Agenda 10/23/2018 Item #17B10/23/2018
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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 07-26, the I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD, to
allow for the development of up to 425 multi-family dwelling units in addition to the existing
permitted maximum 265,000 square feet of office and retail uses and a 107 room motel, subject to a
maximum of 1,172 two-way p.m., peak hour trips for the entire PUD; to add an additional Master
Plan to reflect the site layout if the property is developed with both residential and commercial
uses, and to limit residential uses to the area identified as “C/R;” to add development standards for
residential uses; to modify development commitments relating to environmental, transportation,
utilities, water management, affordable housing, and land use and project phasing requirements;
and to add deviations relating to preserve standards. The subject property is located on the
northwest corner of the Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard intersection, in Section 34,
Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 40.8± acres; and by
providing an effective date. [PL20180000049] (This is a companion to Agenda Item 17.A)
OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) review staff’s findings and
recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC)
regarding the above-referenced petition, render a decision regarding this rezoning petition, and ensure the
project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's
interests are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS: The subject property consists of 40.8+/- acres and is located on the northwest
corner of the Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard intersection, in Section 34, Township 49 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County. This petitioner seeks to amend the I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD, approved
via Ordinance Number 07-26, to allow for the development of up to 425 multi-family dwelling units in
addition to the existing permitted maximum 265,000 square feet of office and retail uses and a 107 room
motel, subject to a maximum of 1,172 two-way p.m., peak hour trips for the entire PUD; to add an
additional Master Plan to reflect the site layout if the property is developed with both residential and
commercial uses, and to limit residential uses to the area identified as “C/R;” to add development
standards for residential uses; to modify development commitments relating to environmental,
transportation, utilities, water management, affordable housing, and land use and project phasing
requirements; and to add deviations relating to preserve standards. In essence, the existing I-75/Alligator
Alley PUD is partially built and approved for commercial uses and a hotel. The applicant is proposing to
amend the PUD to add the option to construct 425 multi-family dwelling units in the C/R Tract as
depicted on the Exhibit B Master Plan in the PUD document.
FISCAL IMPACT: The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help
offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund
projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as
needed to maintain an adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order to meet
the requirements of concurrency management, the developer of every local development order approved
by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with
the project in accordance with Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fees
collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Finally, additional
revenue is generated by application of ad valorem tax rates, and that revenue is directly related to the
value of the improvements. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the
criteria used by staff and the CCPC to analyze this petition.
17.B
Packet Pg. 2008
10/23/2018
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The subject property is currently designated Urban
Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdi strict (AC#9, I-75, and Collier Boulevard and
Davis Boulevard (Interchange Activity Center). In addition to a full array of commercial uses, residential
uses up to 16 units per gross acre may be allowed, as identified on the Future Land Use Maps and on the
Activity Center #9 (CR 951 - Interstate 75) Inset Map within the GMP. Staff identified the FLUE policies
relevant to this project and determined that the proposed PUDA may be deemed consistent with the FLUE
of the GMP. (Please, 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 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 PUD Amendment, to add multi-family residential as an allowable use on the subject
property was reviewed based on the applicable 2017 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the
application indicates that the existing PUD generates approximately 1,172 PM peak hour two -way trips
and 894 PM peak two-way Net trips (Net trips include pass-by traffic). The proposed PUD Amendment
area (shown on Master Plan Exhibit B as “2018 Amendment Area”) is indicated in the TIS as generating
approximately 1,023 PM peak two-way trips and 818 PM peak two-way Net trips (net trips include pass-
by traffic). The development impacts the following roadway segments with the listed capacities:
17.B
Packet Pg. 2009
10/23/2018
Roadway Link 2017 AUIR
Existing
LOS
Current Peak Hour Peak
Direction Service
Volume/Peak Direction
2017 AUIR
Remaining
Capacity
Davis
Boulevard
Radio Road to
Collier Boulevard
B 2,900/West 1,572
Collier
Boulevard
(CR 951)
Golden Gate
Main Canal to I-
75
C 2,300/North 825
Collier
Boulevard
(CR 951)
I-75 to Davis
Boulevard
B 3,600/North 2,027
Collier
Boulevard
(CR 951)
Davis Boulevard
to Rattlesnake
Hammock Road
C 3,000/North 1,082
Based on the 2017 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the
projected trips for the existing and amended PUD 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.
Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat).
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has found this
project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME). The CPUD and
MPUD Master Plans provide for 6.12 acres and 9.41 acres respectively, for the Preserve Area. The
preserve areas will be required to be placed under a conservation easement dedicated to Collier County.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC
heard petition PUDA-PL20180000049 on September 6, 2018, and by a vote of 6 to 0 recommended to
forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. The CCPC approval was
unanimous. The CCPC also sat as the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) and recommended
approval with a vote of 6 to 0. As such, this petition will be placed on Summary Agenda.
The CCPC stipulations include required changes and additions to be added to the PUD:
Section IV
In 4.2 Maximum Development Intensity:
Added language with a corresponding use table “If the C/R Tract, as depicted on the Exhibit B
Master Plan, is developed with both residential and commercial uses, commercial uses on that
tract shall be limited to the following commercial uses.”
n the permitted commercial use table for the “C/R” tract, revised general warehouses and storage
to illustrate “Mini-warehouses, air-conditioned only” and deleted Group 7011 “Hotels and
Motels.”
In 4.4.B:
Added “subject to a minimum lease of 7 months.”
In 4.6 Development Standards:
Added “shall be platted as a separate tract” to the footnotes of Landscape Buffer Tract (LBT) and
Lake Maintenance Tract (LMT)
Section V
17.B
Packet Pg. 2010
10/23/2018
In 5.3.A Utility Requirements:
Added language to reflect jack and bore only if installed after the replanting of the preserve area
as “Language shall be added to the CUE instrument restricting the District’s rights within the
preserve to trenchless pipeline installation (e.g. horizontal directional drilling) in the event that
the pipe is not installed prior to preserve planting restoration.”
Exhibit B Master Plan
Added language to side note to illustrate “Maximum development is 265,000 s.f. of office or
retail, gross leasable area as limited by Section 4.2 and 425 multi-family residential units, subject
to trip count in Section 5.2.K of the PUD.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is an amendment to the existing I-75/Alligator Alley PUD
(Ordinance No. 07-26, as amended). The burden falls upon the applicant for the amendment to prove that
the proposal is consistent with all of the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of
County Commissioners (BCC), should it consider denial, that such denial is not arbitrary, discriminatory
or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the amendment does not meet one or more
of the listed criteria.
Criteria for PUD Amendments
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval
or not.
1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in
relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage,
sewer, water, and other utilities.
2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contract, or
other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to
arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such
areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense? Findings and
recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney.
3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the
Growth Management Plan.
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may
include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and
screening requirements.
5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development?
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring
the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
8. Consider: 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
17.B
Packet Pg. 2011
10/23/2018
regulations.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future
land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan?
10. Will the proposed PUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern?
11. Would the requested PUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district
unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts?
12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood?
15. Will the proposed change create or excessively 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?
16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem?
17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas?
18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent
property in accordance with existing regulations?
20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot (“reasonably”) be used in accordance
with existing zoning? (a “core” question…)
22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county?
23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the
proposed use in districts already permitting such use.
24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alterat ion which
would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed PUD rezone on the
availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service
adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented
through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, art.II], as
17.B
Packet Pg. 2012
10/23/2018
amended.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the PUD rezone request that the
Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health,
safety, and welfare?
The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written
materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies,
letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the BCC hearing as these items relate
to these criteria. This item has been approved as to form and legality, and requires an affirmative vote of
four for Board approval. (SAS)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendation of the CCPC, which is reflected in the
attached Ordinance and recommends that the Board approve the applicant’s request to amend the PUD.
Prepared by: Timothy Finn, AICP, Principal Planner, Zoning Division
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (PDF)
2. Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (PDF)
3. FLUE Consistency Memo - Attachment B (PDF)
4. Development Standards for Residential Areas - Attachment C (PDF)
5. Development Standards for Commercial Areas - Attachment D (PDF)
6. [Linked] Back Up Materials - Attachment E (PDF)
7. Legal Ad - Agenda ID 6402 (PDF)
17.B
Packet Pg. 2013
10/23/2018
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 17.B
Doc ID: 6402
Item Summary: 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 07 -26, the I-75/Alligator Alley
CPUD, to allow for the development of up to 425 multi -family dwelling units in addition to the existing
permitted maximum 265,000 square feet of office and retail uses and a 107 room motel, subject to a
maximum of 1,172 two-way p.m., peak hour trips for the entire PUD; to add an additional Master Plan to
reflect the site layout if the property is developed with both residential and commercial uses, and to limit
residential uses to the area identified as “C/R;” to add development standards for residential uses; to
modify development commitments relating to environmental, transportation, utilities, water management,
affordable housing, and land use and project phasing requirements; and to add deviations relating to
preserve standards. The subject property is located on the northwest corner of the Collier Boulevard and
Davis Boulevard intersection, in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida,
consisting of 40.8± acres; and by providing an effective date. [PL20180000049] (This is a companion to
Agenda Item 17.A)
Meeting Date: 10/23/2018
Prepared by:
Title: – Zoning
Name: Tim Finn
09/13/2018 11:10 AM
Submitted by:
Title: Division Director - Planning and Zoning – Zoning
Name: Michael Bosi
09/13/2018 11:10 AM
Approved By:
Review:
Growth Management Department Judy Puig Level 1 Reviewer Completed 09/14/2018 4:00 PM
Zoning Ray Bellows Additional Reviewer Completed 09/17/2018 5:09 PM
Zoning Michael Bosi Additional Reviewer Completed 09/19/2018 7:54 AM
Growth Management Department James C French Deputy Department Head Review Completed 09/20/2018 1:18 PM
Growth Management Department Thaddeus Cohen Department Head Review Completed 09/20/2018 3:52 PM
County Attorney's Office Scott Stone Level 2 Attorney Review Completed 10/04/2018 10:48 AM
Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 10/08/2018 8:48 AM
County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 10/10/2018 10:11 AM
Budget and Management Office Mark Isackson Additional Reviewer Completed 10/10/2018 10:35 AM
17.B
Packet Pg. 2014
10/23/2018
County Manager's Office Nick Casalanguida Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 10/14/2018 6:32 PM
Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 10/23/2018 9:00 AM
17.B
Packet Pg. 2015
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 1 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 2018
SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/ALLIGATOR ALLEY CPUD
______________________________________________________________________________
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENTS:
Owners:
951 Commerce Center Property 93 FLRPT LLC 95 FLRPT LLC
Owners Association 570 Delaware Ave 7978 Cooper Creek Blvd. #100
8441 Cooper Creek Blvd Buffalo, NY 14202 University Park, FL 34201
University Park, FL 34201
WR-1 Associates, Ltd.
