon hundreds of the collier working class and business owner residents. Please represent us in allowing this building to proceed as planned. Our livelihoods are counting on you. Sincerely, Ron Bowling Acres&Son Plumbing Inc. 5701 Houchin St Suite#1 Naples, Fl 34109 Office 239-597-5031 Fax 239-597-3740 ron@acresplumbing.com www.acresplumbing.com 1 GrecoSherry From: Rene Acres-Hatch <Rene@acresplumbing.com> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 11:54 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Kalea Bay Penny Taylor, I am writing to express my concerns for halting the construction of Kalea Bay 2. I have resided in Naples for over 48 years and have been employed in the construction industry for over 30 years. Tourism is our industry here in Naples and construction is a large part of what keeps Naples growing to accommodate the new comers in our area. Halting the progress of Kalea Bay would have impacts on several areas that should be of concern to ALL Naples residents, not just the few in Glen Eden who might have their view obstructed. Glen Eden should take into consideration that they were entitled to develop their community without opposition from others in the area. Please know the decision that you make concerning this project will set precedence for all future projects and will affect the employment of hundreds of construction workers. I am asking that you please honor your approval of the development of Kalea Bay. Sincerely, Rene' Rene'Acres-3-Catch R Acres Plumbing Co LLC 1911 Seward Ave, Suite 3 Naples, FL. 34109 PH: 239-598-0800 FX: 239-597-1590 Rene@acresplumbing.com ID - ACRES PLUMBING �" t• � ---` ` 0 r'•'0 • 24 HOUR EMERGENCY SERVICE Website Like us on Facebook 1 GrecoSherry From: CasalanguidaNick Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2017 11:43 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: OchsLeo; KlatzkowJeff; StrainMark Subject: Kalea Bay setback reduction Importance: High Commissioner, I apologize for not getting this to you sooner. I spoke with Mark and Leo, but have yet to speak with Jeff. The application is being considered in the same manner as has been historically done throughout Pelican Bay. The administrative reduction was discussed as part of approvals. Should the neighborhood challenge the administrative reduction,this most likely would be heard by the full Board. After reviewing the site plan and documents, I can find no reason for staff to not grant this approval.The towers are all over 100' apart. I believe the code is one half of the sum of the heights.Assuming about 350/2=175,the reductions are not unreasonable. Additionally and importantly,the approximate locations were shown as part of the settlement review. That said, I will let them complete their review and make their findings. Should there be an appeal, I would suggest that we have a follow-up to provide you some history and discuss the potential ramifications. Respectfully, Nick Casalanguida Collier County, Deputy Manager NickCasalanguida@Colliergov.net 239-252-8383 Attached are the relevant pages from the PUD (which is part of the SA). FDF Pages from Settlement Agre... Attached is page one of Brook's letter. FDF Pages from Ralf's Letter to Co... Attached is one page of dimensions from SDP 2"d submittal. (The distances are highlighted, note the garages are not the same as the towers, historically they have not been.) 1 GrecoSherry From: Linda Crowe <linda.crowe@progressivewaste.com> Sent: Friday,June 30, 2017 1:55 PM To: "BillMcDaniel@colliergov.net; FialaDonna; SolisAndy;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt Subject: Kalea Bay Tower#2 Importance: High To Collier County Commissioners, I am very disappointed there is some opposition to the second phase of Kalea Bay. As an informed resident of Southwest Florida and who is heavily involved in the construction and real estate industry, it's unfortunate to hear of opposition to growth within our community. Not only am a licensed Real Estate Agent, I also am fortunate enough to be employed by Waste Connections,who provides hauling and disposal services on construction sites. Kalea Bay Building#1 has not only provided a significant employment opportunity for construction workers who work and live within our community; but has also benefited Southwest Florida by attracting affluent residents who have purchased condominiums in Tower 1. The benefits this project brings within our community reaches far beyond today. It supports our community for many years down the road by the jobs it creates to operate Kalea Bay and the opportunity it brings for outlying existing businesses as well as future business opportunities. The increase in tax revenue for Collier County should also be an important topic not be overlooked. We want to look for future growth and opportunity in Southwest Florida and opposing the second phase of Kalea Bay does not support our local industry of construction, tourism/snowbirds, and real estate markets. Hundreds of companies and probably an estimated thousand workers would be directly affected with the decisions that are made regarding this project. The real estate and construction market has went through some very tough times and to stop the second phase of Kalea Bay would be going backwards. It is encouraging to see and be part of a positive outlook and a growing economy considering what we have been through. I hope that we can continue to grow as a community and every one of whose who work and live within this community can prosper and enjoy the life Southwest Florida has to offer. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Linda Crowe I Territory Manager Waste Connections,Inc. 2289 Bruner Lane, Fort Myers, FL 33912 0:239-489-1716 I F:239-489-1652 I C:239-229-5473 111. WASTE CONNECT rI0NS.INC, C, .r with the F,,nm' 1 GrecoSherry From: Ross Baiera <rjbaiera06@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2017 11:56 AM To: SolisAndy; FialaDonna; BurtSanders@colliergov.net; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: Kalea Bay Towers Site Development Attachments: Scan0018 jpg Commissioners, Please read the attachment. We are presently not at our Florida residence and can't attend the local hearings. Thank you. Ross J. Baiera for Ross J. and Patricia A. Baiera 1 i I I i I GrecoSherry From: Jim & Kitty Shaw <jikisoc@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday,April 12, 2017 11:39 AM To: TaylorPenny; GrecoSherry Subject: Kalea Bay Towers Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed To:Penny Taylor, During the Public Comment portion of the April 11 BCC meeting,a graphical depiction was presented showing a to-scale representation of the height,width and spacing of the proposed five towers at Kalea Bay.When I saw that depiction,a red flag popped up in my mind.During my engineering career,I worked with a design team creating complex medical diagnostic systems.Part of the development process,required by FDA,is called"Hazard Analysis".During HA,a multi-discipline team picks apart the entire system design looking for hidden,unintended consequences that could lead to disastrous events.This is a lengthy,rigorous and painful process,but extremely effective.It caused me to wonder if this process was considered when the towers became taller,wider and closer together. Anyone who has walked the streets of NY City on a windy day can attest to the"wind tunnel effect".This occurs when moving air hits tall, closely spaced buildings and is funneled through the space between the buildings,increasing wind velocity and causing turbulence.This attached article explains wind tunnel effect in greater detail:http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/local/the-pulse/79275-the-science-of- wind-tunnels-where-and-why-those-harsh-winds-strike-Given that we are situated in an area prone to tropical storms with high wind velocities,and the tower"wall"faces the brunt of powerful on-shore winds,and given that many Kalea Bay residents may have mobility challenges,the recent"tweaks"to buildings'width and separation may have unintentionally created a potential future hazard to many tower residents. I am not aware of any tower complex in the Naples area with building dimensions and spacing similar to that of the Kalea Bay plan.If there are no comparable complexes from which to draw conclusions as to wind safety,and there is no study to show the recent plan changes do not create a hazard,should the CCB then require the developer to conduct a wind effect study?After all,if the current development plan is approved without such a study,and a wind-caused injury occurs,does the County share in the responsibility for that injury? Thank you, James D Shaw 841 Carrick Bend Cir.#201 Naples,FL 34110 Other relevant link:http://www.iawe.org/Proceedings/5EACWE/092.pdf 1 GrecoSherry From: Arturo Guido <aguido@legnobastone.com> Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 10:53 AM To: McDanielBill; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Subject: Kalea Bay "To the Collier County Commissioners, "To the Collier County Commissioners, It has recently been brought to our attention that there is some opposition to the second phase of Kalea Bay. I am a concerned local Naples, Florida businessman who owns and operates a five-generation small business headquartered in Naples, Florida.We are extremely involved in the construction industry as we are a small sub-contractor that works directly for C.R. Smith. We are a boutiques manufacturing company with approximately 50 employees directly linked to the Kalea Bay project. A job like this provides significant opportunity not just to our company but to the many trades that are fortunate enough to participate. The Kalea Bay project is a significant element to our business and crucial to the employees that are directly employed because of the Kalea Bay project. No to mention the monetary impact it will also have on all their families. Our company and our employees will be hugely affected with the decisions that are made regarding this project. It would be shameful to post pone the progress of this already approved project and negatively impact tens of thousands of families for the sake of a few. Thank you for your time!" Please consider the environment when printing this email.As a company deeply invested in wood,we appreciate your efforts to maintain a world with healthy forests and prudent environmental stewardship.Thank you! Gegno Bastone Wide PlankElooring "Custom Designed Furniture for'Your Floor" 2684 7forseshoe Drive South Naples, Florida 34104 (0)239-206-1898 c#13 Xegno glCone WIDE PLANK FLOORING Disclaimer Notice The E-Mail and the information contained in it and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged.If you received this email in error please notify us immediately.You are not authorized to,and must not disclose,copy,distribute or retain this E-Mail or any part of it. We have taken precautions to lower the risk of transmitting software viruses,but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on this message and any attachment to it.Neither Legno Bastone nor the sender can accept liability or responsibility for any damage or any loss whatsoever caused by the transmission of any virus. All statements are made WITHOUT PREJUDICE and all offers are made SUBJECT TO CONTRACT within 45 days of quote. 1 GrecoSherry From: Barbara High <bcjh1234@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2015 12:51 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Kalea Bay How was this place given permission to build towers with 24 stories isn't there a limit of 20....so much for that area looking beautiful and picturesque....remember when we said that we didn't want the West coast to look like the East coast....ha....no more. Doesn't the county have any say or even care...what happens in what used to be a beautiful part of Collier? Barbara High Sent from my iPad GrecoSherry From: Gregory.Bennett@Ferguson.com Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 11:23 AM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: Kalea Collier county team, My name is Greg Bennett and I work at Ferguson Enterprises. I have been a part of the Kalea project for the past 5 years. I mainly work on multifamily and have got to spend time in high rises both on our side and the other coast. There is nothing that represents Naples better than Kalea Bay. The project is unlike anything else in the state. It's a high level project, that has the quality and look that all of our northern friends are seeking. Many of the clients are also local Naples people looking for a second home. I know many of the buyers and can't explain their excitement to move in. These are people coming for weeks at a time. From a personal level, the stoppage of work would have a major effect on the economy and my family. My company alone has forecasted this work and planned accordingly. Many people have been hired and trained to service this job as we should. We have based things on feedback from sales. I am Estero residence who has a huge desire to move to Naples. I work in Naples, go to church at North Naples and mainly dine down south. My wife asks me every day when we can move. Projects like Kalea keep our dreams alive of being able to make the move down. We are younger(35 years old)with 3 kids. Naples schools for high school is what we want. I can't explain how many estero/fort myers friends of mine have the same dream to get down. Projects like Kalea provide the income to achieve this. Yes there are over 300 people on the project but there are a ton more behind the scenes. From the distributers to the designers, we would all be hurt from any stoppage. We are the people who are here year round spending money while others are gone. We are the future leaders of our community. Nothing represents Naples better than Kalea bay. Thanks for your time, Gregory Bennett Builder Sales Ferguson,a Wolseley Company 38 Goodlette-Frank Rd, Naples Fl 34102 USA 0:239-963-0080 C:239-872-2713 gregory.bennett@ferguson.com 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 2:11 PM To: TaylorPenny Cc: Ralf Brookes;Judi Palay Subject: Letter from our Attorney Dear Commissioner Taylor, Thank you for meeting with Judi Palay and me last Wednesday. Since then, we have met with Commissioners Fiala, Solice and Saunders.None of them had been given the letter our attorney, Ralf Brookes sent to the County via the County Attorney. Fortunately, we also set up meetings with County Commissioners to provide relevant information.. . I would guess that Mr. Klatzkow gave our attorney's letter to the County Manager and his assistant who may have shared it with Chris Scott and Mike Bosie.Neither Mr. Klatzkow nor Mr. Ochs nor anyone in County Planning has responded to our Attorney or us regarding our concerns. If you have had time to read pp 46--66 of the transcript of the January 11, 2008 Planning Commissioners meeting, you know that some Planning Commissioners wanted to inform County Commissioners about the troubling county staff interpretation of footnote 3 which has lead to the unlimited administrate reductions we take issue with today. I seriously doubt if Commissioner Halas and Commissioner Fiala would have agreed to the Settlement Agreement if they thought the developer could enlarge the diameter of the buildings by 50' and put them as close together as he wanted. I find it troubling that the County Commissioners were circumvented then and continue to be circumvented today. During our conference call with Mike Bosi, he suggested that we, the people upset by the drastic changes that have been made to SDP's, should meet with the builder. That is analogous to a police officer ringing my doorbell and telling me there's a burglar in my back yard and I should go take care of it. The County Attorney suggested that we file an"Administrative Appeal" so that the issues can be openly discussed at a County Commissioners' meeting.Now that we have given our attorney's letter to four of the Commissioners and will give it to the fifth one at a scheduled March 20th meeting, I wonder if County Commissioners could choose to put this on an upcoming meeting's agenda without us having to file an appeal? I apologize that I don't know the process for making your agendas. . . If you feel it would do any good for us to file an Administrative Appeal and get this on an upcoming agenda, we will begin fund raising to pay the filing fees. Sincerely, Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 GrecoSherry From: Daniel Fusco <twcfusco@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2017 11:50 AM To: McDanielBill; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Subject: Kalea Bay opposition Attachments: image1.jpeg; ATT00001.txt Hello, Just a quick note in regards to the petition against phase 2 of Kalea Bay. I am the owner/operator of Woodworkers Cabinet of Naples, Inc and we work closely with CR Smith and his team to manufacture custom cabinetry and millwork for his clients. We have grown our company to over 30 employees and we primarily service CR Smith and the Kalea Bay project. We have recently purchased a second location down the street from our current shop on Taylor Rd. to enable us to keep up with the needs of the Kalea project and we are extremely excited for the remaining phases of this development. Please consider the impact on the families who are counting on this project for years to come and will need this to help pay for their kids college. (I have 5 of them!) Thank you and we appreciate our beautiful town and all the opportunities it offers to the trades people! Sincerely, Daniel Fusco 1 GrecoSherry From: scott@amssoundandvision.com Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 2:28 PM To: McDanielBill; TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Cc: chadrsmith@me.com; marc@amssoundandvision.com; gsrichter@aol.com; jessicajudd@crsmithllc.com Subject: Kalea Bay project To the Collier County Commissioners, I am and have been a Naples resident since 1990. I have seen Naples grow from the small town to a larger town with that small town atmosphere. It is where I enjoy to live and therefore where I set up my family and my business. It pains me to hear that there is opposition to projects, specifically the Kalea Bay project. I understand what it is like to have construction go on next door and although it is a little annoying, it will pass and Naples is better for it. It is promising to our community when homes are built. It creates confidence in community, business, and family life! What better way to increase the value and the operation of our county than welcoming those who are willing to invest in its future! I am an owner of a small company that is involved with the Kalea Bay project. We are a small fish in the pond of contractors working on this project. I cannot speak for them, but we have added staff to our company, invested in advertising, business expansion, and showroom enhancements to provide for the potential 600+families that will call Kalea Bay and Naples, Fl their home. I can only make the assumption that the other companies have made similar investments. It takes a lot of people to build a community and even more to staff the location when it is complete. I would ask that you do not make any changes to these employees source of income or provide more stress for companies in the workforce by delaying the project. Our company and our employees families will be directly affected by the decisions you make. I appreciate your time. If you feel the need to reach out to me about my thoughts on this project,feel free to do so. Best Regards, Scott Moore AMS Sound &Vision Owner 1 ATT00001 Daniel Fusco Woodworker's Cabinet of Naples 6189 Taylor Rd. Naples, FL 34109 239-593-1718 www.woodworkersnaples.com Page 1 GrecoSherry From: Teale Mueller <tealemueller@gmail.com> Sent: Friday,June 30, 2017 11:59 AM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: Kalea Bay Project Dear Collier County Commissioners, My name is Teale Mueller. I am a sales associate and team member that has been instrumental in the day to day sales process of the Kalea Bay Community. I have also been involved in general real estate in Collier County for years. Our team has been involved with so many aspects of representing this wonderful Kalea Bay community and has been immersed in assisting not only our Kalea Bay buyers, but also providing information to and fostering relationships with hundreds of our Collier County full time and seasonal residents who have visited our site.. I am in a position to see the excitement of our future Kalea Bay residents, many who have worked,planned and saved over many years to be in a position to fulfill their dream of living in a community such as Kalea Bay. Another great aspect of being involved in this project is that I have also had the opportunity to see that hundreds of local men and women from many different companies/trades are proudly invested in the employment opportunities a project like Kalea Bay creates. From cleaners, to landscapers, construction workers, designers, material suppliers, cooperating realtors all who have benefited and have been able to provide a better quality of life for themselves and their families. Sometimes our society highlights and amplifies the negative opinions of a few people. This is unfortunate. I believe we all have a responsibility to open our eyes and ears to all of the good and opportunity a project like Kalea Bay presents to so many in our community. Kalea Bay will have such a positive impact in supporting our current and future local economy. There is no doubt that this unique and beautiful community will improve the lives of many for years to come. I thank you for your time and consideration, —rale Mueller Sales Associate Wilson 6, Associates 1391,0 Olci Cara t Road Naples, ft_ "110 235)-79)_0110 Co) 2)9A- -i-£o6 4.=d TealeMuelteragmaii.unn \AN Wilson Associates GrecoSherry From: Brian Dollard <briandollardrce@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 1:13 PM To: McDanielBill;TaylorPenny; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Subject: Kalea Bay Project To the Collier County Commissioners, It has been brought to my attention there is opposition to the development of the Kalea Bay Project by a few surrounding neighbors. Let me start by saying I am a 41 year Resident of Naples, I have been in the construction business for 38 years. I have seen all the changes from Ft. Myers to Marco Island. The construction industry here is 2nd to none for quality of job and the tradesman that build them.We are a vital part of our communities. From purchasing our own properties and creating commerce with other businesses and industries.Also by creating a better tax base for our State and local Government. I currently employ roughly 50 tradesman for our company. Local men and women who have families to provide and support.The Kalea bay Project is vital to my family and my employees families to live a quality life here in Southwest Florida. In this situation with the opposition opinion, it's a shame that a few who have their dwelling in the this location are opposed to those who would like a dwelling in the same location. ( this makes no sense).The Kalea Bay project is the most beautiful thought out resort style community that I have been involved with and the privilege to work on. The construction Industry has been in some tough times as of late,just the past year or so we have been coming out of a serious slow down due to the financial crisis.All the people involved are starting to live a better life and contribute to the community in a more vigor way. If this project was delayed or stopped because of the few who only have their own interest in mind and not the greater good of the community it would be another hardship on the construction industry and the people involved. My company and its employees would certainly feel hardship in their lives. Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. Best regards to all of you. Brian Brian Dollard briandollardree@gmail.com RCE Contractors, Inc 3884 Progress Ave Naples, FL 34104 239-643-5758-Office 239-825-1532- Cell 239-643-6772-Fax CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is only for the person(s) named in the message header. Unless otherwise indicated, it may contain information that is confidential, privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete the e-mail. 1 GrecoSherry From: Ngh0031 <ngh0031@aol.com> Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2017 8:58 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: KALEA BAY SDPA I reside in Glen Eden on the Lakes. The Kalea Bay project is under construction on Vanderbilt Drive in North Naples, with the first tower almost complete and the remaining four towers to be built. A Site Development Plan Amendment (SDPA) is currently under review by Collier Planning, showing buildings with a separation between buildings that would be one-half the required minimum distance (i.e., a separation of 100 feet measured between towers, and 72 feet measured between parking structures). It is also our understanding that the first tower is at least 50 feet wider than the approved SDP. If the remaining towers were to be built as proposed in the SDPA, the results would be a huge concrete barrier to light and air and view. On April 11th, a group of concerned citizens living in the Vanderbilt Drive area attended a Board of County Commissioners meeting to express concerns over these proposed revisions to the approved plans. Sixteen residents signed up to speak during the Public Comment portion of the meeting. After hearing the first speaker, the County Attorney advised the Board that no further public comments on this issue should be allowed. The rationale given was that procedure required that the Site Development Plan Amendment be approved by staff, after which an administrative appeal could be filed. In our opinion, a review and decision on the Site Development Plan Amendment as submitted should not be left solely to staff, but should be considered in a public hearing before the full Board of County Commissioners to allow input and discussion from all parties. These changes are significant, impactful and would be detrimental to all aspects of this area of Vanderbilt drive. We respectfully ask that a public hearing on this issue be held. Henry & Barbara Taylor 14599 Glen Eden Drive Naples, Fl. 34110 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:32 AM To: TaylorPenny; GrecoSherry Subject: Our meeting today at 1:00 Good Morning Commissioner Taylor and Ms. Greco, I am looking forward to our meeting today at 1:00 and appreciate the opportunity to be heard. There will be 13 of us coming to the meeting today: Pat Bonser, Carl and Marilyn Stendhal, Barb and Mike Taylor, Peggy Ross and myself from Glen Eden on the Lakes; Jim and Kitty Shaw from Tarpon Cove; and Lou De Prisco and Dick Wilson from Arbor Trace. Brad Schiffer and Donna Reed Caron are also coming with us. Some of those who had signed up to speak last Tuesday have already headed north. . . We are going to gather outside at 12:45 and enter together. We will not fit into that small room on the 1st floor where we are supposed to check in and get approval before coming upstairs. I was wondering if I could call you directly and get permission to come up or could you somehow facilitate this for us?? I have some photos on my laptop that I would like to show Commissioner Taylor and I was wondering if you have the technology in place to allow them to be projected on a TV or screen or wall so all in our group could see. Thank you. Please call with your response to my questions. Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@a,gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 GrecoSherry From: Jim & Kitty Shaw <jikisoc@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 5:10 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: PLEASE VOTE NO Dear Commissioner Taylor, We strongly urge you to not vote to open the 2008 settlement in order to expand the approved Kalea Bay development by adding 62 homes on the "golf course" PUD property. We have listened to and agree with the various concerns voiced by surrounding communities and environmental conservancy groups. We have been residents of the Barbados VII neighborhood in the Tarpon Cove community for 5 years. We own one of 22 homes which currently enjoy an expansive preserve view that looks westward toward the projected PUD development of 62 homes. Many of us purchased our homes because of this view and were confident based on the 2008 Settlement Agreement that the view would change little as a golf course or green space. We discovered to our surprise at the February 26 meeting that the 100-foot buffer between that development and residences in Tarpon Cove would not extend to the Barbados VII neighborhood and northward. The developer felt that since there was already a Tarpon Cove preserve greater than 100 feet in depth he did not need to add more. What he overlooked was that that area of the preserve is composed of tall slash pines, low scrub, cypress trees and some open clearings. We can see through to the PUD land year round, but from December through March, when the cypress and other deciduous trees shed their leaves, there is view of the PUD minimally obstructed by tall, narrow tree trunks. Furthermore, there is an ongoing, county-mandated invasive plant removal in progress in the Tarpon Cove preserves that will further reduce the vegetative cover. We will be able to see their homes clearly and vice versa. There will be sound and light pollution which will impact the serenity and beauty of our preserve. Another of our concerns for Tarpon Cove is the increased potential for flooding especially in the Cayman community. We are also concerned for the surrounding communities because the water quality in the Cocohatchee estuary will be further degraded by this increased development. Data collected and published from 2002 to present confirms previous findings that the Cocohatchee estuary is already impaired for bacteria and nutrient pollution and concentrations. This impacts the fisheries and recreational use of the waters. Currently large volumes of stormwater runoff from both Lee and Collier counties run through Tarpon Cove community via a canal carrying polluted stormwater. At times of high levels of flow, water floods into the "golf course" PUD property which serves as a sponge. The storm water is released slowly from the land and is cleansed of some of the contamination in the process . Once the PUD property is filled and developed it will no longer retain and cleanse flood water and will itself become a source of additional pollution. From any angle, it appears to us that the only beneficiary of opening the PUD agreement, is the developer, not Collier County and the residents in the North Naples communities. 1 GrecoSherry From: cjhulce@aol.com Sent: Friday, March 20, 2015 1:54 PM To: FialaDonna; GeorgiaHiler@colliergov.net; HenningTom;TamiHenning@colliergov.net; TaylorPenny; NanceTim Subject: Preserve the Cocohatchee Bay Preserve: A Deal is a Deal How arrogant is Lodge Abbot that they think they can somehow (?) unsign the 2008 agreement with Collier County, and why do they have any reason to believe that agreement is no longer in effect after seven years? We live right next door to the Kalea Bay development which is springing out of the ground and causing Immokolee Road, Wiggins Pass and Vanderbilt Drive to be loaded with traffic! Lodge Abbot should not be allowed to develop that kind of density West of Vanderbilt (agreed to as a part of the 2008 agreement)and turn around and disagree/renegotiate the other side of it! A deal is a deal. Please, let's not spend any more taxpayer dollars helping them to further line their pockets and get away with lying and deception. Carol Hulce 435 Dockside Drive#402, Naples, FL 34110 GrecoSherry From: Patricia Massey <amassey@alum.mit.edu> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 6:33 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Preserve The PUD; preserve the land. Dear Ms. Taylor, Thanks for your support on March 24th and your vote not to rezone the Lodge Abbot land, Kalea Bay, on Vanderbilt Drive, east. The decision ended a long fought battle on the language in the County Settlement Agreement of 2008. Our trust in government is reinforced by your vote. We know that this is just a battle in a war that can erupt again, but for now the land will remain green open space. Alan and Patricia Massey 14668 Glen Eden Drive 239-591-4862 1 GrecoSherry From: Patricia Massey <amassey@alum.mit.edu> Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 6:49 PM Subject: PreserveThePUD@gmail.com Dear Commissioner, With just a few weeks to go, I hope that we can count on your support. Lodge Abbott should not be allowed to reopen the PUD as he has requested. Please be firm with him by your vote on March 24th and remind him that he made his decision in 2008. He gave his word; a man is only as good as his word. In 2008, the Commissioners gave him the west side of Vanderbilt Drive to build 5 high rise condos, Kalea Bay. The east side was to remain green, as the Settlement says, FOREVER. As a homeowner for 12 years in Glen Eden on the Lakes, off Vanderbilt Drive, I am very concerned about the green space remaining in the county. Preserve The PUD; preserve the land. Thank you in advance for your support. Alan and Patricia Massey 14668 Glen Eden Drive 239-591-4862 PreserveThePUD@gmail.com i GrecoSherry From: TaylorPenny Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 9:37 PM To: Diane Rupnow Cc: OchsLeo; GrecoSherry; KlatzkowJeff Subject: Re: Confirmation Dear Diane, That is not what I intended nor said. There will be NO public meeting. That was made very clear when the neighbors came to the Commission meeting and we stopped any further testimony. What there will be is a meeting where you and four others will have an opportunity to express your concerns to the County Manager. In the time frame of one week and two days until the meeting on the 28th, there will be no decision from staff coming forward. I am sorry that Sherry may have misunderstood and then communicated what was intended by my remarks. You requested a meeting with the County Manager. I suggested that you have the two former members from the Planning Commission and yourself attend that meeting. This is the only meeting that I intended in my communication with you. The process outlined in the law MUST be followed exactly. Please respect this. Cordially, Penny Penny Taylor Commissioner, District 4 Collier County 239/252-8603 From: Diane Rupnow Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 4:51 PM To: OchsLeo Cc: KlatzkowJeff;TaylorPenny; Ralf Brookes; Brad Schiffer AIA; Donna Reed Caron;Judi Palay; Carl Stendahl; David Cressy Subject: Confirmation Dear Mr. Ochs, This message will confirm our meeting with you on April 28th at 11:00. Even though I will be unable to attend in person, I hope to be able to join the meeting via phone. Carl Stendhal and David Cressy from Glen Eden and 1 GrecoSherry From: Jan Lindberg <jan.lindberg@comcast.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:55 PM To: FialaDonna; HillerGeorgia; HenningTom; NanceTim;TaylorPenny; DeselemKay Subject: RE: Cocohatchee Bay PUD Dear Commissioners, Thank you for your replies. Yes, it is clear that the towers currently planned for Kalea Bay were approved by a settlement agreement in 2008. But my point is the following: when the developer will change the plan regarding the golf course,you have the possibility to negotiate. Why let him take out the golf course without some kind of compensation? In my mind,a good compensation would be to have them shave off a number of stories from the high rises to get them to more fit into the environment. Yours sincerely, Jan Lindberg From:Jan Lindberg [mailto:jan.lindberg@comcast.net] Sent:Tuesday, March 3, 2015 1:33 PM To: 'DonnaFiala@colliergov.net'; 'GeorgiaHiller@colliergov.net'; 'TomHenning@colliergov.net'; 'TimNance@colliergov.net'; 'PennyTaylor@colliergov.net'; 'kaydeselem@colliergov.net' Subject: Cocohatchee Bay PUD Dear Commissioners, Please reconsider the present plan for Kalea Bay. All high rises North of Vanderbilt Beach Road (The Dunes, Pelican Isle,Aqua etc.) are about 10 stories high. Kalea is proposed to be twice that! Please go to the site and try to imagine six high rises twice the height of Aqua. It will be monstrous. Please do not destroy the whole look of this part of North Naples. Yours sincerely, Jan Lindberg 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 11:50 AM To: BrownAraqueSummer Subject: Re: Current Plans for Cocohatchee Bay "golf course parcel" Dear Summer, It has been quite some time since I sent you the above message and you replied . . . I have heard nothing from your director. . . As per terms in the Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement and Release signed by Collier County Commissioners and Lodge Abbott on June 9, 2008 and recorded in the official records of Collier County by Dwight Brock on June 10, 2008, the land on the NE corner of Wiggins Pass Road and Vanderbilt drive is limited in use to a golf course or a preserve in perpetuity. (See screen shot of paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement in attachment 1) Richard Corace (one of two developers making up Lodge Abbott) has made statements like, "golf courses are a liability" and Richard Grant(developer's attorney)has said, "golf courses are not as popular or as profitable as they one were." It is no secret that there are already plenty of golf courses in both Collier and Lee counties and some of them are struggling to make a profit. Because of this, some are asking to convert golf courses to residential zoning. All of the above would cast doubt on the likelihood that a savvy developer would build a newgolf course in today's market and economy. Therefore,those of us who live adjacent to this "golf course parcel" were surprised when big machines moved in there last fall and clear- cut two large areas on the property and then hauled in hundreds of truckloads of fill from Kalea Bay. In September of 2015 and again in November, I sent a message to Matt McLean's office expressing our concerns about Lodge Abbott cutting down trees on property that should remain a preserve in its natural vegetative state if a golf course is not to be built. We were assured that Lodge Abbot's extension of a 2004 permit to build a golf course made his activities legal and possible. I also contacted Daryl Hughes, director of permits and Steve Nagle with Southwest Florida Water Management about our concerns and both reported back that all activity was allowed by the golf course permit. Please go online to the Kalea Bay website and read the entire section on amenities that will be provided to condo owners in the 5 towers and you will find no mention about a golf course being built. Don't you think promotional materials would include information about a golf course IF they planned to build a golf course? (See screen shot of the text of the Kalea Bay amenities description in Attachment 2.) Recently I went to the Kalea Bay Sales office with a visitor from out-of-state who is truly interested in purchasing a condo on the gulf. During a 20 minute discussion,the Kalea Bay sales agent repeated three times that there are no plans to build a golf course with the Kalea Bay project. They have detailed pricing sheets to give to prospective buyers, but there is no mention of golf course memberships. 1 GrecoSherry From: Jacqueline <jacqic@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 4:21 PM To: HillerGeorgia Cc: FialaDonna; TaylorPenny; HenningTom; NanceTim; SmithCamden Subject: NO to Cocohatchee PUD ! PLEASE Thank you for your service to our community. Please vote NO for this ! I live in the Villages of Emerald Bay and vehemently oppose the proposed development on the east side of Vanderbilt Dr. The developer should not be allowed to have the terms of the agreement changed. I hike in that area and it is home to so much wildlife (including bald eagles) which are being squeezed out of our local area as it is with the Kalea Bay development they are building. Please protect that pristine area for our children to enjoy and our wildlife to live. Sincerely, Jacqueline Shifflett Villages of Emerald Bay (410) 713-5252 Permanent resident of Naples 1 GrecoSherry From: Bill & Mary Foote <2feet@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 8:21 PM To: FialaDonna; HillerGeorgia; HenningTom;TaylorPenny; NanceTim Subject: Memo to Cnty Commissioners-Kalea Bay Attachments: Memo to Cnty Commissioners-Kalea Bay.docx Please see attached- Thank you, Bill Foote, Pres. Arbor Trace 1 GrecoSherry From: William Becraft <wbecraft@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 9:27 AM To: FialaDonna; SaundersBurt; SolisAndy; TaylorPenny; BillMcDanial@colliergov.net Cc: William Becraft; Marc Johnson;jeff barkley-beachwalk;Jon Christensen; Tom Glennon; Jim McComb; Richardson, George ;Topper Woelfer Subject: One Naples & Kalea Bay Dear Commissioners, As a resident of the Beachwalk community, I must express my displeasure with the proposed development of One Naples and to the changes considered for Kalea Bay. A 20 story condo tower and three 6 story condos with 300 units are too much for the Vanderbilt Beach area. All the near by 20 story buildings are in the Pelican Bay development, please be strong enough to limit buildings north of Vanderbilt Beach Rd to a more reasonable height, similar to the Turtle club, etc. The increased traffic will be a nightmare and have you ever tried to find a spot on the beach, so let's not add another 600+ people. Kalea Bay should have never been allowed to build 5 hi rises in the first place, so please make them conform to the original plan and not allow them to make their buildings wider or taller. Isn't it interesting that the meetings for One Naples happen in the middle of May, after most seasonal residents have left for the summer. I am writing this because my wife and I fly north this afternoon and we will be unable to attend the meeting this evening. I am asking that you do not approve any condo over 6-7 stories and that the total number of units for the One Naples development be limited to 100-150. With Appreciation, Bill Becraft 564 Beachwalk Circle Naples, Fl 34108 1 GrecoSherry From: TaylorPenny Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 1:16 PM To: Diane Rupnow Subject: RE:Thank you for clarification Dear Diane, Thank you for your email Diane. Enjoy your time with your grandchildren and I am pleased that you will be able to participate in the meeting. All the best, Penny Penny Taylor Chairman, Board of County Commissioners District 4 Commissioner 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 PennyTaylor@colliergov.net 239-252-8604 Gv .er Gati.»>Y From: Diane Rupnow [mailto:rupnowdiane@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 9:17 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Thank you for clarification Dear Commissioner Taylor, Thanks you so much for your email clarifying the intention of your message. Several of us interpreted the words differently so that's why I asked for confirmation. Now our expectations are clear. We are grateful that you facilitated our being able to meet with Leo Ochs. It is unfortunate that both Judi Palay and I will not be in Naples on April 28th at 11:00. We will be on trips we scheduled a long time ago. I will be visiting our two grandchildren in the state of WA and I hope to be allowed to attend the meeting via phone. Ours is a committee of four and the other two members, Carl Stendhal and David Cressy will attend the meeting on the 28th as will Brad Schiffer and Donna Reed Caron, the former Planning Commissioners. Again, we are very grateful that you have helped us to get this meeting with the County Manager. 1 GrecoSherry From: Patricia Massey <amassey@alum.mit.edu> Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2015 6:02 PM To: FialaDonna; HillerGeorgia; HenningTom; NanceTim; TaylorPenny Subject: Settlement Agreement of June 9, 2008 To Collier County Commissioners: Our full time home address for the past 12 years is 14668 Glen Eden Drive, Naples, FL 34110. We abut the Planned Urban Development property being considered by the Planning Commissioners and Collier County Commissioners. We do not want to re-open the Cocohatchee Bay Planned Urban Development (PUD) Settlement of 2008 and we do stand by the Settlement Agreement of June 9, 2008 to have the area remain a green space/nature preserve or golf course forever. We do not want to see the destruction on the Florida native woods and wetlands or more habitat destruction next to our property. Cocohatchee Bay is also at risk of pollution from water runoff during the rainy season. To date there has been no specific information given regarding many of the details of the amendment as to why it would be in the public interest to amend the Settlement Agreement. Developer Lodge/Abbott LLC sued the Citizens of Collier County in 2008 and won the right to build 1, seventeen-story and 4, twenty-story, condo buildings on the west side of Vanderbilt Drive. The developer wants to build homes on court-settlement land designated to be golf course, or left green forever. We have followed the progress of this issue and have faithfully attended meetings. There has not been a public neighborhood meeting since March 19, 2014. Even Richard Corace of Lodge Abbott Associates, the developer, stated that the meeting that night was"neither neighborly nor informative". There has been no specific information given as to the location of the proposed single family homes, ingress and egress access points. There has been no plan to address the increased traffic on Wiggins Pass Road and Vanderbilt Drive. They are both 2 lane roads. The developer has started building Kalea Bay high rise buildings on the west side of Vanderbilt Drive. Is greed driving the desire to build residential areas on the east side too?We expect our elected officials to enforce settlement agreements and not violate public trust. Alan and Patricia Massey 239-591-4862 14668 Glen Eden Dr. Naples, FL 34110 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 9:17 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Thank you for clarification Dear Commissioner Taylor, Thanks you so much for your email clarifying the intention of your message. Several of us interpreted the words differently so that's why I asked for confirmation. Now our expectations are clear. We are grateful that you facilitated our being able to meet with Leo Ochs. It is unfortunate that both Judi Palay and I will not be in Naples on April 28th at 11:00. We will be on trips we scheduled a long time ago. I will be visiting our two grandchildren in the state of WA and I hope to be allowed to attend the meeting via phone. Ours is a committee of four and the other two members, Carl Stendhal and David Cressy will attend the meeting on the 28th as will Brad Schiffer and Donna Reed Caron,the former Planning Commissioners. Again, we are very grateful that you have helped us to get this meeting with the County Manager. Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 GrecoSherry From: KlatzkowJeff Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:35 AM To: TaylorPenny Cc: OchsLeo Subject: TIME CERTAIN REQUEST for ADMIN APPEAL KALEA BAY: PL201700002165 Judith Palay Appeal Ad Attachments: TIME CERTAIN REQUEST for Administrative Appeal Kalea Bay.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Commissioner: Please see attached. Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Collier County Attorney (239) 252-2614 From: Ralf Brookes [mailto:ralfbrookes@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday,June 15, 2017 4:51 PM To: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net> Cc:VelascoJessica <JessicaVelasco@colliergov.net>; SmithCamden <CamdenSmith@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; CasalanguidaNick<NickCasalanguida@colliergov.net>; OchsLeo <LeoOchs@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi<HeidiAshton@colliergov.net> Subject:TIME CERTAIN REQUEST for ADMIN APPEAL KALEA BAY: PL201700002165 Judith Palay Appeal Ad Thank you Jeff Please find letter attached to County Manager and BCC Chair regarding a request for advance time certain (delivered per email below). Can you please deliver this letter to them via email because per the recent proposed Fla Bar rules, I would like to communicate through you on this matter and I do not have the email for the BCC Chair. PS - I am available July 11 after 1 pm and also available anytime July 12 the following day as you note may happen given the number of expected items on this agenda. Thanks again, Ralf 1 Jeff Can you please provide me with assurance in writing in advance regarding not starting this item until I am able to be present on July 11th- I can be there anytime after 1 pm on July 11. I would prefer that the notice of hearing change 9:00 am to "1:00 pm or as soon thereafter as can be heard." [I also hope this would avoid confusion for the many citizens we expect to attend the hearing and allow them to comfortably arrive in the afternoon rather than be there all day in reliance on the official notice that they will read in the newpaper.] Also " "Notice of Intent to Consider a Resolution" should be removed and replaced with "Notice of Intent to Consider an Administrative Appeal" Many thanks in advance, Ralf Ralf Brookes Ralf Brookes Attorney 1217 East Cape Coral Parkway#107 Cape Coral Florida 33904 Phone (239) 910-5464 Fax (866) 341-6086 RalfBrookes@gmail.com Ralf@RalfBrookesAttorney.com Board Certified in City, County and Local Government Law by The Florida Bar Please visit my website at: www.RalfBrookesAttomey.com 3 Wanda Rodriguez, ACT Advanced Certified Paralegal- Office of the County Attorney (239)252-8400 From: Martha S. Vergara [mailto:Martha.Vergara@collierclerk.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 2:25 PM To: RodriguezWanda<WandaRodriguez@colliergov.net>; AshtonHeidi <HeidiAshton@colliergov.net>; 'Velasco,' <Jessica@colliergov.net>; BellowsRay<RayBellows@colliergov.net>; BosiMichael <MichaelBosi@colliergov.net>; SmithCamden<CamdenSmith@colliergov.net> Subject: PL201700002165 Judith Palay Appeal Hello All, Attached is the revised ad proof per the petitioners changes. E3 Let me know if there are any other changes. Thanks, Martha { 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 electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 5 GrecoSherry From: Susan Snyder <ssnyder2@columbus.rr.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 10:00 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Today's Commissioners' Meeting Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Commissioner Taylor, I am deeply disturbed that at the Collier County Commissioners meeting today (April 11, 2017), the United States Constitutional right, as described in the First Amendment (ie. Freedom of Speech), was denied by county leaders to sixteen persons. The agenda item for which we intended to participate was specifically titled, "Public Comments on General Topics Not On The Current Or Future Agenda." Our topic was not on today's agenda, and to our knowledge it is not scheduled to be included on a future agenda. In fact, the purpose of our wanting to speak today was to request that our concern be added to a future agenda. Below is the exact verbiage I intended to use today, had I been allowed to speak. "Good morning Commissioners. For the record, my name is Susan Snyder and I am a registered voter in Collier County. My address is 17 Bluebill Ave, which is located at the north end of Vanderbilt Beach. I've been an active member of the community for 17 years and have closely followed development in the county. My concern today is that I've learned County Commissioners have not been informed by County staff of deviations from the Site Development Plans passed with the Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement. It is the function of county staff to provide Commissioners with all the information needed to make informed administrative decisions that affect the quality of life of the citizens of Collier County. By not informing Commissioners and instead making what I consider unjustified decisions that disregard both the Cocohatchee PUD and the Site Development Plan for the Kalea Bay Towers community, staff's behavior is unethical, unprofessional, and irresponsible. The community at large will be affected by these staff decisions. I would ask Commissioners to set a date for a public hearing to discuss specifics of the Cocohatchee PUD agreement and the Site Development Plan for the Kalea Bay Towers community. Those legal documents give specific dimensions and other specifications regarding the Kalea Bay project. Twice in 2015, Lodge Abbot Associates went to Collier County Commissioners to try to reopen the settlement. The Commissioners said "No." Now it appears that this development company has gone directly to county staff and circumnavigated the Commissioners. Thank you for considering a public hearing for the community to have input." 