Loading...
Ex-parte - Fiala 10/23/2018 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Donna Fiala COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA OCTOBER 23, 2018 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS 9.A. This item requires 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 of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2005-36, the Regal Acres Residential Planned Unit Development, by increasing the permissible number of dwelling units from 184 to 300; by amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, the Collier County Land Development Code by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of an additional 23.15+/-acres of land zoned rural Agricultural (A)to the Regal Acres RPUD; by revising the development standards; by amending the master plan; adding deviations; revising developer commitments; by removing the density bonus agreement for Parcel A approved in Ordinance Number 2005-36 as an attachment to the Ordinance and by approval of an affordable housing density bonus for the added 23.15 acres that will generate 46 bonus units for low or moderate income residents. The property is located on the west side of Greenway Road east of Collier Boulevard (C.R. 951), and north of U.S. 41, in Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida consisting of 59.90+/-acres; and by providing an effective date [PL20170001733]. (This is a companion to Agenda Item 11.E.) NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ®Meetings ®Correspondence ®e-mails ❑Calls Met w/ Nick Kouluharis, mail & emails from surrounding communities, discussions wI Planning Commissioners & Staff, Attended N.I.M., Staff Report 9.B. This item requires ex parte disclosure be provided by the Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code,which established the comprehensive zoning regulations for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida by amending the appropriate zoning atlas map or maps by changing the zoning classification of the herein described real property from a Rural Agricultural (A)zoning district with a portion of the real property in a ST overlay (Special Treatment)to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)zoning district for the project known as Russell Square RPUD to allow development of up to 230 multi-family dwelling units on property located east of Santa Barbara Boulevard and approximately 1/4 mile south of Davis Boulevard in Section 9, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 32.9+/-acres; and by providing an effective date. [PL20170004414]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X SEE FILE NMeetings (Correspondence ne-mails ❑Calls Meet w/ Dan Ciesielski &Wayne Arnold, discussions with residents in surrounding communities, Staff Report Ex parte Items - Commissioner Donna Fiala COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA OCTOBER 23, 2018 SUMMARY AGENDA 17.A. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC-PL20180002425, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in the two Raw Water Well Site Easements and the County Utility Easement (C.U.E.) located along the northerly border of Lot 1 of Alligator Alley Commerce Center Phase Two, as recorded in Plat Book 49, Page 60 of the public records of Collier County, Florida. The subject property is located in the southwest quadrant of the 1-75 and Collier Boulevard intersection, located in Section 34, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (This is a companion to Agenda Item 17.B). X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE ❑Meetings ❑Correspondence ❑e-mails ❑Calls 17.B. This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by the Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance 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) X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE I (Meetings Correspondence e-mails Calls Co er County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 2018 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20170001733 REGAL ACRES, HABITAT FOR HUMANITY PROPERTY OWNERS/APPLICANT/AGENT: Owners: Agent: Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. Laura DeJohn, AICP 11145 Tamiami Trail East Johnson Engineering, Inc. Naples, FL 34113 2122 Johnson Street GHU, LLC and Newell Creek, LLC Fort Myers, FL 33901 7975 Newell Creek Drive Mentor, OH 44060 Applicant: Habitat for Humanity of Collier County 11145 Tamiami Trail East Naples, FL 34113 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to rezone 23.15 acres of land from the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district to be added to the existing Regal Acres RPUD for a 59.90 acre project; and, the additional density of 116 dwelling units which includes 46 affordable bonus units for low or moderate income residents. The property is comprised of five parcels. Four owned by Habitat for Humanity and one under a purchase agreement. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 23.15 acres to be added to the existing 36.75-acre PUD known as Regal Acres RPUD. The property is located west of Greenway Road in Section 12, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (see location map, page 2). The proposed Master Plan is included as Attachment B. PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 1 of 16 Revised: August 20, 2018 i i i i ,t2cc, Z .1,, cmi Aeteweekte• ------ s 1 : 1 I 1 i 1 0 ' r-k: if-1,, • Tr, ' I ' 1 < I I ii 1 `-.-jr--, 1 1 : el ; g ; ..._...... ; -----------1 . ii 1 a 1. . . rc",i ;_1._-:I ' i i I + ' Ct. ' ' i 1 1 F i' i i a, , I 1 1 i i I 2 , ,--.. : , Tiv.; , c tor,:;::, Cii . ' . . Lt.i 0 ET.F.,,,.2 C.....;1,,• • ---- ' • ' .9 CU 0 L'ilY Of: . ' ' - !..: . .•1 r•B ED EZI DE, . 4 4 1. (r) ,..., . 4.... "s..... .7. 4--,I ED • ,,,-.:- ,2_ 4. r....THI: r°Z; i] l',3217 M EIKE Eli Ls...; ,Ati Cit Et ma. c M MCC CLUJ LO Cil C3M [CO 6.] al.. 010] EIXE 0301 ,r.- 0.1 530 01 . 1 /..e..,----Ne•01's 4 Icc*144 lo ze COLD EaLi:i 171C9 a0,4,1 LLD If 'i. . i a ..r .....,-, , ' i : •-it..--,€.' — -,-- i ' I.-.1'--_..,--s-- e\ -u-7. LIJM C:Lti- 1.=11: 1p-,3........' WD :-...w.„1 ' ''e'' - ,di L eN,-;-' s t ., I 1 1 1 i--,,,„-,„ 3;,., M DJ M, tail CIT., , .. ., . , ,. ., . . , 11 i,,,,„ „,1 ,,.1....1.i.,..,‘„ii, m :_i_Ti), au] D , .1, --------(:.., ril E3 :j.,.-:-..14 up p„..c21 4-,. i --i, ,,,0 ......g.. c " 71.1 * 4 .,4...4•. ‘!,J i.L, —1, . 1..... S CD 0 (NJ --I CL ''''''...1 Z (1) .0 i E = 0 z 1... z w Ii o >, c w 1.-: 0 o -.) 4 m Z..."- 0 u u ,Z, 0 40. — -I 1. CD u. I CL ll Aemueeie CI. (III ......--/ c — 44 (I3 0 NI tidtasor ,... ic o 7 /-------- -, 4111IPIA11111 PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 2 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 1 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting a rezoning of 23.15 acres from Rural Agricultural to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) for the purpose of adding lands to the existing RPUD and adding density.The applicant intends to amend Ordinance number 05-36,which is the Regal Acres PUD. The existing approved PUD for Regal Acres permits 184 two-family residential units. The rezoning proposal is to add lands to the west to accommodate a maximum of 116 additional single- family residential units on 23.15 acres of property. The proposed 23.15-acre property is comprised of five parcels, four of which are owned by Habitat for Humanity of Collier County, Inc. The applicant proposes to extend the current Majestic Circle right-of-way and develop the adjacent property, which abuts the south boundary of Naples Reserve PUD and abuts the east boundary of the Walnut Lakes PUD (Reflection Lakes subdivision). The required buffers are detailed on the Master Plan. The general pattern and style of the proposed housing development will be very similar to the existing Regal Acres PUD. The applicant intends to revise the Development Standards, amend the Master Plan, revise the Developer Commitments, and request additional deviations. Specific details for these requests are detailed in that section of the report. As part of the additional requested 116 single family residential units, the applicant is requesting a recommendation of approval for an affordable housing density bonus application for the added 23.15 acres of land, as described, that will generate 46 bonus housing units. The bonus units are intended to accommodate housing opportunities for low or moderate-income residents of Collier County. The base density permitted is four dwelling units per acre, and the applicant is seeking five dwelling units per acre (DU/A). The total number of dwelling units proposed is 300. The density bonus calculation review is detailed in the GMP Consistency Review of this report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Single-family residential homes, zoned RPUD Naples Reserve 1.67 DU/A South: Single-family West Wind mobile home park, zoned MH Mobile Home East: Single-family residential homes, vacant agricultural, zoned A Rural Agricultural West: Single-family residential homes, zoned RPUD Walnut Lakes 3 DU/A PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 3 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 Aerial Ma Coun Pro er A raiser aiN e , :> , s Taps'et lt- h. . 4 . akar 4" 42k ' ' Imo, :# - tt , , a ¢ , Ni c �:i 44' � � �� `11411111lM1tlt# . ll:477 ':::„:' � �� "°'� -� s ��1€.1 J€ 1ti 4 ,i11�11;1,�1#kIF l 1 �+ ::41:: ` + :::1..°:,�� 71r: - � l t 1 IJ, , , i 1 •'i't#l�Elll�y1 '*: 1t 4 a'iA ' 4 d1 .' 1=,44. 11 - "Ai 1- „11,1.$14 �t..1 T 0y.ig,�., 4 1,, # N'tl3lta ..,131y 111111'-1'� .■1113 #. ,,,��s �, 1r . _� ; ; L" f.nlais CT I itt SAM t $ 3 1.1 1 4I i 11A-.,�i ' �F,n_ atm t'1§1131 I t 111}- 1LI'1 t",.11 1 ,- cam` i at # �o tl II i _ -_1' .t 1 I' a xi o ce4.42 x44444-7at�> ...,0,14° -.sisr r tai w;d. re _ ..: 41, {� 6uft GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element(FLUE): The subject property is designated Urban,Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, within the Coastal High Hazard Area(CHHA)as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and in the Future Land Use Element(FLUE) of the Collier County GMP. Relevant to this petition, the Urban designation is intended to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential land uses, including residential developments such as RPUDs. The applicant is proposing adensity bonus agreement for the 23.15 acres added, which is known as Parcel B. The applicant is proposing 116 affordable residential dwelling units at a density of 5 DU/A. (116 DUs/23.15 acres= 5.01 DU/A) in Parcel B. Under the FLUE's Density Rating System, the project is eligible for a maximum density of 3 dwelling units per acre (DU/A), with an additional bonus of up to 8 dwelling units per acre for providing affordable-workforce housing (which is proposed) for a total of 11 DU/A; eligible PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 4 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 density is not an entitlement... Since the proposed for a maximum density of 5 DU/A which is well below the maximum eligible density of 11 DU/A, the proposed density is consistent with the Density Rating System of the FLUE. Under the FLUE's Density Rating System, the project is eligible for a maximum density of three DU/A, with an additional bonus of up to eight dwelling units per acre for providing affordable- workforce housing (which is proposed) for a total of 11 DU/A; eligible density is not an entitlement. The FLUE states the following, "To encourage the provision of affordable-workforce housing within certain Districts and Subdistricts in the Urban Designated Area, a maximum of up to eight (8) residential units per gross acre may be added to the base density if the project meets the requirements of the Affordable-workforce Housing Density Bonus Ordinance(Section 2.06.00 of the Land Development Code...)" Base Density 4 DU/A CHHA Density Reduction -1 DU/A Affordable Housing Bonus +8 DU/A Maximum eligible density 11 DU/A x 59.9 acres= 658.9 DUs= 659 DUs Since the draft housing agreement is for a maximum density of five DU/A which is well below the maximum eligible density of 11 DU/A,the proposed density is consistent with the Density Rating System of the FLUE. The Consistency Review is included as Attachment C. Based upon analysis by the Comprehensive Planning Division,the proposed PUD rezone may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant's Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan(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 PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 5 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 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 on the subject property was reviewed based on the 2017 AUIR Inventory Report. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the proposed PUD will generate approximately 241 PM peak hour two-way total trips. Staff notes that the TIS further indicates that the existing development generates approximately 121 PM peak hour two-way trips and the proposed additional 116 single family residential units will generate approximately 120 PM peak hour two-way trips. The submitted TIS also contains a turn lane analysis for the intersection of Greenway Road and Majestic Circle. Staff agrees that the normally required left- in turn-lane is not required due to the number of trips on Greenway Road, the number of parcels to the north of this development served by Greenway Road and the limited ROW width on Greenway Road which also contains storm-water drainage swales which would potentially be impacted if a turn-lane were constructed. The proposed development will impact the following roadway segments: Roadway Link 2017 Current Peak 2017 Remaining AUIR Hour Peak Capacity Existing Direction Service LOS Volume/Peak Direction Tamiami Trail Collier Boulevard B 3,100/East 2,089 East(US 41) to Joseph Lane Tamiami Trail Joseph Lane to B 2,000/East 1,075 East (US 41) Greenway Road Tamiami Trail Greenway Road to D 1,075/East 248 East(US 41) San Marco Drive *Please note: 2017AUIR totals do not include the recently completed improvements on US 41. These trip totals are anticipated to improve with the 2018 AUIR. Based on the 2017 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed trips for the amended project 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. PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 6 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 Conservation and Coastal Management Element(CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation&Coastal Management Element (CCME). The project site consists of 22.46 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 5.62 (25%) acres of the existing native vegetation shall be placed under preservation and 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 (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. Housing Element Review: Community and Human Services staff has reviewed this petition's Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement to ensure the document contains the appropriate language to address the proposal to provide affordable housing. The Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement is a separate approval by the Board from the PUD Ordinance document. Community and Human Services finds the proposed development to be consistent with Section 2.06.00 of the LDC and the Housing Element of the GMP. The Regal Acres Parcel B development will have a maximum of 116 owner-occupied residential units targeted to low and moderate- income households for a gross density of 5 units per acre. These owner-occupied homes will have approximately 1,400 square feet of living area and will be a minimum of 3 bedrooms and one bath. 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: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the RPUD petition to address environmental concerns. The PUD Master Plan provides a 5.62-acre preserve, which meets the minimum 25%native preservation requirement in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07. No listed animal species were observed on the property; however, data obtained from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission indicates the project is located within panther protection zones which will require a panther management plan be required at PPL or SDP review. Additionally, the data also indicates the presence of black bear in the area. A black bear management plan will also need to be included at PPL or SDP review. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 7 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 Landscape Review: The landscape buffers depicted on the Master Plan are consistent with the LDC requirements. If after removal of exotics from the preserve located on the Western portion, the preserve does not satisfy the requirements of a Type `B' buffer,trees will need to be added into the preserve in accordance with section 3.05.07 of the LDC and a single row of 5' high shrubs spaced 4' on-center will be required on the perimeter berm shown on the `Typical Preserve Section' on sheet B-2. The shrubs, if required,must be native per section 4.06.05.J.a. School District: At this time, there is sufficient capacity for the proposed development either within the concurrency service areas the development is located within or the adjacent concurrency service areas at the elementary, middle and high school levels. This finding is for planning and informational purposes only and does not constitute either a reservation of capacity or a finding of concurrency for the proposed project. At the time of site plan or plat, the development would be reviewed for concurrency to ensure there is capacity within the concurrency service area the development is located within and adjacent concurrency service areas such that the level of service standards are not exceeded. Utilities Review: The project lies within the potable water and south wastewater service areas of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Water and wastewater services are readily available via existing infrastructure along Majestic Circle. System capacity must be confirmed at the time of development permit(SDP or PPL)review,and a commitment to provide service will be established upon permit approval. Zoning Services Review: Zoning Division staff has evaluated the proposed uses related to their intensity and reviewed the proposed development standards for the project. The Zoning Division also evaluated the location project and the potential traffic generation. The proposed single-family residential project is located north of Tamiami Trail East in an area that is still utilized for agricultural purposes. However, there has been additional commercial and residential development beginning to occur along this portion of the East Trail. The proposed site is currently vacant and wooded. Two adjacent neighborhoods are developed as PUD, which is Naples Reserve to the north and Walnut Lakes (Reflection Lakes). Both adjacent PUD's are developed with lower density as there was no affordable housing density bonus requested. The Naples Reserve PUD was developed at 1.67 DU/A and the Walnut Lakes PUD was developed at three DU/A. West Wind mobile home park is not zoned PUD and was developed at approximately 10 DU/A. While the applicant has requested an affordable housing density bonus, the intensity of the development appears to be reasonable and has been found consistent with the GMP. With respect to Development Standards, the proposed standards are appropriate based on the single-family residential use. The Development Standards are included in the backup material. 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 PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 8 of 16 Revised: August 20, 2018 findings in LDC Section 10.02.08": (Zoning Division staff responses in non-bold). 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,water, and other utilities. Zoning Division staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and believes the uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The Public Utilities Division further states the Water distribution and wastewater collection mains are readily available within the Majestic Circle right-of-way, and there is adequate water and wastewater treatment capacity to serve the proposed PUD. 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 were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and demonstrate unified control. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the petition and analyzed it for consistency with goals,objectives,and policies of the GMP. They have found the proposed amendment to be consistent with the GMP. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on the location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. There is no deviation from the required usable open space as submitted. Compliance with approved standards would be demonstrated at the time of SDP. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Compliance with all other applicable concurrency management regulations is required, including but not limited to plat plans or site development plans. The Transportation Division further states that the roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 9 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 will be addressed at the time of first development order(SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to further demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, the project's development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans,are sought.The Public Utilities Division further states that Collier County has sufficient treatment capacity for potable water and wastewater service to 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 development plans. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. For the proposed single-family residential use, there is adequate supporting infrastructure to accommodate this project, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains. Adequate public facility requirements will be addressed when future development approvals are sought. The Public Utilities Division further states that the area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains, to accommodate this project. The scope of any system improvements will be determined at the time of SDP or PPL permit review. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations,or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to the literal application of such regulations. Five deviations are proposed in the request to rezone to RPUD. Please see the deviations section of the report. 