Loading...
Ex-parte - Fiala 03/13/2018 Ex Parte Items - Commissioner Donna Fiala COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.E. 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 affirm a zoning verification letter regarding a proposed Medical Marijuana Treatment Center and direct staff to issue a letter of no objection to the proposed location. (Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Division Director) X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ❑Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls 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 final plat of Maple Ridge Phase 6A PPL, (Application Number PL20170002650) approval of the standard form Construction and Maintenance Agreement and approval of the amount of the performance security. Fl NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ❑Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls Ex Parte Items - Commissioner Donna Fiala COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 SUMMARY AGENDA 17.A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by the 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 Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code which includes the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district to allow for development of up to 40,000 square feet of commercial development for a project to be known as 15501 Old US 41 CPUD; and providing an effective date. The subject property is located on the west side of Old US 41, approximately one mile north of the US 41 and Old US 41 intersection, in Section 10,Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [P120170001083] NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ['Meetings ❑Correspondence De-mails ❑Calls Staff Report 17.B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by the 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. 96-79,the Eagle Creek Planned Unit Development by expanding the golf course by removing one acre from residential tracts and adding the one acre to golf course Tract H-1; by superseding and repealing prior Ordinance Nos. 81-4, 81-114, 82-53 and 85-8; by amending the Master Plan; and providing an effective date. The subject property, consisting of 298+/- acres, is located southwest of the intersection of US 41 and Collier Boulevard in Sections 3 and 4,Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [P120170001320] n NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X] SEE FILE ['Meetings ❑Correspondence De-mails ['Calls Staff Report Ex Parte Items - Commissioner Donna Fiala COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA March 13, 2018 SUMMARY AGENDA (continued) 17.C. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex-parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve a Resolution renaming a portion of Esplanade Boulevard to Montelanico Loop. The subject street is approximately one third of a mile in length, located within the Esplanade Golf and Country Club of Naples, approximately one and a quarter mile north of Immokalee Road, in Section 15,Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [SNR-PL20170002424] ® NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ❑Correspondence ❑e-mails ❑Calls Rearvie 9Lignty 174 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: JANUARY 18,2018 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 PROPERTY OWNERS/APPLICANT/AGENT: Owners/Applicants: Agent: Ultimate Developments,LLC do Frank Norberto Jr. & Alexis V. Crespo,AICP Frank Norberto III Waldrop Engineering,P.A. 7326 Acorn Way 28100 Bonita Grande Dr.#305 Naples, FL 34119 Bonita Springs,FL 34135 DGC&B,LLC c/o Craig Hazelett 15805 Old 41 Road Naples,FL 34110 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to rezone property from a Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district. The subject property is comprised of two vacant parcels,one owned by DGC&B, LLC and one owned by Ultimate Developments,LLC. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property is comprised of two parcels located on the west side of Old US 41, approximately one mile north of the US 41 and Old US 41 intersection, in Section 10, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 4.85+/- acres (see location map on page 2). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petition seeks to rezone the property to CPUD to allow for the development of up to 40,000 square feet(SF)of commercial development including 7,500 SF of catalog/mail order house uses, and all permitted uses in the Commercial Intermediate(C-3)District. PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 1 of 14 Revised: December 27,2017 I 0 ti l XI 1:1 z 0 ao r It / N v W PUO o 5, LEE COUNTY LINE u o R / O i b PROJECT SITE C i LOCATION .../ LOCATION ' to ` m D. I , I N - �e �v ' / P"° ../ : : r z j WIGGINS , _ PASS iD._ ,� Location Map Zoning Map N O Petition Number: PL-2017-1083 SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses, zoning classifications, and maximum approved densities for properties surrounding boundaries of the 15501 Old US 41 CPUD: North: Developed residential, with a current zoning designation of Arbor Lake Club PUD(11.0 Dwelling units per acre [DU/AC]) East: Old US 41, a 2-lane arterial roadway, then a warehouse, light industrial development,with a current zoning designation of Industrial (I) District South: Undeveloped land, with a current zoning designation of Sterling Oaks PUD (3.0 DU/AC)and Tract"M" approved for industrial uses West: Preserve area within Sterling Oaks PUD, with a current zoning designation of Sterling Oaks PUD t AKt v,uii ''-*51. < +'. bt--3 '; Arbor Vie-44 `- 3 , rif .811 II ii _. g ' 1 40 Z .. a si. ,t .., T� ,,-1:‘,=::,..