7978 Cooper Creek Blvd.
University Park, FL 34201
Contract Purchaser:
Thompson Thrift Development, Inc.
901 Wabash Avenue, Suite 300
Terre Haute, IN 47807
Agents:
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq.
Q. Grady Minor & Coleman, Yovanovich &
Associates, P.A. Koester, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey
Bonita Springs, FL 34134
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an
application to amend Ordinance Number 07-26, the I-75/Alligator Alley Commercial Planned Unit
Development (CPUD).
AGENDA ITEM 9-E
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2016 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 2 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property consists of 40.8+/- acres and is located on the northwest corner of the Collier
Boulevard and Davis Boulevard intersection, in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County (see location map, page 3).
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
This petitioner seeks to amend the I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD, approved via Ordinance Number
07-26, to allow for the development of up to 425 multi-family dwelling units in addition to the
existing permitted maximum 265,000 square feet of office and retail uses and a 107 room motel,
subject to a maximum of 1,172 two-way p.m., peak hour trips for the entire PUD; to add an
additional Master Plan to reflect the site layout if the property is developed with both residential
and commercial uses, and to limit residential uses to the area identified as “C/R;” to add
development standards for residential uses; to modify development commitments relating to
environmental, transportation, utilities, water management, affordable housing, and land use and
project phasing requirements; and to add deviations relating to preserve standards.
Intentionally blank
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2017 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 3 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
17.B.1Packet Pg. 2018Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 4 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
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 I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD:
North:
1-75, a four-lane highway, and then undeveloped vacant land with a zoning
designation of Collier Boulevard Mixed Use Commerce Center PUD (10.0
DU/AC) and is approved commercial uses, hotels and motels, and single and
multi-family homes.
East: Developed with a gas station/convenience store, with a current zoning
designation of General Commercial (C-4) District (northwest corner of Collier
Boulevard and Davis Boulevard) and then Collier Boulevard, a six-lane arterial
roadway, and then developed and approved for commercial, institutional, and
light industrial uses with a zoning designation of Tollgate Commercial Center
(PUD).
South: Davis Boulevard, a six-lane arterial roadway, and then developed with a gas
station/convenience store with a zoning designation of Industrial (I) District
(southwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard) and then a
developed with a partially constructed building with a parking lot with a zoning
designation of I-75/Collier Boulevard Commercial Center PUD and allows for
either a single use development such as a shopping center, or less intensive
multiple uses on the property such as mixed-use office and retail. Developed
and approved for commercial, light industrial, and retail uses with a zoning
designation of Westport Commerce Center Mixed-Use Planned Unit
Development (MPUD).
West: Currently being developed with residential, with a current zoning designation
of East Gateway MPUD (16.0 DU/AC), which is approved for a mixed-use
development with a commercial and/or residential development located on the
Davis Boulevard frontage, and the industrial/office park development or
residential development to be located on the northerly portion of the PUD.
Intentionally blank
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2019 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 5 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
Collier County (GIS)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is currently designated Urban
Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict (AC#9, I-75 and Collier Boulevard
and Davis Boulevard (Interchange Activity Center). In addition to a full array of commercial uses,
residential uses up to 16 units per gross acre may be allowed, as identified on the Future Land Use
Maps and on the Activity Center #9 (CR 951 – Interstate 75) Inset Map within the GMP. Staff
identified the FLUE policies relevant to this project and determined that the proposed PUDA may
be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. (Please, 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 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 applicat ions,
conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2020 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 6 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
(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 PUD Amendment, to add multi-family residential as an allowable use on the subject
property was reviewed based on the applicable 2017 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted
in the application indicates that the existing PUD generates approximately 1,172 PM peak hour
two-way trips and 894 PM peak two-way Net trips (Net trips include pass-by traffic). The
proposed PUD Amendment area (shown on Master Plan Exhibit B as “2018 Amendment Area”)
is indicated in the TIS as generating approximately 1,023 PM peak two-way trips and 818 PM
peak two-way Net trips (net trips include pass-by traffic). The development impacts the following
roadway segments with the listed capacities:
Roadway Link 2017
AUIR
Existing
LOS
Current Peak
Hour Peak
Direction Service
Volume/Peak
Direction
2017 AUIR
Remaining
Capacity
Davis
Boulevard
Radio Road to
Collier
Boulevard
B 2,900/West 1,572
Collier
Boulevard
(CR 951)
Golden Gate
Main Canal to
I-75
C 2,300/North 825
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2021 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 7 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
Collier
Boulevard
(CR 951)
I-75 to Davis
Boulevard
B 3,600/North 2,027
Collier
Boulevard
(CR 951)
Davis
Boulevard to
Rattlesnake
Hammock Road
C 3,000/North 1,082
Based on the 2017 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate
the projected trips for the existing and amended PUD 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. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat).
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental review staff has
found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management Element
(CCME). The CPUD and MPUD Master Plans provide for 6.12 acres and 9.41 acres respectively,
for the Preserve Area. The preserve areas will be required to be placed under a conservation
easement dedicated to Collier County.
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
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:
Preservation Requirements - Much of the site has been previously altered. The entire site acreage
of 40.8 acres was used in calculating the native vegetation preservation requirement with the
existing PUD Ordinance Number 07-26. (See Exhibit A - Master Plan) The preserve requirement
will increase from 15% to 25% if the developer chooses to develop residential uses. (See Exhibit
A - Master Plan) As a result of the increase in the preservation requirement, several environmental
deviations are being requested. Much of the existing and proposed preserve will need to be
recreated as indicated on the PUD Master Plan. Restoration planting will be required to be in
accordance with the planting criteria identified in LDC section 3.05.07.H.1.e.
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2022 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 8 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
In accordance with the County Land Development Code (LDC) and GMP, 15% (.15 x 40.79 =
6.12 acres) of the native vegetation is required to be retained on-site for commercial uses and 25%
(25 x 37.6 = 9.41 acres) of the native vegetation is required to be retained on-site for residential
uses. For the native vegetation calculation, which includes residential uses, the existing ingress
and egress easements were excluded for a total of 37.6 acres of native vegetation.
Permitting History - South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) permit No. 11-00556-
S was issued for the property on June 15, 1989. The permit identified 28.10 acres of jurisdictional
wetlands. The SFWMD mitigation plan required the creation of 3.00 acres of deep marsh
surrounded by 9.70 acres of forested wetland and the preservation of 0.75 acres of pine flatwoods
adjacent to the wetland mitigation area. The total SFWMD conservation area was 13.45 acres. In
addition, the mitigation plan required a 20-foot wide, 2.30 acres, landscape buffer/maintenance
easement planted with native herbaceous, shrub, and tree species to surround the created wetland
area. Wetland preserves will receive pretreated stormwater to maintain hydrology and provide
additional storage.
The on-site wetland mitigation efforts have proven to be unsuccessful. The previously
permitted wetland impacts that were originally mitigated on-site will be mitigated off-site by
purchasing credits at a wetland mitigation bank.
Listed Species requirement - No listed species were documented using the project site. The
Environmental Data Report indicates the presence of black bear in the area. A black bear
management plan will be required at time of PPL or SDP review.
Landscape Review: There are no new landscape deviations requested as part of this amendment.
This PUD falls within Activity Center #9 overlay, which has enhanced buffer requirements within
400’ of I-75. Palms are required in the amount of 25% of the required Type ‘D’ buffer trees.
Undulating beds of ornamental grasses are also required to cover at least 30% of the buffer. Native
palms and native ornamental grasses may be used to satisfy the Activity Center #9 overlay buffer
requirement and also be consistent with LDC section 3.05.07. The County Utility Easement (CUE)
and Landscape Buffer Easement (LBE) along the West will be overlapping. The required plantings
may be installed within the CUE so long as the minimum 7.5’ offset from water main lines and
force main lines is provided.
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 has reviewed the petition for compliance
with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project.
Utilities Review: The project lies within the potable water and the south wastewater service areas
of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Water and wastewater services are readily available
via existing infrastructure along Bedzel Circle, an internal roadway. Tom Chmelik, Division
Director of Engineering and Project Management, issued a letter on July 20, 2018, committing to
serve the project and identifying specific connection points.
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2023 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 9 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
Zoning Services Review: Staff analyzed the proposed residential density and compared it to the
residential densities on the abutting properties. (See Attachment C – Development Standards for
Residential Areas) As previously mentioned in the Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning portion of
the staff report, to the north and west there are properties zoned Collier Boulevard Mixed Use
Commerce Center PUD (10.0 DU/AC) and East Gateway MPUD (16.0 DU/AC). The East
Gateway MPUD is currently under development. However, the properties to the east (Tollgate
Commercial Center PUD) and the south (I-75/Collier Boulevard Commercial Center PUD) and
(Westport Commerce Center Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development MPUD) do not have a have
a residential component and encompass uses that are more intensive than residential uses such as
commercial, institutional, mixed-use office and light industrial. It shall be noted that the Tollgate
Commercial Center PUD, I-75/Collier Boulevard Commercial Center PUD, and Westport
Commerce Center MPUD are separated by Davis and Collier Boulevards, both of which are six-
lane arterials roadways, which further separates the higher use intensities from the proposed
residential within I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD.