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 the proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans'compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: (Zoning Division staff responses in non-bold): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the elements of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning staff has determined the petition is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the FLUM and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern related to surrounding properties is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this report. The proposed single-family PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 10 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 residential uses will not likely change the existing land use patterns in the area. Both Naples Reserve and Walnut Lakes PUD's are developed with a similar residential pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The property is zoned Rural Agricultural with RPUD residential uses surround the property. The application is to rezone to RPUD,which would not create an isolated district. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The existing district boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed RPUD boundaries are logical and appropriate. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not specifically necessary. However, the applicant believes the rezoning is necessary to accommodate the construction of low and moderate-income (workforce) housing in Collier County. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change is not likely to adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The existing neighborhood is residential,and the proposal is expanding with additional residential dwellings. 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 Transportation Division states that 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 the 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. It is not anticipated that the rezone request to RPUD will create drainage problems in the area. 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 environmental staff will evaluate the stormwater management system and design criteria at the time of SDP or PPL. PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 11 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed rezone to RPUD is not likely to reduce light or air to adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. Property value is affected by many factors. It is driven by market conditions and is generally a subjective determination. Zoning alone is not likely to adversely affect the property values. Generally, market conditions will prevail. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Most of the adjacent property is already developed as residential use. The approval of the rezone request from A to RPUD is not likely to deter development activity of surrounding property. 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 rezone to RPUD complies with the GMP and is found consistent, then it is consistent with public policy and the change does not result in the granting of a special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is determined to be consistent with public welfare. 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, it is nearly landlocked. Additionally, the applicant cannot use the property as they have proposed without rezoning to RPUD and getting approval for the affordable housing density bonus. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. The Zoning Division staff determination is the proposed uses are not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The application was reviewed and found compliant with the GMP and the LDC. The Zoning Division staff does not review other sites related to a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 12 of 16 Revised:August 20, 2018 • would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the proposed rezone request to RPUD would require significant site alteration. The site is vacant and heavily wooded and razing, and land balancing would be required prior to any development activity at the site. The development standards would be applied during the SDP and plat 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 must comply with the criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF) and must be consistent with applicable goals and objectives of the GMP related to adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by Comprehensive Planning staff for consistency with the GMP as part of the amendment process, and they find it to be consistent. The Public Utilities Division further states that the activity proposed by this amendment will have no adverse impact on public utilities facility adequacy. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. 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 petitioner is seeking five deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The petitioner's rationale and staff analysis/recommendation is outlined below. Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.N, "Street System Requirements," which calls for minimum local street right-of-way width of 60 feet. This request is to allow for a 50-foot right-of- way minimum width for a limited section of the private street network, extending for a length of approximately 350 feet and terminating in a hammerhead or Y configuration,provided that the water main will be centrally located in the 10-foot space between the on-street parking and the right-of-way line. Petitioner's Justification: Minimum right-of-way width of 50 feet is requested to address a limited section of the private street network in the northern vicinity of the site. This segment of the private street network is approximately 350 feet in length and will serve approximately 20 homesites at the most. It is appropriate for this intimately scaled street to have 10 foot wide lanes corresponding to a more context-sensitive human scale. This reduces impervious area and reduces land dedicated to the roadway by ten feet, which in turn allows for more open space throughout the site that provides more community benefit. A 50 foot right-of-way is adequate to achieve safe and efficient vehicular, emergency vehicle, and pedestrian movement while satisfying utility and drainage needs in this location. Aside from this segment of the PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 13 of 16 Revised: August 20, 2018 private street network, the other roads within the RPUD will be consistent with a minimum right-of- way width of 60 feet. StaffAnalysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as it's a stub street. The deviation should be contingent upon approval by the local Fire District. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5, "On-Premises Directional Signs," which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10 feet from the edge of the roadway,paved surface or back of curb. This deviation requests a minimum setback of 5 feet from the edge of private roadway/drive aisle. Petitioner's Justification: This deviation will allow locational flexibility for directional signage internal to the RPUD. This also allows for helpful directional signage to be located between the edge of the roadway and the sidewalk. A unified design theme will apply to all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and attractiveness. All directional signage will meet the Clear Sight Distance requirements in accordance with LDC Section 6.06.05. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as the proposed residential project has higher density and the design is more compact. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.05.D.2.a, "Trees and Palms," which states that no more than 30% of required canopy trees may be substituted by palms. This deviation requests to increase the allowable substitution of palms to up to 60% of required canopy trees used to satisfy individual residential lot requirements (of LDC section 4.06.05.A.1). Petitioner's Justification: The intent is to relocate the required residential lot-tree plantings to the right-of-way and common areas where they can be maintained by the HOA and provide enhanced aesthetics around the walkways and on-street parking. Street trees may be planted in close proximity to underground utilities and sidewalks. Allowing up to 60%of the plantings in this area to be palms will reduce the degree of tree health issues in the future, minimize the impact of street trees on the utilities, and reduce the likelihood of roots heaving sidewalks or on-street parking. The quality appearance of a well-landscaped community and treelined streets is still accomplished and is more sustainable with the proposed palms substituting for up to 60%of canopy trees. StaffAnalysis and Recommendation: The LDC does not include limitations on the number of palm trees for a Street Tree Plan. The petitioner's justification seeks to allow palm trees planted within the Street Tree Plan to satisfy the canopy tree requirement for residential lots. LDC Section 4.06.05 A.1. requires one canopy tree per 3,000 sq. ft. of pervious area for each residential lot, and allows developments with a street tree program and lots of less than 3,000 sq. ft. of pervious open space to utilize street trees located directly in front of the lot to count toward that lot's required canopy tree. Since the residential tree requirement is on a lot-by-lot basis,only one tree is required for any lot with less than 3,000 sq. ft. of pervious area. Therefore, increasing the allowable percentage of palms to 60%would still require one hardwood canopy tree per lot. Since the LDC does not limit the number of palms within a Street Tree Plan, and the proposed deviation does not accomplish the applicant's intent to utilize palm trees within the street right-of-way for the required residential canopy tree requirement, Staff recommends denial of this deviation. PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 14 of 16 Revised: August 20, 2018 Deviation#4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C,"Fences and Walls"which calls for a maximum fence or wall height of 6 feet in residential components of PUDs. This deviation requests allowance for a maximum wall height of 8 feet for buffering to the southern property line and protection from the drainage ditch to the south. Petitioner's Justification: The proposed deviation will provide the adjacent West Wind mobile home park and future neighbors additional visual screening and provide a protective barrier between the proposed recreational area and the existing drainage ditch to the south. This enhances aesthetics and protects the children who will be likely to play in the recreation area. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as the proposed fence deviation provides additional protection related to the drainage area. Deviation #5 Seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J, "Dead End Streets,"which calls for dead ends streets to terminate in a cul-de-sac. This deviation requests the ability to end one of the street segments within the PUD with a hammerhead or Y configuration as approved by the local Fire District. Petitioner's Justification: This deviation request applies to the limited section of the private street network in the northern vicinity of the site. This segment of the private street network is approximately 350 feet in length and will serve approximately 20 homesites at the most.A full-sized cul-de-sac on a short street of approximately 350 feet is a very inefficient use of space. The alternative fire department turnaround options of a hammerhead or "Y"can more effectively serve the circulation needs of this specific location, resulting in enhancement to the overall development by providing added amenities, landscaping, and open space while still providing adequate room for fire trucks to maneuver safely in the proposed location. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as the proposed residential project has higher density and the design is more compact. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on June 4, 2018, 5:30 PM, at the First Haitian Baptist Mission of Naples 14600 Tamiami Trail E.Naples,FL. For further information,please see the NIM Summary information in the backup material. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report on August 28, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 15 of 16 Revised: August 20, 2018 Zoning Division staff recommends the CCPC forward petition PUDZ-PL20170001733 Regal Acres rezone and amendment to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval, with the exception of Deviation Request#3 and; contingent upon approval by the local fire district for Deviations #1 and#5, and, Zoning Division Staff recommends the CCPC forward PUDZ PL20170001733 Regal Acres Affordable Housing Density Bonus Application for Parcel B to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: A) Proposed RPUD Ordinance, Regal Acres B) Proposed Master Plan for Parcel B, Regal Acres C) FLUE Consistency Review D) Affordable Housing Density Bonus Agreement Regal Acres E) Public Correspondence PUDZ-PL20170001733; Regal Acres Page 16 of 16 Revised: August 20, 2018 BrownleeMichael From: Meltem Tanner<ems_meltem@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 12:32 AM To: SolisAndy; FialaDonna; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill; ems-matt@msn.com Subject: Habitat for Humanity Regal Acres II Categories: PRINTED Hi Dear Commissioners, I am a homeowner at Reflection Lakes, Manchester Dr. We regretfully found out that there would be a possibility to replace the agricultural zone in Regal Acres II ( off Rt 41 and Greenway Rd ) to a housing project. When we've purchased our property we were assured by Neal Communities that we would have a large preserve in the back of our property that is not buildable. This is the only reason why we purchased our property. Also I believe there should have more green space in our county. I feel it is becoming out of hand when I see ongoing construction all over the place and replacing our beautiful nature with ugly structures. You and other commissioners should plan very well, Please don't let our beautiful community become like any other city. We will seek our rights through legal systems in case of a decision that would destroy our preserve or replace it with housing. It's imperative that you and other commissioners make your decisions responsibly. Thank you Meltem Tanner 14359 Manchester Drive Naples, FL 34114 1 Brown lee Michael From: Kim Pojeta 2 <pojetabodrl@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 7:27 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: tonight meeting at the church on Regal Acres Categories: PRINTED First thank you for attending. And secondly, I apologize for handing the mike back when I finished my question. But I asked if Habitat looks at affordable housing as a whole throughout the county by district prior to choosing a location to build since Collier residents work all over the county too. The response was about land value/cost. I suggested they consider looking at all affordable housing locations including existing value properties that can be bought by district before determining where need is and looking at land in areas that lack affordable housing even though the bottom dollar of the product may be higher because commuting 45 minutes to work or more is tough too. I also realized after I left that looking by district and by build-able amounts of district could be valuable too. Thanks again for attending and for your support, Kim 1 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2018 9:49 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: A followup to yesterday's email Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Hello again Mrs. Fiala...I had sent a decent email to the Collier Pres. of Habitat yesterday. His reply back to me was not nice. I can forward it to you if you want to read it. He accused me of not doing my homework, not living long enough in Collier County, and he has no interest in even knowing about Habitat in Broward County. I replied back that I have lived in Collier Cty for 14 years,that as a retired educator with advanced degrees (also Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Florida) I always have done My Homework, and that he should drive over to Broward if he doesn't believe my facts! Frankly, I am now angry which I seldom allow myself to become! Our Master Board at Reflection Lakes and Naples Reserve are also angry and what Habitat needs to understand is: WE DO NOT WANT TO BE REZONED FROM OUR CURRENT AGRICULTURAL TO WHAT ANY DEVELOPER WANTS IN ORDER TO BUILD. Habitat's attitude with their nasty attorney wants NO OPPOSITION and they are determined to get what they want. Furthermore, Habitat's normal Modus Operandi is to go into blighted areas to improve housing for those less fortunate. Naples Reserve and Reflection Lakes are NOT BLIGHTED, nor do we want to have that happen since our investments here range from $220K-$1million plus(especially at Naples Reserve)! But again the point is to stop the building in our Preserved area which is ZONED AGRICULTURAL! This has nothing to do with racism or discrimination. We have a diversity in RL, and my neighbors are minority and great people who work very hard and pay a very high rent! You will get flooded with mail and emails which are now becoming a full fledged campaign. We are begging you and the other County Commissioners to NOT REZONE OUR AREA. Please do NOT make this a DONE DEAL for Habitat which is what they already figure they have. We recently lost to the Storage facility that is being built across from Naples Reserve Blvd entrance on 41. We will NOT stand idly by and accept any rezoning to allow any additional acreage to be bought and built on by any entity that destroys our beautiful Preserve area. As always, thank you a million times for your hard work! Most respectfully, Ms.Janet M. O'Connell Reflection Lakes Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android BrownleeMichael From: Vicki Smith <vicki14534©gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 7:07 PM To: StrainMark; BellowsRay; FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: do not rezone the agricultural area behind Reflection Lakes for Habitat Housing Attachments: 6.27.18commissionersReflection Lakes Community.docx Categories: PRINTED Vicki L. Smith 1 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8©yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 12:49 PM To: FialaDonna; bod@reflectionlakesatnaples.com; Jane Kraska; Errol Devore Subject: Fw: Your meeting last night in southeast Naples Categories: PRINTED Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android Forwarded Message From: "Janet OConnell" <janetoc8@yahoo.com> To: "nkouloheras@habitatcollier.org" <nkouloheras@habitatcollier.org> Sent: Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 12:47 PM Subject: Your meeting last night in southeast Naples To Mr. Kouloheras: I was at the meeting last night and spoke about the overbuilding, etc and mentioned what has happened in Broward County. The attempt by your insulting and overcontrolling attorney to interrupt and take the microphone away from me was totally inappropriate and close to violating my 1st Amendment rights. I have always been a supporter of Habitat and often visit your Restore on 41 to buy some smallish item for a few dollars which is all I can afford. I have worked hard since age 16...l am now closing in on 68. I have known very hard times and have never asked nor expected any help from anyone. I still do tutoring part time when available which has helped me to pay off the huge Hurricane Assessment of$1800 at Reflection Lakes. My final$600 payment is due on June 15th. I live on the cheaper street of Winchester Court (condo/villa area) and in April 2016 I paid less than $200K.The Preserve behind us is exactly that. Your presentation was very slick, as our Master Association President said to you. He didn't even indicate his title, because most of us in Reflection Lakes are very down to earth, many years hard working, middle class folks.The majority of us are definitely NOT racist nor discriminatory.Yes, most of my life savings went into my condo/villa where I figured I could live peacefully for maybe 15-18 years before my life ends. Now your organization comes along wanting to build on the Preserve and I guess you consider it a DONE DEAL since you have already figured that the Rezoning will go your way! If it does, which will be very sad and beyond disturbing, our beauty will end and the density factor that you don't really care about will continue to take over and yes, this is already on the way to Broward County West! My other point and direct question is...What if you had a tract of land down in Port Royal or the Estates area of Marco Island? How would you handle a major outcry of opposition from many million dollar owners in luxury areas? I realize that this is a mute point. But you need to also look at your building in Broward County and how poorly maintained those have become! The years go by and blight comes because of overbuilding.The developers have made their many millions at our expense.You too have a huge budget of over$90million! I am a nobody who has dedicated her life to helping many thousands of students and parents over 30 years. I made a pittance salary and my state pension is pathetic, not to mention the lack of decent medical and dental benefits! My mother and I lived in a tiny house in Pompano Beach and then when I could afford a small condo in Lighthouse Point, I moved us to the other side of Federal Highway to a little bit better area. I drove every day out to Coral Springs. As I said, I never expected anything to be made easier for me.Your expectations are a bit too much since you think Rezoning is appropriate and you already have your plans to build. In my mind that is putting the cart before the horse, but you must already know that the winds are going to blow favorably your way. Moreover, there are plenty of affordable housing dwellings off of Manatee Road and along 41 west of here. And by the way, how on earth do you expect the extra kids to be taken into the already very sad, decrepit Manatee schools that Collier County Schools could care less about improving?! Frankly, those portables should be condemned. I am a realist. I am also 100% honest and have always done the right thing. Finally, your lawyer should also do the right thing and at least send me an email apology. Respectfully, Ms Janet M. O'Connell 14160 Winchester Ct.