1 GrecoSherry From: Diane Rupnow <rupnowdiane@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 3, 2017 10:38 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Update--Mark Strain Commissioner Taylor, thanks for suggesting that our group set up a meeting with Mark Strain. I sent him an email requesting such a meeting, but have had no response from him. Hopefully, he will be able to work us into his busy schedule. I would love to get feedback from you after you have read the pages 46--66 of the January 11, 2008 Planning Commissioners' meeting. How can the opinion of one staff--Ross Gochener--be the reason that footnote 3 could be interpreted to mean the administrative reduction could be unlimited? Why was it okay to NOT inform the Board of County Commissioners about the disagreement of the interpretation of Footnote 3. I am willing to bet that if Frank Halas and Donna Fiala had been told that they planned on changing the SDP's after they were approved in the Settlement Agreement (i.e. width of buildings changed from 260' to 310' AND the buildings could be placed 100' or less apart,they never would have approved that in 2008.Now we have a mess. . . Also, please read the Cocohatchee Bay Settlement Agreement Analysis. Thanks! Diane Diane Rupnow rupnowdiane@gmail.com 402 580-1545 1 Cocohatchee Bay Facts/Time Line The Cocohatchee Bay Planned Unit Development (PUD) was approved in 2000 and included 532.09 acres of land, 590 dwelling units, 4 towers 20 stories tall, 1 tower 15 stories tall, a golf course with 3 holes west of Vanderbilt and 15 holes east of Vanderbilt. Of the 590 dwelling units, 110 units were approved east of Vanderbilt and 480 units were approved in the towers. The 2000 PUD also included a Bald Eagle Management Plan in which Abbott agreed to a "no construction zone" within 750' of the bald eagles' nest (1500' during nesting season.) When the bald eagle was removed from the endangered species list, Abbott applied for and received approval from state and federal agencies and submitted a site development plan. Planning Commission advised that a PUD amendment to amend the Bald Eagle Management Plan would first be required. • May 10, 2005 BCC heard Abbott's amendment and disapproved by a vote of 4-1. Abbott began litigation in June of 2005. May 1, 2006 Abbott served a Bert Harris Notice of Claim on the County for over $247 million. After months of required mediation, at its December 12, 2006 meeting, Commissioners authorized making a written settlement offer to Lodge Abbott. April 22, 2008 BCC approved Settlement Agreement. The document was dated June 9, 2008 and recorded by the Clerk of Courts on June 10tH The Settlement allowed 108 dwelling units to be moved from the eastern parcel to the towers and assured that "if the golf course development area or golf course use is ever discontinued or abandoned for any reasons, then all of the GC Parcel including without limitation the entire golf course development area, except for those portions allowed for 2 residential units, shall remain forever as green open space and be limited in perpetuity to the uses expressly allowed in Paragraph 5.3 of the amended PUD Preserve Parcel." To read entire settlement go to: http://media.wix.com/ugd/d6f3a 1_6aecd24ad6d948849c6b3cfec23e6cf4.pdf Although Hiller ignored her constituents and totally did all she could to get the developer what he wanted, she was not successful. She has been trying to find a way to eliminate the need for a supermajority vote—she insists this is not a land-use issue. . . , a u € Y . ' 'r 3 P' �x �� / `4 andA Ma" * wJ ,' Y I*,, �T + 9,,• ,,-i::- *.474.4'..• ' . l' c j "� ,.11,1,...'' tp, �w .49#04,0:#74,, �5{ y� 42 1,4 '2,,,w0S,A4 ri. ' , r ..,3.-- ,t, �ex * % .-, 1 . . , v, ,„1 , „ti. - , p i„ {Mz & i - R i 4,44-. .- A . - ; ----tv"-- ---., .,, " . ,. % : 7,_ par tom; _.+.---- ..• a ,. a ect i� 'v6c '4' --4. - k '..:.; .t,I e,.,41"'4i,rkt,11,411c. 0,,,t,*>,'..g.f, ii, - ,,,,,,,,,,;171,f , � r �i k t- '{ TM x' 4 s t, 'aai' ", y. R.i,kev<s. ,i1� 4444 ' % lull r,' It '+�� ,� ,r. a L.,%*, ,� . - • � .t,., s: x 3ar,51 •. E a ae wi > ,i � `• : .} gra , 4 i �' "fie 44'.-„ 4,`t4 .. A, , , ,, ,,,,„ , , . :.„ , .. „ ,,,, .. . ., t It �a E*. ' fa ..�y a ; ids . m}.' L- tQ ' ' b 03 40 X 1) M CJ 4� a 6 'v In a ` ,4 3 13-611 412 u o Cl -p „� ,� E © WI u v t o C . }+o C L til + o tCl IU 4.r o c a t o no c i ti Z.6 c o c O L ro 'E $4- aJ w " a V o .+ C ›N '''.- (13 U C la- 4i$ 3 4) VI M .= >it V -- ( ' Nor .0 ; a o 3 <[ a ti 'E C c Q 10.• 0. .0 o o a i ► > I CI. .0 >1 C +-+ • 13 to .0 . ii „C VI ..0 .0 .0 C .� 0 C III ?► Iall N T+ ` ` +�' ILII '� C VI M 4a O "w r° 113 Lti 15 M ICI ifl - u CO °§ •• in i ,i la. u. tti aJ a o C' 'Iv G G IV 2, 0. ,CU I„ c C. c , .o -v •,/2 a © a s-1 •- as c c ai c _ v- s r" / L+tiJ . . IIt a-+ .. a F••- g 4- 441 t .. ir0 73 eJ 113 IAtph. LS. +r 4 .•< ►� = 0 .4e. LI 0 I... 44 R . ii....1 CL 46'11 4.1 IV 4.4 0 LL w 4- m L c t°g RI c F- . .et c a ea o w a o .c a CU E i In bp �C p.. .51 s a 4J Ei c •— a, 2 (u u c In L to C c , L 0. In to C 4 O .� ;1 .0 a la o .0 2 L a }+ o ft. Z ;'C'CI 49 I«J C t� +Q F it: tc i Ct1 .' I›N 0an t CL 5 u a CU 4-1 u C +� a FVI RS es- o % C _ I,,. C E c° c C `u Cl" 'CU •t0 o Z7 tni V) 1 ._ In " - co ou a •W Z LL 6 y"" al 0. ai 4. ii o 70 .0 .0 a ra o Ila .3L C It Z .la a a ir24,0 cl. oj 03 n3 g t4 C 03 b-0 k" = E .0 to C .7:-: — L V 16- .r fa 44 a 4+ o a, +i- 3 a .- ;.. .c 0 by a o cy ▪'� E .14 o. , •m a s na .0 c 0 = a C y,. VI 0 •t1J In,y o 1- o .. . ; (6o o .— ;t o c a 611 til 0 m ...1 14. n U • t a t tiO vn . I. til >, .0 Rf o a GrecoSherry From: JudiPalay@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 11:05 PM To: TaylorPenny Subject: Wed pm-- Regarding Kalea Bay I wanted you to know the truth re our attempt to speak at the Open Session. THank you for your support. Judi Palay 239-513-9141 805-824-6615 From: JudiPalay@aol.com To: JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net Sent: 4/12/2017 6:25:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time Subj: Wed pm-- Regarding Kalea Bay Dear Attorney Klatzkow, Yesterday, you blocked more than a dozen Collier County residents from speaking to our commissioners. They wished to alert them to changes that were made to Kalea Bay Building one-- and since no one from the community was noticed re the changes, those changes are forever. And, now, since no one objected to those, you know that the same will be expected for buildings 2-5. It seems that we citizens are not playing on the same field as this developer. While you may not wish to tangle with him, he is taking advantage of us. We have to live the consequences of his actions. As I said yesterday, this Agreement is not a great one, but we are abiding by its stipulations and so must he. It states that he will not sue the county commissioners but you are allowing him to make us the targets and at an unnecessary expense to us when our role is not that of the enforcer of said Agreement. We are the public who are supposed to be protected. Our elected officials are supposed to know, follow and ensure that the rules are followed. When the commissioners are deliberately circumvented and are unaware of the deviations, we have a right to tell them. Building one was not on the agenda and will never be. PLease let me know how you intend to rectify yesterday's hurt to our Cocohatchee Bay residents. I feel strongly that we have been "injured" by a decision that should not have been made. Thank you- Judi Palay 239-513-9141 805-824-6615 GrecoSherry From: Renee Gaddis <renee@reneegaddis.com> Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2017 1:15 PM To: McDanielBill; TaylorPenny; BurtSaunders@colliergov.n; FialaDonna; SolisAndy Subject: Kalea Bay PUD Attachments: renee letter July 6 2017.pdf Renee Gaddis Principal Designer RENEE CADDIS INTERIORS t. 239.431.8352 I m. 239.848.5794 a. 9915 Tamiami Trail N, Suite 1 ( Naples, FL 34108 renee@reneegaddis.com www.reneegaddis.com 1 GrecoSherry From: TaylorPenny Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 3:26 PM To: Diane Rupnow Subject: RE: Letter from our Attorney Dear Diane, I spoke with Mark Strain and would suggest that you and Judi meet with him. He has worked on the developer's side and has expressed caution at filing anything right now. I have a meeting tomorrow and have been preparing for it since I saw you so I haven't read the minutes. However I will reach out to you after we get through tomorrow....and I have had a chance to review the material that you gave me. Penny Penny Taylor Chairman, Board of County Commissioners District 4 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL 34112 PennyTaylor@colliergov.net 239-252-8604 Co er County From: Diane Rupnow [mailto:rupnowdiane@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 2:11 PM To: TaylorPenny Cc: Ralf Brookes; Judi Palay Subject: Letter from our Attorney Dear Commissioner Taylor, Thank you for meeting with Judi Palay and me last Wednesday. Since then, we have met with Commissioners Fiala, Solice and Saunders. None of them had been given the letter our attorney, Ralf Brookes sent to the County via the County Attorney. Fortunately, we also set up meetings with County Commissioners to provide relevant information.. . I would guess that Mr. Klatzkow gave our attorney's letter to the County Manager and his assistant who may have shared it with Chris Scott and Mike Bosie. Neither Mr. Klatzkow nor Mr. Ochs nor anyone in County Planning has responded to our Attorney or us regarding our concerns. i GrecoSherry From: GrecoSherry Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 10:04 AM To: 'Diane Rupnow' Cc: TaylorPenny Subject: RE: Our meeting today at 1:00 Good morning Ms. Rupnow, We look forward to meeting with you also and thank you for letting us know in advance the number of attendees and their names. We have arranged to have you get through security and communications quickly. Also, we are working with our IT personnel in order for you to be able to show your photos to everyone at the meeting. If you have any other questions please call our office. S/ierry 4reco Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 239-252-8604 SherryGreco(a@colliergov.net Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter 9 er County From: Diane Rupnow [mailto:rupnowdiane@gmail.com] Sent:Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:32 AM To:TaylorPenny; GrecoSherry Subject: Our meeting today at 1:00 Good Morning Commissioner Taylor and Ms. Greco, I am looking forward to our meeting today at 1:00 and appreciate the opportunity to be heard. There will be 13 of us coming to the meeting today: Pat Bonser, Carl and Marilyn Stendhal, Barb and Mike Taylor, Peggy Ross and myself from Glen Eden on the Lakes; Jim and Kitty Shaw from Tarpon Cove; and Lou De Prisco and Dick Wilson from Arbor Trace. Brad 1 BiIIMcDaniel@colliergov.net PennyTaylor@colliergov.net BurtSaunders@colliergov.net DonnaFiala@colliergov.net AndySolis@colliergov.net McDaniel, Taylor, Saunder, Fiala, Solis Dear Collier County Commissioners: As a long-time Naples business owner, I am concerned that the opposition to the second phase of Kalea Bay, should it be successful, may adversely affect the Southwest Florida economy and the Collier County tax base. Projects such as this generate significant tax revenue for our county and at the same time require little in government services. That's a win-win for government. It will also provide hundreds of jobs to an industry that is coming off years of stagnation. Commissioners, I urge you to support the Kalea Bay development project and allow our free market to work as it is intended and over the objections of the not- in-my-backyard opposition. Sincerely, Renee Gaddis Renee Gaddis Interiors 9915 Tamiami Trail N #1 Naples, Florida 34108 (239) 431-8352 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 07/11/17 Advertised Public Hearings 9.A. ***This item has been continued from the June 27, 2017 BCC meeting.*** 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. 2007-46, as amended,the Wolf Creek RPUD,to approve an insubstantial change to the PUD,to add a preserve exhibit that revises the preserve configuration for Parcels 3B and 9 only, and providing for an effective date. The subject property is located on the north side of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately one-half mile west of Collier Boulevard, in Section 34,Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 189± acres. [PDI-PL20160000404] (Mike Bosi, Director, Zoning Division) NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE (Meetings Correspondence ®e-mails ®Calls Calls: Calls from Bruce Anderson's office (Cheffy Passidomo) on Friday July 7th & Conference call on Monday, July 10th Emails: Marc Allen (a constituent who has an issue with the plan), Steve Bracci an attorney for the Black Bear Ridge HOA and its members, Richard Yovanovich & Brue Anderson CA) tot Cre ed< ig GrecoSherry J $ filo From: Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 5:30 PM To: KlatzkowJeff Cc: SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; FialaDonna; rbanderson@napleslaw.com Subject: Wolf Creek PUD/Vanderbilt Reserve request for insubstantial change Attachments: 2017.07.05 Letter to Jeff Klatzkow (Wolf Creek PUD - Vanderbilt Reserve).pdf; Exhibit No. 2.0 Application No. 161123-9 Page 3 of 7.pdf;Vanderbilt Reserve Summary June 2017.pdf; Summary Documents July 2017 2nd.pdf Dear Jeff and others, please see the attached letter and attachments on behalf of Black Bear Ridge HOA and its members. Sincerely, Steve Bracci • In Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. 1 STEVEN J.BRACCI, PA A Professional Association Attorney at Law 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102 Naples,Florida 34109 Ph: (239)596-2635 Fax: (239)431-6045 steve@braccilaw.com www.braccilaw.com { July 5,2017 VIA E-MAIL jeffldatzkow@colliergov.net Jeffrey A.Klatzkow,County Attorney Collier County Attorney's Office 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 800 Naples,Florida 34112 Re: Vanderbilt Reserve Wolf Creek PUD Insubstantial Change Request Vanderbilt Reserve-SDP Application for 215 unit subdivision per Permit Tracking#PL20160000157 Dear Jeff: On behalf of the Black Bear Ridge HOA and its members,the purpose of this letter is to suggest that Vanderbilt Reserve is improperly seeking a piecemeal"insubstantial change" to the Wolf Creek PUD as part of its overall effort to obtain an SDP for a 215 unit residential subdivision. The SDP application documents are referenced at Permit Tracking #PL20160000157. In order for Vanderbilt Reserve to obtain that SDP,it requires not only a reduction of its preserve area,but also an increase in its residential density. The increase in density requires a"substantial" change to the Wolf Creek PUD pursuant to LDC Sect. 10.02.13.E.1.b,rather than the currently requested insubstantial change. For whatever reason, both staff and the owner/developer are ignoring the fact that the presently requested 215 units far exceeds the density allocated to the Vamderbilt Reserve property pursuant to the PUD. Not only do Vanderbilt Reserve's proposed 215 units exceed its overall allocated density,but the 115 dwelling units(plus 4 partial units)shown on what is known as the "Mederos"property far exceeds the 80 units that were allocated to the Mederos Parcel pursuant to Zoning Ordinance 2007-46. At last week's hearing on Vanderbilt Reserve's insubstantial change application to amend the Wolf Creek PUD to reduce the preserve area,you correctly advised the Board,that the Wolf Creek PUD was "balkanized"back in 2007. In other words, rather than looking at the PUD's density as a whole, certain parcels were treated by the BCC as sub-parcels and allocated specific unit densities. This includes what is known as the"Mederos"property which, under Ordinance 2007-46, was assigned 80 development units. This same "Mederos"parcel is where the bulk of preserve is situated which the Developer/owner is seeking a reduction. Jeffrey A. Klatzkow, County Attorney Page 3 Please feel free to contact me if you wish to further discuss this matter. Sincerely, STEVEN J. BRACCI, PA { Steven J.Bracci, Esq. cc: Collier County Board of County Commissioners Bruce Anderson, Esq. Client { { I CD CD r"- NVId 30VNIVLICI I — __. _ s I 4 ..t.c4,-I 4 1. I I 1 MKT 1.4"NOIVII V008 V ONICIV11.3 NIANid CV CS 4,5 OPP muns I. 116 11 .11(31134333Alin93x3A 1m387: 11.11 oil 1.118b3ONV 1 1 3AtI3S-31:1----- 4 i v .4 — Ili 0 I __ -__-_-_:a .i 1 I i 6 III 1 1- i 1118113ONVA........ HI num,„ _ _, ,,''',1f,,,, 1 , 1 I CN 0 ,-- C'') Z ',-,,, •2) .--, _a "-- as e 1 1 , wiv— — in INIV ill Li' It -- I Jot poi I I, i .. , , y i 11 i I I; Lig 1 w 0 44-14,' 41j51, iii4 j <111 ji ,j,ji '_:14. ';-; .- . - i 1 i 1 ii cf 14 .,/-,- • • • %, IbiOiO1ftfluhIiiiiiihIuuiitifthiIhd.ffl* IIUuhi üthfflth1W, 1 !i 1 It 11 izal 1 li -CI I ill ri IiUiiuifluiilUtiiiuiiitilitiifliüiiiiliflhiHil iiiiiiiiiii iiiiii ii" it Iif; 11 54 = i"--I 4-- 'Ai-- .‘-i' ' " 1,11 1 miinip LI 31 ii il < lig! i i Ilii-lit L 11,011114 , -1fill,Plii 1,-:- IOW v.isi ',1-',Ie -, , ,-..--1,•----r pLuitillini ri;1 .1 I 11 i 1 I;I! il I Ilii / Pi *isomplommumumouipurii INN" i i 1;I i i 1:l 0 iii 11,11 i ,3g t 1 1 ri 1.4..T.-..rs*4014+,#..r.p.?tnit*P91#"*.t*I.Plirski. ..*-**"*14,144"i!'"*"*•40"14! I i i' l;f ill 11.1i II i! i N. s, I 1 l'i i I t;1111;11 ii 1 1 i ft 11 t th 11 1.2 1 11 0, , I I 5 li I i D Pla PI titt a P - . ' a _ v ' o 40 i U) 41 :4'4 13 4,01 1 1:‘ 7, . c ., , . .„ 0,4 ___ _ , if ,,,,r _ r__ , R_A;2; 0 ccs _- - — . ...,, I-II" , 11/ ....a. ..-" ow 0) ey) ..-..... — 1 1 -4 41 t —. -',..:,--z-'wi., ,,,, ,,,,-.. 'Crr- ....--`.,f_. h' -- ----- E.--.. C -..,..7.-.1..-a.r....—. 4,,...„.. ,..--,... ..-...-.. .__„ ... . r mr _ a) z ea,- it v trutl R .., 1 vrtit. alai (-, ,I IL_ , ilatittir 3 i .:1 .,4 i . . ., VI 0, r , .. , . I/4 ,i 1 .... ,,*. 1 • *, . ?, innsArmAffitr Alle;351.144-„ -_46._ - _ L.. -... 1,, kilts silo 1 -.., 1 I . , ill i tli jai Lazi eji Ili .=z a lir.,pi 2 r....,...,.....,x ;;;Iya,„_,........,........... .„.....iiimmnimi-L2-11 -==xaszrar.--.... -:.....-74.,tr, ,......, :2:„...i CI ...I' ,,,allillie1' nr...e=3.,---tt--t33-.22._;:::-..... .- ,,-,7,7_,,,:s--...io 7 fr . ..4. , -.7 „.., '0 7. :3,,rh----12*.„ zialuirla 'Itattail Wail' i't" 'T -----0'; E : - r..ii E a) r 1 1 ,I 4 ' i 1 Ilrike* Olt .MIE rittillEk. ' 01120P40,11' 1* 3, il I: En= , ,I . 1 c.) t_,... 4, --ipt4ii , , r-k 4.-,,,0' 4 • NA a' I in0- :14 ,..1.4.,-...„... ,- c 3 , F--I :0 1 ''i L..; •• .1 y- z 0 0 0 0 ... - - iiii nil*. 1 11 .... I 1 •I'M i C kCs w i 1_ • IllIl 011 i il# iv- T.:0! ,t . ., c. = 0, .1* f 11 I 0 = If jilt pli 1- a 1 a I E v , : .! illuitilis-E.I _ ,111 I 1 i . - • I t 114 4.- 1 CD 113 0 'To > C5 31] li iE an .L, h 0 t i ......-,r , it - mit " co 't a) 0 - II_ .70' Olitre'- . --i- ----, , ,, 12._F„,,i ' --,-; RH•, , - ' 11 ' ' 1 it i lel • i milk ', ' I,: irl-namo .- 1'' '10 6 1_ ili 'le it) Ii,.210!C,1--, ---,Ca A e„ ,1 , I d 1/1 -11 !" 1, i '*i 41 .'i iiititiststit gligiltilighdl--29' Wirt ., w , 1 illit.fil -II: 1 t ?: 'Ill,1 , ....=1 ,,,,' tra i • s . .----,-----zsara-z.-za4a.............. .1 !: ii ii, 4 ... '',-,........ ---"--••••CairiiiriVitarrigardims"Tro''. 'm'lim ......,.....z. . vorammoAlik, i LI i'. I; V tilt .......,,,.., . -... .-...•...-141:7;;; .—..4., 41,:"..M1MijeTrill 1 1 1 i 1. , vii .....—_.,...,......,....,11,..„,„7-e-,;grits omming r illy 1444 i . i ii 4 i ' ""-' ir,--11;:itia,fil a1041" . "0"-111114,61T-', -,I, .: , ,..„,,..,1 IL-- i , , 0 ,. , R2! 1 , r .1 ,.I.'A' ' - • , .11,I*,. : • 1 CP CI - litl i ' 1 901109114 COI 1111wIw''.11-1 '''' laps -..m.-1,At...,- villit 4* V ill '' g cu j ?'--1 • Re : ' - - - - - '-i__LLI___1_-- ,_---illi ,.. Ail ..:1:.•s. - el -, - vg i FE ID' to' c.) t.... (-) gall 4 1 43 = jUir- -411P el .4 'j :_. 1 ..; , ....... -; 1 .• I i 1 vu ..... ill : iktrilid t; el j,1 RI 0 , 4 f .. "•11111i11,13-t 1' i (t) 133 , 3 Ectwir L , 0 cl 4 1 leic.Itl;eleo it I; -, I V 12 CD co i II ; li iiitilitizists Astetfil'iliffeds ../ Ailit L, • PI II. a I/ 4_,....!---II- 1.1,-,--Tr.---- (4., r . . ""-;,„ ,t1ICI4 !! 1 IL; al) ra7m7"111441-11figrallitril'ipts7 li; ek in ; 1 il fir NM, wit l'A 4A-110 Israii. -11 I • ,, mni ...i.: 1 8 ci ele e a 4, an , p • : It od .-,i'l'ili isitie ; AA,. Ill' I I . lia _ •=-,=- -_ _ - - -- - .t.,•;,.... . _ _ -— -- , .;i-... .. 1:, ... I*1 .''',..—..--..--T- I, ii - .41..-.1.01.,ti.O...... i.. . --- - ....-- - -------- .. .'.. ".. .a ... ... .. 1 ------- --- -. ......--. —. f4i0ede \ i Commissioner, Pertinent pages from County records have been attached in hopes of allowing a better understanding of the Wolf Creek PUD specifically with regards to density allocation, the proposed Vanderbilt Reserve site plan and offsite improvements. A) History of density allocation in Wolf Creek RPUD: Sept 23, 2003 - Ordinance 2003-45 - Wolf Creek PUD established - 147.69 acres with 591 dwelling units approved and maximum permitted density of 4 dwelling units per acre - no allocation to any specific parcel or development but separate parcels delineated August 23, 2004 - Cost Sharing Agreement entered into OR 3635: Dwelling units assigned to parcels - note parcel numbers for CSA are different than those in County WCPUD document Upon execution of the agreement there was an immediate transfer of dwelling units from parcels 4, 5 & 6 to parcel 1 Following that transfer, the owner of parcel 1&2 had a limited time option to purchase additional density from the owner of parcels 7, 8 & 9, and this option expired in 2005 Density only transferable with written permission of owner of property losing density Runs with the land - owner is property owner May 22, 2007 - Ordinance 2007-46 - Mederos 20 acre parcel added to WCPUD BCC minutes May 22-23, 2007 pages 70-71 80 dwelling units requested for now Vanderbilt Reserve Parcel 9 no density bonuses requested, density of 3.99 80 dwelling units specifically allocated to the —20 acres which is now the Vanderbilt Reserve Parcel 9 - pg 17 Ord 2007-46 states "80 dwelling units approved in the the 20 acres being added" May 14, 2013 - Ordinance 2013-37 - Scenic Woods and a portion of Palermo Cove brought into WCPUD 83 dwelling units specifically assigned to parcels 1A-3A density was assigned, thus only usable by those parcels page 11 Ord 2013-37 Minutes from CCPC dated March 21, 2013 pigs 53-54: County and developer lawyers worked together to construct verbiage that would specifically allocate the 83 dwelling units that were being added to parcels 1A- 3A only and limited the density in 1A-3A such that they could The northern parcel is allocated 24 dwelling units by the CSA based upon acreage it consists of—12 acres, which is —60% of the total acreage of parcel #3 WCPUD (parcel #4 of CSA) - which was allocated 40 dwelling units by the CSA, therefore based upon acreage, 3B would be allocated 24 dwelling units by the CSA Conclusions:The proposed site development plan for Vanderbilt Reserve has platted density not available or approved C) Offsite Improvements for Wolf Creek PUD - PristineNanderbilt Beach intersection Observations: Ordinance 2003-45 - WCPUD Master Plan Exhibit A shows a right turn in lane from Vanderbilt onto Pristine - note also right turn in lanes at Buckstone and into Mission Hills - these have been constructed The right turn in lane from Vanderbilt onto Pristine is present on all of the Master Plan exhibit A's through OR 2013-37 2004 CSA- OR 3635 Pgs 1696-1697 Phase I Budget for Black Bear Ridge shows line items for offsite improvements at Vanderbilt Beach Road intersection with monies to be allocated for WB Rt, EB Lt turn lanes as well as signalization There is a note under assumptions: "Vanderbilt Beach Rd temporary turn lanes not required (i.e. payments to county to build improvements to support project and to built as part of 6 lane improvements)." 2005 Construction Escrow Agreement with County for Subdivision Improvements Improvements set forth in the "Estimate" by Grady Minor are required improvements by Collier County ordinances Offsite improvements at Vanderbilt Beach Road intersection included WB Rt and EB Lt turn lanes as well as signalization - these were "required" The cost of these improvements were funded by the construction loan agreement -with a $3,057,906.50 construction loan held in a specific account The county had the right to utilize the funds for construction of the required improvements if the developer failed to complete them The requirements were binding upon the Developer's successors Google Maps - if you use google maps to look at Vanderbilt Beach Rd from Collier Blvd through Rt 41, the Pristine Drive/Vanderbilt Beach Rd intersection appears to be the only intersection that does not have a right turn in lane 011: 3635 PG: 1677 construction of Segment 2 shall be deemed to be the payment of said owner(s)fair share of the cost of the North-South Road with respect to Parcel 3. 7. Wolf Creek PUD. (a) Allocation. The Wolf Creek PUD encompasses Parcel 1, Parcel 2,Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive, and Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive. The Wolf Creek PUD permits 591 residential dwelling units. Unless otherwise provided herein, density shall not be transferred from one parcel to another within the Wolf Creek PUD without prior written permission of the owner of the property losing density. The Wolf Creek PUD allocated the 591 residential units as follows and as shown on Exhibit"F"attached hereto and made a part hereof: Parcel 1-64 units;Parcel 7-41 units; and all other parcels in the PUD- 81 units each. Upon the execution of this Agreement, 41 dwelling units each shall be automatically transferred from each of Parcels 4, Parcel 5, and Parcel 6, at no cost, to Parcel 1, with a total resulting transfer of 123 units to Parcel 1. Accordingly,the number of residential units allocated to Parcel 1 under the Wolf Creek PUD shall be 187. (b) Option to Purchase Additional Density. The owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 ("Purchaser")shall have the option to purchase(in addition to the density allocated to Parcel 1 and Parcel pursuant to subsection (a) hereof) from the owner of Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive, ("Seller") up to 92 dwelling units which have been allocated"'+ a '9• ; ►bsption (a) hereof to Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive. Said option maybe exer^� A... . re than two transactions on or before P �" ' December 31, 2005 ("Expiration ti e purchase pn ch individual dwelling unit shall be $500.00. In the event Purchaser ec .oto exercise this option, ' .chaser shall,on or before the Expiration Date, notify Seller of the numyer . u °_'b--purehag-'. Clo 'ng i,)f any such purchase of dwelling units shall occur within 20 da of eller's re -bf n_otic-from P irch$ser. The purchase price shall be paid in cash, wired funds,or cas ' s c� c�`7a,"a` • < "VI' an pffice in Collier County, Florida or such other method as may be a 1 e tabl• t4 t1 e '-1= in 's .ole discretion. Seller shall have the sole discretion to determine d1 • . .\ei' ling e'a signed. Purchaser shall pay all costs associated with the tracer of dwelling units. V's oytio l terminate on midnight of the Expiration Date and be of no \ orce and effect. / ''"^''' e'r `� r. (c) Contingency. In t any statute, law . hrtdnce,resolution,rule, or regulation is adopted and enforced by the state, e '- = •a 4 entity (or any agency or department thereof) that would have the effect oftnit�nng-i e number of dwelling units that can be constructed within the Wolf Creek PUD(in it en1"ire ,the parties agree that Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be collectively allocated 33%of any such temporary allocation and Parcels 4 through 9 shall be allocated 67% of any such temporary allocation;provided,however,that such temporary allocation shall not have the effect of reallocating density among the parcels. For the purposes of this paragraph only, the term "temporary"shall mean for a period of no more than twelve(12)months. 8. Native Vegetation. Unless otherwise agreed by the owners of the various Parcels, all Parcels within the Wolf Creek PUD shall be designed to stand alone. All Parcels with indigenous native vegetation, as determined by Collier County, will be required to preserve or replant 25% of such native vegetation, as described in Section 3.9.5.5.3 of the Collier County Land Development Code, as amended, or in the event of a repeal of said section, such other section of the Collier County Land Development Code controlling the same subject matter. Each of the Parcels shall provide for its own native vegetation requirements as shown within the Collier County approved environmental impact study that was submitted in conjunction with the Wolf Creek PUD rezoning petition,unless otherwise agreed to by any one or more Parcels owners. Parcels providing in excess of 25% native vegetation can transfer such credit to another Parcel under different ownership only upon written agreement of the property owner transferring the excess credit. 