This petition proposes a maximum residential density of 10.4 DU/AC, which is compatible to all
the surrounding properties to the subject property to the north and west. Even though the I-
75/Alligator Alley CPUD is proposing a marginal increase in dwelling units per acre than what is
allowed at Collier Boulevard Mixed Use Commerce Center PUD and is requesting fewer dwelling
units per acre than East Gateway MPUD, it should be noted that the proposed residential
development in the surrounding area will be a mixture of single, multi -family residential, retail,
and light industrial to the north and west of the subject property. It shall be noted that construction
has begun within the East Gateway MPUD with single family dwelling units for the Fronterra
residential community. As such, the mixture of these proposed residential uses for the
I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD will not out of context with regard to the community character of the
immediate vicinity.
Staff analyzed the proposed uses and associated development standards in the I-75/Alligator Alley
CPUD and compared them with the uses allowed in all the surrounding adjacent properties. To
the north, the Collier Boulevard Mixed Use Commerce Center PUD is currently not developed
with vacant land; however, the proposed uses for this PUD are commercial, hotels, motels, and
single and multi-family dwellings. To the west, the East Gateway MPUD is currently constructing
single-family dwellings within the Fronterra residential community; however, the East Gateway
MPUD also proposes mixed-use development with commercial and/or residential development
located on the Davis Boulevard frontage, and industrial/office park development or residential
development to be located on the northerly portion of the MPUD. The residential development
allowed within this PUD are single family (currently under construction as Fronterra) and multi-
family residential. To the east, there is a Marathon gas station with a convenience store situated at
the northwest corner of Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard. Further to the east on the eastern
side of Collier Boulevard is the Tollgate Commercial Center PUD which has light industrial, auto,
self-storage, and commercial uses with hotels and restaurants that front Collier Boulevard. To the
south, at the southwestern corner of Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard, is a Mobil gas station
with convenience store and then a partially constructed building with a parking lot with vacant
undeveloped land within the I-75/Collier Boulevard Commercial Center PUD and is approved for
mixed-use office and retail. Westport Commerce Center MPUD is also situated to the south of the
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2024 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 10 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
subject property and is largely encompassed by the Market Center which has the Walmart
Supercenter, offices, restaurants, and various retail stores. The I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD
currently has a four-story La Quinta Inn & Suites along Collier Boulevard and a McDonalds,
Dunkin Donuts, and Taco Bell along Davis Boulevard. This PUD currently allows for commercial,
office uses, hotels, and restaurants; however, if amended, this PUD will also allow for multi-family
residential in the form of a maximum of 425 market rate unit apartments thereby making this a
Mixed Use Planned Unit Development. As such, the mixture of these proposed residential uses
intertwined with the existing allowable commercial uses for the I-75 /Alligator Alley MPUD will
not be out of context with regard to community character of the immediate vicinity and would be
compatible with the allowed uses in the surrounding zoning districts and PUDs.
Staff analyzed the proposed residential development standards for principal and accessory
structures proposed within the I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD and how they compare to the PUDs
surrounding the subject PUD. (See Attachment C - Development Standards for Residential Areas)
The minimum floor area and the minimum distances between structures, is less than what is
allowed within the East Gateway MPUD; however, the minimum floor area, maximum building
heights, and setbacks allowed within the I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD is more than what is allowed
within the Collier Boulevard Mixed-Use Commerce Center PUD and East Gateway MPUD.
Furthermore, staff analyzed the commercial development standards for principal and accessory
structures proposed within the I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD and how they compare to the PUDs
surrounding the subject property. (See Attachment D - Development Standards for Commercial
Areas) In short, lot widths, setbacks, distance between structures, building heights, and minimum
floor areas are generally the same among all surrounding PUDs as compared to these development
standards proposed in I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD. Moreover, the I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD will
have preserves, water management areas, and landscape buffers along the northern and west ern
boundaries that will mitigate and create a smooth transition between these commercial uses and
the neighboring properties. Regardless of the mixture of uses, development will be limited to 1,172
trips. As such, the proposed I-75/Alligator Alley MPUD commercial development standards are
compatible and would not be out of context with the surrounding areas around the I-75/Alligator
Alley MPUD property.
It shall be further noted that during the review process of this petition, Staff commented that
community and recreational uses be graphically shown on the Master Plan and that the CCPC
historically has insisted that these amenity areas be shown on Master Plans. In response to this
comment, the agent has disagreed. As such, this issue will need to be discussed during the
September 6, 2018 CCPC meeting.
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 developmen t proposed in
relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access,
drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2025 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 11 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
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 should provide adequate assurances that the proposed
change should not adversely affect living conditions 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 5.
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 buffers shown on the
Master Plan are consistent with the LDC requirements for the changes being proposed to
the uses within the PUD.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
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
transportation consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of the 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. As
stated in the July 20, 2018 letter from Tom Chmelik, Division Director of Engineering and
Project Management, Collier County will have sufficient water distribution and wastewater
collection/transmission system capacity to serve the project. 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
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2026 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 12 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
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
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.
This CPUD was approved with three deviations pursuant to Ordinance Number 07-26, and
the petitioner is now seeking three new deviations, requiring an evaluation to the extent to
which development standards and deviations proposed for this CPUD depart from
development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning
district. Each new deviation requested by the petitioner is itemized and analyzed in the
Deviation Discussion section of this staff report on page 15. Staff is supportive of all
deviations, because it is the opinion of staff that the petitioner has demonstrated that “the
elements may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of
the community” in accordance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3 and that the petitioner has
demonstrated the deviations are “justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least
equivalent to literal application of such regulations” in accordance with LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h.
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 will be consistent with the
goals, objectives, and policies of the (FLUM) and other elements of the GMP if the
proposed GMPA is adopted.
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.
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2027 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 13 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
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.
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.
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 has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time,
i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation
Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first
development order (SDP or Plat). Additionally, the project’s development must comply
with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development
approvals 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 or
impact the water quality of the anticipated discharge. Stormwater best management
practices, treatment, and storage for 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
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2028 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 14 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
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.
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.
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 p roposed
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
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2029 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 15 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
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
is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this amendment will
have no adverse impact on public utilities facility adequacy.
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.
DEVIATION DISCUSSION:
The PUD was approved with three deviations pursuant to Ordinance Number 07-26. The petitioner
is now seeking to add three additional deviations, and those deviations have been directly extracted
from the proposed PUD Ordinance, itemized in Exhibit E (see Attachment 1 – Proposed
Ordinance). The petitioner’s justification and staff analysis/recommendation for each deviation
are listed below.
Deviation #4: (Created preserves)
“Deviation 4 seeks Relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.H.1.e.ii(b), Created preserves, which requires
that “Approved created preserves may be used to recreate not more than two acres of the required
preserves if the property has equal to or greater than twenty acres and less than eighty acres of
existing native vegetation”, to allow for the creation and/or replanting of 3.29 acres of onsite native
vegetation preservation area.”
Petitioner’s Justification: Per PUD Ordinance 07-26, a 6.12-acre native vegetation preserve was
retained on the northern portion of the Project site. An additional 3.29 acres of onsite native
preservation area will be required if the property is developed to include residential uses. This
increases the size of the onsite preservation area from 6.12 to 9.41 acres. The preservation areas
will be enhanced through the removal of exotic vegetation; the preserve areas will primarily
consist of a created preserve.
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2030 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 16 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Environmental staff recommends APPROVAL for this
specific PUD for the reason that due to the change in use, the preservation requirement is
increasing, and much of the native vegetation was cleared many years ago. Therefore, it is
reasonable to allow for more recreated preserve since much of the area adjacent to the existing
PUD preserve has been impacted.
Staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section
10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a
detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.”
Deviation #5: (Preserve standards)
“Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.H.1.(d), Preserve standards, which requires
that “no individual residential or commercial lot, parcel lines or other easements including but, not
limited to, utility or access easements that are not compatible with allowable uses in preserve area,
may project into a preserve”, to allow water management facilities, berms, and Collier County
utility easements to be located within the native vegetation preservation area, as depicted on the
Master Plan.”
Petitioner’s Justification: Collier County utility easements are located along the northern
boundary of the proposed native vegetation preservation area. The County agrees to vacate the
easements along the northern property line in favor of an easement to be recorded along the western
property line. This will be done as a companion Vacation Application by Collier County Public
Utilities along with this PUDA application. Please see Utility Requirements in Section 5.3 of the
PUD. The location of and use of this easement is not incompatible with the preserve area as Collier
County Public Utilities will install its pipeline beneath the preserve using horizontal directional
drilling to avoid any aboveground impacts. Any future impacts within the County Utility Easement
due to main breakage or actions by its employees or contractors would be immediately restored to
a native condition by Collier County Public Utilities; a replanting plan will be provided during
plan review.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Environmental staff recommends APPROVAL with the
condition that any pipeline(s) required within the Collier County utility easements are installed
beneath the preserve by directional horizontal drilling methods stated in the Petitioner’s
Justification above.
Staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section
10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a
detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.”
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2031 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 17 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
Deviation #6: (Stormwater discharges in preserves)
“Deviation 6 seeks Relief from LDC 3.05.07.H.1.h.ii.f) which states that “when stormwater
discharges are allowed in preserves, the associated stormwater facilities such as berms, swales, or
outfall structures, may be located within the preserve, but the area of such facilities cannot count
towards the native vegetation preservation requirement pursuant to section 3.05.07” to allow for
berms to count toward the minimum native vegetation so as long as they are recreated in
accordance with LDC section 3.05.07.H.1.e.”