#1801 Naples, FL. 34114 Reflection Lakes Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 2 BrownleeMichael From: Lenore Meurer<lenorem@aol.com> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2018 9:06 PM Subject: Habitat for Humanity NIM for more low income housing 6/4/18 attached Attachments: Habitathomebuyer(1) (1).pdf; HFH Regal Acres NIM meeting 642018, adding more low income housing to over concentration in East Naples.pdf Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED NIM Well of course its scheduled in dead of summer with noone around, in the middle of a rain storm like last year to deter attendance and opposition. No surprises there, this is more low income housing to add to Regal acres out on 41, like we need anymore. I want to require where they are moving from since Cormac insisted at the last AHAC that these people were Naples residents? and from here, though I never knew that we had such a huge Haitian population. Where are they employed, can't look like the past incomplete documents which confirmed noone working in East Naples, not even close. Take a look.. I am submitting my questions, such as how they comply with the statute to avoid overconcentration of low income housing in this target area and do they have that assessment? No bonus housing or any AF housing should be approved without establishing a methodogy for criteria that ensures compliance with the statute. We have 52% of all Affordable housing in Collier County located right here in East Naples, we know there is no way they comply with the law. Who is responsible to ensure Collier staff comply with the law and apply methodology/ assessment with every development application submitted? Where is the data that proves these areas are not saturated? Do all development applications evaluate the equitable distribution of AF housing? Should they? Obviously no one is concerned about the big picture since we have such a huge disparity in housing numbers. Will North Naples citizens be concerned about the housing disparity when we implement bussing their children to Avalon, and other East Naples schools? We are definitely heading in that direction folks just like Fort Myers, because its unconstitutionalto not provide a quality education to children in schools having up to 98% economically disadvantaged attending. This must be reported at the Federal level and immediately addressed. While Collier staff can continue to ignore the statute regarding overconcentration in low income housing in East Naples, there is no ignoring the LAW. We need to demand enforcement of the law to protect us, our children and our communities. Please attend this NIM and be heard, ask these critical questions, where is the analysis that safeguards our communities? We need the data analysis since we must prevent further over saturation and concentration. Habitat has the Largest Affordable Housing Communities in the WORLD located right here, in little Naples, its what we're known as, 'Habitat County' and they're buying up land out on 41 and everywhere, and we let this happen, we've done nothing to stop it, and we will suffer with the repurcussions of doing nothing, saying nothing... LENORE MEURER 1 PRESIDENT Lely Landings of Southwest Floricka LenoreMOaol.com 239-234-6236 2 BrownleeMichael From: Ashley Kennedy <ashinosh@icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 10:16 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Concern from Reflection Lakes Categories: PRINTED 14717 Sonoma Blvd. Naples Florida 34114 June 28,2018 Collier County Commissioners and Planning Commission Liaison Growth Management Dept./Zoning Services Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,FL 34104 Dear Ms.Fiala, Our community gathered for a meeting with Habitat for Humanity representatives last evening,June 26,2018 in Reflection Lakes.The goal was to reach agreement to stop the rezoning or facilitate compromise via additional building plan modifications to reduce noise and privacy to those residents bordering the preserve area separating both developments.Increased housing from 184 to 300 units will only increase noise and opportunity for trespassing to our quiet retirement neighborhood. This was the second meeting and this the second letter Reflection Lakes homeowners have voiced their concerns.As homeowners,we foresee inevitable security issues since several incidents have already occurred with teenagers infringing on Manchester Drive properties that abut this preserve.Destroying further woodlands only opens both our developments for more transient trespassing and risk.Neighbors located on the east side of Manchester Drive in Reflection Lakes not only paid larger premium fees for lots that were to border permanent woodland,but stand to suffer damage or injury to their property which derogates from their reasonable use and pleasure.Rezoning compromises what now provides privacy and security;the extensive woodland area that insures distance between developments. As discussed with Habitat at the meeting,we strongly advocate for the DENIAL OF REZONING.In the event you refuse to support our community,we expect the following at Habitat's expense: 1. No less than an eight-foot solid wall between developments to block noise and trespass. 2. Move the playground and basketball court closer to Greenway Road from current planned location 3. Do not construct 22 Habitat homes closest to the preserve thus maintaining the preserve's trees and allowing room for a barrier wall on Habitat's property. 4. Consider the financial impact of upgrading roads leading to these Habitat homes as current conditions threaten optimal access by emergency personnel and vehicles. Sincerely, Ashley Allison Kennedy 1 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 9:59 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Habitat on our Preserve Zoned Agricultural Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Hello again Mrs. Fiala...I have been one of your very loyal supporters ever since I moved here from Broward County in 2004.Thank you for talking to me as you were leaving the meeting last night. More people spoke after you left, including another RL owner who expressed her disgust especially at that nasty female lawyer. I don't know if you noticed that she did interrupt me and reached out to take the microphone away from me! I told her that I had every right to speak. It sounds like Habitat considers this a DONE DEAL, since the other Commissioners will give them the Rezoning! It's even much worse than the approval of the recent storage facility across from Naples Reserve Blvd entrance! I said what I did last night because I watched Broward County get over-developed over my 30 plus years over there.The end result in Broward is terrible...traffic a total nightmare, high crime,disgusting density, and even Lighthouse Point where I had a cute condo looks old and crappy. Coral Springs is now also horrific. I'm sure my prediction for Naples is correct if the County leaders continue to sell off to the developers including Habitat. It doesn't surprise me what you said about your trying to get a few decent stores out this way. Look at Freedom Square and the blight there! The old Kmart building remains a huge problem. Even Dollar Tree is moving into a much needed new location behind the 5th/3rd Bank across 41! You have tried so hard but your colleagues don't care. PLEASE STAND UP TO THEM AND TRY TO STOP THE REZONING! Yes, Habitat does much good but to listen to their slick presentation along with their horrible lawyer was so AWFUL.They even have land down by the Links! Habitat in Broward has built disgusting homes that are NOT maintained. So, it looks like Collier County could be renamed Broward County West in the near future! Horror. Is this what our Commission wants?We the People and owners with our lifetime investments sunk into Collier County do NOT. I'm guessing what I'm saying here will not make a difference, a very hard pill for me to swallow as a retired FL educator. Most Respectfully, Janet M. O'Connell 14160 Winchester Ct.#1801 Naples, FL 34114 Reflection Lakes Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 1 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 5:49 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: Habitat Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Hello again Mrs. Fiala...just an update concerning our most recent meeting last evening(June 26th)with Habitat's President in our clubhouse per his request. We again faced another very difficult meeting, as Habitat's President considers it a DONE DEAL and that we need to accept it. He had two Xeroxes: one showing a viewpoint of scope/line of elevation from us to their tops of many little houses; the second was a map in color showing their development and proximity to Reflection Lakes.This upset most of us and his monotonous litany of descriptions, etc. We fired back with many questions and also making it clear that we want NO REZONING AND NO FURTHER BUILDING ENCROACHING ON OUR PRESERVE AND INCLUSIVE THEREOF. HE could have cared less but said maybe he could include a fence.We said A TALL WALL WOULD BE NECESSARY. I brought up the Manatee schools and would Habitat be donating some of their$93 Million to help on that and also Greenway Road? He said that he's not concerned about the schools, because according to him there are 16 empty classrooms! When I asked if these were damaged portables, he would not reply. As for Greenway Rd he left that up in the air with us presuming that the County will have to fund that disastrous road! He said the$93 Million has to be allocated for buying more land behind us for their 184-300 little houses and the mortgages for the owners! Plus the density will be 5 units per acre. We all feel very defeated and angry. We hope that the Rezoning will NOT happen and are begging the County Commission, Planning Commission, and Zoning to make an intelligent decision to keep our Preserve and disputed tract of land Agricultural. Again and again...The building MUST STOP. Please share with your colleagues. Most respectfully, Ms Janet O'Connell ( retired Broward County educator) Reflection Lakes Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 1 BrownleeMichael From: Tom Custer<tcuster49@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 7:16 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: HH proposed expansion to Regal Acres. Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Donna, I have received your Tidbits for some time now and understand you have petitioned your other commissioners to appropriately distribute affordable housing developments equally in Collier county and not focus on East and South Naples. I agree whole heartedly with that to maintain proper diversity in the neighborhoods as being economically sound and essential for property values and diversification. Mike Yancon, sent you an email asking for support to defeat the proposed Zoning Change Habitat for Humanity is proposing by expanding the existing Regal Acres to add approximately 118 more homes that will be contiguous to Naples Reserve. Many in the surrounding neighborhoods attended the first meeting on June 4th at the Haitian Church and vehemently opposed it for the reasons noted above. I am Mike Yancon"s neighbor and will be adversely affected by this expansion if approved as well along with many families along the fence line there. What help you can provide would be greatly appreciated.. In addition, I have been searching Collier County's websites to find a graphic map that inidicates all the Habitat communities and all other affordable housing communities and how they are populated throughout Naples. This would clearly show all the concentration areas for discussion. Please help with this so we can defer growth here and relocate to other areas of Naples. Respectfully submitted and look forward to hearing from you soon. I believe the next meeting with the planning commission or zoning board for this request in June 23 or. 24th. Thanks so much -Tom Custer Thanks- Tom C. 1 BrownleeMichael From: Ronald Wahl <rkwah198@msn.com> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2018 10:05 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: Habitat for Humanity Regal Acres II Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Dear Commissioners: We are very concerned about the consideration of sacrificing preserve land for housing. Preserve land was designated so land would be preserved. We all thought that was an environmental responsibility. WE ARE