- ,. -, a r R.1.C9 �'xi `t F � n t;,,, 4 :1* - 4 . >- "• t Aerial(County GIS) PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 3 of 14 Revised: December 27,2017 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN(GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Urban, Urban Mixed Use District,Urban Residential Subdistrict,as depicted on the Future Land Use Map(PLUM)and in the FLUE of the Collier County OMP. Relevant to this petition,the Urban designation is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses, including mixed-use developments such as Planned Unit Developments(PUD).Certain industrial and commercial uses are also allowed subject to criteria. The FLUE provision the petitioner is relying upon to achieve consistency is the Office and In-fill Commercial Subdistrict. (see Attachment B—FLUE Consistency Review) Transportation Element: In evaluating this project,staff reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement(TIS) for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP using the 2016 and 2017 Annual Update and Inventory Reports(AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states, "The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions,and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element(FLUE)affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system,and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved. A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links(roadway segments)directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2%of the adopted LOS standard service volume;and c. For all other links the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3%of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses the project's significant impacts on all roadways." The proposed PUDZ on the subject property was reviewed based on the then applicable 2016 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted with the application indicates that the proposed,new commercial development will generate approximately 216 PM peak hour unadjusted two-way trips. Staff also evaluated the traffic impacts for the proposed project based on the recently adopted 2017 AUIR,which are also included in the table below. PUDZ-PL20170001083: 15501 OLD US 41 Page 4 of 14 Revised: December 27.2017 Roadway Link 2016 AUIR Current Peak 2016 2017 2017 Existing Hour Peak Remaining AUIR Remaining LOS Direction Capacity LOS Capacity Service Volume/Peak Direction Old US 41 Lee County E 1,000/North 29 F -87 Line to US 41 to(Tamiami Trail) US 41 Old US 41 to C 3,100/North 977 C 905 (Tamiami Lee County Trail) Line US 41 Old US 41 to D 3,100/North 485 D 173 (Tamiami hnmokalee Trail) Road Staff notes that the Old US 41 road way is over-capacity based on the 2017 AUIR. Roadway improvements are currently scheduled,but they are outside of the current 5-year plan. This project is more importantly located within the Northwest Transportation Concurrency Management Area (TCMA) boundary and is therefore subject to Policy 5.6 of the GMP. This policy requires any new development exceeding LOS levels within a TCMA designated area must provide documentation that at least two Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies are provided/used. The specific TDM's for this development shall be provided at time of Site Development Plan SDP or SDPA review. Based on the 2016 AUIR,the 2017 AUIR,and applicable TCMA provisions,the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed new trips for the project, based on the OMP Policy noted above, within the 5-year planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Conservation and Coastal Management Element(CCME): Environmental review staff found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element(CCME). A minimum of 0.117 acres of the existing native vegetation is required for preservation and shall be dedicated to Collier County. The Project's current Master Plan proposes a 1.17 acre preserve area. GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions, such as this proposed rezoning. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of PUDZ-PL20170001083, 15501 OLD US 41 Page 5 of 14 Revised: December 27, 2017 consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Section 10.02.13.13.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. The CCPC uses the aforementioned criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the Board,who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning or amendment request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below,under the heading"Zoning Services Analysis."In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD document to address environmental concerns. The PUD Master Plan provides 1.17 acres of Preserve,which exceeds the minimum requirement of 15%(0.117 acres) in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07.B. There were no listed species observed on the site. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. Utilities Review: Public Utilities staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. Emergency Management Review: Emergency Management staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC,and recommends approval of this project. Landscape Review: The Master Plan shows a preserve approximately 100 feet in width along the West boundary line of the PUD.Abutting the preserve to the east is an existing FPL easement and Collier County Drainage Canal. No plantings are permitted within Collier County Drainage Easements. Existing landscaping in the preserve can satisfy the landscape buffer requirement. If the preserve does not meet the buffer requirement after removal of exotics then supplemental planting is required as necessary to bring the buffer up to code. A 15-foot wide Type D Buffer is proposed along Old US 41 on the East side of the PUD. The Master Plan proposes a Type B Buffer along the North PUD boundary and a 10-foot wide Type A buffer along the South PUD boundary. Historic Preservation Review: Historic Preservation staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC,and recommends approval of this project. Zoning Services Review: Staff has evaluated the uses proposed and their intensities and the development standards such as building heights, setbacks, and landscape buffers. Staff also evaluated the building mass,building location and orientation,the amount and type of open space and its location,and traffic generation/attraction of the proposed uses. PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 6 of 14 Revised: December 27, 2C 17 The total amount of allowable commercial square footage, being requested is 40,000 SF of commercial uses, including a 7,500 SF catalog and mail order house use (SIC Retail, Miscellaneous 5961). The CPUD will allow for a logical transition of intensity along the Old US 41 corridor frontage to the preserve lands to the west, and will be compatible with the adjacent high density residential use to the north, and approved industrial uses to the south. The project is immediately adjacent to approved industrial uses;is infill in terms of its size and the surrounding development pattern; and can provide for neighborhood commercial uses and employment within close proximity to existing neighborhoods,existing and planned public infrastructure,and transit facilities. As shown on the proposed PUD Master Plan,the catalog and mail order house use will be located on the southern portion of the CPUD,adjacent to the industrial zoned section,Tract M,of Sterling Oaks PUD. This is an intensive use and is appropriately located away from the multi-family residential uses to the north of the PUD. Within the proposed 15501 Old US 41 CPUD boundaries,the minimum setback from OLD US 41 is 25 feet with a northern boundary setback of 25 feet and a southern boundary setback of 20 feet. The actual building heights are not to exceed 45 feet, and the zoned heights are not to exceed 35 feet. The Arbor Lake Club PUD has a maximum height of three floors to the north. The Sterling Oaks PUD has a maximum height of 50 feet to the west and south. The(I) district to the east has a maximum height of 50 feet. The proposed height of the 15501 Old US 41 CPUD is compatible with the immediate neighborhoods as the surrounding properties have maximum heights below 50 feet. As previously stated, a 15-foot wide Type D Buffer is proposed along Old US 41 on the East side of the PUD. The Master Plan proposes a Type B Buffer along the north PUD boundary,a 10-foot wide Type A buffer along the south PUD boundary, and a preserve approximately 100 feet in width along the west boundary line of the PUD. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08": 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land,surrounding areas,traffic and access, drainage,sewer,water,and other utilities. The type and pattern of development proposed should not have a negative impact upon any physical characteristics of the land, the surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Furthermore,this project, if developed, will be required to comply with all county regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other utilities pursuant to Section 6.02.00 Adequate Public Facilities of the LDC. PUDZ-PL20170001083: 15501 OLD US 41 Page 7 of 14 Revised: December 27, 2017 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application,which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of conformity with the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP Consistency portion of this staff report(or within an accompanying memorandum). 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements,restrictions on design,and buffering and screening requirements. As described in the StaffAnalysis section of this staff report subsection Landscape Review, staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. There is a significant committed improvement project scheduled for Old US 41 that is also noted in the consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order(SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal systems and potable water supplies to accommodate this project. Furthermore, adequate public facilities requirements will be addressed when development approvals are sought. PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 8 of 14 Revised: December 27,2017 8. Conformity with PUD regulations,or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. No deviations are proposed in connection with this request to rezone to CPUD. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable": 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals, objectives,and policies of the FLUM and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern (of the abutting properties) is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this staff report. The proposed use would not change the existing land use patterns of the surrounding properties. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The subject parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. It is also comparable with expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE of the GMP. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. As shown on the zoning map included at the beginning of this report, the existing district boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed PUD zoning boundaries follow the property ownership boundaries and coincide with the GMP subdistrict boundaries. The zoning map on page 2 of the staff report illustrates the perimeter of the outer boundary of the subject parcel. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not necessary,per se, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes. It should be noted that the proposed uses are not allowed under the current zoning classification. PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 9 of 14 Revised: December 27,2017 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD Rezone is consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected by the FLUE of the GMP. Development in compliance with the proposed PUD rezone should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development,or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project. Additionally,the project is located within a TCMA area and shall use at least two of the Transportation Demand (TDM) strategies at time of Site Development Plan (SDP) or Plat(PPL)to address concurrency management. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed development will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore,the project is subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The PUD Document provides adequate property development regulations to ensure light and air should not be seriously reduced to adjacent areas. The Master Plan further demonstrates that the locations of proposed preserve and open space areas should further ensure light and air should not be seriously reduced in adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results,which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning;however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Properties to the west and south of the subject property are undeveloped, whereas the properties to the east and north are developed, as previously noted. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 10 of 14 Revised. December 27,2017 improvement or development of adjacent property. Therefore,the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. If the proposed development complies with the GMP through the proposed amendment, then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The proposed uses and development standards cannot be used in accordance with the existing classification. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD rezone is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or County. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 11 of 14 Revised: December 27,2017 The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities(APF),and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities,except as may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by County staff responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no LOS will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the PUD Document. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this rezoning will have no impact on public facility adequacy in regard to utilities. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health,safety,and welfare. To be determined by the Board during its advertised public hearing. DEVIATION DISCUSSION: The petitioner is not seeking deviations from the requirements of the LDC. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on October 25, 2017 at the Christus Victor Lutheran Church at 15600 Tamiami Trail North in Naples. The meeting commenced at approximately 6:00 p.m. and ended at 6:25 p.m. Handouts were distributed outlining the project overview,proposed uses,and development regulations, sign-in sheet are attached in back materials in the CCPC Package. Alexis Crespo and Lindsay Robin (Agents) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and Staff,and an overview of the proposed CPUD rezoning application,including the location of commercial buildings, intended C-3 and mail order house uses, maximum square footage of development, location of preserve areas, and access. They also outlined the rezoning process and opportunities to provide input at public hearings. Following the Consultant's presentation, the meeting was opened up to attendees to make comments and ask the Agents questions regarding the proposed development. Attendees asked about the types of products to be sold,truck traffic,Old 41 traffic congestion,the sustainability of the native preserve and any potential development near this location.They also discussed building height limitations. There were no further questions or comments. Ms. Crespo thanked the attendees for coming and noted that their contact information is available for those who wished to reach out with any further questions. Please see backup materials in the CCPC Package for further detail. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC)REVIEW: This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC)review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 12 of 14 Revised: December 27,2017 COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report on December 27,2017. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the CCPC forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: A) Proposed Ordinance B) FLUE Consistency Review PUDZ-PL20170001083: 15501 OLD US 41 Page 13 of 14 Revised: December 27,2017 PREPARED BY: - - 2.41- p7 TIMOTHY FINN, ICP,PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION REVIEWED BY: a"--. ________ i v - 7.e' ' 17 RAYM•t t V.BELLOWS,ZONING MANAGER DATE ZONING 5 IVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION MIKE BOSI,AICP, DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION APPROVED BY: 41111Fa.....--$.4.41 """S::: ----.--- /' 7- /e 1 S FRENCH,DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Tentative Board of County Commissioners Hearing Date February 27, 2018. PUDZ-PL20170001083; 15501 OLD US 41 Page 14 of 14 Revised: December 19,2017 CoLl ier Coi my STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 1,2018 SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20170001320 EAGLE CREEK PROPERTY OWNERS/APPLICANT/AGENT: Owner/Applicant: Agent: Eagle Creek Golf and Country Club, Inc. Frederick E. Hood, AICP 11 Cypress View Drive Davidson Engineering, Inc. Naples,FL 34113 4365 Radio Road, Suite 201 Naples,FL 34104 REOUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to amend Ordinance Number 96-79, as amended, to the Eagle Creek Planned Unit Development(PUD). GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 298+/-acres and is located southwest of the intersection of US 41 Collier Boulevard in Sections 3 and 4, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County(see location map,page 2). PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: This petitioner seeks to amend Eagle Creek PUD, approved via Ordinance #96-79, to change a land use designation of a portion of Tract B from Residential to Golf Course; creating a new sub- tract H-1 by converting a portion of Tract B2 and H. Golf Course uses will allow: Golf Course, Golf Course Driving Range, Short Game Practice Area, Golf Course Maintenance Areas (no vertical structures permitted), and Water Management. PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 1 of 12 January 17, 2018 x I t 4 c cT - ID O Q 00 0 t§ SITE 1.-' . _ i . , ,.„. .,,,,,,,,,,,,„., L3 3r f RaaMNna►e 1 LOCATION " 3 ►„ t I C PROJECT '. m.. LOCATION t ,., _ airte4 '- Pilo � K T F i g ,, itHt op ling 1 • IPut, Ts A i A. v Loci'ion Map Zoning Map in N Petition Number: PL20170001320 N SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: This section of the staff report identifies the land uses and zoning classifications for properties surrounding boundaries of portions of tract B2 and B3 of the Eagle Creek PUD: North: Golf course within Eagle Creek PUD, ; th a urrent zoning designation of Eagle Creek PUD South: Cypress View Drive, a private 2-lane road, then the clubhouse of the Eagle Creek Golf&Country Club,with a current zoning designation of Eagle Creek PUD East: Cypress View Drive,a private 2-lane road, then multifamily, with a current zoning designation of Eagle Creek PUD West: Golf course within Eagle Creek PUD, with a current zoning designation of Eagle Creek PUD '7,1't,,-1,--„',:.l:,,-k4.4v,.164,,l-' -g1.-*(.,,'.,,',,4,,„o/,, fi#,''A'' ..-1-..,-,, • -:,,.,,,ts.s„,,„\,,i,ft,,'.„,,',, ' . " zy ,„ / ` ° * e.,, t''''''''' -. tft-, 111.11 i .4„, sio . , .,,,,, :„ ii.,,, ,...,.i.,,,,,,,,....,44.4. ; , -4,, -* - '”" ' *'''' ' 4 --* ,... , , , ..,,,, , .„ , 401%,,,,,. ,,,,, ,,, I'l'''' - wiiiii ,,, ,,.... ,,,, .,:.H. .., „ ,,,, , k .'em - 4 few a t ,. � --,,,,,,-... :_.--,-- , .., ___ ,, :ii:i., ,. .,i, 41 �.,N' '£ #. ? . Ug 4 a Aerial( County GIS) PUHA-PL2017tIo01320 ,January i 7, 2018 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP)CONSISTENCY: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions,such as this proposed rezoning. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the overall GMP as part of the recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. This petition is consistent with the GMP. Future Land Use Element(FLUE): Staff identified the FLUE policies relevant to this project and determined that the proposed amendment to the PUD may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Please, see Attachment B —FLUE Consistency Review for a more detailed analysis of how staff derived this determination. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the application and found this petition consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. As indicated in the submittal the proposed rezone request is to allow golf course uses instead of the currently allowed residential land uses. According to the 2017 AUIR, staff finds that the adjacent roadway links, Collier Boulevard(SR-951)between Tamiami Trail East(US 41)and Wal-Mart Drive, is a 6-lane divided roadway with a current service volume of 2,500 trips, and has a remaining capacity of approximately 791 trips. Collier Boulevard(SR-951)between Wal-Mart Drive and Manatee Road maintains a current service volume of 2,000 trips and has a remaining capacity of approximately 94 trips. Staff notes that the proposed land use change will not generate additional new trips, according to the application, and will not increase the number of residential units. Therefore,the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): No revisions to the environmental portions of the PUD are being made. The petition is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME)of the GMP. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition, including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5, Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred to as the "PUD Findings"), and Section 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as "Rezone Findings"), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC's recommendation. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the heading "Zoning Services Analysis." Drainage: The proposed PUD Amendment request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area. Stormwater best management practices, treatment, and storage will be addressed PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 4 of 12 January 17,2018 through the environmental resource permitting process with the South Florida Water Management District.County staff will also evaluate the project's stormwater management system,calculations, and design criteria at the time of site development plan (SDP) and/or platting(PPL). Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC. No revisions to the environmental portions of the PUD are being made. Landscape Review: The proposed changes to the PUD do not affect the landscaping standards identified in the original PUD. School District: The Collier County School District does not have any issue with the proposed amendment as it will not impact the District's level of service. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this PUD Amendment. Utilities Review: Public Utilities staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. Zoning Services Review: This amendment to the Eagle Creek PUD proposes to expand the existing golf course by removing one acre from residential tracts and adding the one acre to golf course tract H-l. Approximately,one-half acre will be removed from Tract B-2 and one-half acre will be removed from Tract H to create 1.14 acres for Tract H-1. In essence, the amendment would be converting approximately one acre of residential zoned land into one acre of open space or golf course, and would decrease the residential area and increase open space. Lastly, the subject property would now be identified as Tract H-1 on the revised Master Plan. Furthermore, this amendment proposes new permitted uses for Tract H-1 such as golf course, golf course driving range, short game practice area, golf course maintenance areas (no vertical structures permitted), and water management. Staff believes these proposed uses would be considered compatible uses in the new Tract H-1. As such, staff has determined the proposed uses would be appropriate and compatible with the PUD. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that, "In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan's compliance with the following criteria in addition to the findings in LDC Section 10.02.08": 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land,surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage,sewer,water,and other utilities. Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and believes the uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The commitments made by the applicant and staff's recommended stipulations should provide adequate assurances that the proposed change should not adversely affect living conditions PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 5 of 12 January 17, 2018 in the area. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application,which were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of conformity with the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP Consistency portion of this staff report on page 4. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements,restrictions on design,and buffering and screening requirements. As described in the Staff Analysis section of this staff report, the proposed changes to the PUD do not affect the landscaping standards of the original PUD. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The usable open space areas are increasing; therefore, no deviation from required usable open space is being requested, and compliance would be demonstrated at the time of SDP or PPL. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the the consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time, a new Transportation Impact Statement (TIS) will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally,the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains, to accommodate this project based upon the PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 6 of 12 January 17.2018 ua commitments made by the petitioner, and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements will continuously be addressed when development approvals are sought. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations,or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case,based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. All future development proposed on sub-tract H-1 would have to comply the LDC and other applicable codes. The petitioner is not requesting any deviations to the LDC. Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F states, "When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners...shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable": 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the subject petition is consistent with the goals, objectives,and policies of the(FLUM)and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern (of the abutting properties) is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this staff report. The proposed use would not change the existing land use patterns of the surrounding properties. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The property is currently zoned PUD and would remain as such. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. This petition does not propose any change to the boundaries of the PUD. The Master Plan would be updated by relabeling the subject property. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not necessary; however, it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to include the proposed uses and development standards that are specific to the subject parcel. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 7 of 12 January 17,2018 The proposed PUD Amendment is not anticipated to adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development,or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time, a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed PUDA request is not anticipated to create drainage problems in the area, provided stormwater best management practices,treatment.and storage on this project will be addressed through Environmental Resource Permitting (ERP) with the South Florida Water Management District(SFWMD).County staff will evaluate the project's stormwater management system, calculations, and design criteria at time of SDP and/or PPL. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. It is not anticipated the changes proposed to this PUD Amendment would seriously reduce light or air to the adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The subject property is currently vacant, and staff does not anticipate this amendment serving as a deterrent to its improvement. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare. PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 8 of 12 January 17,2018 If the proposed development complies with the GMP through the proposed amendment, then that constitutes a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed uses cannot be achieved without amending the PUD. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. It is staff's opinion that the proposed uses, associated development standards, and developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or platting processes, and again later as part of the building permit process. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities(APF),and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities,except as may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by County staff responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the PUD Document. The concurrency review for APF PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 9 of 12 January 17, 2018 is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this amendment will have no impact on public facility adequacy in regard to utilities. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health,safety,and welfare. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING(NIM): A Neighborhood Information Meeting was held on Thursday, October 19th, 2017. The meeting began at 5:30 p.m.,at the clubhouse of the Eagle Creek Golf&Country Club community, located at 11 Cypress View Drive Naples, FL 34113. The following individuals, associated with the review and presentation of the project,were present. • Frederick Hood, Davidson Engineering •Jessica Harrelson, Davidson Engineering • Eric Johnson, Collier County •Tim Finn,Collier County Frederick Hood started the meeting by making a presentation,reading the following: Frederick Hood: Good evening. My name is Frederick Hood with Davidson Engineering, and I am the land development consultant representing the applicant, the Eagle Creek Golf and Country Club. Here with me tonight is Jessica Harrelson, the Project Coordinator with Davidson Engineering, and Jimmy Alston, the Golf Course Superintendent for Eagle Creek. Also in attendance is Eric Johnson, the Principal Planner with Collier County, whom is reviewing the project. The applicant is seeking a Planned Unit Development Amendment(also referred to as a PUDA), to the existing Eagle Creek PUD. The purpose of this meeting is to inform you, the surrounding residents of the proposed project, the intent of the PUDA. As required by the Collier County Land Development Code, this meeting is being recorded. I will give a brief description of the project and answer any questions you may have at the end of my presentation. The PUDA application is seeking to change the land use designation of a 1.14-acre parcel from residential to golf course. Currently, this parcel is situated between an existing golf course tract to the west(shown here on the aerial) with existing