Petitioner’s Justification: The revised master plan now includes the existing perimeter berm
within the expanded proposed preserve limits. The current PUD approved Master Plan
configuration had the berm outside of the delineated preserve.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Environmental staff recommends APPROVAL for this
specific PUD for the reason that due to the change in use, the preservation requirement is
increasing, and the applicant does not want to use existing vegetated areas that were previously
platted for development. The primary intent of GMP CCME Policy 6.1.1 is to retain and protect
existing native vegetation. Staff is in agreement to allow the berm planted with native vegetation
to count towards the minimum native vegetation preservation requirement since much of the
preserve needs to be recreated.
Staff recommends APPROVAL of this deviation, finding that in compliance with LDC Section
10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that “the element may be waived without a
detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community,” and LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is “justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations.”
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS:
The applicant conducted a duly noticed and advertised NIM on May 1, 2018, at SpringHill Suites
Naples, located at 3798 White Lake Boulevard. The meeting commenced at approximately 5:36
p.m. and ended at 5:44 p.m. The applicant’s agent explained the request for the PUD Amendment.
Wayne Arnold, the agent, conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and
staff, and an overview of the proposed I-75/Alligator Alley PUDA application. The agent
explained that the I-75/Alligator Alley PUD is an existing PUD and is approved for 265,000 square
feet of retail with a 107-room motel. The amendment proposed is to add 425 multi-family units
and would thereby displace approximately 83,000 square feet of commercial space. The project
will not amend the previously approved 265,000 square feet of retail or change any of the
commercial uses. The proposed residential use would be a combination of two to four-story
buildings and would be market rate, long-term rental apartments. Following the agent’s
presentation, the meeting was opened to attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team
questions regarding the proposed PUD Amendment. Other items of concerns discussed were the
preserves, utility easements, the displacement of 83,000 square feet of commercial space. A copy
of the sign-in sheet, handouts, and transcript are included in the Backup Materials in Attachment E.
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2032 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 18 of 18
Revised: August 16, 2018
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project
does require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project meets the EAC scope
of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes
of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, environmental deviations are being requested.
COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW:
The County Attorney’s Office reviewed this staff report on August 17, 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
C) Development Standards for Residential Areas
D) Development Standards for Commercial Areas
E) Backup Materials
17.B.1
Packet Pg. 2033 Attachment: Staff Report-PUDA-PL20180000049-I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2034 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2035 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2036 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2037 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2038 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2039 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2040 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2041 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2042 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2043 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2044 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2045 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2046 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2047 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2048 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2049 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2050 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2051 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2052 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2053 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2054 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2055 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2056 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2057 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2058 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2059 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2060 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
17.B.2
Packet Pg. 2061 Attachment: Proposed Ordinance - Attachment A (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
‒ 1 ‒
Growth Management Department
Zoning Division
C O N S I S T E N C Y R E V I E W M E M O R A N D U M
To: Timothy Finn, Principal Planner, Zoning Services Section
From: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section
Date: April 12, 2018
Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review of Proposed Commercial Planned Unit
Development Amendment (PUDA) Petition
PETITION NUMBER: PUDA-PL20180000049
PETITION NAME: I-75 Alligator Alley Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD)
REQUEST: This petition requests a PUD amendment to the I-75 Alligator Alley CPUD in accordance with
provisions of Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistricts (MUAC), and specifically, to add a residential option
(to the “commercial” PUD) for multi-family dwelling units to develop up to 425 multi-family dwelling
units, which equates to a density of 10.4 dwelling units per acre, and giving mixed-use identity to entire
PUD.
LOCATION: The subject property, consisting of ±40.8 acres, is in the southwest corner of I-75 & Collier
Blvd. (CR 951), and northwest corner of Davis Blvd. (SR 84) & Collier Blvd., in Section 34, Township 49
South, Range 26 East.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Urban Commercial
District, Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict (AC#9, I-75 and Collier Boulevard and Davis Boulevard
(Interchange Activity Center). In addition to the full array of commercial uses; residential uses, up to 16
units per gross acre, may be allowed, as identified on the Future Land Use Map and on the Activity
Center #9 (CR 951 ‒ Interstate 75) Inset Map within the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Residential
density is based upon the total project acreage and an Interchange Master Plan (IMP), which has its
implementing provisions adopted into the Land Development Code.
FLUE Policy 5.6 requires development to be compatible with, and complementary to, surrounding land
uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code. Comprehensive Planning leaves these reviews for,
and determinations for making further recommendations on, compatibility complementary
matters to the Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety. However,
Comprehensive Planning staff notes that in reviewing the appropriateness of the requested
residential intensity and density on the subject site, that present the most potential for
compatibility and complementary issues. The Submittal 1 document entitled “Evaluation
Criteria” has been submitted to support the PUD amendment with calculations regarding how
the desired density of 10.4 residential units per gross acre is derived.
17.B.3
Packet Pg. 2062 Attachment: FLUE Consistency Memo - Attachment B (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
‒ 2 ‒
Comprehensive Planning staff encourages the compatibility analysis to be further inclusive in
nature, and include reviews of both the subject property and surrounding or nearby properties
regarding allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights,
setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural
features, amount and type of open space and location, traffic generation/attraction, etc.
The County recognizes Smart Growth policies and practices in its consideration of future land use
arrangements and choice-making options. FLUE Objective 7 and Policies 7.1 through 7.4 promote Smart
Growth policies for new development and redevelopment projects pertaining to access,
interconnections, open space, and walkable communities. Each Policy is followed by staff analysis [in
bold italicized text].
Objective 7:
Promote smart growth policies, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adhere to the existing
development character of the Collier County, where applicable, and as follows:
Policy 7.1:
The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting
collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection
spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [Exhibit ‘B’ Master Plan, indicates two (2)
primary direct ingress/egress points connecting the interior ±29.4 acre, “C/R” area with Bedzel
Circle, a local street, to the south, and a handful of secondary direct ingress/egress points
connecting with Bedzel Circle to the east. Bedzel Circle provides street connections at Joyrose
Place and Bedzel Drive, local one-lot deep connectors, to the south, on to Davis Boulevard (SR 84).
The ±40.8 ac. I-75 Alligator Alley CPUD is bounded by arterial or collector roads (I-75, CR 951
and SR 84) on three sides. These connections enable the project to be consistent with this Policy.]
Policy 7.2:
The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle
congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Exhibit ‘B’
Master Plan, indicates two (2) primary direct ingress/egress points connecting the interior ±29.4
acre, “C/R” area with Bedzel Circle, a local street, to the south, and a handful of secondary direct
ingress/egress points connecting with Bedzel Circle to the east. These accesses enable the project
to be consistent with this Policy.]
Policy 7.3:
All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or
interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use
type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the
Transportation Element. [The interior ±29.4 acre, “C/R” area connections to the south, via Bedzel
Circle, Joyrose Place and Bedzel Drive, provide immediate access to the hotel, fast food
restaurants, and other businesses. The I-75 Alligator Alley CPUD Exhibit ‘B’ Master Plan, proposes
extending Bedzel Circle to the west – connecting this street with the adjoining development. These
interconnection points enable the project to be consistent with this Policy.]
17.B.3
Packet Pg. 2063 Attachment: FLUE Consistency Memo - Attachment B (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
‒ 3 ‒
Policy 7.4:
The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of
densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [With respect
to providing walkability, this policy promotes projects that make it safe and convenient to walk
and encourages pedestrian activity. Exhibit ‘B’ Master Plan, illustrates a perimeter walk on, or in
the adjacent right-of -way to, the interior ±29.4 acre, “C/R” area of the subject property. There is
no deviation requested pertaining to sidewalks; therefore, the project will be subject to LDC
requirements for provision of sidewalks.
With respect to providing a blend of densities, this policy promotes projects that offer a range of
housing prices and types. Submittal 1 document entitled “Proposed Ordinance”, Section IV,
Permitted Uses and Dimensional Standards for Commercial and Residential Development,
provides for the addition of only “Multi-family-residential dwelling units”. Table 3, Residential
Development Standards, provides each of the 425 units may be a minimum of 700 sq. ft. in floor
area. Recognizing this as minimum floor area, development of project allows for a blend of
densities, range of housing prices or types.
Open space will be provided as required per the LDC, and generally includes boardwalks and
walking trails in preserve areas. No civic facilities are provided for.]
Based upon the above analysis, the proposed PUD rezone may be deemed consistent with the
Future Land Use Element of the GMP.
cc: Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager, Zoning Services Section
David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section
Michael Bosi, AICP, Director, Zoning Division
G: Comp\Consistency Reviews\2018
G:\CDES Planning Services\Consistency Reviews\2018\PUDA\PUDA-PL2018-049 I-75 Alligator Alley_FNL.docx
17.B.3
Packet Pg. 2064 Attachment: FLUE Consistency Memo - Attachment B (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
Development Standards for Residential Areas
Single Family
Detached
Single
Family
Attached &
Townhouse
Single Family
Zero Lot Line
Two Family &
Duplex
Multi Family Amenity
Area
Minimum Lot Area
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal
structure is
10,000 s.f.
East Gateway 5,000 s.f. for
Tract C/R(13) &
Tract I/B/R(14)
1,800 s.f. for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
3,190 s.f. for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
2,625 s.f. for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
n/a n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
6,000 s.f.
3,500 s.f. per
dwelling unit
3,500 s.f.
3,500 s.f. 7
1 acre
n/a
Minimum Floor Area
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal structure
is 700 s.f.
n/a
East Gateway 1,500 s.f. for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
750 s.f. for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
1,500 s.f. for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
750 s.f. for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R
750 s.f. for Tract
C/R & Tract I/B/R.
n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
1,200 s.f. 1,000 s.f. 1,200 s.f. 1,200 s.f. 600 s.f. n/a
Minimum Lot Width
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
East Gateway 50 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
18 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
31 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R
35 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R
n/a n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center8
60 feet 30 feet 35 feet 35 feet 150 feet n/a
Minimum Lot Depth
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
East Gateway 100 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
100 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
80 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R
75 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R
n/a n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Minimum Front Yard
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal and
accessory
Structures are both
15 feet
Principal and
accessory
Structures are
both 15 feet
East Gateway2 Principal and
accessory
structures are
both 20 feet
for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R.