6 *** OR: 3635 PG: 1699 *** INITIAL DENSITY ALLOCATION-WOLF CREEK PUD Wolf Creek PUDs Initial Residential Unit Allocation 81 81 tiff` .. -�a: �AVMs� 81 ""Ill 110111 4 ON xi, . -- L� D v r�„cacdd lewd wrk - -� PUD a..e.Mw \-. f ,:.,, 4 ft ce B1 64 A2 Nrdr00'Batch Rad A-1 Tota/of 147.69 acres and 591 Units EXHIBIT"F' 28 May 22-23, 2007 to read, but what I wanted to point out here is that the -- let's see. We've got Vanderbilt road -- Beach Road here and 951 there. Thank you. And I heavily marked -- right there in the middle is parcel number five marked in red so that you can see what the situation is. The heavy black line that goes all the way around the existing PUD goes clear around -- clear around to the other side and back, carved out this -- either carved out or left out this parcel which is right smack dab in the middle. And to everybody's credit, they are trying to put this together with the existing PUD rather than create some other type of PUD or new PUD and -- so that we can have a real unified project and project area. A couple things to keep in mind. And this is all in the staff report. I know that you all have read the staff report and all the documents, but the -- in this subdistrict there's a base density of four dwelling units per acre. There's a limit of a maximum of 16 units per acre under the density rating system. And we're not asking for any density bonuses and there are no density reductions that are applicable. So the site would be eligible for four dwelling units per acre, and the requested density is actually 3.99. I'm not sure how it worked out that way. But we're asking for the four units per acre essentially. The transportation element. It's been found consistent with the transportation element. There are contingencies concerning concurrency and -- that are in the PUD document that has -- that was discussed and handled at the Planning Commission hearing and -- so that is in the PUD document that you have in front of you. One thing that is a little bit different, and that's the affordable housing impacts. The request had contained no provisions to address affordable or workforce housing demands that may be created. We went through the Planning Commission hearing process. It was Page 71 general configuration of which is also illustrated by Exhibit"A" and Exhibit "A- 1". B. Areas illustrated as lakes by Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1" shall be constructed as lakes or, upon approval, parts thereof may be constructed as shallow, intermittent wet and dry depressions for water retention purposes. Such areas, lakes and intermittent wet and dry areas shall be in the same general configuration and contain the same general acreage as shown by Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1". Minor modification to all tracts, lakes or other boundaries may be permitted at the time of subdivision plat or SDP approval, subject to the provisions of the LDC. C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1", such easements as necessary (utility, private, semi-public) shall be established within or along the various Tracts as may be necessary. 2.4 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DENSITY OR INTENSITY OF LAND USES A maximum of 671754 residential dwelling units shall be constructed in the residential areas of the project. The gross project area is 44-7496188.78± acres. The gross project density shall be a maximum of 3.99 units per acre if all 674-754 dwelling units are approved and constructed-. A minimum of 83 dwelling units will be assigned to parcels 1A - 3A due to the additional acreage being added to the PUD by the owner of those parcels. In addition, parcels 1A- 3A shall be entitled to incorporate any other density owned by the developer of these parcels. There shall be a maximum density of 163 dwelling units on parcels 1A- 3A. 2.5 RELATED PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS A. Prior to the recording of a record plat, and/or condominium plat for all or part of the RPUD, final plans of all required improvements shall receive approval of the appropriate Collier County governmental agency to insure compliance with the RPUD Master Plan, Collier County subdivision rules, and the platting laws of the State of Florida. B. Exhibit "A", RPUD Master Plan and Exhibit "A-1" RPUD Master Plan Amended, constitutes the required RPUD development plan. Subsequent to or concurrent with RPUD approval, a subdivision plat or SDP, as applicable, may be submitted for areas covered by the RPUD Master Plan. Any division of the property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the RPUD Master Plan Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "A-1" -and LDC. C. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructural improvements regarding any dedications to Collier County and the methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities. Words streak-through are deleted;words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD PL2012-0650 Revised 5-14-2013 Page 11 of 26 March 21,2013 we're modifying and bringing in properties to our PUD. We think we control those units that we're bringing in. And then,of course,you've heard reference to another allocation agreement that was in place before this PUD amendment was revised. So the language here,in essence,says that we've got 83 units associated with what we're bringing in, and then there's,you know--I can't read it from here. I'll have to come over and read it if we want to read it into the record. But,in essence,the language is going to say,a minimum of 83 dwelling units will be assigned to the Parcels I A through 3A due to the additional acreage being added to the PUD by the owner of those parcels. And,in addition,Parcels 1 A through 3A shall be entitled to incorporate any other density owned by the developer of these parcels. There shall be a ma.,dmum density of 163 units on Parcels IA through 3A. And that's really for,I guess,protection of the other owners as well to make sure that we're not making a grab for more units than we think we're entitled to,nor are we going to put a bunch of density that was unanticipated on the parcels that were originally part of the agreement. So hopefully that works for everybody. I know that--I mean,obviously everything's subject to further wordsmithing,but I think that captures what we were trying to do. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I was concerned earlier today that--I wanted to make sure that the additional density was captured by those parcels so that it wasn't spread to others who may not have expected it so--because that would be a change in intensity. And I think you've kept it that way,so that's good. Anybody else have any comments,questions? If not,let's go to Page 12. Now,this is an amendment to an existing PUD,so some of the language that we tried to correct in the Palermo can't necessarily apply to this because of the way—this product's already started.You've already got plats done and SDPs done and quite a bit. MR.ARNOLD: But I do think under Section 3.4(aX4),which is,again,the reference to the gatehouse,guardhouse,architectural features,et cetera-- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's all new. MR.ARNOLD: --that's new language that we added for Parcels IA through 3A,and I think it's probably wise that we put in the same development standards that we talked about in Palermo Cove just for consistency purposes. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It's new language;I would agree. MR.ARNOLD: Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Anybody else? That's on Page 13. On Page 3--I mean,on Item 3 of that,you have carports shall be permitted within parking areas,and garages shall be permitted at the edge of vehicular pavements. With the setbacks and all the other standards for those carports and garages,I would assume,then, that the accessory-structure language on the tables that follow apply to those carports or garages;is that a correct assumption? MR.ARNOLD: I think so. That was language that currently exists,Mr.Strain. It wasn't new language we added if--it's A3 that you're reading? CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Yeah. I was just curious,because we--that's the same kind of question that started our discussion on 4. But I think staff on that one—because carports would have to be accessory to units,that would be more or less your accessory standards that you would be looking at. I guess it could have been written better to begin with. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Didn't those come from the multifamily units? That's where you'd normally have a carport. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well,it's not restricted to them,but I mean,I would-- COMMISSIONER VONIER: But this is a single-family dwelling project now,so it probably doesn't make any difference. Carports aren't germane,I wouldn't think. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But this applies to the entire Wolf Creek PUD. COMMISSIONER VONIER: Oh,yeah;that's right.Okay,yeah. Everybody else,yeah. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. On page 14,anybody have any issues? That's the existing language. And on Page 15 is the new language. And we have some corrections from the other document that need to be Page 54 of 85 a-- t — f6,9-LK(1.6):XYJ 91.1K-L 65(116) 3N01N .V. 0 • IOD V 33w9 Y 31Y1i'LY.113111E)7 L KIZ Nv'�4g I GtdW and- .=;_:r4::..a .r-4:2,-� --- ?I3�1.1I`),t'% 7IAI' Clad }I'3.'Z�.� .�7�1�� Is.. %-"• 1•• 3/il `ONIXS3NI)N? NOSQIA 6Q ,AN sitAN Iu 16hO 4 emirs*+*men we, , ) ,wm AN � .. ��ro11 •�• !1I -------- _ =c1a = ____J -- !ill Iilt i gzi v ;I 1. 1 3 ��'i i' i 2 1.4- 3 1 11 tz, al Ai i 6 1 i 1 1 illI 11'l'; ' t4 6 4 411= it ‘:4 Cr) Cr.) ilf———-------—-- ..z.--_---=--.:-.:::_-_-_ -:;.:7-4 R 0 -Nig aI Wit. Trit\ts 1 II il O I ) low. ,13., I'll II i 4 '. -- -- .....:faVit..arrosat...__ 5 ll alb 1 I E ! I 1 * II S 11 Ii !I 16h 1 :I E M !I 11 I3 �1 ii ; 11 1h I a 11 11 1 V I 4 r if 11 - I t I,,,, ills I $ N ' —I-- • ,.4.__ ..„..___ �� ` ;I III! I 11 . I , I , 1 .it ' illi 1 i ; '' 11 If it I„ti "ii�9s0 . ill 1 ii 11: il sil il V I g I 1 I :II i 1 it ii '� I ( 1� j i , 1 eIII8 still3 7 :,„ L__J 1' Itit11 !HI ii 1 i'' ii it i - I IL , , y I i IE 1Pi �F ri , El3 E`11, 00111 Q 1l1 , 01 .. antium 1. 1 is t 10; : I. 41 .N 4110, Il ! I li I' I II Y .Iiitil..101 Standards, current edition, and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), current edition. All other improvements shall be consistent with and as required by the LDC. B. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all development points of ingress and egress from any County collector or arterial roadway. Said lighting shall be in place prior to the issuance of the first permanent certificate of occupancy (CO). C. Site-related improvements (as opposed to system-related improvements) necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO. D. Road Impact Fees shall be paid in accordance with applicable County ordinances and the LDC. E. All proposed median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution No. 01-247), as it may be amended, and the LDC, as it may be amended. Collier County reserves the right to modify or close any median opening existing at the time of approval of this RPUD which is found to be adverse to the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based on, but are not limited to: safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity. F. Interconnections shall be required by Collier County staff as a condition of SDP approval. G. The developer shall be responsible for its proportional share of the cost of a traffic signal system, or other traffic control device, sign, or pavement marking at any development entrance onto the County's collector/arterial roadway network, including both ends of the loop road, should a traffic signal be warranted. If warranted, upon the completion of the installation, inspection, burn-in period, and final approval/acceptance of said traffic signal it shall be turned over (for ownership) to Collier County, and will then be operated and maintained by the Collier County Transportation Department. H. Access points, including both driveways and proposed streets, shown on the RPUD Master Plan Exhibit A and Exhibit A-1, shall be considered to be conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property frontage. All such access issues shall be approved or denied during the review of required subsequent site plan or final plat submissions. All such access points shall be consistent with the Collier County Access Management Policy (Resolution No. 01-247), Words struck through are deleted;words underlined are added. Wolf Creek RPUD PL2012-0650 Revised 5-14-2013 Page 23 of 26 OR: 3635 PG: 1697 Black Bear Ridge-Phase I Budget Assumptions Construction stake out excluded. Permit fees excluded. Impact fees excluded. Engineering fees excluded. Testing services excluded. Street lighting excluded(except VBR intersection). Conservation Area No mitigation,or replanting costs included(clearing only). Sewer p Sewer profile has been adjusted to include - XE j�C � service for the potential lots on the Comc b- �vvj� ve Drainage c Water / Will provide water service stubs or 2 7101)111111 17. Earthwork and Clearing ..1+ - -+ Fill from lakes is limited to only I.. vation depth below existing D' .+'. commendation. An average of 1.6 ft of fill over the' eveloped site. '1`` f 01.• Rock excavation,rock crushing and: k incidental to the lake exca r Paving `� , yj p T (< �� Sidewalk cost included in initial infrastructure. 1'{L 1- 1 Offsite Inner loop road to be built by others,including turn lanes to serve site(no costs assumed). Vanderbilt Beach Rd 6 lane improvements in place(I.e.force main). Vanderbilt Beach Rd temporary turn lanes not required(I.e.payment to county to build improvements to support project and to built as part of 6 lane improvements). 6°10 ��... EXHIBIT"D"-Page 3 of 3 26 THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SIX AND 50/100 DOLLARS ($3,057,906.50) from the Construction Loan, to be disbursed only pursuant to this Agreement. Lender acknowledges that this Agreement shall not constitute a draw against the Construction Loan fund, but that only such funds as are actually disbursed, whether pursuant to this Agreement or a provision of the Construction Loan, shall accrue interest. 4. The escrowed funds shall be released to the Developer only upon written approval of the Development Services Director who shall approve the release of the funds on deposit not more than once a month to the Developer, in amounts due for work done to date based on the percentage completion of the work multiplied by the respective work costs less ten percent (10%); and further, that upon completion of the work, the Development Services Director shall approve the release of any remainder of escrowed funds except to the extent of$305,790.65 which shall remain in escrow as a Developer guaranty of maintenance of the Required Improvements for a minimum period of one (1) year pursuant to Paragraph 10 of the Agreement. However, in the event that Developer shall fail to comply with the requirements of this Agreement, then the Lender agrees to pay to the County immediately upon demand the balance of the funds held in escrow by the Lender, as of the date of the demand, provided that upon payment of such balance to the County, the County will have executed and delivered to the Lender in exchange for such funds a statement to be signed by the Development Services Director to the effect that: • (a) Developer for more than sixty (60) days after written notification of such failure has failed to comply with the requirements of this agreement; (b) The County, or its authorized agent, will complete the work called for under the terms of the above-mentioned contract or will complete such portion of such work as the County, in its sole discretion shall deem necessary in the public interest to the extent of the funds then held in escrow; (c) The escrow funds drawn down by the County shall be used for construction of the Required Improvements engineering, legal and contingent costs and expenses, and to offset any damages, either direct or consequential, which the County may sustain on account of the failure of the Developer to carry out and execute the above-mentioned development work; and, (d) The County will promptly repay to the Lender any portion of the funds drawn down and not expended in completion of the said development work. 5. Written notice to the Lender by the County specifying what amounts are to be paid to the Developer shall constitute authorization by the County to the Lender for release of the specified funds to the Developer. Payment by the Lender to the Developer of the amounts specified in a letter of authorization by the County to the Lender shall constitute a release by the County and Developer of the Lender for the funds disbursed in accordance with the letter of authorization from the County. 6. The Required Improvements shall not be considered complete until a statement of substantial completion by Developer's engineer along with the final project records have been IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board and the'Developer have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized-representatives this c-,iriciay ofJuly.,2005. DEVELOPER: BUCKSTONE ESTATES,LLC, i a Florida limited liability company .+..r/ By: Catalina Land Group, (P J •T2. Y 5 ' ' a Florida corporation, illim"-- 11111W its Manager (Print Name: ft•d-lb Pt, _t ) By: W4 liam L. Hoover, President LENDER: Orion Bank, a Florida banking corporation liVA./,. rLal��rr�'1 etA By: tel / 06?-4,4G'e_.4/ - 1111/111 Name: ifrr��ereX K /hi L L(Print Name: Body A. Rasehte Title: 5 Efiet Dic 1''1',0 ee0,,5i bevy- , ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA LI:y101*: ., t?CK,Clerk . :` -* **,, 0,,''. • 1/4"- "k...,i420_, LA), Cir1.631Sk. • /ai e.--4021A:•....L.' %. - `` =; •�,,,;!y m Cle -At: ` Chairman `;.5 1 gria• >:•ure: At`tt.l, WHO L • Cy LL. pproved as•to*rrti and legal sufficiency: • Assistant County At ey S:Cnot K7iss FnWa.Ybmse'BV1 B.K.*9.bd.van v¢msm[Ns.doc GrecoSherry From: marc alien <mallencny@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday,June 22, 2017 8:12 AM To: TaylorPenny Subject: PDI - PL20160000404 Wolf Creek RPUD preserve reduction Re: PDI - PL20160000404: Wolf Creek RPUD by the developer of parcels 3b and 9 to reduce preserves Dear Commissioner Taylor, First, let me be clear, I am not against development, nor against this developer's right to develop his property. The property is, however, within a residential planned urban development, Wolf Creek, and development should be in keeping with the agreements and ordinances associated with the RPUD, and should be compatible with other developments in the RPUD. There are two facets to this proposal; preserve reduction and residential density, although only one is being considered with this PDI. To be properly assessed the project should be looked at in its entirety, not piecemeal. Please consider the following: With respect to the preserves: There were no excess preserves or excess native vegetation prior to 2013 when a portion of Palermo Cove was brought into the Wolf Creek PUD. As noted in the CCPC minutes of 3/21/2013, it was intended that there be no net effect upon preserves and no increase in density in the Wolf Creek RPUD and Palermo Cove PUD, with the 2013 WCPUD and Palermo Cove amendments. Thus, the apparent "excess" should not have existed. The excess appeared when the required preserves for SFWMD, which were more than the county's native vegetation requirement, were added to the WCPUD map exhibit as preserve, but not taken into account as required native vegetation because only a portion was required. The excess was an unintended consequence and a reduction should therefore not be approved. With respect to the density: While other county PUDs may have dwelling unit "pools", Wolf Creek 1 In conclusion please consider: The PDI for a requested reconfiguration of the preserve map and decrease in preserves should not be approved as there should be no "excess" preserves. The companion PL 20160000157 should not be approved as the requested number of dwelling units is more than twice that allocated. The high density row house type development is not compatible with the original plan and not in keeping with the majority of the adjacent developments. Note that there is no opposition to development according to parameters of the original plan; a development of —104 dwelling units, which may be multifamily, possibly with a mild or moderate increase in density, but this proposal is not that. We have met with the developer in an attempt to work out something mutually agreeable. They have been unwilling to consider any compromise in their proposed density, to which they are not entitled according to allocation. Thank you for your time, Respectfully, Marc Allen, 7347 Acorn Way, Naples FL *OR 3635 PGS 1672-1699, recognized as valid and enforceable as documented in various county meeting minutes **Ordinances 2007-46 and 2013-37 ***BCC minutes 5/22-23/2007, CCPC minutes 3/21/13 3 GrecoSherry From: Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 2:38 PM To: R. Bruce Anderson; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; FialaDonna; KlatzkowJeff; CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael Cc: Richard Yovanovich (ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com) Subject: RE:Wolf Creek PUD/Vanderbilt Reserve request for insubstantial change Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Board—this is in response to Mr. Anderson's email below. I believe you should ask Mr. Anderson to clarify what he means when he states: "The prior owner of the property had a site plan for 254 dwelling units on the land now owned by my client, so claims by others that your approval would somehow increase density are flat out wrong." The impression left by Mr.Anderson is that the prior 254 site plan was approved by the county, and that the new presently pending 215 unit site plan now reduces the approved site plan. Mr. Anderson should clarify whether the county ever approved a 254 site plan, or whether he is instead just referencing a concept plan on a sheet of paper that was never approved. Sincerely, Steve Bracci .t +4 \ti Wim, Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. 1 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 not addressed to you(or if you have any reason to believe that it is not intended for you),please notify the sender by retum 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. From: Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent: Wednesday,July 05, 2017 5:30 PM To: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net> Cc: burtsaunders@colliergov.net; pennytaylor@colliergov.net; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJrCc@colliergov.net>; andysolis@colliergov.net; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; R. Bruce Anderson<rbanderson@napleslaw.com> Subject: Wolf Creek PUD/Vanderbilt Reserve request for insubstantial change Dear Jeff and others, please see the attached letter and attachments on behalf of Black Bear Ridge HOA and its members. Sincerely, Steve Bracci 111\tir' Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. 3 GrecoSherry From: Richard Yovanovich <ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 3:48 PM To: R. Bruce Anderson; SaundersBurt;TaylorPenny; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; FialaDonna; KlatzkowJeff; CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael Cc: Steve Bracci Subject: RE: Wolf Creek PUD/Vanderbilt Reserve request for insubstantial change Attachments: Stock pf Buckstone Estates Purchase &Sale Agreement.pdf; Assignment of Construction Documents & Permits.pdf; Cost Sharing Agreement for the Development of Shared Access Road (OR 363....pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Commissioners, The petition before the BCC pertains to the modification of the preserve area. As I previously stated, it is my understanding that the Mederos parcel is limited to a density of 80 units. Mr. Bracci provided you with some of the legislative history supporting my understanding with regards to the PUD limiting density. Mr. Anderson stated to the BCC that the change in preserve area is related to increasing the lot size. However, the current plat submitted by his client clearly shows the purpose is to increase density beyond the PUD permitted density of 80 units for the Mederos parcel. Increasing density cannot occur through the Insubstantial Change process. Therefore, as long as the approval of the reduction in preserve size is conditioned upon development of the Mederos parcel being limited to 80 units, my client does not object to the petition filed by Mr. Anderson's client. I appreciate that the prior property owner had other site plans with a higher density. However, there is no evidence that the prior site plans were approved by the County. Accordingly,the prior site plans are irrelevant and not consistent with the PUD. As to the ownership of the 103 units,that is a private matter. We do not agree with Mr. Bracci's position on ownership of the units. Because Mr. Bracci spent most of his allotted time addressing ownership of the excess units, we are providing copies of some documents addressing the density rights in the PUD. The Purchase and Sale Agreement clearly identifies that Stock Development purchased the excess density. Also attached is an assignment document assigning developer rights to Black Bear Ridge Naples, LLC. Finally, the Cost Sharing Agreement addresses the excess density. At no time was the excess density assigned to Mr. Bracci's client. Mr. Bracci also spent a lot of time addressing the payment for the intersection improvements at Pristine Drive and Vanderbilt Beach Road. My client has already agreed to pay the 30% share of Black Bear Ridge set forth in the Cost Sharing Agreement for the right and left turn lanes at Pristine Drive and Vanderbilt Beach Road.The 30%share was based upon an allotted density of 203 units. Only 100 units were built. Black Bear Ridge, LLC remains the owner of the unbuilt 103 units. The unbuilt units have not been assigned to the residents of Black Bear Ridge or to the Homeowner's Association. Please contact me if you have any further questions. 