condominiums to the east. After approval of the PUDA, the subject parcel will be re-designated and known as Tract H-1, allowing for the following permitted land uses: Golf Course, Golf Course Driving Range, Short Game Practice Area Golf Course Maintenance Areas. and Water Management Things to note are: There are no vertical structures proposed within this newly designated golf course tract. There is no anticipated increase in traffic to the community. This new golf course tract will be for the enjoyment and benefit of the existing golf course members only. And to end the presentation, I will give a brief description on the PUDA process. Our application is currently in for the 3rd, and what we believe to be the final review by County Staff Once we receive approval from all County reviewers, we will be scheduled for public hearings. There are two hearings that will be held, the first with the Planning Commission and the second with the Board of County Commissioners. Because you are all within the required notification area, you will receive letters informing you of the dates of these hearings. Additionally,public hearing signs will be posted along Collier Blvd, so you will soon see PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 10 of 12 January 17, 2018 those posted as well. That ends my presentation and if there are any questions, I will be happy to answer them. The following questions were asked: Unidentified Male Voice: What is the timeframe? Frederick Hood: The review should be completed by the year's end with a possible CCPC hearing date before the end of the year and BCC early next year. Unidentified Male Voice:Are the plans put together yet? Frederick Hood: The site is currently only under a zoning change and the Site Development Plans had not yet been prepared, and briefly explained the SDP process. Unidentified Male Voice:Are you only rezoning at this time? Frederick Hood: Yes...from residential to golf course. Unidentified Male Voice: Who is involved with the design process? Frederick Hood: The golf course will coordinate with the engineer. The meeting was adjourned at approximately 5:38p.m. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report on January 16, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the CCPC forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: A) Proposed Ordinance B) FLUE Consistency Review PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 11 of 12 January 17,2018 PREPARED BY: -- 1‘ - 1 TIMOTHY FINN,AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE ZONING DIVISION -ZONING SERVICES SECTION REVIEWED BY: [/fid RA �� D V. BELLOWS,ZONING MANAGER I DATE ZON G DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION /- // -I) MIKE BOSI, AICP, DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION APPROVED BY: t ES FRENCH, DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT PUDA-PL20170001320 Page 13 of 13 December 6. 2017 1411 .P141 CD zz CD el) b II Cfi sr 0 CD .. _ ..., ... 41 ----------' CO '' 5 rVwwJ co V J N 5 1 rte, N mi. �' 0-11 O b *CJ erisCf ile o b O c rt b CD 0-1 ,- emit . . • • ® • up) - o o c 5o )_,. N a) O ¢, 81 (7 �-' r•:;• L CA C/) a p O 4 On O O U) crDn C � �' ,-- ¢: 0 O . Cn & o ; ,< �_,n (;c) .Cn r Cr 0 C r • Cn CD • --' ,-I- ~�'. q �- C! a �C --,. 0 Oma . 0 Crq 1: 111 Cn Senior Statistics • Seniors 65+make up 30.9% of the population in Collier County, an increase from 29% in 2016, and higher than FL at 18.9 and U.S. at 15.2. • Highest percent of seniors is age 65-74. • 35% of seniors in Collier County pay more than 30% of their income for housing. Of those, 18% spend more than 50%. • Average monthly social security benefit for women: ➢ $1,235 in Collier County ➢ $1,161 in Florida ➢ $1,155 in the United States • Retirement income is limited to social security for many and can be significantly reduced by when a husband dies. • In Collier County senior women are emerging as a small but critical subset of homelessness. • During a ten month period in 2016, 21 senior women contacted Naples Senior Center at JFCS because they were homeless or about to be evicted. • In Collier County the waiting list for affordable senior housing is often three to five years. • More seniors will be women because they are likely to live longer than their generation of men, and have fewer resources on which to draw. • Generally, women have worked less and earned less than men, and therefore have lower or no pensions and lower Social Security retirement benefits. Since women tend to live longer than men, they are more likely to be single and depend on one income in their old age. • In Florida in 2015, there were 18 percent more women 65 or older than men of the same age, but 38 percent more in poverty. A • 46 qb EIP go ar di 46 aAlb to ,a > 0 c..) ' Ak,..., -4..'_ - ,z, ',-, ,i_-,....:,,. .4 -_,,,,,,,,,,,;„:;-:, ,::::. ..„ 4bm gi ill i s k ,,,,_ , .„ _ **�* ., 3� * * . ,.. It,' 1 r + r ,. 40 3n 11101 Air m' of/cf. ,- 'm 1 I ii a n Y .rte 7 ' ;;t ,. . .. .... et. _ , .. , .,, ..,. ,....,. , a „,., ..... ,.. .. , © ,f , . ..., ;:, ,,, , ,,_. _;=t .. -. ,:._, .� - 4 . . . .... _ z 4 c,......) v -.L.._ _ III ri = et. = elp HT1 O N el'4 =II > O "..3 ' (It = z = d0 O �D N f". Q eD eD eiD rri r... a 20 r Win = 0. N 1-k :Li :4 lift" = 111 0 = co) ...3 ' ' .1:.- = /41..4 i g 0: ft, = et ...,L,, ,,, t„ . i en C4 nos• eD ~,,.., . �j c.,..* -..) 6% 0 P 1175 < - �' (Nisi ,....., 2 0 et eD ei