RESIDENTS OF REFLECTION LAKES. TAKE A LOOK AT HOW REFLECTION LAKES WAS FORCED TO PRESERVE LAND IN HENDRY COUNTY WHICH IS A HARDSHIP FOR OUR COMMUNITY! WHY WOULD YOU LET HABITAT FOR HUMANITY BUILD REGAL ACRES ON PRESERVE LAND???? Ron and Sheila Wahl 14704 Cranberry Ct. Naples, FL 344114 1 BrownleeMichael From: BrownleeMichael Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 8:23 AM To: 'vinny P' Subject: RE: Affordable Housing Distribution If you follow this link to the GMD Public Portal, and type in the word "Habitat" in the Search box,you will see the status of all project applications. http://cvportal.colliergov.net/CityViewWeb/Planning/Locator Michael Brownlee Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Donna Fiala, District#1 From:vinny P [mailto:cyberhel@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday,June 04, 2018 8:33 PM To: BrownleeMichael <Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Affordable Housing Distribution How can I find out where Habitat is building in east naples also the number of units in each delelopement.? From: BrownleeMichael <Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday,June 4, 2018 2:40 PM To:vinny P Subject: RE: Affordable Housing Distribution Not familiar with one with that many units. Michael Brownlee Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Donna Fiala, District#1 From: vinny P [mailto:cyberhel@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 1:54 PM To: BrownleeMichael <Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Affordable Housing Distribution Michael: Thanks for the info. Do you know anything about a 1000 unit proposal in East Naples and where it may be? thanks 1 kathy pantano From: BrownleeMichael <Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 1:36 PM To: vinny P Subject: RE: Affordable Housing Distribution The links are in the email (highlighted below) Michael Brownlee Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Donna Fiala, District#1 From: vinny P [mailto:cyberhel@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 12:43 PM To: BrownleeMichael <Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Affordable Housing Distribution Michael: You siad yesterday that you were sending the contact information and links for the planning commision and Collier county commissioners. I never got them so could you please send. thanks kathy pantano 516 799 2481 From: BrownleeMichael <Michael.Brownlee@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 4:46 PM To: vinny P Subject: Affordable Housing Distribution Dear Kathy, Per our conversation this afternoon, you may find the attached useful. The planning Commissioners email addresses can be found here: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-s-z/zoning-division/zoning-services- section/collier-county-planning-commission-ccpc Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) Collier County, FL www.colliercountyfl.gov 2 Collier County offices will be closed on Monday, May 28 in observation of Memorial Day, honoring those who have died in service of the United States of America. And the County Commissioners contacts are here: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-a-e/board-of-county-commissioners Regards, Michael Brownlee Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Donna Fiala, District#1 W. Harmon Turner Building- Bldg "F" 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite #303 Naples, FL 34112 P: (239) 252-8601 F: (239) 252-6578 NOTE: Our County Email Addresses have changed. My new email address is Michael.Brownlee@CollierCountyFL.gov co air County Subscribe to Commissioner Fiala's Newsletter here. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by teLephone or in writing. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 3 BrownleeMichael From: Lynn Livingston <redwingnut1 @me.com> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2018 10:30 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Regal Acres II Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED My family is strongly opposed to any expansion of the Habitat for Humanity development called Regal Acres,which we understand will be called Regal Acres II.The current community called Regal Acres is an eyesore. 80%of the community has homes that are not maintained and yards that are worse. Some of the homes have 3-4 cars in the driveway, even during working hours.These are supposed to be single family homes but obviously have extended families that have moved in. Even now,we can hear the noise and loud partying at night from existing Habitat homes.Teenagers from Regal Acres have been coming along the canal and trespassing on Reflection Lakes private property.We have seen groups of 3-8 teenagers run through our and our neighbors'yards. Having more Habitat homes only 150 feet from the east side of Reflection Lakes will be a horrible eyesore, more noise and possible increase in trespassing. Respectfully submitted, Aubrey Livingston 14587 Manchester Dr Naples, FL 34114 1 BrownleeMichael From: East Naples Merchant's Association <info=eastnaplesmerchantsassoc.com@mail144.sea22.mcdlv.net> on behalf of East Naples Merchant's Association <info@eastnaplesmerchantsassoc.com> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 6:06 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Notice From Donna Fiala: Neighborhood Information Meeting on Habitat For Humanity Rezoning Request Notice: Neighborhood Information Meeting Today, June 4th at View this email in your browser 5:30 PM Notice From Donna Fiala Neighborhood Information Meeting TODAY Habitat For Humanity Seeks Rezoning Habitat for Humanity has Petitioned Collier County to seek rezoning of the property located on the west side of Greenway Road to be accessed via Majestic Circle. Habitat is seeking approval to amend the master plan to include additional land and will increase the permissible number of dwelling units from 184 to 300. The Petitioner is asking the County to approve an application to amend the Regal Acres Residential Planned Unit Development by changing the zoning classification of 23.15 acres that will generate 46 bonus units for low or moderate income residents on the described property. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of the intended development associated with this application. 1 The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held TODAY, Monday, June 4th at 5:30 pm at the First Haitian Baptist Church of Naples located at 14600 Tamiami Trail E., Naples, Fl. 34114. At this meeting the petitioner will make every effort to illustrate how the property will be developed and to answer any questions. Map of Greenway Road at Majestic Circle in East Naples rzo Enchanting Shores e", s, Co-(p Park Greenway Road &Majestic Circle Mangee,R6 Marco Shore Estates le La3ces RV Paradise Pointe RV RRSOrt Golf Club e,I 3 �.s eP Copyright©2018 East Naples Merchants Assoc., All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you are a current member of our association or you have attended a 2 meeting in the past and agreed to be on our email list. Our mailing address is: East Naples Merchants Assoc. 8595 Collier Blvd., Suite 107, Box 35 Naples, FL 34114 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list mailchimp 3 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2018 9:31 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: No Rezoning to benefit Habitat Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Thank you Commissioner Fiala for Micael's reply.There are a few more serious issues that prove the bullying tactics of Habitat. More children going to the Manatee schools that are already Title Nine and in terrible condition...is the Collier School Board going to build much needed new buildings over on that site? Where is that money going to come from? It doesn't seem likely that Habitat is going to contribute any money from their$93 million budget to help the Manatee schools! Is the Federal government going to supply more free meals, etc for these additional children? Lely High School is also overcrowded! Now Greenway Road. Naples Reserve closed the use of that road for construction trucks over a year ago.That road is in terrible condition and will need to be redone and improved. Will the County provide money for that since Habitat won't? Also the Collier Sherrif does go back into Regal Estates 1 quite often for crime calls. Building a wall with foliage by Habitat that will cost$600,000 out of Habitat's coffers is now NOT a guarantee as you heard the other night from Habitat's Collier President. He made it clear that that would be a lot of money that Habitat may NOT be able to fork out! Well, how much more duping is the Collier County Commission going to stand for?Our communities are NOT BLIGHTED. Habitat normally goes into blighted areas to do some good work. Unfortunately,the improvements in these blighted areas do not last, because the so-called "sweat equity" is not long term. I have seen this in NY and in Broward County, FL As a retired Florida educator on a very limited budget who has worked very hard all of my life and NEVER expected any handout from anyone, this entire "Bill of Goods" smells terrible. We do NOT WANT REZONING TO satisfy any additional building that also has a huge potential for corruption. Florida, where I have lived most of my life, has always had too much corruption by developers, politicians, local governments. Collier County was once a safe haven and known for decency.Along with out of control building now in full swing, many of our local leaders are being swept along to satisfy those with the money responsible for Collier's reputation going downhill.This is totally reprehensible. So much corruption destroyed Broward.The lessons are very clear and being ignored now in Collier. ( I will now fade into the background as many others will also be standing up.) Respectfully, Janet M. O'Connell Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android Q 5 2018 11 By Jun 4,2018 Donna Fiala Collier County Commissioner-District 3299 Tamiami Trail East Suite#03 Naples Florida 34112 Subject:"WE OPPOSE" The ReZoning of Agricultural land adjacent to Regal Acres and to Keep Preserve land from becoming Residential"a I" Dear Ms.Donna Fiala We purchased a Home in Reflection Lakes last Year and were told that the land to the South and East of us was Preserve Land and would not Built on or developed.__ This re Zoning will cause the land and animal residence no where to go... Also that in East Naples we are way over its Quota of Affordable Housing by Over 10%... Sincerely yours, 111111t.4111 �` J % "ilshear 14594 Manchester Dr ( Reflection Lakes) 615-962-1310 •s } 1234 Main Street Anytown,State ZIP T:123-456-7890 F: 123-456-7891 w:www.apple.com rtTEIN [E11] TERRA W i LEINICAR JUL 0 5 2018 By Jun 4,2018 Donna Fiala Collier County Commissioner-District 1 3299 Tamiami Trail East Suite#o3 Naples Florida 3412 Subject:"WE OPPOSE" The ReZoning of Agriculturai4nd adjacent to Regal Acres and to Keep Preserve land from becoming Residential tnttn `' r' Dear Ms.Donna Fiala We purchased a Home in Reflection Lakes last Year and were told that the land to the South and East of us was Preserve Land and would not Built on or developed... This re Zoning will cause the land and animal residence no where to go... Also that•. East Naples we are way over its Quota of Affordable Housing by Over io%... Sinc:0 yo * i 41 0 T- riilshear 14594 Manchester Dr ( Reflection Lakes) 615-962-1311 1234 Main Street Anytown,State ZIP T:123-456-7890 F: 123-456-7891 w:wwwapple.com -- C'..• (3) - ...c Gza 7.