1 Thank you very much. Sincerely, Bruce Anderson R. Bruce Anderson Attorney at Law CHEFFYPASSIDOMO Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. ATTORNEYS.AT LAIC 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239) 659-4942 direct (239) 261-9300 telephone (239) 261-9782 facsimile rbanderson a(�napleslaw.com www.napleslaw.com 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 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. From:Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent:Wednesday,July 05, 2017 5:30 PM To: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net> Cc: burtsaunders@colliergov.net; pennytaylor@colliergov.net; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net>; andysolis@colliergov.net; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net>; R. Bruce Anderson<rbanderson@napleslaw.com> Subject: Wolf Creek PUD/Vanderbilt Reserve request for insubstantial change Dear Jeff and others, please see the attached letter and attachments on behalf of Black Bear Ridge HOA and its members. Sincerely, Steve Bracci Nk �i Steven J. Bracci, PA,Attorney at Law, 9015 Strada Stell Court, Suite 102, Naples, Florida 34109 Office: (239) 596-2635; Fax: (239)431-6045; email: steve@braccilaw.com THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS TRANSMISSION MAY BE ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL. IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. ANY ATTACHMENTS TO THIS TRANSMISSION ARE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONVEYING THE DIRECT WRITTEN AND COMMONLY VISIBLE COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN. USE OF ANY ATTACHMENT FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN RECEIPT OF THE DIRECT WRITTEN COMMUNICATION CONTAINED THEREIN IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. NO TRANSMISSION OF UNDERLYING CODE OR METADATA IS INTENDED. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO THE SENDER. 3 ASSIGNMENT OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND PERMITS THIS ASSIGNMENT OF CONSTRU /"TION DOCUMENTS AND PERMITS (this "Assignment") is made and delivered on this 1(It' of December, 2010, by Buckstone Estates, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (the "Assignor"), to Black Bear Ridge Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company(the"Assignee"), STATEMENT OF PURPOSE WHEREAS, Assignor has this day transferred its rights title and interest in that certain real property described as: Exhibit"A"attached hereto;and WHEREAS, Assignor desires to transfer to Assignee all of its right, title and interest in and to all construction plans, permits and government entitlements for its benefit including, but not limited to the items set forth on: 'Exhibit"B"attached hereto. WHEREAS: Assignor is the "Developer" in the Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Easements For Black Bear Ridge recorded on August 30, 2005 in Official Records Book 3879, at Page 1030 and amendments thereto (the "Declaration") and desires to assign its right, title and interest as "Developer" under the Declaration for the purpose of continuing the process of development of the Black Bear Ridge community and the sale of single family residences to third parties. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN and No/100 DOLLARS ($10.00)and other good and valuable consideration,Assignor hereby agrees as follows: 1. Assignor hereby grants, transfers and assigns to Assignee, its successors and assigns, all of Assignor's right, title and interest in, to and under the Construction Documents, Permits and Governmental Entitlements. Notwithstanding the provisions above to the contrary, Assignor shall retain its rights to the escrowed funds on deposit with Collier County pursuant to the Construction, Maintenance and Escrow Agreements for Subdivision Improvements with the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. 2. Assignor warrants and represents to Assignee that: (a) there are no other assignments or conveyances of any of Assignor's rights under the Construction Documents, Permits and Governmental Entitlements to any other person or entity; (b) Assignor has not done any act or failed to do any act which might prevent Assignee from,or limit Assignee in,acting under any of the provisions contained herein; (c) no default exists under the terms of the Construction Documents, Permits and Governmental Entitlements and no prohibition exists in any instrument to which Assignor is a party or by which Assignor is otherwise bound relating to Assignor's right to execute this IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Assignor has signed and sealed this Assignment or has caused this Assignment to be signed and sealed by duly authorized representatives the day and year first above written. WITNESSES: ASSIGNOR: BUCKSTONE ESTATES,LLC,a Florida limited liability company By: Jody K.Vanderbilt Q. Grady Minor Its: Co-Manager Print e (Corporate Seal) Beth D. Lightner Print Name By ' Jody Vander � Michael D. Moore Its: Co-Manager Print Name Beth D. Lightner (Corporate Seal) Print Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this /6/4"—day of December, 2010 by Q. Grady Minor as Co- Manager of Buckstone Estates, LLC, a Florida limited liability company on behalf of the company, ho is personally known to nL, or who has produced (type o identification) as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. NOTE: If a type of identification is not inserted in the blank provided, then the person executing this instrument was personally known to me. if the words in the parenthetical "did not" are not circled, then the person executing this instrument did take an oath. - MywHrooa��s� N ry Public My Commission Expires: EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY Lots 2,4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 38. 43,46, 47,48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 58, 59, 62, 63, 64,67, Black Bear Ridge-.Phase 1, a subdivision according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 43, Pages 89 through 92,of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. AND Lots 68, 69, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 81, 84, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, Black Bear Ridge- Phase 2,a subdivision according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 47,pages 40 through 42, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. AND Lots 95, 96, 98, 99, Black Bear Ridge - Phase 3, a subdivision according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 48,pages 71 and 72, of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. -- Exhibit RB" — • • 1.PARTIES AND PROPERTY; J �G �aC tapmcw� t�� 0- �lltt s- \It4rtt �1>�if 0]11- 0-Y (`Buyer") r agrees to buy and euckoton■ Motets(, LLC, a Florida liaitad liability company ("Seller) 3• agrees to sell the property described as:Street Address: 5sa attached legal dascriptioo 2. Legal Description: as* Attached L.yal Description c Intangible 1' and the following Peraenal Property:ties Ldd.udum •8 a (all collectively referred to as the"Property")on the terms and conditions set forth below. ,a•2.PURCHASE PRICE $ 3152s, 000.e „• (a)Deposit held in escrow by Conroy, boy a Durant $ 3V/ 5aQ. Y 12 (Escrow Agent") lend. (1u wile Z business ,. days of Effective Date) ,3• Escrow Agent's address: talo vaadarbilt Beach ?Rood Phone: 239.419,5700 ,a- (b)AAitiol,d.A tto-be-made to C ..v*Aye.,+' thin --daya.efterfffective-Bete $ n ja 15' ( .jp jr60rpW.,ltCj0i3L.Wiibia yGAfter-EffiCti,a✓6.Drzte S rife 5 (d)-Total flm.ncino jnm ph 4 al a tr (e)Other nit $ n/d ae (1)All deposits will be credited to the purchase price at closing.Balance to close,subject O s to adjustments and prorations,to be paid with locally drawn cashier's or official bank $ 3 r' Z r zb check(s)or wire transfer. 21 3.TIME FOR ACCEPTANCE;EFFECTIVE DATE:COMPUTATION OF TIME Unless this offer is signed by Seller and Buyer 22'and an executed copy delvered to al parties on Or before 20 days ,this offer will be withdrawn and the 23 Buyer's deposit,If any,will be returned.The Urns for acceptance of any counter offer wil be 3 days from the date th counter and 24 offer is delivered.The"Effective Date"of this Contract Is the date on which the last one.of the Seller and Buys hes signed 25 or initialed and delivered this offer or the final counter offer.Calendar days will be used when computing time periods,excepbard as time periods of 5 days or less.Time periods of 5 days or less will be computed without Including Saturday.Sunday.or national (see 27 legal holidays.Any time period ending on a Saturday,Sunday,or national legal holiday will extend until 5:00 p.m.of the next ti`dde>stua 25 business day.Time is of the essence in this Contract. 2s 4.CLOSING DATE AND LOCATION: within 30 days after the expiration of the Due V 3o- (a)Closing Date: This transaction will be closed aa-,.p j Feriod (Closing Date),unless specifically 31 extended by other provisions of this Contract.The Closing Date will prevail over all other time periods including,but not limited 32 to,Financing end Due Diligence periods.In the event insurance underwriting Is suspended on Cloning Date and Buyer is unable 33 to obtain property insurance, Buyer may postpone closing up to 5 days after the insurance underwriting suspension Is lifted. ta. (b)Location;Closing will take place in Collin: County,Florida.(If lett blank, 3s closing wil take place In the county where the Property is located.)Closing may be conducted by mall or electronic means. 3e•Buyer(tg..) �end Seller U C___)acknowledge receipt of a copy of this page,which Is Page 1 of 7 Pages. al W GC-3 Rev.10 V 0 29019 ftarlda Assocla len of lienee' .Al Rghts riasaa`red Thar .ortsars in ltrsaasd to tJ. Conroy - Talon Baaag(sat a (Maley. 5LC2 rw,,tranaactioadaat.soa. Iglet • en possession,which show all currently existing structuree.In the event this transaction does not close,all documents provided 93 by Seller will be returned to Seller within 10 days from the date this Contract is terminated. c e Cit Buyer will,at 0 Seller's 61 Buyers expense and within the time period allowed to deriver and examine title evidence, es obtain a current certified survey of the Property from a registered surveyor.it the survey reveals encroachments on the se Properly or that the Improvements encroach on the lands of another, liN Buyer wtl accept the Property with existing eV Ur• encroachments 0 such encroachments wll constitute a title defect to be cured within the Curative Period. of (d)Ingress and Egress: Seiler warrants that the Property presently has ingress and egress. 0e 7.PROPERTY CONDITION: Seiler will deliver the Property to Buyer at the time agreed in Its present'as Is condition,ordinary ,00 wear and tear excepted,and will maintain the landscaping and grounds in a comparable condition.Seller makes no warranties 101 other than marketability of title.By accepting the Property'as is,'Buyer waives all claims against Seiler for any defects In the ,02 Property.(Check(a)or(b)) ice 4(a)As Is: Buyer has inspected the Property or waives any right to inspect end :. pts the Property in its'as is`condition, toe• f (b)Due Ditlpence Period:Buyer we,at Buyer's expense and within ewe clays from Effective Date("Due Diligence ,as Period'),determine whether the Property is suitable,In Buyer's sole and absolute discretion,for Buyer's Intended use and ae development of the Property as specified in Paragraph 6.During the Due Diligence Period,Buyer may conduct any tests, 107 analyses,surveys and investigations('inspection')which Buyer deems necessary to determine to Buyer's satisfaction the ,0e Property's engineering,architectural,environmental properties;zoning and zoning restrictions:flood zone designation and ice restrictions;subdivision regulations;soil and grade;availability of access to public roads,water,and other utilities;consistency 110 with local,state and regional growth management and comprehensive land use plans;availability of permits,government r„ approvals and licenses;compliance with American with Disabilities Act absence of asbestos,soil and ground water 112 contamination;and other Inspections that Buyer deems appropriate to determine the suitability of the Property for Buyer's 113 intended use and development.Buyer we deliver written notice to Setter prior to the expiration of the Due Diligence Period ,,. of Buyer's determination of whether or not the Property is acceptable.Buyer's failure to comply with this notice requirement its wit constitute acceptance of the Property in its present"as is'condition.Seller grants to Buyer,its agents,contractors and ,1s assigns,the right to enter the Property at any time during the Due Diligence Period for the purpose of conducting Inspections; 117 provided,however,that Buyer,its agents,contractors and assigns enter the Properly and conduct inspections at their own na risk. Buyer will indemnify and hold Seller harmless from losses,damages,costs,claims and expenses of any nature,including 116 attorneys'tees at all levels,and torn liability to any person,arkerig from the conduct of any and all inspections or any work ,2o authorized by Buyer.Buyer will not engage in any activity that could result In a mechanic's lien being filed against the Property 121 without Seller's prior written consent.In the event this transaction does not dose,(1)Buyer will repair all dam to the in Property resulting from the Inspections and return the Property to the condition it was in prior to conduct of the inspections,and 123 (2)Buyer wit,at Buyer's expense,release to Seller ell reports and other work generated as a result of the Inspections.Should 121 Buyer deliver timely notice that the Property is not acceptable,Seller agrees that Buyers deposit we be immediately returned in to Buyer end the Contract terminated. ,2e (c)Walk-through Inspection:Buyer may,on the day prior to closing or any other time mutually agreeable to the parties, 127 conduct a final'walk-through"inspection of the Property to determine compliance with this paragraph and to ensure that at 128 Property is on the premises. in 8.OPERATION OF PROPERTY DURING CONTRACT PERIOD: Sailer wit continue to operate the Property and any business 133 conducted on the Property in the manner operated prior to Contract and will take no action that would adversely Impact the 131 Property,tenants,lenders or business,if any.My changes,such as seetkeeirecariespaceethat materially affect the Property or 132-Buyer's intended use of the Property wilt be permitted ti;only with Buyer's consent o without Buyers consent. *Seller contracting to sell a lot(a) Le 131 9.CLOSING PROCEDURE 134 ter)Possession and Occupancy:Seiler well delver possession and occupancy of the Property to Buyer at closing.Seller will las provide keys,remote controls,and any security/access codes necessary to operate all locks,mailboxes,and security systems. 138 (b)Coats:Buyer we pay buyer's attorneys'fees,taxes and recording fees on notes,mortgages and financing statements and 137 recording fees for the deed.feeler wit pay aster's attorneys'fees, nd recording fees for cloc urnente needed ,3a to cure title defects,If Seller is obligated to d iSCharge any encumbrance at or prior to closing and fails to do so,Buyer may use / ,ere purchase proceeds to satisfy the encumbrances. �/ *and tiger on deed. ao (c)Documents:Seller sell provide the dewed;bill of sale;mechanic's len Octave;originals of those assignable service and 141 maintenance contracts that will be assumed by Buyer after the Closing Date and setters to each service contractor from Seller 147 Buydr(')( )and Seller( )f 1 ocletowledge reoMit of tl tea of this page,which Is Page 3 of 7 Pages. OC-3 Pay.to.Kne eD 2003 Ronda Amoeba,of ROTOR" AA RION Fiavwnd Mi. .olt....r. Ls ll000sod to [J. Coatoy - Taloa uaarguseoL. !silky. LKt ww.tr.asratLoadamk.ous. 95 in full settlement of any claims,upon which this Contract wit terminate or(2)seek specific performance.If Beller retains the las deposit.Seiler will pay the Brokers named In Paragraph 20 testy percent of all forfeited deposits retained by Seller(to be split 197 equally among the Brokers)up to the tut amount of the brokerage fee. 1 e 14.ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS: In any claim or controversy arising out of or relating to this Contract,the prevailing party, 1%, which for purposes of this provision wit Include Buyer,Seiler and Broker,wit be awarded reasonable attorneys'fees,costs,and 200 expenses, 201 16.NOTICES: M notices will be in writing and may be delivered by mail,personal delivery,or electronic means.Parties agree to Zoe send at notices to addresses specified on the signature page(s).Any notice,document,or Item given by or delivered to an attorney 203 or-real estate licensee Inductng a transaction broker)representing a party will be as effective as if given by or delivered to that party. 204 18.DISCLOSURES: los (a)Commen3fel Reel Estate Sales Commission Use Act The Florida Commercial Real Estate Sales Commission Lien Act 205 provides that when a broker has earned a commission by performing licensed services under a brokerage agreement with you, 207 the broker may claim a lien against your net sales proceeds for the broker commission.The broker's ten rights under the act 2ca cannot be waived before the commission is earned. lac (b)Special Assessment Liens Imposed by PirWIc Body:The Property may be sub)ect to unpaid special assessment lien(s) 210 imposed by a public body.(A public body includes a Community Development District.)Such liens,If any,shell be paid as set 211 forth in Paragraph 9.(e). 212 (c)Radon(tae:Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that,when It has accumulated in a building In suf8r9ant quantities, 213 may present health risks to persons who are exposed to It over time.Levels of radon that exceed federal and state guidelines 214 have been found in buildings In Florida.Additional information regarding radon and radon testing may be obtained from your 215 county public health unit. 2,a (d)Energy-Efficiency Rating Information:Buyer acknowledges receipt of the Information brochure required by Section 217 553.966,Florida Statutes. 215 1T.RISK OF LASS: 219 (a)tf,after the Effective Dote and befdre closing,the Property is damaged by fie or other casualty,Seller will bear the risk of 22o loss and Buyer may cancel this Contract without lebiity and the deposit(s)will be returned to Buyer.Alternatively,Buyer will 221 have the option of purchasing the Property at the agreed upon purchase price and Seller will transfer to Buyer at closing any 222 insurance proceeds,or Seller's claim to any insurance proceeds payable for the damage.Seiler will cooperate with and assist 223 Buyer in collecting any such proceeds. 224 (b)If,after the Effective Date and before dosing.any part of the Property Is taken in condemnation or under the right of eminent 225 domain,or proceedings for such taking will be pending or threatened,Buyer may cancel this Contract without liability and the 226 depostt(s)wti be returned to Buyer..Alternativey,Buyer we have the option of purchasing what is left of the Property at the 227 agreed upon purchase price and Sailor WI transfer to the Buyer at dosing the proceeds of any award,or Selier's calm to any ne award payable for the taking.Seller wig cooperate with and assist Buyer in cofecting any such award. 227 113.ASSIGNABILITY;PERSONS BOUND: This Contract may be assigned to a related entity, and otherwise O IS riot assigneble / 230'61 is assignable.The terms"Buyer,''Seller and'Broker'may be singular or plural.This Contract is binding upon Buyer,Seller 231 and their heirs,personal representatives,successors and assigns(if assignment Is permitted). 232 1 S.MISCELLANEOUS: The terms of this Contract constitute the entire agreement between Buyer and Seller.Modifications of 233 this Contract we not be binding unless In writing,signed and delivered by the party to be bound.Signatures.initials,documents 234 referenced in this Contract,counterparts and written modifications communicated electronically or on paper will be acceptable 235 for all purposes,Including dellvery,and will be binding,Handwritten or typewritten terms inserted in or attached to this Contract 233 prevail over preprinted terms.If any provision of this Contract is or becomes invalid or unenforceable,all remaining provisions will 237 continue to be fully effective.This Contract will be construed under Florida law and will not be recorded in any public records. 231'Puysr i, )U end SMer L i U SeiCIOwl6tiga=SO of a CON tit itis Pegg.Witt!i8 Page bat 7 Pages. cc-s Rev.taws 02009 Florida Acsoomlan Cf REoac55' At Wilts Reievad rasa tat[rurti is ltcs a.d to 12. Oaasoy - lidos p.m.s.mrt a lomat'', LLC] rrr•tr.a.eottonMnt,caa. 231 Each person signing this Contract on behalf of a party that is a business entity represents and warrants to the other party that 292 such signatory has full power and authority to enter into and perform this Contract in accordance with Its terms and each person . 203 executing this Contract and other documents on behalf of such party has been duly authorized to do so. Date: u�Ll5i" 31 r 2.G zea atur Duyet) t C{ /�. �J 23e- 1,Y;r ye t 4Cc. 1 7T k. '2`►C6?1 t/ Tax 1D No.: S-(73/ O(-f28 237 (Typed or Printed Name of Buyer) 23e'TItIe: Mo 3eA Telephone: 231- 54Z-734(1 23r Date: 3(s (Signature of Buys.) Wit. • Tax lD No.: sae (Typed or Printed Name of Buyer) 3a3-Tale; Telephone: ale Buyer's Address for purpose of notice: X FaceknUa: E-maTh Sucitataw taker . !1 Baited liabilityQ (1 ^ l 39C8�nx _ / ! i Dote: 1 I`i L� 1 0 • At 3W (Signature of Seger) acs Q. Greedy Isiaor Tex ID No.: 54 2 23 Xe (Typed or punted Name of Seiler) • I�3,a'Title: Co-tiaoaver Telephone: ZPi- L2(a 0 ^ 3 2,1-) (... Buck/stone Estates, LLC, a Florida liadted Iiablity '} Date: CT--(L-1 — .ts( o 312 (Signature of Seller) � � , 2 � 3 2'�-.3 4 313- Ifichael D. 1100E4 Tax D No.: 314 (Typed or Printed Name of Seller) 315 rifle, -1tenagrez / Telephone:2- — ata'sellers Address for purpose or notice: G 10 Mit t �t Es1 , aO�1D Vr.JrA c1 i e&h. J2 � lza1 iU,pms� Fi 3 V/C a,r Facsimile: Z ) t " 4'y 7— cI/it'D E-rttait The Florida Aaaocation d RFALrova•makat no ntpneentanan ae to the Ypal wildly or adequacy d any provision of this rent In any specific transaction,This aanderd'mad bum ehald not be used In oornples transactions or with Wendy,idem or addllons.Thk torn Is waggle for uu by the antis real setas Mu/dry and Is nil blended to ider* the user as a Ftseaoi .Ram rod'u a tapishred oolediw members*nwk which may be used aft+by real estate licensees who we mortars d the NATIONAL ASSOQATK 4 OF REALTC]fiS•end who eubsate to its Code Of Ethics. The copyright taws of the lkrlted States(17 UB..Cods,build the Lmeu*anted reproduclbn at the form by any means indudlp facdrnie a oonputertted tortes. 3113'Buyer trin}(._....)end Star( 'r( )edvowiedZe fecept of B copy of this pegs,which Is Page 7 or 7 Pages. CC-3 Rea.1009 0 2009 Florida Association of F5ALwns' Al Bights Reesrved Mt. ■cltware le licenn+d to !J. Convoy - Taloa Yaaapeaot a Malty. LLC] www.traaea.tio.4ak.eaa. ADDENDUM TO FAR COMMERCIAL CONTRACT BLACK BEAR RIDGE This Addendum to FAR Commercial Contract("Addendum")is made and entered into as of the date set forth on the Contract to which this Addendum is attached("Contract") by and between the parties set forth as Seller and Buyer on said Contract, for the sale and purchase of the following real property: Those Black Bear Ridge subdivision Lots as specifically set forth in the Exhibit to the Commercial Contract(the"Property"). The Contract and this Addendum shall be collectively refereed to as the Contract. IN THE EVENT ANY PROVISION OF THIS ADDENDUM CONFLICTS IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITH THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT, THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ADDENDUM SHALL CONTROL. 1. IT IS EXPRESSLY AGREED AND ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE BUYER THAT ANY i` EXPRESS REPRESENTATIONS,WARRANTIES,OR STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE CONTRACT, WHETHER REFERRING TO THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY, OR WHETHER REFERRING TO THE EXISTENCE OF FEATURES, FUNCTIONS OR SERVICES RELATING TO OR SERVING THE PROPERTY (INCLUDING, BY WAY OF EXAMPLE ONLY, WHETHER THE PROPERTY HAS PARTICULAR TYPES OF UTILITY SERVICES), ARE SPECIFICALLY WANED, DISCLAIMED, AND RENDERED NULL AND VOID AND THE PROPERTY IS BEING SOLD "AS IS-WHERE IS" AND SELLER MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY AND HAS NO OBLIGATIONS FOR REPAIRS THEREOF. 2. APPROVAL BY IBERIA BANK. Buyer acknowledges that Iberia Bank ("Iberia") has a Mortgage on the Property. The Contract is contingent upon a)the approval of the purchase price, terms of the Contract and the Closing Statement;b)Iberia's agreement to accept a payoff.which is less than the balance due on the loan, and : c) Iberia's release and satisfaction of the mortgage upon receipt of the discounted Closing payoff. Iberia shall have twenty(20)days from the Effective Date to approve the purchase price and contract terms (the "Approval Deadline"). In the event that Iberia has not delivered written acceptance within the Approval Deadline, either party may terminate the Contract by delivering written notice to the other. Buyer's right to terminate shall cease to exist if Seller gives notice to Buyer that Seller waives this contingency or that Lender Approval has been obtained prior to Buyer giving Seller notice of termination. TIME PERIODS. All time periods under the Contract shall commence from the date Seller W,./ either delivers notice to Buyer of Lender Approval or the date Seller has waived the contingency. Buyer and Seller agree to extend the Closing Date in the Contract, not to exceed ten (10)days if Iberia 6/ requires additional time to complete the short sale transaction. 3. ASSIGNMENT OF PERMITS,PLANS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS. At Closing, Owner to assign(I)its development rights,density rights,drainage rights,and allocations to Buyer(ii)all architectural, engineering, building and similar plans, specifications,drawings,studies, reports, plats, permits surveys, work product, and the like related to the Land and Improvements, (iii)all permits, approvals, and applications with any governmental authorities pertaining to the Land or any portion thereof, and all sewer taps, allocations and agreements for utilities and utility deposits, if any, (iv) all rights and interests appurtenant to the Land and Improvements arising out of or related to any property owners associations, declaration, reciprocal easement agreement,or other encumbrance affecting title to the Land in connection with a common development scheme with other lands, and other embellishments now or in the future on or appurtenant to the Land, and all other intangible property relating to the Land,if any("Intangible Property")to Buyer. 3467972 OR: 3635 PG: 1672 RECORDED in OFFICIAL RECORDS of COLLIER COUNTY, FL 09/01/2004 at 10:13AM DWIGHT B. BROCI, CLERK This instrument was prepared RIC FIE 239.50 without an opinion of title and INDEIING 3.00 7 after recording return to: Retn: I Gregory L.Urbancic,Esq. GOODLBTTE COLEMAN IT AL Ni Goodlette,Coleman&Johnson,P.A. 4001 TAMIAMI TR N #300 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300 NAPLES FL 34103 Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (space above this line for recording data) COST SHARING AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SHARED ACCESS ROAD THIS COST SHARING AG ' :1 DEVELOP NT OF A SHARED ACCESS ROAD(this"Agreement" . ent -• ..= e I:: ,?.y of , 2004, by and among the following: (i)Wek d Estates,LLC,a ••' el tted liability c pany("Wolf Creek Estates"); (ii) William L. Hoover�as L ustee ..of,the Fallen Timb.