Principal and
accessory
structures are
both 20 feet
for Tract C/R
& Tract
I/B/R.
Principal and
accessory
structures are
both 20 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal and
accessory
structures are
both 20 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal and
accessory
structures are both
20 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract I/B/R.
n/a
17.B.4
Packet Pg. 2065 Attachment: Development Standards for Residential Areas - Attachment C (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
25 feet (9) (10) 20 feet 15 feet 15 feet 25 feet n/a
Minimum Side Yard
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal and
Accessory
Structures are both
10 feet
Principal and
Accessory
Structures are
both 10 feet
East Gateway Principal and
accessory
structures are
both 5 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal
structures is
0 or 5 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is
5 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal
structures is 0 or
10 feet3 for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R. Accessory
is 5 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R.
Principal
structures is 0 or
5 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R. Accessory
is 0 feet5 for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal structures
is 10 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 0 feet5
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center(11)
7.5 feet(10) 0 or 12 feet 0 or 12(12) 0 or 6 feet 0 or .6BH Building
Height
n/a
Minimum Rear Yard
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal is 10 feet
from perimeter
buffer or 0 feet
from LMT1
Accessory
structures is 0 feet
from perimeter
buffer or 0 feet
from LMT1
Principal is
10 feet from
perimeter
buffer or 0
feet from
LMT1
Accessory
structures is 0
feet from
perimeter
buffer or 0
feet from
LMT1
East Gateway4 Principal
structures is 10
feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R.
Accessory is 3
feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R.
Principal
structures is
15 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is
10 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal
structures is 10
feet for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 3
feet for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R.
Principal
structures is 10
feet for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 5
feet for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R.
Principal structures
is 15 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 10 feet
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
Principal is 20
feet(10)
Accessory is
10 feet
Principal is
20 feet
Accessory is
10 feet
Principal is 10
feet
Accessory is 5
feet
Principal is 15
feet
Accessory is 5
feet
Principal is 25 feet
Accessory is 10
feet
n/a
Minimum from
Western PUD
Boundary
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal and
Accessory
Structures are both
100 feet
Principal and
Accessory
Structures are
both 100 feet
East Gateway Principal
structures is 20
Principal
structures is 25
Principal
structures is 20
Principal
structures is 25
Principal structures
is 25 feet for Tract
n/a
17.B.4
Packet Pg. 2066 Attachment: Development Standards for Residential Areas - Attachment C (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
feet for Tract
C/R & 15 feet
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is
15 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
feet for Tract
C/R & 15 feet
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is
15 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
feet for Tract C/R
& 15 feet Tract
I/B/R. Accessory
is 15 feet for
Tract C/R & Tract
I/B/R.
feet for Tract C/R
& 15 feet Tract
I/B/R. Accessory
is 15 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
C/R & 20 feet Tract
I/B/R. Accessory is
15 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract I/B/R.
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Minimum Preserve
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal is 25 feet
and Accessory
Structures is 10
feet
Principal is
25 feet and
Accessory
Structures is
10 feet
East Gateway 25 feet for
Tract I/B/R
25 feet for
Tract I/B/R
25 feet for Tract
I/B/R
25 for feet Tract
I/B/R
25 for feet Tract
I/B/R
n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Minimum Distance
Between Structures
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a ½ the sum of
building heights
10 feet
East Gateway5 Principal
structures is 10
feet for Tract
C/R & 15 feet
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is
0/10 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal
structures is
10 feet for
Tract C/R &
15 feet Tract
I/B/R.
Accessory is
0/10 feet for
Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Principal
structures is 10
feet for Tract C/R
& 15 feet Tract
I/B/R. Accessory
is 0/10 feet for
Tract C/R & Tract
I/B/R.
Principal
structures is 1
Story is 12 feet
and 2 story is 20
feet for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 0/10
feet for Tract
C/R & Tract
I/B/R.
Principal structures
is ½ the zoned
building height for
Tract C/R & Tract
I/B/R. Accessory is
0/10 feet for Tract
C/R & Tract I/B/R.
n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
n/a 10 feet n/a n/a .5 BH n/a
Maximum Height
I-75/Alligator Alley n/a n/a n/a n/a Principal: 60 feet
(zoned)
Actual:
65 feet (actual)
Accessory
35 feet (zoned)
Actual:
40 feet (actual)
Principal: 35
feet (zoned)
Actual:
45 feet
(actual)
Accessory
35 feet
(zoned)
Actual:
40 feet
(actual)
17.B.4
Packet Pg. 2067 Attachment: Development Standards for Residential Areas - Attachment C (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
East Gateway6 Principal
structures is
30 feet (zoned)
and
35 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 25
feet (zoned) and
30 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
Principal
structures is
40 feet (zoned)
and
45 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is
25 feet (zoned)
and
30 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R
& Tract I/B/R
Principal
structures is 30
feet (zoned)
and
35 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 25
feet (zoned) and
30 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
Principal
structures is 40
feet (zoned)
and
45 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R.
Accessory is 25
feet (zoned) and
30 feet (actual)
for Tract C/R &
Tract I/B/R
Principal structures
is 45 feet (zoned)
and
50 feet (actual) for
Tract C/R & Tract
I/B/R.
Accessory is 35
feet (zoned) and
30 feet (actual) for
Tract C/R & Tract
I/B/R
n/a
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use Commerce
Center
35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet n/a
1 LMT – Lake Maintenance Tract
2 Front entry garages must be a minimum of 23’ from a sidewalk. The minimum 20’ setback for a
residence may be reduced to 14’ for a side-loaded or rear entry garage. Porches, entry features and
roofed courtyards may be reduced to 14’.
3 Minimum separation between adjacent dwelling units shall be 10’.
4 Landscape Buffer Easements and/or Lake Maintenance Easements shall be located within open
space tracts or lake tracts and not be within a platted residential lot. Where a home site is adjacent
to a Landscape Buffer Easement or Lake Maintenance Easement within open space tracts or lake
tracts, the principal and accessory structure setback on the platted residential lot may be reduced to
zero (0) feet where it abuts the easement/tract.
5 Building distance may be reduced at garages to a minimum of 0’ where attached garages are
provided and a 10’ minimum separation is maintained, if detached.
6 Privacy walls for zero lot line units may be constructed to a maximum height of 8’.
7 Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of thirty-five hundred (3,500) square feet for
a total minimum lot area of seven thousand (7,000) square feet.
8 Minimum lot width may be reduced by twenty (20) present for cul-de-sac lots or lots located on
curvilinear streets provided the minimum lot area is still maintained.
9 Single-family dwellings which provide for two (2) parking spaces within an enclosed garage and
provide for guest parking other than private driveways may reduce front yard requirements to five (5)
feet for the garage and fifteen (15) feet for the remaining structures. Side entry garage setbacks may
be reduced to twelve (12) feet.
10 See also Section 8.2.12 Transportation Requirements of the Collier Boulevard Mixed Use
Commerce Center PUD pertaining to I-75 setback requirements.
11 Accessory uses such as pool enclosures may be attached to principal uses and may be set back
five (5) feet from side or rear property lines.
12 Where the zero (0) foot yard option is utilized, the opposite side of the structure shall have a twelve
(12) foot sideyard.
13 C/R – Commercial/Residential Development
14 I/B/R – Industrial/Business Park/ or Residential Development
17.B.4
Packet Pg. 2068 Attachment: Development Standards for Residential Areas - Attachment C (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
Development Standards for Commercial Areas
Front yard setback
I-75/Alligator Alley Principal structures is 25 feet. Accessory is 20 feet
East Gateway 25 feet or ½ BH1 as measured from each exterior wall (INTERNAL) for Tract C/R2.
Davis Blvd – 50 setback and gas station canopies is 30 feet. 25-foot landscape buffer along entire frontage of
Davis Blvd for Tract C/R.
30 feet for Tract I/B/R3. (INTERNAL)
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
I-75/Collier
Boulevard
Commercial Center
Westport Commerce
Center
Tollgate
25 feet
25 feet
25 feet for commercial and light industrial
25 feet for commercial and light industrial
Side yard setback
I-75/Alligator Alley Principal structures is 15 feet or one-half the building height (BH), whichever is greater. Accessory is 15 feet.
East Gateway ½ of the BH as measured from each exterior wall, with a minimum of 15 feet (INTERNAL) for Tract C/R.
20 percent of the lot width, not to exceed 50 feet (INTERNAL)
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
15 feet or ½ of the BH
I-75/Collier
Boulevard
Commercial Center
PUD
15 feet
Westport Commerce
Center
15 feet for commercial
20 feet for light industrial
Tollgate None, or a minimum of 5 feet with unobstructed passage from front to rear yard for commercial and industrial.
15 feet for hotels, motels, and transient lodging facilities plus 1 foot for each 2 feet of building height over
50 feet.
Minimum distance
between structures
I-75/Alligator Alley Principal structures is same as side yard requirements. Accessory is ½ BH.
East Gateway Same as side yards for Tracts C/R and I/B/R.
NOTE: 20-foot-wide type C landscape buffer with wall be provided between residential and commercial uses
and commercial buildings shall be separated from residential by a minimum of 50 feet in Tract C/R
Westport Commerce
Center
None, or 5 feet with unobstructed passage from front to rear yard
17.B.5
Packet Pg. 2069 Attachment: Development Standards for Commercial Areas - Attachment D (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
Tollgate ½ the sum of the heights
Rear yard setback
I-75/Alligator Alley Principal structures is one-half the BH as measured from an exterior wall. Accessory is 15 feet.
East Gateway ½ of the BH as measured from each exterior wall. (INTERNAL) for Tract C/R.