•• EH 4Nr-i 4.0 c=3 ,-- 1--- ".." .., 1 1===, 1 • ,...„ ......_\ . . i„.., ..,...,..:, 4-.7 ni•-• ,..7 ,...r,. V. ../1 ti...* p.-.,... t.E. . p \0 . .. BrownleeMichael From: Raymond williams <raymondwilliamsjr@hotmail.com> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 9:03 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Habitat for Humanity Regal Acres II project Categories: PRINTED Good morning. I am one of the board of directors at Westwind Estates in East Naples. Habitat for Humanity reached out to us back in the spring and had a meeting with the residents and board members to discuss their Regal Acres II project. We brought up a few concerns about noise and what we would like to see done. They listened to our concerns and went back and addressed those problems. And came back with a solution that was more than acceptable to us. And we would welcome them as Neighbors. Raymond Williams Board member Westwind Estates Make everyday the best it can. Life is to short not too. Sent by Outlook for Android Make everyday the best it can. Life is to short not too. Sent by Outlook for Android 1 BrownleeMichael From: Michael Yancon <michael.yancon@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 3:05 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Tom Custer; Mara Foley Subject: PERTINENT INFORMATION > Regal Acres RPUD Rezoning Petition Attachments: Naples Reserve Rezoning Support Flyers.pdf Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Commissioners, Relating to the petition submitted by Habitat for Humanity to expand the Regal Acres RPUD, currently on the BCC Agenda for consideration on 10/23/2018. I am a resident of Naples Reserve who will be directly impacted by future developments if this petition is approved, and wanted to express my support for approval. Since learning about the petition, several residents of Naples Reserve and I have met with Habitat on multiple occasions to discuss reasonable options for improving the buffer zone between NR and the proposed expansion, above and beyond what is required by code. The result of these discussions is an 8ft wall with heavy foliage on both sides to be installed and run along the north and east sides of Habitats property line. Habitat commissioned the creation of sketches and diagrams showing the physical location of the wall and what it would look like, and submitted these to the CCPC during their 8/6/18 meeting to be considered as part of the overall development proposal. Considering above, I personally feel the Habitat team has gone above and beyond to address our concerns relating to the preserve area that will be developed. I have also attached signed flyers from 31 other Naples Reserve residents indicating their support for re-zoning, most of whom own homes that will in some way be immediately impacted by this development. Respectfully submitted, Michael Yancon 269-720-9702 Naples Reserve 14595 Topsail Dr, Naples FL 34114 michael.yancon@gmail.com BrownleeMichael From: Dawn Chard <charddawnc@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 9:41 AM To: StrainMark; BellowsRay; FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: Proposed Habitat for Humanity Community- East Naples = Do not rezone the agricultural area behind Reflection Lakes for Habitat Housing Attachments: 6.27.18_Commissioners_Reflection_Lakes_Community.docx Categories: PRINTED Please see the attached. BrownleeMichael From: Ashley Kennedy<ashinosh@icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 12:07 PM To: BellowsRay; BosiMichael; SolisAndy; TaylorPenny; SaboJames; StrainMark; patrickdearborn@collergov.net; SchmittJoseph; HomiakKaren; McDanielBill; FialaDonna Subject: 9/6 decision re: rezoning PL20170001733 Categories: PRINTED Mrs. David C. Kennedy 14717 Sonoma Blvd. Naples, FL, 34114 To: Collier County Commissioners and Planning Commission Liaison Growth Management Dept. /Zoning Services Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Dear Mr. Bosi, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Bellows, Ms. Fiala, Mr.Solis, Mr. Saunders, Ms.Taylor, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Mark Strain,Mr. Feyer, Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Dearborn, Ms. Homiak, Mr. Sabo: You have on file many letters (June 27, 2018) against rezoning the west side of Greenway Road that borders 300 feet from Reflection Lakes community pool cages and Naples Reserve properties. Retired residents payed significant fees for their land that is immediate to this reserved agricultural land up for a rezoning decision. Recently three members our community met with Nick Kouloheras from Habitat with hope of stopping the rezoning or compromising by placing a solid sound- proof wall between our communities. Reports back from that meeting indicate Nick discouraged having 200 residents come to the 9/6/18 planning meeting. If our residents avoid fighting rezoning, he said he might consider building a solid wall between our communities. His coercive and bias statements meant to influence our attendance on 9/6 does not minimize our true objections to this rezoning; but does emphasize that money and politics have more influence on your decisions than the rights of other Naples' citizens. Please see the highlighted areas below, as the planning commission and county commissioners are accountable and responsible for creating low- income zones in Collier County. Collier County Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing(2015) https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showdocument?id=66401 The Fair Housing Act and similar state fair housing laws list seven prohibited bases for housing discrimination:11 race, color, national origin,gender, familial status, disability, and religion.The socioeconomic analysis appearing earlier in this report contains information on race, ethnicity, and other related factors, but is concerned with the county's composition as a whole.This protected class analysis addresses each of the federally protected groups and their geographic distribution within Collier County to illustrate where concentrations exist. Taken together with this further analysis of affordable housing, labor market participation, education, land use, and other issues,the report as a whole attempts to provide answers as to why protected class concentrations exist where they do. While Collier County is one of the wealthiest counties in Florida, with a per capita income that is approximately 1.4 times that of the state,there are significant poverty indicators and geographic areas of poverty. Four Collier communities have per capita incomes ranging from $9,496 to$24,556, according to the 2010 Census: Immokalee and three communities in the Greater Naples area (Naples Manor, Golden Gate City, and Naples Park).Additionally, Collier County has 5 zip codes designated as Low Income Areas by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (34142, 34114, 34104, 34113, and 34116). One goal of zoning is to balance individual property rights with the power of government to promote and protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the overall community. Land development codes regulate how a parcel of land in a community may be used and the density of development. Local governments may divide their jurisdiction into zoning districts by adopting a zoning map consistent with the comprehensive plan; define categories of permitted and conditional uses for those districts; and establish design or performance standards for those uses. Zoning may regulate the height, shape, and placement of structures and lot sizes or shapes.Jurisdictions also can expressly prohibit certain types of uses within zoning districts. • We ask that you block this rezoning; keep it agricultural preserve • Do not rezone; balance our property rights to promote the general welfare of our community OR • Regulate the placement of structures; so woodland can be viewed from RL community, not houses • Restrict the number of buildings closest to our land which is 20 Habitat houses • Habitat must build an eight-foot solid wall between our developments • Habitat must move the playground and basketball court closer to Greenway Road from current planned location Rezoning compromises what now provides privacy and security to Reflection Lakes and Naples Reserve; this extensive woodland area insures distance between developments. We do not condone extortion or coercion by any politician or Habitat leadership. Please share this letter at the 9/6 meeting since our community received notice from Nick Kouloheras, not to attend. As discussed with Habitat at several meetings, we strongly advocate for the DENIAL OF REZONING. Sincerely, Robert J. and Vicki L. Smith Mrs. David Kennedy 2 BrownleeMichael From: Vicki Smith <vicki14534@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 1:58 PM To: McDanielBill; FialaDonna; StrainMark; TaylorPenny; SolisAndy Subject: CFO for Habitat Categories: PRINTED Dear Mr. Bosi, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Bellows, Ms. Fiala, Mr. Solis, Mr. Saunders, Ms. Taylor, Mr. McDaniel, Mr. Mark Strain: The CFO, Dean Kakos, now sold his home in Reflection Lakes.This sends a big message to neighbors he does not want to live near the Habitat community. Without a clear dividing wall, our property values will suffer. Shame on him and what he represents. Vicki L Smith 1 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2018 9:37 AM To: FialaDonna Subject: Fw: Your Habitat Decision Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android Forwarded Message From: "Janet OConnell" <janetoc8@yahoo.com> To: "Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov" <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:23 PM Subject: Re: Your Habitat Decision Thank you Mrs Taylor. I too miss teaching Latin at Trinity by the Cove but a home-schooled parent I know is trying to start up a Highlands Cottage School ( based in Kentucky) here in Naples.This school follows a wonderful Classical curriculum! Depending on enrollment, I may be teaching Latin for her new school on Mondays beginning August 20th! In addition, I will continue tutoring another home-schooled family of 4 kids from last year.This keeps me busy along with being on the Social Committee, pool aerobics, and an additional indoor exercise class at least one day per week at Reflection Lakes! With all due respect to your graph of Habitat new-builds,the following information here in East Naples(near me) should also apply as already existing Habitat units: Charlee Estates=122 units Trail Ridge=204 units Habitat Village(Victoria.Falls)=110 units Regal Acres 1(bordering Reflection Lakes)=184 units ( not including Naples Manor area) Total in 34114= 620 units On Hold and hopefully Planning Commission will not Rezone: Regal Acres 2 =115 units only 150 ft away from our Manchester Dr. line. Also, I do want you to know that my condo/villa at 14160 Winchester Ct.