+ Lnd Trust dated November 5, 2003 ("Hoover/Fallen Timbers"); (iO) l�arld indner, as'J ustee • de\ unrecorded Land Trust UTT/D January 4, 1999 ("Lindner/T4tst " it « a: ••• • r stee under unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D May 21, 1999 ("Lindner2� ae( jp4 •'• ,• es, LC, a Florida limited liability •company("Buckstone Estatesl'). ` r WITNESSET ' THA WAFREAS, the parties` e = own adjacent rea im/ Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East,Collier County,Flo =• • • "S. WHEREAS, the parties hereto + • fo_1 t properties which are the subject of this Agreement,with said individual properties being legally described on Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof: OWNER: PARCEL: Lindner/Trust 1 Parcel 1 Lindner/Trust 2 Parcel 2 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 4 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 5 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 6 Buckstone Estates Parcel 7 Hoover/Fallen Timbers Parcel 8(west half) Buckstone Estates Parcel 8(east half) Buckstone Estates Parcel 9 Lindner/Trust 1 Parcel 10 Buckstone Estates Parcel 11 1 OR: 3635 PG: 1674 Vanderbilt Beach Road and Immokalee Road corridors, located between Livingston Road and Collier Boulevard. The Parcels are permitted to have differing land uses but the actual land uses shall be compatible with each other. The Parcels shall be developed using a similar architectural theme along the access roads, quality buffering and screening between the differing land uses, and common site design techniques. All Parcels shall be designed and developed to minimize any negative impacts on abutting and neighboring Parcels. 5. Zoning. Each owner (and the owner's successor, assign, and successor in title) agrees that it shall not object to any rezoning and/or development consistent with the following provisions: (a) Parcel 10 may be rezoned and developed for specialty retail and office land uses. The most westerly 175 feet of Parcel 10 shall be designed and developed only for offices, banks, drug stores, sit-down restaurants, retail shops, and similar intensity commercial uses, and shall not be permitted to have gas stations,convenience stores,fast food restaurants,and stand alone bars or lounges. (b) Parcel 1, Parcel 2, and Parcels 4 through 9, inclusive, may be developed for residential use. Said parcels have been rezoned to the Wolf Creek PUD, Collier County Ordinance No. 03-45 (hereinafter "Wolf Creek PUD") and shall be developed according to the development standards within the Wolf Creek PUD. Any owner of one of -- y apply for a PUD Amendment to the Wolf Creek PUD through Collier County for - •.`,a - �i. oses without written permission of the remaining owner(s) of the Wolf Cr. is property: i -*I ' d moderate intensity changes to said owner's own parcel or(ii)to inco additional property inn e olf Creek PUD, including,without limitation, Parcel 3,Parcel 11, ay�d/o • =orin• ear el wit • S tion 34 owned by Comcast. Any amendment to the Wolf Creek/PUOI sh 'tn4in .'. the a e p- •tted principal uses and the same or substantially the same develoOm- _.i. ', , - e f Creek PUD at the time of such amendment. Further, any amen. sh•r b . -a, o -a velkpment consultants experienced in Collier County PUD rezoni' , '14i •, • .„ocess.s. _ (c) The owner of 1 or Parcel 2 have •sigh at .' ` e,as to said owner's parcels,to request a rezoning to allow d `v o 3 ment for residents• ^use s •al; hes, private schools, child care facilities,and/or adult living facili : L_ (d) The owner of Parcel 1 as a as to said owner's parcel, to request a rezoning to allow development for residenha'h-tis, «, .. es,private schools, child care facilities, and/or adult living facilities. (e) The owner of Parcel 11 has the right at any time, as to said owner's parcel, to request a rezoning to allow development for residential uses,churches,and/or child care facilities. (f) Any 3-story buildings on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be setback a minimum of thirty-five (35) feet from the North-South Road (as hereinafter defined)between Points "A" through "D" as shown on Exhibit "B"attached hereto and made a part hereof. Additionally, any buildings on Parcel 1 or Parcel 2 shall have tile, metal, or wood roofs, and either a carport or garage for each residential unit. None of the Parcels shall be developed for Affordable Housing, as defined within the Collier County Affordable Housing Density Bonus Ordinance,as amended from time to time. 6. Design,Permitting,and Construction of North-South Access Road. (a) General. The parties intend for a 2-lane north-south access road to be constructed generally in the location shown on Exhibit "B" from Point "A" to Point "F" (the "North-South Road"). All references herein to a particular "Point" shall mean and refer to those labels on Exhibit "B". The 3 011: 3635 PG: 1676 either (i) all owners agree in writing that the North-South Road should remain private or (ii) the dedication of the North-South Road is not accepted by Collier County. In the event the owners of the Parcels agree to maintain the North-South Road as a private road, the written agreement among the owners shall make a provision for the on-going maintenance and repair of the North-South Road and a means for sharing the costs and expenses of the same. In the event the North-South Road including any of the appurtenances thereto, or any portion thereof) is not accepted by Collier County, the owners shall enter into a written agreement regarding the on-going maintenance and repair thereof. All owners agree to promptly execute such documentation and provide such information as may be requested or required by Collier County to complete the dedication. (f) Maintenance of North-South Road. Any Developer (as hereinafter defined) completing construction of the North-South Road or any segment thereof shall maintain and repair, in keeping with all governmental permits and approvals, such portion of the North-South Road, until such time as the North-South Road is dedicated to (and such dedication is accepted by) Collier County, and Collier County accepts the North-South Road for maintenance, in accordance herewith. The owners shall be obligated to reimburse the Developer (as the case may be) for their pro rata share of the costs and expenses incurred by the Developer in connection with the maintenance and repair of the North-South Road (or portion thereof) for so long as the Developer is obligated to maintain and repair same as provided herein. Each owner's pro rata share the-naintance and repair cost shall be the same as each owner's share for the initial constructio •f t k .6Chi .• •on. Each owner shall deliver its pro rata share of such maintenance and repairs,; . a e Deve •..- ' ... five (5) business days of receipt of a bill therefore from the Develop j the event that the �rrth outh Road (including any of the appurtenances thereto, or any portio not acce•ted b Col er County as a public road and/or for maintenance within one (1/) y r a date oft., pletio, of\the North-South Road, then the Developer shall no longer be resp'o•:-.04 • --.i : r..-,: r of, the North-South Road and the owners of the Parcels shall agree . .n T - F e o• • 11 o futOre maintenance, which method may include, without limitati n {: '• .�u• .f • •o if uni i •ev lo,,� ' ent district pursuant to Section 190, Florida Statutes ("CDD" b N • • .• • . • • er h atr association("MHOA"). In the event a CDD is formed for th � i•ose of maintaining_6,id r;•ai/4 4,the North-South Road, the CDD shall have the responsibility fo `7 inning the mainterii ee 5 it work and paying the cost and expense of the same. Notwiths , • anything to the cons, e CDD shall only have financial responsibility pertaining to the lanbenefited amend,°S' `� d by the CDD. The CDD shall have no fmancial obligations to or for any p•. el • • "f tto TCDD. The CDD shall have the authority to collect for such cost and expense in ma . ..• e- :ith-South Road through assessments or such other collection mechanism as may be authorized pursuant to Section 190,Florida Statutes. In the event a MHOA is formed, the MHOA shall have the responsibility for performing the maintenance and repair work and paying the cost and expense of the same. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the MHOA shall only have financial responsibility pertaining to the land which is benefited and burdened by the MHOA. The MHOA shall have no fmancial obligations to or for any parcels not subjected to the MHOA. The MHOA shall have the authority to collect for such cost and expense in maintaining the North-South Road through assessments. (g) Mederos Property (Parcel 3). Parcel 3, owned by Mederos, is not included within the scope of this Agreement. It is agreed that in the event that one or more signatories hereto(individually or collectively) or Prime Investors and Developers, Inc. acquire Parcel 3 prior to construction of Segment 2 of the North-South Road, then said party will cooperate by promptly granting such easements as may be necessary to develop Segment 2 of the North-South Road. The alignment of the North-South Road shall thereafter be adjusted onto Parcel 3, with the width of the road on Parcel 3 being the greater of the following: (i) thirty (30) feet or (ii) one-half of the width of the North-South Road as proposed for the segment of the North-South Road encompassing Parcel 3 and Parcel 8. The conveyance of such an easement by such owner(s)prior to Collier County's approval of the roadway drawings and plans for the 5 OR: 3635 PG: 1678 9. Access Easements/Signature Entry Feature. In order to construct the North-South Road,various road right-of-way easements will be required from the owners of the Parcels. To the extent not previously provided,the owners of the Parcels agree to convey the easements described in this section at no cost to the other owners within twenty(20)days of a receipt of a written request from the Developer (as defined in Section 11 below), and further agree to the conditions and limitations described in this section. (a) Parcel 2/Parcel 8. The owner of Parcel 2 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the east 30 feet of Parcel 2 for the benefit of all Parcels. The owner of Parcel 8 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the west 30 feet of Parcel 8 for the benefit of all Parcels. The owner of Parcel 9 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the west 30 feet of Parcel 9 for the benefit of all Parcels. Where the minimum road width is required by Collier County Transportation Services to be wider than 60 feet, the easement width provided shall be increased the minimum amount necessary to accommodate the North-South Road, with the center of the roadway remaining on the half section line where possible(unless the Developer controls the land on both sides of the roadway, in which case the Developer shall determine in its sole discretion where to locate the centerline of the North-South Road for said portions); provided, however, that where a wider road right-of-way is needed to provide a turn lane into a particular project the additional road right-of-way easement area shall come from the parcel needing such turn lane. (b) Parcel 1/Parcel 10. F o int"A-2"to�oi the owner of Parcel 1 shall provide a non-exclusive 42-foot wide pe eit,t`oad right-of-way ease t a' ng the east 42 feet of Parcel 1 and the owner of Parcel 10 shall pro "de rtun-eAcl sive_42_fipt wid nent road right-of-way easement along the western 42 feet of P cel 0, 1r ..r - benefii of all ) arce s. From Point"B"to Point "C", the roadway width is intended to * .a,syr: s ,• - ght of--way to 60-foot road right-of- way. The owner of Parcel 1 shall • • 'di o ! I e �, •, to 42,foot wide permanent road right- of-way easement along the ea,t, I to '2 et flP. c 1'1 and .w t�qf Parcel 10 shall provide a non- exclusive 30-foot to 42-foot 14d ,-` ..„, en • a '`4,f-IN• along the western 30 to 42 feet of Parcel 10, each for the ben .' all Parcels. The acil dth c s ch road right-of-way shall be as determined by Collier County ..rtation Services-.*, - :p((t 1eview of the roadway plans for Segment 1. Where the minimum •: • .dth is required by forunty Transportation Services to be wider than contemplated herein,th- -as: t width provid-: . "CP cel 1 and Parcel 10 shall be increased 96 the minimum amount necessary to acc..-ig r C•ori4 .: ? Road. (c) Purpose of Easements. These easements provided for in this section are for the purpose of providing unrestricted ingress and egress for all of the Parcels and shall also be for the construction of the North-South Road, including all necessary or required utilities, sidewalks, water management facilities,landscaping, and signage. (d) Signature Entry Feature. (i) Permitted Owners/Location. The easements described in subsection 9(b) of this Agreement (or in a separate easement if desired by the owner of Parcel 1 or Parcel 10) shall permit the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, the owner of Parcels 7 through 9, or the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 ("Permitted Owners") to construct a signature entry feature (hereinafter"Signature Entry Feature") upon no more than 400 square feet in area and located north of where the North-South Road intersects with Vanderbilt Beach Road. For purposes of this section, the term Permitted Owners shall be deemed to include and mean, as to each individual Permitted Owner, said Permitted Owner's successor, assign, or successor in title. The Signature Entry Feature may be constructed at any time subsequent to the commencement of construction of the North-South Road between Points "A-2"and "C". The Signature Entry Feature may be located, at the sole discretion of the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, in either the 7 OR: 3635 PG: 1680 the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive and one-half of the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 4 through 6,inclusive; and (b) each non-constructing owner not opting out of the shared signage shall notify the Constructing Owner of its project name for the sign(s) within thirty (30) days of notice from the Constructing Owner or the Constructing Owner shall leave the sign face blank for any non-constructing owner not timely notifying the Constructing Owner of its project name; and (c) each of share of the sign face(s) shall be equally visible to both westbound and eastbound motorists traveling along Vanderbilt Beach Road. (vi) Cost. The costs for design, permitting, and construction of the Signature Entry Feature shall be shared as described in this paragraph. In the event the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 elect to participate, the costs shall be divided as follows: one-third of the total costs shall be paid by the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive; one-third by the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2; and one-third by the owners of Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive. In the event the owners of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 elect not to participate (and Parcel 10 is not substituted), the costs shall be divided as follows: one-half of the total costs shall be paid by the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive; and one-half by the owners of Parcels 7 through 9,inclusive. ..-----------7-----, '. „(^"”R v Q! T (vii) Payment. 1:119,,..,'' L cling Own 'vide the non-constructing owners with a detailed billing statement for theiV . ,• ction cost within fo iv 45) days after the completion of the initial construction and installatloof igna {e Entry Feature, d each of said non-constructing owners shall remit payment to the Co , glt iez' . . thYrtc (30) ys�f the receipt of such bill. If any such bill(s) is not paid within aid p:. . 0. •, •i,4: • t c f all such invoices together with interest thereon at nine percent .- • , ('I/o s • 1 +i hien on said non-constructing owner's o unless and until aid,(h� . , ,1116/.1,-""ma r. oro c such lien in the Public Records property, of Collier County, Florida aga' e . -co ,.. .c - . er .a ,, d bring legal action against the non-constructing owner for ,n-constructing own.Cs c.ns� n costs; and (c) may, at the Constructing Owner's option, f `eglo - any such lien desc'i e a the same manner as a mortgage lien on real property, and interest, 't d reasonable attorne i.' of any such action will be added to the amount of any such lien, and s verable in e Constructing Owner prevails in any such action. iTIE 1-%C (viii) Maintenance. The Signature Entry Feature shall be maintained and repaired from time to time,which maintenance and repair shall be performed in accordance with all governmental permits and approvals. The Constructing Owner (or its successor or assign) shall be responsible for such maintenance and repair, unless otherwise agreed among the owners participating in the Signature Entry Feature. The costs for any such maintenance or repair to the Signature Entry Feature shall be shared in the same manner described in Section 9(d)(v) above relating to construction costs. Any owner may assign its obligations for payment of such maintenance and repair costs to a property owners' association or condominium association formed with respect to such owner's parcel(s). The Constructing Owner may assign its obligation for maintenance and repair of the Signature Entry Feature to a property owners' association or condominium association formed with respect to the Constructing Owner's parcel(s). (e) Directional Signage. At the request of the owner of Parcels 4 though 6, inclusive, or the owners of Parcels 7 though 9, inclusive, the owner of Parcel 10 shall provide the owners of Parcels 4 through 6 and Parcels 7 through 9 with a non-exclusive sign easement having an area of four(4) square feet for the purpose of erecting and sharing a directional sign along the eastern side of the North-South Road, where the North-South Road intersects with the access road into Parcel 10. The easement shall be in a location such that that the directional sign is easily visible to northbound motorists. 9 OR: 3635 PG: 1682 acknowledge, consent to,join in, and deliver all documents, applications and other papers which may be necessary to make such applications or to obtain the Road Permits and Approvals. (c) Development of Segment 1. Upon completion of the final plans and specifications for Segment 1,and approval of the same by Collier County,the Developer shall furnish such finals plans and specifications for the construction of Segment 1,including sidewalks, accompanying utilities,landscaping, signage (except for the signature entry feature), and other related improvements to the other owners for their review. No sooner than fifteen (15) days after such plans and specifications have been delivered to the other owners, the Developer shall seek bids for the construction and installation of Segment 1 from not less than three (3) qualified, licensed contractors previously experienced in Collier County as road contractors. At the sole option of the Developer, the Developer may also seek up to two (2) bids from qualified, licensed contractors not previously experienced in Collier County. When such bids are solicited by the Developer, the Developer shall notify the other owners and provide them with a copy of the request for bid and a list of the contractors from whom bids are being solicited. When the bids are returned, the Developer shall provide copies of all completed bids to the other owners. In the event the Developer selects any complete bidder other than the lowest complete bidder,the Developer shall provide the other owners with its reason(s) for selecting the applicable bidder, and the other owners shall have the right of approval with regard thereto, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned. If any owner fails to notify the Developer in writing of their disapproval of the selected bidder within five (5) business days after s ,_ftise,thereof from the Developer, such selection shall be deemed to have been appy dic b :Sh" M j twithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the other own l li e no right 1 al if the Developer selects the low complete bidder. )/ No less than thirty-five,(35 da • :. to •mmen•'ng con tru tion of Segment 1,the Developer shall provide the owners of the o icels •F• " : Owners") with the following: (i) a cost estimate for the construe on • 1, in'lid:gig . zI' oftingency (hereinafter"Road Plan"); and (ii) a breakdown of the c sx,,: o e •a ,:e P.'+el (a.;io{each of the Parcels, "Individual Construction Cost"). The No • •n tt, - .-.11 h•-:` `' the (35) days from the receipt of said materials from Developer ce said owner's Indi s ual iCo2 tion Cost into an escrow account with an escrow agent designated'` ' e Developer, whi sc/oy :4, t shall be an attorney licensed in the State of Florida. The cons• olio funds deposited wi aa- w ow agent shall be available to the Developer through customary cons•. cieqp• • •ws. No later Ifo -five(45)days after the Developer's receipt of a certificate of completion, -' I •• •-lQt' v ile the construction fund account. Any excess funds shall be returned in a pro rata •.i•i •• -F`•i•n the Individual Construction Costs paid. In the event of a shortage of construction funds to 4cover the costs and expenses of the Developer in constructing Segment 1 (other than due to non-payment by a Non-Constructing Owner), the Non- Constructing Owners shall be responsible for paying their pro rata share of such shortage. Developer shall provide the Non-Constructing Owners with commercially reasonable documentation which evidences the additional costs and expenses incurred by the Developer and the pro rata share of said costs and expenses for each Non-Constructing Owner. Each Non-Constructing Owner shall have twenty-five (25)days to pay its share of such shortage to the Developer. (d) Non-Payment-Segment 1. Except as provided in subsection (e) below, in the event timely payment of the applicable Individual Construction Cost is not received from any Non-Constructing Owner, then (i) the amount of all such Individual Construction Cost together with interest thereon at nine percent per annum(9%) shall constitute a lien on said Non-Constructing Owner's property,unless and until paid; (ii)the Developer may record each such lien in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida against the Non-Constructing Owner's property and bring legal action against the Non-Constructing Owner for the Non-Constructing Owner's construction costs; and(iii)may, at the Developer's option, foreclose any such lien described above in the same manner as a mortgage lien on real property, and interest, costs and reasonable attorney's fees of any such action will be added to the amount of any such lien, and shall be 11 OR: 3635 PG: 1684 business days after depositing the same in a letter box or by other means placed within the possession of the United States Postal Service,properly addressed to the party in accordance with the foregoing and with the proper amount of postage affixed thereto. In the event of any notice via facsimile transmission,a hard copy shall be sent via regular mail on the day of such transmission. Any such transmission received after 5:00 p.m.Eastern Standard Time(or Daylight Savings Time,whichever then applicable)shall be deemed to have been given on the next following business day. The addressees and addresses for the purpose of this Section may be changed by any party by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided herein. For the purpose of changing such addresses or addressees only, unless and until such written notice is received, the last addressee and respective address stated herein shall be deemed to continue in effect for all purposes. 13. Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with Florida law (exclusive of choice of law rules). Venue for any action arising hereunder shall lie exclusively in Collier County,Florida. 14. Prevailing Party. The prevailing party in any litigation involving this Agreement shall be entitled to recover from the non-prevailing party all attorneys' fees,paralegal fees and costs incurred in connection with such litigation, at arbitratioin .or-a.. : ' otherwise, including reasonable attorneys' fees • and paralegal fees in the enforcement of ---.`ii;- , ,' der. The owners of the parcels herein described shall only be liable for/r5 on of this • a - -nt during their respective periods of ownership, and in the event any/atxt o is brought for reco = 'o monetary damages for any breach hereof, the claimant shall look,Iolel -4he-interest of the th- owner of the parcel in breach for the recovery of such monetary dan)Ages ____ "' \ \ f e 1 :rs 'r. •4 • E. s sAgreement are for the exclusive 15. No Third P l Tl �t gr benefit of the parties, their heirs c + , • . `,s �, d as w . s, ci rt as otherwise provided herein, and not for the benefit of anon, : •< ...-i's A enks,.be deemed to have conferred any rights, express or implied, upoVan third person. No tandin e} ng herein to the contrary, it is recognized by all parties hereto 'me Investors an.` vt -- 10 (ar" „f c. is presently under contract to purchase Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 - Contract"). For p ..$ s., f this paragraph, the term "Prime" shall mean and refer only to Prime ..� . . and Develo,�- ,\kbj r to a corporation that is the assignee of the interests of Prime Investors . _ D4' p acid under the Prime Contract; provided, however that (i) said assignee shall hayority shareholders as Prime Investors and Developers, Inc. and (ii) Prime shall provide written notice to the owners of the Parcels within ten (10) days of any such an assignment and the verifying shareholder information. In the event of an assignment not complying with the foregoing terms,all of Prime's third-party beneficiary rights referenced hereunder shall immediately cease. Provided that the Prime Contract is in full force and effect and Prime is not in default under the Prime Contract, it is recognized by all parties hereto that Prime is a third party beneficiary of this Agreement and as such, has a vested interest in and to the terms hereof Once this Agreement is executed,no changes,modifications and or alterations to this Agreement shall be permitted unless same shall be in writing and has the written consent of Prime;provided,however,consent of Prime shall not be required under the following conditions: (i) the Prime Contract is no longer in full force or effect or (ii) Prime is in default under the Prime Contract. In any event, the requirement for Prime's consent under this paragraph and Prime's third-party beneficiary rights hereunder shall cease and terminate as of October 31,2004. 16. Partial Invalidity. If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall, to any extent, be declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, such term or 13 OR: 3635 PG: 1686 IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. WOLF CREEK ESTATES: WOLF CREEK ESTATES,LLC, a Florida limited liability company •' .'/ ' By: Catalina Land Group,Inc. a Florida corporation, v. / _ k its Manager Print Name. ... L. (' a . 