15 feet for Tract I/B/R. (INTERNAL)
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
25 feet or ½ of the BH
I-75/Collier Boulevard
Commercial Center
PUD
15 feet
Westport Commerce
Center
15 feet for commercial
20 feet for light industrial
Tollgate 25 feet for commercial and light industrial
Motel density and
intensity
I-75/Alligator Alley 26 units per acre based on prior SDP approval. Unimproved lots the maximum floor area ratio is 0.60.
Minimum floor area, all
commercial uses
I-75/Alligator Alley 1,000 s.f.
East Gateway 1,000 s.f. for Tract C/R
Maximum gross leasable floor area is 200,000 s.f. for Tract C/R
Maximum gross leasable floor area is 250,000 s.f. for Tract I/B/R.
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
1,000 s.f. for each building on the ground floor
I-75/Collier
Boulevard
Commercial Center
700 s.f. for gross floor area on ground floor
Westport Commerce
Center
700 s.f. for each building on the ground floor
Tollgate 1,000 s.f. per building on ground floor for commercial and light industrial
Maximum height
I-75/Alligator Alley Principal structures is not to exceed 50 feet. Accessory is 2 stories or 25 feet.
East Gateway Saddleback Village PUD adjacent:
35 feet zoned and 45 feet actual for Tract C/R
Greater than 50 feet from Saddleback Village PUD:
50 feet zoned and 60 feet actual for Tract C/R
35 feet adjacent to Saddlebrook Village PUD and 50 feet in all other areas for Tract I/B/R.
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
50 feet
I-75/Collier Boulevard
Commercial Center
PUD
50 feet
17.B.5
Packet Pg. 2070 Attachment: Development Standards for Commercial Areas - Attachment D (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
Westport Commerce
Center
35 feet; except for non-functional architectural elements (bell towers) maximum height of 50 feet for
commercial
50 feet for light industrial
Tollgate 100 feet
Minimum lot size
I-75/Alligator Alley 10,000 s.f.
East Gateway 10,000 s.f. for Tract C/R.
20,000 s.f. for Tract I/B/R.
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
10,000 s.f.
I-75/Collier
Boulevard
Commercial Center
PUD
10,000 s.f.
Westport Commerce
Center
10,000 s.f. for commercial
1 acre for light industrial
Tollgate 10,000 s.f. for commercial and light industrial
Setback from Preserve
areas
I-75/Alligator Alley 25 feet for principal structures and 10 feet for accessory structures
Minimum Lot width
I-75/Alligator Alley 100 feet
East Gateway 100 feet for Tracts C/R and I/B/R.
Collier Boulevard
Mixed-Use
Commerce Center
100 feet
I-75 /Collier
Boulevard
Commercial Center
PUD
100 feet
Westport Commerce
Center
100 feet for commercial
125 feet for light industrial
Tollgate 10,000 s.f. for commercial and light industrial
Industrial uses
I-75/Alligator Alley Should industrial develop and is visible from 1 -75, an 8-foot-high masonry wall shall be provided along I-
75.
1 BH – Building Height
2 C/R - Commercial/Residential Development
3 I/B/R - Industrial/Business Park/ or Residential Development
17.B.5
Packet Pg. 2071 Attachment: Development Standards for Commercial Areas - Attachment D (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))
Prepared August 13, 2018
I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA)
(PL20180000049)
Application and Supporting
Documents
September 6, 2018 CCPC Hearing
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375
3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com
Mr. Timothy Finn, AICP
RE:Collier County Application for Public Hearing, I -75/Alligator Alley CPUD Amendment PL20180000049,
Submittal 1
March 20, 2018
Page 2 of 2
Please see "Property Owner List" document
Please see "Applicant Agent Information" document
CPUD
2007-26
CPUD
Commercial
Residential and Commercial
I-75/Alligator Alley
34 49 26
Alligator Alley Commerce Center
Please see "Legal Description" document
49 19-20, 60-64 Please see "Property Owner List" document
40.79
Northwest quadrant of Collier Boulevard
and Davis Boulevard
Interstate 75 Interstate 75 ROW
WESTPORT COMMERCE CENTER MPUD, I-75/COLLIER BLVD COMMERCE CENTER PUD, C-4 and I Retail, commercial, fast food and gas stations
Interstate 75, Collier Blvd and Tollgate DRI/PUD Hotels, restaurants, gas station, commercial and industrial
East Gateway PUD Undeveloped commercial and residential
Not applicable
No
Thompson Thrift Development, Inc.
901 Wabash Ave., Suite 300 Terre Haute IN 47807
34 49 26
Alligator Alley Commerce Center
Please see "Legal Description" document
Please see "Property Owner List" document
Addition of 425 residential dwelling units
200,813 GPD 148,750 GPD
143,438 GPD 106,250 GPD
2019
Not applicable
Please see "Utility Dedication Statement" document
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
D. Wayne Arnold, AICP as Agent
06/11/2018
and
David H. Baldauf, Title Manager
Shaun A. Benderson, Title Manager
Ronald Benderson 1995 Trust 100% owner
David H. Baldauf, Title Manager
Shaun A. Benderson, Title Manager
93 CH, LLC 100% owner
BG the Village,LLC, General Partner
David H. Baldauf, Manager of BG the Village, LLC
Shaun Benderson, Manager of BG the Village LLC
93 CH, LLC 100% owner
Randall Benderson, President, Director
David H. Baldauf, Vice President, Director
Paul M. Thrift, President
John G. Thompson, Secretary-Treasurer
The Paul M. Thrift Revocable Trust dated
May 16, 2003, Paul M. Thrift, Trustee
50%
The John G. Thompson Revocable Trust dated December 2,
2003, John G. Thompson, Trustee
50%
7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
UNIVERSITY PARK, FL 34201
Current Principal Place of Business:
Current Mailing Address:
7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
UNIVERSITY PARK, FL 34201 US
Entity Name:WR-I ASSOCIATES, LTD.
DOCUMENT# A97000002183
FEI Number: NOT APPLICABLE Certificate of Status Desired:
Name and Address of Current Registered Agent:
GAYTON, ALICIA H
7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
UNIVERSITY PARK, FL 34201 US
The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida.
SIGNATURE:
Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date
General Partner Detail :
I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under
oath; that I am a general partner of the limited partnership or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 620, Florida Statutes; and that my name
appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered.
SIGNATURE:
Electronic Signature of Signing General Partner Detail Date
FILED
Apr 17, 2018
Secretary of State
CC5000523383
DAVID H. BALDAUF MANAGER OF GP 04/17/2018
2018 FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ANNUAL REPORT
No
Document #L04000023381
Name BG THE VILLAGE, LLC
Address 7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
City-State-Zip:UNIVERSITY PARK FL 34201
7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
UNIVERSITY PARK, FL 34201
Current Principal Place of Business:
Current Mailing Address:
7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
UNIVERSITY PARK, FL 34201 US
Entity Name:BG THE VILLAGE, LLC
DOCUMENT# L04000023381
FEI Number: 20-0971712 Certificate of Status Desired:
Name and Address of Current Registered Agent:
GAYTON, ALICIA H
7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
UNIVERSITY PARK, FL 34201 US
The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida.
SIGNATURE:
Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date
Authorized Person(s) Detail :
I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under
oath; that I am a managing member or manager of the limited liability company or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 605, Florida Statutes; and
that my name appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered.
SIGNATURE:
Electronic Signature of Signing Authorized Person(s) Detail Date
ALICIA H GAYTON
FILED
Apr 18, 2018
Secretary of State
CC5973511592
DAVID H. BALDAUF MANAGER 04/18/2018
2018 FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL REPORT
No
04/18/2018
Title MANAGER
Name BALDAUF, DAVID H
Address 7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
City-State-Zip:UNIVERSITY PARK FL 34201
Title MANAGER
Name SCALIONE, STEPHEN C
Address 7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
City-State-Zip:UNIVERSITY PARK FL 34201
Title MANAGER
Name BENDERSON, SHAUN A
Address 7978 COOPER CREEK BLVD
City-State-Zip:UNIVERSITY PARK FL 34201
please allow 3 days for processing.
bold type FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE
PROVIDED.
PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
FOLIO (Property ID)NUMBER(s)(attach to,or associate with, legal description if more than one)
(as applicable, if already assigned)
(if applicable)
(for existing projects/sites only)
LOCATION MAP
(if applicable)
(if applicable)
Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 1 of 2
Alligator Alley Commerce
PUD Amendment
S34 T49 R26
See attached PUD Parcel List
See attached PUD Parcel List
I-75/Alligator Alley
A
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
F Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Approved by: Date:
Updated by: Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 2 of 2
21968000121
21968001120
3/16/2018
See attached
I-75/Alligator Alley, Alligator Alley Commerce Center
Sharon Umpenhour
239-947-1144 sumpenhour@gradyminor.com
Project No. 00BDC525
I-75 /ALLIGATOR ALLEY PUD
COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT
Revised June 2018
Prepared For:
Watermark Residential
901 Wabash Avenue, Suite 300
Terre Haute, Indiana 47807
(317) 454-0829
Prepared By:
Passarella & Associates, Inc.