1l• ."41 By: Qi9jyt - Print Name: - William L.Hoover,President COtik STATE OF 1p'Q.l' 4 ' SS. COUNTY OF • The foregoing instnun: t • we4 " of 1 , 2004 b William L.Hoover as Presi•-, t. • dpitT o 'orporation, a mans of Wolf Creek Estates, LLC, a Florida ' r -' �• • . • • entities who is(/personally known to me or( )has produc • vidence of identification. 'eet -‘1,c9 (SEAL) 0,6 �' •`,t�! .& . / . 0..I, _ 0'�e' BRANDY A. -� P P *4-1 IC * * MY COMMISSION 600 158976 1 I .� EXPIRES:February 16,2007 e:' �'F ov nd'A Bonded Thin Budget nota/S.Mces (Type or Print) My Commission Expires: 15 OR: 3635 PG: 1688 1,� DNE' RUST 1: .. arii Print N;. _k� %f� v z} Mark L. order,as Trus: under Unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D January 4,1999 /..AIII " --- ' __...011111111176,1'41--;IL ilrigkIllivglitirlr'r / r STATE OF ) COUNTY OF case C ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me,this 3 of AUQ}U4 , 2004 by Mark L. Lindner, as Trustee under that unrecord • Land Tru ... D January 4, 1999 who is( ) personally known to me or ( ) has produced f ,Jas evidd ice of identification. / IPop' (SEAL) „2,1? ��l A �� Name: _ � )i.`A_ _ m. YPe o• Tint) • ` 4 W . t mission .sires: w� � \ �l.(J • r .4 , `,,,Itat ttt,ly PI( , EC 0 . ,,,,—, ...... .,, , . .._".. „.....,_is , ,..., • ,..,.. .. .. ...,,‘... z..—., . _ .... ,..„. .;..0...... .,:,, . .. . . . ,. .. Ar,,..... .. .. r r CIRC i1irtit, •`',% �. ' , :1 : 17 Z L 'd 8862 9E6 6EZ Alb3>IO3/1S 131› woad Wd8E: L VOOZ—EZ-8 • OR: 3635 PG: 1690 BUCKSTONE ESTATES: BUCKSTONE ESTATES,LLC, a Florida limited liability company By: Catalina Land Group,Inc. �� �, 0 a Florida corporation, L its Manager • Print Name: . , ., . c.'t- P1% . . ' Ai ' • By: Print Name: (g_� • 1. Al, William L.Hoover,President STATE OF ct...0r-QA )) `1� - S.COUNTY OF IJ / �N�R (-O� qi i The foregoing instrument •aii.a . owledged before me, s of t/ud' , 2004 by William L. Hoover as Presi.- t • n • �Land Gr.up, Inc. a "orida corpora , the manager of Bucku stone Estates, LLC, a Fl. •da bili i co 1 y, on ,-ha of said company who is ( � personally known to me or ` .-d „„rte. -1r as evidence of identification. I P.Y. _ lair Vol:, 4.iNalAt * my►. ' )D 158078 e (� EXPIRES: , •,2007 (Type or Print) '',,i�n�c� ten,,,: pii!iy .. wsssionExpires: 71-TE C- SAGniDai ss1,ha.V,.s .She:.A..m.Ne.8e.4oe 19 OR: 3635 PG: 1692 Parcel 10: (Owned by:Mark L.Lindner,as Trustee under unrecorded Land Trust U/i'/D January 4, 1999) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA;THENCE RUN NORTH 89°46'10" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,322.24 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE RUN NORTH 02°14'20" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, FOR A DISTANCE OF 145.13 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD, A 175 FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY,AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 02°14'20" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SO I.A. 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34,FOR A DIS ..i r i 'e t; - T TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER e' OF THE SOUTH 1/2 4., ` - • —A. t t SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECI•ION 34;THE "' NORTH 89°47'3:' : ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 2 I SOUTHWEST 1/4 • . . SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, .•R 41 •'I` • 22.04 E TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF E S 1 IF r 5 SO `r S 1/4 •F THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SE 01',�sit% !al a `•S . .13' EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE IF r y1 19' 1 '.O AST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, • • ,l . 8 F a T• • :OINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-W• ,; .' •••''• RB • ; V-' ROAD; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89°46' ir .• ST, ALONG THE '� •TH Ris' a IF-WAY LINE OF SAID VANDERBILT `iv ROAD, FOR A =;'. • + 1,322.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG ii Tt•CONTAINING 15.: ` • ' ORE OR LESS. Less and except that , '-y Collier County in that certain Warranty Deed recorded I c a1( r•. :ook 3573,Page 0780 of the Public Records of Collier County,Flori... Parcel 11: (Owned by:Buckstone Estates,LLC) The West 330 feet of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. 21 OR: 3635 PG: 1694 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT COST ALLOCATION Parcel Owner's Share of Intersection Improvement Costs #6 L. #4 Inn 11 iiIawmvi(s Land 1 • 3., ' 6% --agate, 1511V AdgNB Land Tom oac4YsLand Wand What O PUD RddanWl4.; Masion Hills _ Shopping Canter #1 #10 9.5% A-2 9.5% Yandw4ltBeach Road A-1 EXHIBIT"C" 23 OR: 3635 PG: 1696 Black Bear-Ridge-Please I Budget Off-sate Improvements Item-North-South Outer Loop Road Quantity Unit Price Total 1 Clearing and Grubbing 2 AC $3,500.00 $7.000.00 2 Silt Fence 2,800 LF $1.50 $4,200.00 3 Fill 8,500 CY 59.00 576,500.00 4 Final Grade 1 1.5 56,500.00 $6,500.00 $ Valley Gutter 2.700 LF $5.50 $14,850.00 6 8'Limerock Base(compacted and primed) 4,800 SY $7.50 $36,000.00 7 12'Stabilized Subgrade 5,750 SY S2.25 512,937.50 8 3'Asphalt 4,800 SY $8.50 540,800.00 9 Signing R pavement markbigs 1 LS $6,500.00 $6,500.00 • 1.0 Sodding 5,800 SY $1.50 58,700.00 11 5'wide Concrete sidewalk 1,500 SY $16.50 $24,750.00 12 4'L.bnerock(under sidewalk) 1,500 SY $4.50 $6,750.00 13 Maintenance of Traffic 1 LS $2,500.00 52,500.00 Sub-total M 1`,x,}r `.� 5247987.50 Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements atlty Unit Price Total 1 Turn Lanes Complete(WB Re.ES Ls) $40,000.00 $80,000.00 2 Signa lation .� ( Cl qqf T '000.00 $130,000.00 3 Side Drain Drainage(4 051,DBL run 36') 3YyTY LeL/ ..00 535,000.00 4 Lighting I w 1~'•'ra $25,000.00 /5) SiWotai '.,d.'�.;,_n' `- ,$270,000.00 Item-North-South Outerp d \ Sanitary Sewer - - Queue! Volt? Total 1 8'PVC Force Main(C-900 Clips ,l' 1..1 II $28,000.00 2 Y Plug Valve w/Box f ltI ' 77, 52,76 00 3 Ha Tap Future 16`Force on $5,50100 ' '':, 136,260.00 Item-North-South Outet Water Maio Qaraadty " Unitl Ha Tap Existing 30'Rcinf Con -, , . �� 1 (or alt-j/b and tap new prop 24"' 'aa I LSI, S3. 4liy:000.00 2 12'PVC Water Main(CL 200) 1.400 LF Y .. $35,700.00 3 12'Gate Valve w/Box 2 EA ". 53,000.00 4 Fire Hydrant(Complete Assembly) O� 2 EA s.i'.., $4,800.00 5 PemunmtBacteria1SamplePoint ��'? 7- �3,$i1,.''.00 $1,000.00 6 Temporary Bacterial Sample Point [ e•y' C. ' .. 900.00 $900.00 7 Air Release Valve " -.EA-""- 51,550.00 $3,100.00 Sub-Total ;iii;5a:,.,.. .oat°, $83,500.00 Item-North-South Outer Loop Road- Dralaage Quantity Unit Price Total I Control Structure 1 EA 54,000.00 54,000.00 2 15'RCP 100 LF 523.00 52,300.00 3 18`RCP 350 LF 525.00 $8,750.00 4 24"RCP 1,200 12 $34.00 $40,800.00 5 Valley Gutter Throat Inlet 6 EA $2,000.00 $12,000.00 6 Grate Inlet 4 EA $1,700.00 $6,800.00 7 Junction Box 8 EA $1,850.00 $14,100.00 8 15"Flared End Section 1 EA $900.00 5900.00 Sab-Total Orge§gean 590,150.00 OlfSiteTotals - {;c ?":'-:'' 5728497.50 5/14/2004 EXHIBIT"D"-Page 2 of 3 25 OR: 3635 PG: 1698 Q. GRADY MINOR,P.E. 1415 Panther Lane, Suite 232 Naples,Florida 34109 Phone 239-591-6795 Fax 239-591-6732 July 23,2004 RE: Estimate of Engineering, Surveying&Permitting Costs for Pristine Drive Segment One Engineering Design and Permitting of Pristine Drive $35,000 Engineering Design and Permitting of Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Int. Improvements $10,000 Pristine Drive Permitting Costs $1,500 Estimated Costs for Engineering Design and Permitting $46,500 Construction Engineering for Pristine Drive $9,372 Construction Engineering for Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Int./ROW Improvements $4,565 Total Estimated Costs for Constructio �gD1� $13,937 Construction Surveying for Pris:R` ve ��* $18,656 Construction Surveying for V., de •' - -. Rd. Int./R0 • p •vements $6,017 Total Estimated Costs for Co s i cti eying $24,673 ECOPYe nCO CSC 308A51 engrcosts EXHIBIT"E" 27 ASSIGNMENT OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND PERMITS THIS ASSIGNMENT OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND PERMITS (this "Assignment") is made and delivered on this 1 p` '''of December, 2010, by Buckstone Estates, LLC, a Florida limited liability company (the "Assignor"), to Black Bear Ridge Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability company(the"Assignee"). STATEMENT OF PURPOSE WHEREAS, Assignor has this day transferred its rights title and interest in that certain real property described as: Exhibit"A"attached hereto; and WHEREAS, Assignor desires to transfer to Assignee all of its right, title and interest in and to all construction plans, permits and government entitlements for its benefit including, but not limited to the items set forth on: 'Exhibit"B"attached hereto. WHEREAS: Assignor is the "Developer" in the Declaration of Covenants, Restrictions and Easements For Black Bear Ridge recorded on August 30, 2005 in Official Records Book 3879, at Page 1030 and amendments thereto (the "Declaration") and desires to assign its right, title and interest as"Developer" under the Declaration for the purpose of continuing the process of development of the Black Bear Ridge community and the sale of single family residences to third parties. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN and No/100 DOLLARS ($10.00)and other good and valuable consideration,Assignor hereby agrees as follows: 1. Assignor hereby grants, transfers and assigns to Assignee, its successors and assigns, all of Assignor's right, title and interest in, to and under the Construction Documents, Permits and Governmental Entitlements. Notwithstanding the provisions above to the contrary, Assignor shall retain its rights to the escrowed funds on deposit with Collier County pursuant to the Construction, Maintenance and Escrow Agreements for Subdivision Improvements with the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. 2. Assignor warrants and represents to Assignee that: (a) there are no other assignments or conveyances of any of Assignor's rights under the Construction Documents, Permits and Governmental Entitlements to any other person or entity; (b) Assignor has not done any act or failed to do any act which might prevent Assignee from,or limit Assignee in,acting under any of the provisions contained herein; (c) no default exists under the terms of the Construction Documents, Permits and Governmental Entitlements and no prohibition exists in any instrument to which Assignor is a party or by which Assignor is otherwise bound relating to Assignor's right to execute this IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Assignor has signed and sealed this Assignment or has caused this Assignment to be signed and sealed by duly authorized representatives the day and year first above written. WITNESSES: ASSIGNOR: BUCKSTONE ESTATES,LLC,a Florida limited liability company By: a cc.) Jody K.Vanderbilt Q. Grady Minor Its: Co-Manager Print e aedi;75C___ (Corporate Seal) Beth D. Lightner Print Name By: 71„,e Jody K.Vanderbilt Michael D. Moore Its: Co-Manager Print Name "rotivc*-- Beth D. Lightner (Corporate Seal) Print Name STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER / J The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this / ''day of December, 2010 by Q. Grady Minor as Co- Manager of Buckstone Estates, LLC, a Florida limited liability company on behalf of the company, ho is personally known to me or who has produced (type o identification) as identification and who did (did not) take an oath. NOTE: If a type of identification is not inserted in the blank provided, then the person executing this instrument was personally known to me. If the words in the parenthetical "did not" are not circled, then the person executing this instrument did take an oath. crs- son Img1tiaa N Public `403+�+ My Commission Expires: , waaar EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY Lots 2,4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20,21, 23, 28, 31, 34, 35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43,46, 47,48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 58, 59, 62, 63, 64,67, Black Bear Ridge-Phase 1, a subdivision according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 43, Pages 89 through 92,of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida AND Lots 68, 69, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 81, 84, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, Black Bear Ridge- Phase 2,a subdivision according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 47, pages 40 through 42, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. AND Lots 95, 96, 98, 99, Black Bear Ridge - Phase 3, a subdivision according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 48,pages 71 and 72, of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. 3467972 OR: 3635 PG: 1672 RECORDED in OFFICIAL RECORDS of COLLIER COUNTY, FL 09/01/2004 at 10:13AM DWIGHT B. BROCI, CLERK This instrument was prepared RIC FEB 239.50 without an opinion of title and INDEIING 3.00 U after recording return to: Retn: Gregory L.Urbancic,Esq. GOODLETTE COLEMAN IT AL NI Goodlette,Coleman&Johnson,P.A. 4001 TAMIAII TR I f300 4001 Tamiami Trail North,Suite 300 NAPLES FL 34103 Naples,Florida 34103 (239)435-3535 (space above this line for recording data) COST SHARING AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SHARED ACCESS ROAD THIS COST SHARING AG tIgRr ` 1 DEVELOP NT OF A SHARED ACCESS ROAD(this"Agreement" . entere• .'t e s 44 of , 2004, by and among the following: (i)Wo Estates,LLC,a • s 'ted liability c pany("Wolf Creek Estates"); (ii) William L. Hoover;as kuste_e of the Fallen Timb.+s L nd Trust dated November 5, 2003 ("Hoover/Fallen Timbers"); (i0) arld--- ,in`dner, ='I'y tee . d unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D January 4, 1999 ("Lindner/Tr;&st f"..„0,- a:-... „ti '•• . • I stee under unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D May 21, 1999 ("Lind serf 2 ( ` : �, ks I ,f'rk es, 1,LC, a Florida limited liability company(`Buckstone Estates'). �' r7) ,:,.. ..., ET) C'\ \WITNESSET ? THA WHEREAS, the parties a own adjacent real . a Section 34, Township 48 South, Range 26 East,Collier County,Flo "S. WHEREAS, the parties hereto • •.,l IWA' '' properties which are the subject of this Agreement,with said individual properties being legally described on Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof: OWNER: PARCEL: Lindner/Trust 1 Parcel 1 Lindner/Trust 2 Parcel 2 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 4 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 5 Wolf Creek Estates Parcel 6 Buckstone Estates Parcel 7 Hoover/Fallen Timbers Parcel 8(west half) Buckstone Estates Parcel 8(east half) Buckstone Estates Parcel 9 Lindner/Trust 1 Parcel 10 Buckstone Estates Parcel 11 1 OR: 3635 PG: 1674 Vanderbilt Beach Road and Inimokalee Road corridors, located between Livingston Road and Collier Boulevard. The Parcels are permitted to have differing land uses but the actual land uses shall be compatible with each other. The Parcels shall be developed using a similar architectural theme along the access roads, quality buffering and screening between the differing land uses, and common site design techniques. All Parcels shall be designed and developed to minimize any negative impacts on abutting and neighboring Parcels. 5. Zoning. Each owner (and the owner's successor, assign, and successor in title) agrees that it shall not object to any rezoning and/or development consistent with the following provisions: (a) Parcel 10 may be rezoned and developed for specialty retail and office land uses. The most westerly 175 feet of Parcel 10 shall be designed and developed only for offices, banks, drug stores, sit-down restaurants, retail shops, and similar intensity commercial uses, and shall not be permitted to have gas stations, convenience stores,fast food restaurants,and stand alone bars or lounges. (b) Parcel 1, Parcel 2, and Parcels 4 through 9, inclusive, may be developed for residential use. Said parcels have been rezoned to the Wolf Creek PUD, Collier County Ordinance No. 03-45 (hereinafter "Wolf Creek PUD") and shall be developed according to the development standards within the Wolf Creek PUD. Any owner of one of esYsy apply for a PUD Amendment to the Wolf Creek PUD through Collier County for fkafArten i rposes without written permission of the remaining owner(s) of the Wolf Creel --property:-Ii) q�+ , d moderate intensity changes to said owner's own parcel or(ii)to incot additional property in e olf Creek PUD, including,without limitation, Parcel 3,Parcel 11, afd/o orin ar el wit S tion 34 owned by Comcast. Any amendment to the Wolf Creek/PUP shier e -=in . the'aOle p- ,.tte4 principal uses and the same or substantially the same devel meii- ..,-•, i • 1 1 , -.f Creek PUD at the time of such amendment. Further, any am • F sh• . b • • •a s' = o _ •1-velipment consultants experienced in Collier County PUD rezo • ''J! . • .. ocess•s. F.,, (c) The owner of •: 1 or Parcel 2 have . gh•at .• e,as to said owner's parcels,to request a rezoning to allow d vOo,ment for residenti. uses •al, hes, private schools, child care facilities,and/or adult living facili (...i (d) The owner of Parcel 1# •. 0, -p..;%tl a as to said owner's parcel, to request a rezoning to allow development for residential-tiVis,private schools, child care facilities, and/or adult living facilities. (e) The owner of Parcel 11 has the right at any time, as to said owner's parcel, to request a rezoning to allow development for residential uses,churches,and/or child care facilities. (f) Any 3-story buildings on Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be setback a minimum of thirty-five (35) feet from the North-South Road (as hereinafter defined)between Points "A" through "D" as shown on Exhibit"B"attached hereto and made a part hereof. Additionally, any buildings on Parcel 1 or Parcel 2 shall have tile, metal, or wood roofs, and either a carport or garage for each residential unit. None of the Parcels shall be developed for Affordable Housing, as defined within the Collier County Affordable Housing Density Bonus Ordinance,as amended from time to time. 6. Design,Permitting,and Construction of North-South Access Road. (a) General. The parties intend for a 2-lane north-south access road to be constructed generally in the location shown on Exhibit "B" from Point "A" to Point "F" (the "North-South Road"). All references herein to a particular "Point" shall mean and refer to those labels on Exhibit "B". The 3 OR: 3635 PG: 1676 either (i) all owners agree in writing that the North-South Road should remain private or (ii) the dedication of the North-South Road is not accepted by Collier County. In the event the owners of the Parcels agree to maintain the North-South Road as a private road, the written agreement among the owners shall make a provision for the on-going maintenance and repair of the North-South Road and a means for sharing the costs and expenses of the same. In the event the North-South Road including any of the appurtenances thereto, or any portion thereof) is not accepted by Collier County, the owners shall enter into a written agreement regarding the on-going maintenance and repair thereof. All owners agree to promptly execute such documentation and provide such information as may be requested or required by Collier County to complete the dedication. (f) Maintenance of North-South Road. Any Developer (as hereinafter defined) completing construction of the North-South Road or any segment thereof shall maintain and repair, in keeping with all governmental permits and approvals, such portion of the North-South Road, until such time as the North-South Road is dedicated to (and such dedication is accepted by) Collier County, and Collier County accepts the North-South Road for maintenance, in accordance herewith. The owners shall be obligated to reimburse the Developer (as the case may be) for their pro rata share of the costs and expenses incurred by the Developer in connection with the maintenance and repair of the North-South Road (or portion thereof) for so long as the Developer is obligated to maintain and repair same as provided herein. Each owner's pro rata sharenance and repair cost shall be the same as each owner's share for the initial constructio •fhicc(bIt.. on. Each owner shall deliver its pro rata share of such maintenance and reps' a e Deve o• r . -., five (5) business days of receipt of a bill therefore from the Developef.( the event that the (firth outh Road (including any of the appurtenances thereto, or any portion t reef)-is, not acce•ted bCol er County as a public road and/or for maintenance within one (010 year •w= .e date ort., pletio., of the North-South Road, then the Developer shall no longer be/re .o. 0. : . —•••i . r...::r of the North-South Road and the owners of the Parcels shall agreep.n ro. 1. Or o futjare maintenance, which method may include, without limitati n a- `. . .} .f . 'o I; um t: •ev 1p„ r}ient district pursuant to Section 190, Florida Statutes ("CDD" • •- . • r"er h ' association("MHOA"). In the event a CDD is formed for th C. 11.ose of maintainingd r;.a. `'. ,the North-South Road, the CDD shall have the responsibility fo ` -; arming the mainte , e = 5A: it work and paying the cost and expense of the same. Notwiths••, . w anything to the co �i ,-4., CDD shall only have financial responsibility pertaining to the lana i benefitedd by the CDD. The CDD shall have no financial obligations to or for any p.. . . . `CDD. The CDD shall have the authority to collect for such cost and expense in mai i l , '- i th-South Road through assessments or such Pan g other collection mechanism as may be authorized pursuant to Section 190,Florida Statutes. In the event a MHOA is formed, the MHOA shall have the responsibility for performing the maintenance and repair work and paying the cost and expense of the same. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the MHOA shall only have financial responsibility pertaining to the land which is benefited and burdened by the MHOA. The MHOA shall have no fmancial obligations to or for any parcels not subjected to the MHOA. The MHOA shall have the authority to collect for such cost and expense in maintaining the North-South Road through assessments. (g) Mederos Property (Parcel 3). Parcel 3, owned by Mederos, is not included within the scope of this Agreement. It is agreed that in the event that one or more signatories hereto(individually or collectively) or Prime Investors and Developers, Inc. acquire Parcel 3 prior to construction of Segment 2 of the North-South Road, then said party will cooperate by promptly granting such easements as may be necessary to develop Segment 2 of the North-South Road. The alignment of the North-South Road shall thereafter be adjusted onto Parcel 3, with the width of the road on Parcel 3 being the greater of the following: (i) thirty (30) feet or (ii) one-half of the width of the North-South Road as proposed for the segment of the North-South Road encompassing Parcel 3 and Parcel 8. The conveyance of such an easement by such owner(s)prior to Collier County's approval of the roadway drawings and plans for the 5 OR: 3635 PG: 1678 9. Access Easements/Signature Entry Feature. In order to construct the North-South Road,various road right-of-way easements will be required from the owners of the Parcels. To the extent not previously provided,the owners of the Parcels agree to convey the easements described in this section at no cost to the other owners within twenty(20)days of a receipt of a written request from the Developer (as defined in Section 11 below), and further agree to the conditions and limitations described in this section. (a) Parcel 2/Parcel 8. The owner of Parcel 2 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the east 30 feet of Parcel 2 for the benefit of all Parcels. The owner of Parcel 8 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the west 30 feet of Parcel 8 for the benefit of all Parcels. The owner of Parcel 9 shall provide a non-exclusive 30-foot wide permanent road right-of-way easement along the west 30 feet of Parcel 9 for the benefit of all Parcels. Where the minimum road width is required by Collier County Transportation Services to be wider than 60 feet, the easement width provided shall be increased the minimum amount necessary to accommodate the North-South Road, with the center of the roadway remaining on the half section line where possible(unless the Developer controls the land on both sides of the roadway, in which case the Developer shall determine in its sole discretion where to locate the centerline of the North-South Road for said portions); provided, however, that where a wider road right-of-way is needed to provide a turn lane into a particular project the additional road right-of-way easement area shall come from the parcel needing such turn lane. R C63 r.. (b) Parcel 1/Parcel 10.7, o .•int"A-2"to '6..4 the owner of Parcel 1 shall provide a non-exclusive 42-foot wide p but oad right-of-way eas- t a' ng the east 42 feet of Parcel 1 and the owner of Parcel 10 shall pro 'de 7- non-exclusive sive 42-iropt wid- •e nent road right-of-way easement along the western 42 feet of P 'cel 0, ,.•r •- benefi of all Farces. From Point`B"to Point "C", the roadway width is intended to ra. ..s r . •• •. =.rp ghtfkof-way to 60-foot road right-of- way. The owner of Parcel 1 shall i • *el • , - 1 e E, •, t• 42ifoot wide permanent road right- of-way easement along the ea tp,,3 `to ,2 ..et • t'. c 11 and •w$� 9f Parcel 10 shall provide a non- exclusive 30-foot to 42-foot d -' en • f-w ' . ` along the western 30 to 42 feet of Parcel 10, each for the ben all Parcels. The ac •.,1 dth ch road right-of-way shall be as determined by Collier County .••rtation Services' :,,Nr. . view of the roadway plans for Segment 1. Where the minimum ..3 'dth is required by . i unty Transportation Services to be wider than contemplated herein,th ,-•t width provid-: • " cel 1 and Parcel 10 shall be increased the minimum amount necessary to acc••' WV'. :14V41 ' ' # 'oad. (c) Purpose of Easements. These easements provided for in this section are for the purpose of providing unrestricted ingress and egress for all of the Parcels and shall also be for the construction of the North-South Road, including all necessary or required utilities, sidewalks, water management facilities,landscaping, and signage. (d) Signature Entry Feature. (i) Permitted Owners/Location. The easements described in subsection 9(b) of this Agreement (or in a separate easement if desired by the owner of Parcel 1 or Parcel 10) shall permit the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, the owner of Parcels 7 through 9, or the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 ("Permitted Owners")to construct a signature entry feature (hereinafter"Signature Entry Feature") upon no more than 400 square feet in area and located north of where the North-South Road intersects with Vanderbilt Beach Road. For purposes of this section, the term Permitted Owners shall be deemed to include and mean, as to each individual Permitted Owner, said Permitted Owner's successor, assign, or successor in title. The Signature Entry Feature may be constructed at any time subsequent to the commencement of construction of the North-South Road between Points "A-2"and "C". The Signature Entry Feature may be located, at the sole discretion of the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, in either the 7 OR: 3635 PG: 1680 the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive and one-half of the sign face(s) for the project on Parcels 4 through 6,inclusive;and (b)each non-constructing owner not opting out of the shared signage shall notify the Constructing Owner of its project name for the sign(s) within thirty (30) days of notice from the Constructing Owner or the Constructing Owner shall leave the sign face blank for any non-constructing owner not timely notifying the Constructing Owner of its project name; and (c) each of share of the sign face(s) shall be equally visible to both westbound and eastbound motorists traveling along Vanderbilt Beach Road. (vi) Cost. The costs for design, permitting, and construction of the Signature Entry Feature shall be shared as described in this paragraph. In the event the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 elect to participate, the costs shall be divided as follows: one-third of the total costs shall be paid by the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive; one-third by the owner of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2; and one-third by the owners of Parcels 7 through 9, inclusive. In the event the owners of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 elect not to participate (and Parcel 10 is not substituted), the costs shall be divided as follows: one-half of the total costs shall be paid by the owner of Parcels 4 through 6, inclusive; and one-half by the owners of Parcels 7 through 9,inclusive. WR. COQ�. (vii) Payment. .'� $:• cting Own- ` •1 'vide the non-constructing owners with a detailed billing statement for the �, 1 ction cost within fo iv (45)days after the completion of the initial construction and installati ofigna�re Entry Feature, •• d each of said non-constructing owners shall remit payment to the Conitru e' g (30) cots @f the receipt of such bill. If any such bill(s) is not paid within aid i .- . 0 i'•.% ,. ; + t bf all such invoices together with interest thereon at nine percent .-J . 1 ('/o s . 1 , li- op said non-constructing owner's property,unless and until paid, ii • .• +,gAt! mar-'or. such hen in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida aga e •. -co k• •c _ C: er"`•• ..• d bring legal action against the non-constructing owner for ..n-constructing owns c.ns• c . n costs; and (c) may, at the Constructing Owner's option, f 'e Io - any such lien des ;4.-• a,144aiiin the same manner as a mortgage lien on real property, and interest, • d reasonable attorne• 4.esiof any such action will be added to the amount of any such lien, and s ( verable in -#.the Constructing Owner prevails in any such action. fj E c. L (viii) Maintenance. The Signature Entry Feature shall be maintained and repaired from time to time,which maintenance and repair shall be performed in accordance with all governmental permits and approvals. The Constructing Owner (or its successor or assign) shall be responsible for such maintenance and repair, unless otherwise agreed among the owners participating in the Signature Entry Feature. The costs for any such maintenance or repair to the Signature Entry Feature shall be shared in the same manner described in Section 9(d)(v) above relating to construction costs. Any owner may assign its obligations for payment of such maintenance and repair costs to a property owners' association or condominium association formed with respect to such owner's parcel(s). The Constructing Owner may assign its obligation for maintenance and repair of the Signature Entry Feature to a property owners' association or condominium association formed with respect to the Constructing Owner's parcel(s). (e) Directional Signage. At the request of the owner of Parcels 4 though 6, inclusive, or the owners of Parcels 7 though 9, inclusive, the owner of Parcel 10 shall provide the owners of Parcels 4 through 6 and Parcels 7 through 9 with a non-exclusive sign easement having an area of four(4) square feet for the purpose of erecting and sharing a directional sign along the eastern side of the North-South Road, where the North-South Road intersects with the access road into Parcel 10. The easement shall be in a location such that that the directional sign is easily visible to northbound motorists. 9 OR: 3635 PG: 1682 acknowledge, consent to,join in, and deliver all documents, applications and other papers which may be necessary to make such applications or to obtain the Road Permits and Approvals. (c) Development of Segment 1. Upon completion of the final plans and specifications for Segment 1, and approval of the same by Collier County,the Developer shall furnish such finals plans and specifications for the construction of Segment 1,including sidewalks,accompanying utilities,landscaping, signage (except for the signature entry feature), and other related improvements to the other owners for their review. No sooner than fifteen(15) days after such plans and specifications have been delivered to the other owners, the Developer shall seek bids for the construction and installation of Segment 1 from not less than three (3) qualified, licensed contractors previously experienced in Collier County as road contractors. At the sole option of the Developer, the Developer may also seek up to two (2) bids from qualified, licensed contractors not previously experienced in Collier County. When such bids are solicited by the Developer, the Developer shall notify the other owners and provide them with a copy of the request for bid and a list of the contractors from whom bids are being solicited. When the bids are returned, the Developer shall provide copies of all completed bids to the other owners. In the event the Developer selects any complete bidder other than the lowest complete bidder,the Developer shall provide the other owners with its reason(s) for selecting the applicable bidder, and the other owners shall have the right of approval with regard thereto, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed or conditioned. If any owner fails to notify the Developer in writing of their disapproval of the selected bidder within five (5) business days after - - ; • - thereof from the Developer, such selection shall be deemed to have been apprr b c . Pt" ',twithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the other own /41:01 ave no right • . Y"• • al if the Developer selects the low complete bidder. L.' ' N_--_- No less than thirty-five,(35yda0p to •mmening cont `tion of Segment 1,the Developer shall provide the owners of the o e .•••.fie.• .' •, • •..'f- O'vners") with the following: (i) a cost estimate for the construe on N _, n 1, 411d�g ' ,�' • o tangency (hereinafter"Road Plan"); and (ii) a breakdown of the c si ti •t- o e• •l !e P. •el (aS 1;e' ach of the Parcels, "Individual Construction Cost"). The Not •n. ` , - is ll • . e (35) days from the receipt of said materials from Developer ce said owner's India , nal o fru9'tion Cost into an escrow account with an escrow agent designate 'ily e Developer, whieli,;:s -ovy' It shall be an attorney licensed in the State of Florida. The cons• • funds deposited wi I' row agent shall be available to the Developer through customary cons' q'Ci • •1 •ws. No later r •� -five(45)days after the Developer's receipt of a certificate of completion, .•- II - •• "slider) Ile the construction fund account. Any excess funds shall be returned in a pro rata n J I'elSas-• *i:n the Individual Construction Costs paid. In the event of a shortage of construction funds to cover the costs and expenses of the Developer in constructing Segment 1 (other than due to non-payment by a Non-Constructing Owner), the Non- Constructing Owners shall be responsible for paying their pro rata share of such shortage. Developer shall provide the Non-Constructing Owners with commercially reasonable documentation which evidences the additional costs and expenses incurred by the Developer and the pro rata share of said costs and expenses for each Non-Constructing Owner. Each Non-Constructing Owner shall have twenty-five (25)days to pay its share of such shortage to the Developer. (d) Non-Payment-Segment 1. Except as provided in subsection (e) below, in the event timely payment of the applicable Individual Construction Cost is not received from any Non-Constructing Owner, then (i) the amount of all such Individual Construction Cost together with interest thereon at nine percent per annum(9%) shall constitute a lien on said Non-Constructing Owner's property,unless and until paid; (ii)the Developer may record each such lien in the Public Records of Collier County, Florida against the Non-Constructing Owner's property and bring legal action against the Non-Constructing Owner for the Non-Constructing Owner's construction costs; and (iii)may, at the Developer's option, foreclose any such lien described above in the same manner as a mortgage lien on real property, and interest, costs and reasonable attorney's fees of any such action will be added to the amount of any such lien, and shall be 11 OR: 3635 PG: 1684 business days after depositing the same in a letter box or by other means placed within the possession of the United States Postal Service,properly addressed to the party in accordance with the foregoing and with the proper amount of postage affixed thereto. In the event of any notice via facsimile transmission,a hard copy shall be sent via regular mail on the day of such transmission. Any such transmission received after 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time(or Daylight Savings Time,whichever then applicable)shall be deemed to have been given on the next following business day. The addressees and addresses for the purpose of this Section may be changed by any party by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided herein. For the purpose of changing such addresses or addressees only, unless and until such written notice is received, the last addressee and respective address stated herein shall be deemed to continue in effect for all purposes. 13. Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with Florida law (exclusive of choice of law rules). Venue for any action arising hereunder shall lie exclusively in Collier County,Florida. 14. Prevailing Party. The prevailing party in any litigation involving this Agreement shall be entitled to recover from the non-prevailing party all attorneys' fees,paralegal fees and costs incurred in connection with such litigation, at arbitratiis Ta.. 1-or.otherwise, including reasonable attorneys' fees • • and paralegal fees in the enforcement", .\ it- •rnder. The owners of the parcels herein described shall only be liable for •+ • on of this •�' ? - t during their respective periods of ownership, and in the event any,i'acit o- is brought for reco , • monetary damages for any breach hereof, the claimant shall look/olel, o-the-interest of the th- ow er of the parcel in breach for the recovery of such monetary damages 1 - '" a j § 15. No Third P• ,e 1 e5___, .eR - • s tis Agreement are for the exclusive benefit of the parties, their hepr5., > c•es ,,J -=s ;, d asp`'. s, g t as otherwise provided herein, and not for the benefit of any •'•- "on, : ' ...-;s A deemed to have conferred any rights, express or implied, upo \- third person. Notwli . • .in nj ing herein to the contrary, it is recognized by all parties hereto me Investors an s 9 v: o ),4fnc. is presently under contract to purchase Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 Contract"). For p ..sirs,*this paragraph, the term "Prime" shall mean and refer only to Prime • • and Develo!iv ,\1 .4r to a corporation that is the assignee of the interests of Prime Investors • _ D p ss, d under the Prime Contract; provided, � � however that (i) said assignee shall hay---t Ionty shareholders as Prime Investors and Developers, Inc. and (ii) Prime shall provide written notice to the owners of the Parcels within ten (10) days of any such an assignment and the verifying shareholder information. In the event of an assignment not complying with the foregoing terms,all of Prime's third-party beneficiary rights referenced hereunder shall immediately cease. Provided that the Prime Contract is in full force and effect and Prime is not in default under the Prime Contract, it is recognized by all parties hereto that Prime is a third party beneficiary of this Agreement and as such, has a vested interest in and to the terms hereof. Once this Agreement is executed,no changes, modifications and or alterations to this Agreement shall be permitted unless same shall be in writing and has the written consent of Prime;provided,however,consent of Prime shall not be required under the following conditions: (i) the Prime Contract is no longer in full force or effect or (ii) Prime is in default under the Prime Contract. In any event, the requirement for Prime's consent under this paragraph and Prime's third-party beneficiary rights hereunder shall cease and terminate as of October 31,2004. 16. Partial Invalidity. If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall, to any extent, be declared invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, such term or 13 OR: 3635 PG: 1686 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. WOLF CREEK ESTATES: WOLF CREEK ESTATES,LLC, a Florida limited liability company 46 1 .I/ ' By: Catalina Land Group,Inc. a Florida corporation, A _ / , its Manager Print Name. - •► L. C' •-�- 'J ilk i a . e, le:a• a X11 By: 'f.2/ Print Name: +'^ - ...N. a L'_ William L.Hoover,President .,AS,R CO6 STATE OF c`p�.1'" ,�'� ,' ss• COUNTY OF • ) LL The foregoing instrum$nt : c. r:w d . " � - t 1 of , 2004 by William L.Hoover as Presi.eu( • I•to '':a. d o ,.,Inc. o i da,dorporation, e rnana of Wolf Creek Estates, LLC, a Florida '..•r: . .•sili • • •.• •, •n ." • •- ', . entities who is (/personally known to me or( )has produc-•` • vidence of identification. (SEAL) .P C.1� rtli 0 _'. . / /LI. - •a`:;: OR: 3635 PG: 1688 II.,/ D ' RU51'1: higi Print N,. klW !fidr— v-6 Mark L. order,as Tiurs• under Unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D January 4,1999 / 411.0".."--- '.. —..••00/7"e": ii.IV,IIIIIIIIMmirzr STATE OF ) � )u• COUNTY OF C--s-Se./c- ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me,this 3 of AU(i)04 , 2004 by Mark L. Lindner, as Trustee under that unrecord • Land Tru D January 4, 1999 who is( ) personally known to me or ( ) has produced — c24,4TMIII as evid ce of identification. (SEAL) ,al 4 f ! . �� •T _ ate _ e) Name: Vii. / . � ypeo 'rint) ...t p mum ..ires: IAY� a ' ��� . 11! - . ,_, ••., - , ... . . •.-,....„. + ,...., , , ...., / ._•. • .. t-IyT , 17 Z l 'd 8862 986 6E A1b3NO3/1S 131)1 WOdd Wd8E: l V00Z—EZ—8 OR: 3635 PG: 1690 BUCKSTONE ESTATES: BUCKSTONE ESTATES,LLC, a Florida limited liability company IIIA By: Catalina Land Group,Inc. �, 0 a Florida corporation, -. li L. its Manager o Print Name: . . ., • c,'C- PIS . ' =tea ft.*ii ' • By: — , , , Print Name: rte[ i. ;Mt t. William L.Hoover,President STATE OF CL.-(3r-2-.X i)A ) )ss. COUNTY OF 0�\.\\ r R The foregoing instrumed before me, s of ,) 2004 by William L. Hoover as Presand Group, Inc. a • orida corpora the manager of Buckstone Estates, LLC, a Fli i co P y, on ,-ha of said company who is ( 4� personally known to me or -d�.r�.`-rr y as evidence of identification. 'i'�` yr i (SEAL) `,-- iip A , Q . 1µr,,uk� , - ;r :4 7T•\'Y-.' ��:4 **. * My WM` ." DD 158976 e' : EXPIRES: ;,2007 c.J (Type or Print) '+,,°me Bonded'+�.nd'' /if!' i 0 r+ssionExpires: Viravrl0at Mom\lioo�McmmJ<kYSwim Ammar-NahSc i.doc 19 011. 3635 PG: 1692 Parcel 10: (Owned by:Mark L.Lindner,as Trustee under unrecorded Land Trust U/T/D January 4, 1999) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA;THENCE RUN NORTH 89°46'10" WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1,322.24 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE RUN NORTH 02°14'20" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, FOR A DISTANCE OF 145.13 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF VANDERBILT BEACH ROAD, A 175 FOOT WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE CONTINUE NORTH 02°14'20" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SO '.I. 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34,FOR A DIS ..,....,f e "- T TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTH 1/2 a ' T l.0.,- •- ••1:1%,,.. I SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34;THE r4'''i.1 NORTH 89°47' ' ALONG THE NORTH LINE ' OF THE SOUTH 2 * I SOUTHWEST 1/4 I SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, SR • ID •7` - I L.22.04 ' EE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF ESn -7 , AF r I so r6 S 1/4 9 F THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SE O" �r.1 a •- '13' ."' EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE IF I S • - +' ,9' / ` ','� -O I •ST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 34, i IS ! I ..C; 1' T• • :OINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-W• i s� .e ". ' z t' : V' ROAD; THENCE RUN SOUTH 89°46' tr •ST, ALONG THE 'e�' RI tate F-WAY LINE OF SAID VANDERBILTa ROAD, FOR A s 1,322.20 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG ' : ':,(a CONTAINING 15.: • ORE OR LESS. Less and except that -1 . .t -• •. -..i • Collier County in that certain Warranty Deed recorded • Eala:•s . :ook 3573,Page 0780 of the Public Records of Collier County,Flori•a. Parcel 11: (Owned by:Buckstone Estates,LLC) The West 330 feet of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 34,Township 48 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. 21 OR: 3635 PG: 1694 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT COST ALLOCATION Parcel Owner's Share of Intersection Improvement Costs f% 12% Y,i�r . ��� ,.. .,, 44 '11 #74L\--------„.7.,tcrd > 0 s% .411 k iv.„,,,,„,,„ wc( olirry , D Ton pay's Land Island Walt -- PUD Residentiali 4 r k > C 12% .('1l Mission/ds #1 = #10 9.5% ,4-2 9.5% Vend hoot Besot Road A-1 EXHIBIT"C" 23 OR: 3635 PG: 1696 Black Bear_Ridec-Phase I Budget Off-ante Improvements Item-North-South Outer Loop Road Quantity Unit Price Total I Clearing and Grubbing 2 AC $3,500.00 57,000.00 2 Silt Fence 2,800 LF 51.50 54,200.00 3 Fill 8,500 CY $9.00 576,500.00 4 Final Grade I LS $6,500.00 $6,500.00 5 Valley Gutter 2,700 LF $5.50 514,850.00 6 8'Limerock Base(compacted and primed) 4,800 SY $7.50 536,000.00 7 12'Stabilized Subgrade 5,750 SY 52.25 512,937.50 8 3"Asphalt 4,800 SY I8.50 $40,800.00 9 Signing&pavement markings I LS 56.500.00 56,500.00 10 Sodding 5,800 SY 51.50 58,700.00 11 5'Wide ConcreteSidewafc 7,500 5Y SI6.50 $24,750.00 12 4'Lunetock(under sidewalk) 1,500 SY $4.50 S6,750.00 13 Maintenance of Traffic I LS 52,500.00 52,500.00 Sub-totalA' i % 5247,987.50 Vanderbilt Beach Road Intersection Improvements gtity Unit Price Total I Tum Lanes Complete(WB Rt,EB Lt) ..- S40,000.00 580,000.00 2 Sigoaliation Ci )'T .,000.00 $130,000.00 3 Side Drain Drainage(4 DBI,DBL run 36') w‘,...,8„,11.-t1".1' `LTJ 1.00 535,000.00 4 Lightingt es ,r $25,000.00 CSt .fatal +axb-;;M;.";<C.:,' �Sne,000.00 S Item-North-South Outer p ' d "1 Sanitary Sew f . Qrantf UnitP Tata' I 8'PVC Force Main(C-900 Class •r r r t• $28,000.00 2 8'Plug Valve wI Box f inIA.7 52,764.00 3 Hot Tap Future 16"Force '�on _ 55,50100 t.zrs x ,.; .R= .00 •Ir t Item-North-South Oute -.MIL a Water Main QuantityUnit rite '1 Hot Tap Existing 30'Rcinf Con 1Q $.3. 1 (or alt jlb and tap new prop 24' 1 LS' '11•1C).000.00 2 12'PVC Water Main(CL 200) 1.400 LFY 1'•40 a 5,700.00 3 12'Gate Valve w/Box 2 EA �` $3,000.00 4 Fire Hydrant(Complete Assembly) 0 1, 2 EA v..t'. $4,800.00 5 Permanent Bacterial Sample Point `\,C ..' .00 $1,000.00 6 Temporary Bacterial Sample PointC.I .4900.00 5900.00 7 Air Release Valve $1,550.00 33,100.00 Sub-Total „: ,. .wwwfx $83,500.00 Item-North-South Outer Loop Road- Draiaaie Quantity Unit Price Total I Control Structure 1 EA 54,000.00 54,000.00 2 15"RCP 100 LF $23.00 52,300.00 3 I3"RCP 350 LF 525.00 $8,750.00 4 24'RCP 1,200 LF 534.00 $40,800.00 5 Valley Getter Throat Inlet 6 EA $2,000.00 512,000.00 6 Grate Inlet 4 EA $1,700.00 56,800.00 7 Junction Box 8 EA $1,850.00 514,800.00 8 15'Flared End Section 1 EA $900.00 $900.00 Sub-Total 4'-:;<4"s.:: �' `x ",`:.`.a ll 596,350.00 OIFSiteTotale OffiNeffain $728,097.50 5/14/2004 EXHIBIT"D"-Page 2 of 3 25 OR: 3635 PG: 1698 Q. GRADY MINOR,P.E. 1415 Panther Lane, Suite 232 Naples,Florida 34109 Phone 239-591-6795 Fax 239-591-6732 July 23,2004 RE: Estimate of Engineering, Surveying&Permitting Costs for Pristine Drive Segment One Engineering Design and Permitting of Pristine Drive $35,000 Engineering Design and Permitting of Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Int. Improvements $10,000 Pristine Drive Permitting Costs $1,500 Estimated Costs for Engineering Design and Permitting $46,500 Construction Engineering for Pristine Drive $9,372 Construction Engineering for Vanderbilt Beach Rd. Int./ROW Improvements $4,565 Total Estimated Costs for Constructio L winner-00o $13,937 ti � Construction Surveying for Pris:i 6,0' ve .� $18,656 Construction Surveying for V.. de •' e - . Rd. Int./RO s p vements $6,017 Total Estimated Costs for Co s I cti t .. . eying $24,673 (7), CIIIPY E� \''(C'- -: \\,,,,, ,__ `C, � E GI , RD 308A51 cngrcosts EXHIBIT"F' 27 GrecoSherry From: R. Bruce Anderson <rbanderson@napleslaw.com> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 10:52 AM To: Steve Bracci Cc: SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill; SolisAndy; FialaDonna; KlatzkowJeff; CasalanguidaNick; BosiMichael; Richard Yovanovich (ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com) Subject: Re:Wolf Creek PUD/Vanderbilt Reserve request for insubstantial change Attachments: image001 jpg; image002.png All, If the County had approved the prior owner's conceptual plan, I would have said "approved" and referenced an SDP#. That prior plan included the existing conceptual preserve area that would now be modified by my client's insubstantial change application. The point is that whether the conceptual Preserve is changed or not makes no difference about how many homes can fit on the land, regardless of the existing or modified preserve area. Opponents claim otherwise.They are simply wrong. I do have one correction from the project's engineer.The number of dwelling units on the prior owner's plan was 215. The 254 is the number is the number of remaining unbuilt units approved in the PUD. Thank You, R Bruce Anderson Attorney at Law Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 Telephone: 239-659-4942 direct 239-261-9300 main Facsimile: 239-261-0884 RBAnderson@napleslaw.com<mailto:RBAnderson@napleslaw.com> www.napleslaw.com<http://www.napleslaw.com> On Jul 7, 2017, at 2:38 PM, Steve Bracci <steve@braccilaw.com<mailto:steve@braccilaw.com»wrote: Dear Board—this is in response to Mr.Anderson's email below. I believe you should ask Mr. Anderson to clarify what he means when he states: "The prior owner of the property had a site plan for 254 dwelling units on the land now owned by my client, so claims by others that your approval would somehow increase density are flat out wrong." The impression left by Mr.Anderson is that the prior 254 site plan was approved by the county, and that the new presently pending 215 unit site plan now reduces the approved site plan. Mr. Anderson should clarify whether the county ever approved a 254 site plan, or whether he is instead just referencing a concept plan on a sheet of paper that was never approved. Sincerely, 1 The Water Management District claimed jurisdiction on the isolated wetland and issued its approval for the landowner to impact the wetland and mitigate offsite on much more environmentally valuable lands.The County, as recommended by your Planning Director, should also approve that change by approving the insubstantial PUD change. My client has several different site plans with differing numbers of dwelling units it is considering.The prior owner of the property had a site plan for 254 dwelling units on the land now owned by my client, so claims by others that your approval would somehow increase density are flat out wrong. Approval of my client's insubstantial change to the PUD master plan has nothing to do with how many homes he can build,whether that be 254 proposed by the prior owner or a lesser number. Allowable density is not at issue. My client believes that prior 254 unit plan results in an inferior housing product, and he seeks to reconfigure the preserve area to provide deeper lots, and a better housing product at a density at least 15% less than that planned by the prior owner. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Bruce Anderson R. Bruce Anderson Attorney at Law <image001.jpg> Cheffy Passidomo, P.A. 821 5th Avenue South Naples, FL 34102 (239) 659-4942 direct (239) 261-9300 telephone (239) 261-9782 facsimile rbanderson@napleslaw.com<mailto:rbanderson@napleslaw.com> www.napleslaw.com<http://www.napleslaw.com> 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 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. From: Steve Bracci [mailto:steve@braccilaw.com] Sent:Wednesday,July 05, 2017 5:30 PM To: KlatzkowJeff<JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net<mailto:JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net» Cc: burtsaunders@colliergov.net<mailto:burtsaunders@colliergov.net>; pennytaylor@colliergov.net<mailto:pennytaylor@colliergov.net>; McDanielBill <WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net<mailto:WilliamMcDanielJr@colliergov.net»; andysolis@colliergov.net<mailto:andysolis@colliergov.net>; FialaDonna <DonnaFiala@colliergov.net<mailto:DonnaFiala@colliergov.net»; R. Bruce Anderson <rbanderson@napleslaw.com<mailto:rbanderson@napleslaw.com» Subject: Wolf Creek PUD/Vanderbilt Reserve request for insubstantial change 3 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 07/11/17 Consent Agenda 16.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 Petition VAC-PL20170000756,to quitclaim and release the County's interest in the Park tract of Edgewild, as recorded in Plat Book 13, Pages 44-45 of the public records of Collier County, Florida.The subject property is located just west of Livingston Road, approximately one half mile south of Immokalee Road, in Section 25, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. F NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings (Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls Exp arte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 07/11/17 Consent Agenda 16.A.4 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 Arthrex Boulevard, Application Number PL20170001077. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings I 1Correspondence ❑e-mails ®Calls Meetings and telephone conversations and conversations with staff Ex parte Items - Commissioner Penny Taylor COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 07/11/17 Consent Agenda 16.A.5 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 at Hacienda Lakes Phase 1A, Application Number PL20170001378. NI NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I (Meetings I (Correspondence I le-mails I (Calls