13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200
Fort Myers, Florida 33912
(239) 274-0067
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1
Environmental Data Author ...........................................................................................................1
Vegetation Descriptions .................................................................................................................2
Listed Species Survey ....................................................................................................................4
Native Vegetation Preservation .....................................................................................................4
References ......................................................................................................................................7
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1.Native and Non-Native Habitat Types and Acreages ............................................4
Table 2.Native Vegetation Preserve Supplemental Planting List .......................................5
iii
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Page
Exhibit 1.Project Location Map.........................................................................................E1-1
Exhibit 2.Aerial with Boundary.........................................................................................E2-1
Exhibit 3.Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands Map ........................................................E3-1
Exhibit 4.Listed Species Survey ........................................................................................E4-1
Exhibit 5.Aerial with Native Vegetation Preserve Per PUD 07-26 Ordinance .................E5-1
Exhibit 6.Native Vegetation Map ......................................................................................E6-1
Exhibit 7.Aerial with Native Vegetation Preserve Area
Per Proposed PUD Amendment ........................................................................E7-1
Exhibit 8.Aerial with On-Site and Off-Site Preserves .......................................................E8-1
1
INTRODUCTION
The following Environmental Data (ED) Report is provided in support of the Planned Unit
Development (PUD)amendment for the I-75/Alligator Alley PUD (Project).The ED was
prepared in accordance with the Collier County ED submittal requirements outlined in Chapter
3.08.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). A PUD (Ordinance 07-26)was
previously approved for the Project on February 13, 2007.This PUD amendment includes the
addition of a residential component to the PUD and an increase in the native vegetation
preservation area.
The 40.79±acre Project site is located in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County (Exhibit 1).More specifically, the property is located southeast of the interchange of
Interstate 75 (I-75)and County Road (CR) 951. The Project is bordered by I-75 to the north, by
CR 951 to the east, Davis Boulevard to the south,and the East Gateway PUD to the west
(Exhibit 2).
The Project includes a modification to an existing PUD known as the I-75/Alligator Alley PUD
(Ordinance No. 07-26). Existing commercial development on-site includes a motel and fast food
restaurants along the Davis Boulevard frontage road. The remainder of the Project consists of a
combination of access roads, fill pads, disturbed areas, ditches,and forested and herbaceous
upland and wetland areas.
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)Permit Modification No. 11-00556-S and
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)Permit No. SAJ-1988-1061 were issued for the Project on
January 13, 2009 and February 19, 2009,respectively. The majority of the wetland impacts
authorized by these permits were completed and compensatory mitigation was provided through
the purchase of 13.45 wetland credits from Big Cypress Mitigation Bank;however,the permits
expired before the completion of authorized activities. The applicant will seek re-authorization of
the SFWMD and the COE permits to complete the previously permitted wetland impacts.
The following ED includes details regarding the author of this report, vegetation descriptions for
the various habitats on-site, results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella &
Associates, Inc. (PAI)in March 2018, and an overview of the minimum native vegetation
preservation requirement.
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA AUTHOR
This ED report was prepared by Bethany Brosious. She satisfies the environmental credential
and experience requirements for preparing the ED, per Section 3.08.00 of the Collier County
LDC.
Ms. Brosious is an Ecologist with PAI with 11 years of consulting experience in the
environmental industry. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Animal Sciences from the
University of Florida and a Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from Florida
Gulf Coast University.
2
VEGETATION DESCRIPTIONS
The existing land uses include a combination of roadways, commercial parcels,disturbed land,
and forested uplands and wetlands with varying degrees of exotic infestation. The vegetation
associations for the property were mapped using November 2016 rectified color aerials
(Scale:1"= 250') and groundtruthing was conducted in January 2018.The mapping was
classified based on the nomenclature of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification
System (FLUCFCS) Levels III and IV (Florida Department of Transportation 1999). Level IV
FLUCFCS was utilized to denote disturbance and “E” codes were used to identify levels of
exotic species invasion (e.g., melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), earleaf acacia (Acacia
auriculiformis), and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius)). AutoCAD Map 3D 2017
software was used to determine the acreage of each mapped polygon, produce summaries, and
generate the final FLUCFCS map (Exhibit 3).
A total of nine vegetative associations and land uses (i.e., FLUCFCS codes) were identified on
the property. The dominant habitat type is Disturbed Land,(FLUCFCS Code 740)accounting for
43.5 percent of the property (17.74± acres).Exotic vegetation documented on-site includes but is
not limited to torpedograss (Panicum repens), Brazilian pepper, melaleuca, cogongrass
(Imperata cylindrica),and earleaf acacia.The degree of exotic infestation ranges from 25 to 100
percent cover.
The Project site contains 12.72±acres of SFWMD and COE jurisdictional wetlands and 0.21±
acre of SFMWD other surface water (OSW)and COE “Waters of the United States” (Waters)
(Exhibit 3). The jurisdictional wetlands identified by FLUCFCS codes include 1.08±acres of
Pine, Hydric, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E2)and 11.64±acres of Wet
Prairies, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6439 E2). The on-site wetlands contain
exotic vegetation including torpedograss, Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, and melaleuca. The
OSW and Waters are comprised of 0.21±acre of Ditch (FLUCFCS Code 514).
A description for each FLUCFCS classification is outlined below.
Commercial and Services (FLUCFCS Code 140)
This land use is located on the southern portion of the Project site and consists of existing
commercial development and impervious surfaces.
Pine Flatwood, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics)(FLUCFCS Code 4119 E2)
This upland habitat is found in the northern portion of the Project site. The canopy contains slash
pine (Pinus elliottii) and earleaf acacia. The sub-canopy consists of earleaf acacia, slash pine,
cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto), and scattered wax myrtle (Morella cerifera) and Brazilian
pepper. The ground cover is dominated by saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) with gulfdune
paspalum (Paspalum monostachyum), spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), greenbier (Smilax
sp.), and muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia).
3
Brazilian Pepper (FLUCFCS Code 422)
This upland habitat is located in the southeastern portion of the Project site.The canopy and
sub-canopy strata are dominated by Brazilian pepper with scattered cabbage palm in the
sub-canopy. The ground cover is generally open with scattered spermacoce.
Ditch (FLUCFCS Code 514)
Ditches are located in the central and eastern portions of the Project site and are bordered by
exotics such as Brazilian pepper and melaleuca. The ground cover is open.
Pine, Hydric, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E2)
This wetland habitat is located in the eastern portion of the Project.The canopy is mostly open
with scattered slash pine, melaleuca, and earleaf acacia around the edges of the habitat. The sub-
canopy consists of scattered slash pine, cabbage palm, earleaf acacia, and melaleuca. The
ground cover is dominated by torpedograss with sand cordgrass (Spartina bakeri), pineland
heliotrope (Heliotropium polyphyllum), Asiatic pennywort (Centella asiatica), water pennywort
(Hydrocotyle umbellata), wiregrass (Aristida stricta), rosy camphorweed (Pluchea baccharis),
and climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens).
Wet Prairies, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6439E2)
This wetland habitat is located on the northern portion of the Project site. The canopy is open,
and the sub-canopy is mostly open with widely scattered melaleuca, a mix of dead and live bald
cypress (Taxodium distichum), and slash pine plantings. The ground cover includes a mix of
scattered rush fuirena (Fuirena scirpoidea), torpedograss, sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense),
Asiatic pennywort, sand cordgrass and pineland heliotrope.
Disturbed Land (FLUCFCS Code 740)
This habitat consists of previously cleared and filled land. The canopy is open and the
sub-canopy consists of widely scattered slash pine, earleaf acacia, and lead tree (Leucaena
leucocephala). The ground cover includes smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus), bahiagrass
(Paspalum notatum) torpedograss, cogongrass, finger grass (Eustachys sp.), Florida tickseed
(Coreopsis floridana), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), and spermacoce.
Berm (FLUCFCS Code 747)
This upland land use is located around the northern and central portions of the Project site. The
canopy contains slash pine, earleaf acacia, and live oak (Quercus virginiana).The sub-canopy is
comprised of earleaf acacia, melaleuca, slash pine, live oak, cabbage palm and Brazilian pepper.
The ground cover includes saw palmetto,live oak, earleaf acacia, spermacoce,and muscadine
grape.
Roadway (FLUCFCS Code 814)
This land use consists of internal on-site roadways.
4
LISTED SPECIES SURVEY
A listed plant and wildlife species survey was conducted by PAI on March 1, 2018. During the
survey, no listed species were documented utilizing the Project.The survey methodology and
results are provided as Exhibit 4.
NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVATION
Per PUD Ordinance 07-26, for the existing commercial development, 15 percent of the on-site
native vegetation was preserved which resulted in the retention of a 6.17 acre preservation area
on the northern portion of the Project in accordance with Section 3.05.07.B.1 of the Collier
County LDC (Exhibit 5).
The proposed zoning amendment application includes the addition of a residential land use to the
PUD. Per LDC Section 3.05.07.B.1, for a Residential or Mixed-Use Development, the minimum
preserve requirement is 25 percent of the native vegetation. In the current condition, the Project
contains 3.17± acres of on-site right of way and access/utility easements which are not classified
as native vegetation for this zoning amendment application. After the right of way and easement
acreage are deducted from the Project acreage, the remaining 37.62±acres are classified as
native vegetation (Table 1, Exhibit 6).
Table 1 provides a summary of the native vegetation communities on-site and the native
vegetation preservation calculation.
Table 1.Native and Non-Native Habitat Types and Acreages
FLUCFCS
Code Description
Native
Vegetation
Acreage
Non-Native
Vegetation
Acreage
140 Commercial and Services 4.20*-
4119 E2 Pine Flatwood, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics)0.49 -
422 Brazilian Pepper 0.12*-
514 Ditch 0.20*-
6259 E2 Pine,Hydric, Disturbed, (25-49% Exotics)1.04 -
6439 E2 Wet Prairies, Disturbed (25-49% Exotics)11.43 -
740 Disturbed Land 16.86*-
747 Berm 2.23*-
5
Table 1.(Continued)
FLUCFCS
Code Description
Native
Vegetation
Acreage
Non-Native
Vegetation
Acreage
814 Roadway 1.05*-
-Existing ROW and Easements -3.17
Total 37.62 3.17
Minimum Retained Native Vegetation Requirement for
Commercial or Industrial Development
(Native Vegetation Acreage,40.79±Acres x 15 Percent)
6.12
Minimum Retained Native Vegetation Requirement for
Residential or Mixed-Use Development
(Native Vegetation Acreage,37.62±Acres x 25 Percent)
9.41
*Includes area previously classified as native vegetation under PUD Ordinance 07-26
For a Residential or Mixed-Use Development, a 9.41±acre preserve will be required (i.e.,
37.62±acres of native vegetation x 25 percent = 9.41±acres of required native vegetation
preserve) and retained on the northern portion of the Project (Exhibit 7). The preserve size
(6.17±acres vs. 9.41±acres) will be determined upon selection of a development plan and at the
time of site development plan approval.
To satisfy the native vegetation preservation requirement, the applicant will preserve and
enhance habitat along the northern portion of the Project.The preserve connects off-site to the
East Gateway PUD conservation area located to the west of the Project (Exhibit 8).
Enhancement activities within the on-site preserve area will include the removal of exotic
vegetation and planting of native vegetation. The preserve area will be replanted consistent with
the requirements of LDC Section 3.05.07.H.1.e.vi and in accordance with Table 2.
Table 2.Native Vegetation Preservation Area Supplemental Planting List
Common Name Scientific Name Minimum
Height
Minimum
Container Size
Planting
Density
(On Center)
Tree Plantings
Slash Pine Pinus elliottii 6-10 ft.3 gal.20-30 ft.
Cypress Taxodium sp.6-10 ft.3 gal.20-30 ft.
Red Maple Acer rubrum 6-10 ft.3 gal.20-30 ft.
Pop Ash Fraxinus caroliniana 6-10 ft.3 gal.20-30 ft.
Shrub Plantings
Wax Myrtle Morella cerifera 3 ft.7 gal.10 ft.
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis 3 ft.7 gal.10 ft.
Pond Apple Annona glabra 3 ft.7 gal.10 ft.
6
Table 2.(Continued)
Common Name Scientific Name Minimum
Height
Minimum
Container Size
Planting
Density
(On Center)
Ground Cover Plantings
Cordgrass Spartina bakeri 12 in.1 gal.3 ft.
Gulfdune Paspalum Paspalum monostachyum 12 in.1 gal.3 ft.
Sawgrass Cladium jamaicense 12 in.1 gal.3 ft.
Spikerush Eleocharis interstincta 12 in. 1 gal.3 ft.
Maidencane Panicum hemitomon 12 in.1 gal.3 ft.
Pickerelweed Pontederia cordoata 12 in.1 gal.3 ft.
Arrowhead Sagittaria lancifolia 12 in.1 gal.3 ft.
No listed species were documented within the Project limits. The Project contained no xeric
scrub, dune, strand, hardwood hammocks,or wetlands with a Wetland Rapid Assessment
Procedure (WRAP) score of at least 0.65, or upland habitat that serves as a buffer to high quality
wetlands. As a result, the location of the native vegetation preserves was selected to provide
connectivity to the off-site conservation/preserve lands to the west,per Section 3.05.07.A.5 of
the Collier County LDC,and to encompass the majority of the remaining on-site wetland areas.
As previously noted, these areas will also be enhanced through exotic vegetation removal and the
planting of native vegetation This activity will improve the quality of habitat on-site and off-site
through the elimination of exotic and nuisance species seed sources.
7
REFERENCES
Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification
System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Second Edition.
EXHIBIT 1
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
EXHIBIT 2
AERIAL WITH BOUNDARY
EXHIBIT 3
AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP
EXHIBIT 4
LISTED SPECIES SURVEY REPORT
Passarella & Associates, Inc.1 of 4
#00BDC525 03/19/18
I-75/ALLIGATOR ALLEY PUD
LISTED SPECIES SURVEY
March 2018
INTRODUCTION
This report documents the results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella &
Associates, Inc. (PAI) on March 1, 2018 for the I-75/Alligator Alley Planned Unit Development
(PUD)(Project). The purpose of the survey was to review the Project area for plant and wildlife
species listed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC), the Florida
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) as endangered, threatened, species of special concern, or commercially exploited.The
review included a literature search of listed species within the Project’s geographical area and an
on-site field survey conducted on March 1, 2018.The survey was also conducted to be consistent
with Sections 3.04.03 and 3.08.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC).
The Project site is 40.79± acres and is located in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County (Figure 1).More specifically, the Project site is located at the southwest
interchange of Interstate 75 (I-75)and County Road (CR)951 and is composed of a combination
of access roads, developed commercial areas, fill pads, surface water management systems, and a
wetland mitigation area on the northern portion of the Project. The Project’s surrounding land uses
include undeveloped, I-75 interchange to the north, CR 951 to the east, Davis Boulevard to the
south,and the East Gateway PUD to the west.
METHODOLOGY AND DISCUSSION
The listed plant and wildlife species survey included a literature review for local, state, and federal
listed species documented on the Project site or within the vicinity of the Project and a field survey
of the Project site conducted on March 1, 2018.
Literature Review
The literature review involved an examination of available information on listed species in the
Project’s geographical region. The literature sources reviewed include the FWCC Florida’s
Endangered and Threatened Species (2017); Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their
Allies (Runde et al. 1991); USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the
Southeast Region (1987); the Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan (Logan et al. 1993); the
Landscape Conservation Strategy Map (Kautz et al. 2006); and the USFWS and/or the FWCC
databases for telemetry locations of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), bald eagle, red-
cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW), Florida black bear (Ursus americanus
floridanus), Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), and wading bird rookeries, such as the
wood stork (Mycteria americana), in Collier County.
Passarella & Associates, Inc.2 of 4
#00BDC525 03/19/18
The results of the literature search found no documented occurrences of listed wildlife species on
the Project site (Figure 2). However, listed species were documented within the vicinity of the
Project.
A RCW location is approximately one-third mile west of the Project site. The USFWS considers
suitable habitat for the RCW to include any forested community with pines in the canopy that
encompasses more than 10.0± acres (i.e., includes both on-and off-site). Although the Project area
contains a limited number of canopy pine trees, no cavities were noted in pines during the field
survey and no sightings were documented in the area. The RCW is a state and federally listed
endangered species.
The Project is located within the 30± kilometer (18.6± mile) core foraging area for one documented
wood stork rookery, No. 619018 (Figure 3). The wood stork is a state and federally listed
threatened species. The wetlands on the Project are disturbed with melaleuca (Melaleuca
quinquenervia)and offer poor foraging potential for the wood stork.
A documented bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nest is Nest CO-056 located approximately
one mile southeast of the Project.The nest distance is beyond the USFWS and the FWCC
recommended 660-foot buffer protection zone for active and alternate bald eagle nests. The bald
eagle is not a listed species but is protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
The FWCC database contains no documented Florida black bear radio-telemetry locations on-site
or within a one-mile radius of the Project area (Figure 2). The Florida black bear was delisted by
the FWCC in August 2012.
A panther telemetry point is located approximately 1,000 feet west of the Project site and was
recorded in January 2016.The Project is not located within the USFWS Florida Panther Zones
(Kautz et al.2006) and/or Focus Area (Figure 4). The Florida panther is a state and federally listed
endangered species.
The Project area is located within the USFWS’ designated consultation area for the Florida
bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus)(FBB)(Figure 5). The Project contains a limited number of
canopy pine trees;however,no cavities were noted in pines during the field survey. No FBBs or
their sign (i.e.,guano) were document during the survey. The FBB is a state and federally listed
engendered species.
Field Survey
A field survey for listed species was conducted on the Project site on March 1, 2018. Survey
methodology consisted of qualified ecologists walking parallel belt transects across the property
(Figure 6). The transects were generally walked approximately 75 feet apart, depending on habitat
type and visibility. The weather during the March 1, 2018 survey was clear skies with some
scattered clouds in the afternoon, and a light wind. The temperatures ranged from the mid 60s to
upper 70s. The survey began around 9:00 a.m. and ended at approximately 2:00 p.m.No listed
species were documented on the Project site during the survey.
Passarella & Associates, Inc.3 of 4
#00BDC525 03/19/18
RESULTS
A listed species survey was conducted for the Project site. The survey included a review of
available literature regarding documented occurrences of listed species and a field survey of the
Project site. The literature review found no documented occurrences for listed species within the
Project limits.The field survey was conducted on March 1, 2018 and documented no listed species
on the Project site.
Passarella & Associates, Inc.4 of 4
#00BDC525 03/19/18
REFERENCES
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2017. Florida’s Endangered Species,
Threatened Species, and Species of Special Concern. Official Lists, Bureau of Non-Game
Wildlife, Division of Wildlife. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
Tallahassee, Florida.
Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. Mazzotti,
R. McBride, L. Richardson, K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape-scale
conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation, Volume 130, Issue 1, Pages
118-133
Logan, Todd, Andrew C. Eller, Jr., Ross Morrell, Donna Ruffner, and Jim Sewell. 1993. Florida
Panther Habitat Preservation Plan South Florida Population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; Gainesville, Florida.
Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. Robson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of
Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986-1989. Nongame Wildlife
Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission,
Tallahassee, Florida.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the
Southeast Region.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Draft Standard Local Operating Procedures for Endangered
Species Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. South Florida Ecological Services Office.
EXHIBIT 5
AERIAL WITH NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVE AREA
PER PUD 07-26 ORDINANCE
EXHIBIT 6
NATIVE VEGETATION MAP
EXHIBIT 7
AERIAL WITH NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVE AREA
PER PROPOSED PUD AMENDMENT
EXHIBIT 8
AERIAL WITH ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE PRESERVES
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375
3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266
Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com
I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD PL20180000049
May 1, 2018 NIM
Page 1 of 5
I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD PL20180000049
May 1, 2018 NIM
Page 2 of 5
I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD PL20180000049
May 1, 2018 NIM
Page 3 of 5
I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD PL20180000049
May 1, 2018 NIM
Page 4 of 5
I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD PL20180000049
May 1, 2018 NIM
Page 5 of 5
08/10/2018 Page 1 of 1
17.B.7
Packet Pg. 2072 Attachment: Legal Ad - Agenda ID 6402 (6402 : I-75/Alligator Alley (PUDA))