#1801 cost me $182,500 in April 2016. By Collier County's definition,that means I live in Affordable Housing here in Reflection Lakes! I would not qualify for Habitat, because I do have savings which I have very carefully and methodically put into annuities over 40 years. I will be accessing those annuities when I turn 70 and 1/2 in only 2 and/1/2 years from now! That will be added onto my FL pension and SS monthly payments.The less I access,then the more I will have for myself in a decent Nursing Home! I also would not want to live in Habitat housing, because I believe in self-pride and hard work.The aforementioned I would not have had to even worry about if my family had not lost millions! Reasoning for the necessity of hard work too! Finally, thank you for your compliment about my intelligence! Whatever brain power I still have comes from my genius mother. I am not a genius like she was, because I had a head injury as a baby. I am only grateful to God for giving me the ability to accomplish what I have throughout my life and hopefully making a difference in many thousands of students and parents lives in Coral Springs, FL. Whomever I have touched here in Collier County, I hope I have also made a little bit of a difference. I hope your granddaughter(Maya?) has a great upcoming school year too! Most respectfully, Janet O'Connell Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 2:55 PM, TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Dear Janet, Thank you for your email and voicing your concerns. I do not agree with your summations, however. It is hard to separate our past from our present and I don't doubt that you have seen areas deteriorate because of folks not caring about where they live. Habitat for Humanity has built barely 200 homes in 'East Naples' since 2012. I believe the data shows 160 units since 2012 - built or rehabbed. Sherry, my assistant will be sending you the graph with accurate data. You are a very intelligent woman,Janet, and I know you will accept data that has been verified.This data was pulled by Habitat from the County's Growth Management division. Please keep an open mind as we go forward. Habitat received the grant and I voted for that because there no other non-profit that applied for that money. We are mandated by the State of Florida to provide housing for the lower income folks of which you now qualify. YOU would qualify to live in a Habitat home Janet. Again, it was nice seeing you and I am disappointed that we had no Latin this summer at Trinity. Warmly, Penny Penny Taylor Collier County Board of County Commissioners District 4, Commissioner 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL. 34112 Penny.Taylor@CollierCountyfl.gov<mailto:Penny.Taylor(c@CollierCountyfl.gov> 239-252-8604 On Jul 11, 2018, at 1:24 PM,Janet OConnell<janetoc8@yahoo.com<mailto:ianetoc8@yahoo.com>>wrote: To Commissioner Taylor...lt was nice to see you and hear that your granddaughter is doing fine. I found yesterday's meeting, especially regarding 11F- Habitat,very disturbing. Mrs. Patricia Cogswell, (real estate appraiser and owner at Reflection Lakes),who spoke after my weak message, was totally 100%correct on her statistics. We are being inundated in East Naples(Our Commissioner Donna Fiala, whom we love in our District, obviously is not listened to by the majority on the Commission and should be.) She knows Naples and has lived here for many years and clearly sees what is happening. Since I lived and worked as an educator for over 30 years in Broward County, I also know first-hand what is already happening to Collier County.Also, Habitat's mission use to be going into blighted areas and giving a leg up to a neighborhood to improve. Since I am originally from New York, this was done in the Bronx with bad end results years later and the same in Fort Lauderdale. Some improvement and then back to blight because the people living in the Habitat housing do not keep it up and could care less about self-pride.This can also be seen even now in Charlee Estates, Regal Acres 1, and Trail Ridge, all 3 communities too close to Reflection Lakes. Regal Acres 2 if Habitat gets the Rezoning, will have very serious implications for Reflection Lakes and wealthier NAPLES RESERVE behind us! After yesterday's meeting, I am quite sure that Habitat will get the Rezoning and the additional 115 Habitat little houses will be within 150 ft of our Manchester Dr. line and 300 ft from lovely Egrets Landing line in Naples Reserve.The fact that you don't represent this District and I guess prefer your wealthy areas and moneyed people,you are seriously 2 hurting your working and retired middle class folks on fixed incomes. My average salary over 30 years with Broward County schools was about$45K annually. My 30th year was close to$60K with my awful state pension based on the average of my last 5 years...rather pathetic. I also have my SS to add on enabling me to meet my expenses on a very tight budget. I have a condo villa on Winchester Ct that I paid under$200K in April 2016. My monthly fees are $473 per month and taxes even under Homestead are too much. But as I said yesterday, I have lived frugally all of my life ( also taking care of my wonderful brilliant mother slowly dying of Alzheimer's), working since age 16 and still working as a tutor for a wonderful home schooled family ( my earnings from them helped me to pay off our huge hurricane assessment of$1800.00 which my insurance denied), but I am almost 68 years of age. I also have my last family member, my sister, on Marco Island slowly dying of emphysema...she had to recently close her much respected business A Carr Transportation.Through hard work one can boost himself/herself up on their own. It means No instant gratification like the majority expect today. Just so you know, I came from wealth, as I was born and raised in very wealthy Pelham Manor, Westchester County, New York. My mother was a genius who at age 16 in 1929 started at ivy league Barnard College on a full scholarship, graduating in 1932. Most women were not attending college back then, plus the Great Depression was in full force. My father attended NYU and became Treasurer of Hess Oil when I was a little girl. Due to my father's illness, by the time I was a teenager we went from riches to rags. I tell you this, because my life has been hard and full of tragedy, but I have always held my head up high and been thankful for the determination I got from my Mom and a measure of her intelligence. I do not believe in handouts since immigrants, including mine, coming into America 100-150 years ago had to work hard and lived in truly awful housing with no organization and no government help. Grants from taxpayers taxes were nonexistent.There is too much greed and corruption running rampant in America nowadays. History should teach us lessons which are also sadly lacking and definitely ignored. I truly was shocked by your motion yesterday, and I doubt you will see me at another meeting again. I hope you continue to have a successful life. I also wish the best always for your cute granddaughter.Acquiring a good education is always the Key to Success too. Respectfully, Janet M. O'Connell Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android< https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=lnProduct&c=Global Internal YGrowth AndroidEmailSig AndroidUsers wl=y m subl=Internal sub2=Global YGrowth sub3=EmailSignature> Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 3 BrownleeMichael From: DAVID KENNEDY<kennedydc@icloud.com> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 12:13 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: personal letter re Habitat zoning request Attachments: Personal letter re Habitat request.docx Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Dear Commissioner Fiala, attached is an original, personal letter from me. Please do read it. Thank you. David Kennedy 14717 Sonoma Blvd. Naples, FL 34114 239-596-8489 1 BrownleeMichael From: Sue Thomas <KAMConcretePumping@live.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2018 1:31 PM To: TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; StrainMark Cc: Vicki Smith Subject: A must read before your Habitat Vote tomorrow Categories: PRINTED Richard and Susan Thomas 14579 Manchester Drive Naples Florida 34114 Sept 5,2018 Collier County Commissioners and Planning Commission Liaison Growth Management Dept./Zoning Services Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Dear Mr. Bosi, Mr. Cohen, Mr. Bellows, Ms. Fiala, Mr. Solis, Mr. Saunders, Ms. Taylor, Mr. McDaniel,Mr. Mark Strain,Mr. Feyer, Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Dearborn, Ms. Homiak, Mr. Sabo: I feel that this is a done deal all ready and this board doesn't care about this area at all. I hope and pray that I am wrong. Do you realize that we are saturated with low income housing all ready which is why Costco and Sam's won't put a store here because the area is saturated with low income families. You have heard concerns about over flowing trash cans, street racing along Greenway, kids cutting through woods into our development, the noise level is all ready loud, boom boxes in the middle of the night, kids where they don't belong yet you are probably going to approve more two story residences behind our homes. This new development will make things even worse because there will be no garages—so that's more people in the home, more cars outside and no place to put the garbage cans—which has created a bear problem—no one in the older development puts the cans in the garage. Nick Kouloheras will tell you have they have an HOA but obviously the people who live there really don't care and don't have ownership pride. Nick Kouloheras, glibly stated that he would look into a wall for us and then the next meeting he said they really don't have the money for it. Additionally, my son owns a concrete pump company and I offered a discount on doing the fill cells in the wall, I have received no call from Habitat which tells me they have no intention of protecting Reflection Lakes. Habitat, no money? Really—I think not, I would like to know the amount of the last fund raising letter sent out brought in. They have plenty of funds and the cost to install the wall is minimal when you are looking to divide that between so many units. If this was your home Penny Taylor, what would you want? I know that you don't care at all about East Naples. You must put in a wall—preferably on top of a berm. I lived in Golden Gate City for over 10 years, it took me a long time to save enough to move out of there and now you want to put a getto behind my home. Nick Kouloheras says it won't affect the appraised value—probably not since that's the taxable amount but when you make an area undesirable, which this vote will do,you have just cast a death sentence on property values in this area. I'm 61, I have no time to 1 recover from this vote. I was planning on being able torefinance my home so I can stay in it—but that won't happen because you will be cutting the value of our property tin Reflection Lakes. Here is a visual of what you are destroying just in case you can't understand what I am saying. y tea. r:P-4 41, rw . 44 a fi r sr 0001t Atto r • ' f I can't imagine this gone—the deer come all the time to Reflection Lakes, 4-5 of them at a time. This is Regal Acres 1 5: 34�fi".g4$jx$ 44, 117 F .w . There were at least 9 homes that had full driveways and flowing in the street 2 .::: 71 '''..t4-''' ''. v mow. 400 Uncut grass and garbage cans outside—this is our bear problem '404,,. rl , t .„.-,-;;-; ''''' immiNgx & .. . Ask _or More can's outside 3 4�a I ; � 1111 , .....u w Driving commercial vehicles on the grass S P1' "MIMiP m Qf3fi$T ii If the wind blew it over—couldn't you pick it up- no pride in ownership here. 4 jjyy€ 2 fl. tilcar -y. .. a And finally—the boat and ry storage yard—but I have to pay to store mine but I will have to look at theirs. Please do the right thing—Give us a wall, on a berm—not a fence—your sticking a basketball court in our backyard—the noise and the boom boxes will be never ending. Please help Reflection Lakes maintain their safety and quiet. Sincerely Rick and Sue Thomas 14579 Manchester Dr Naples, Fl 34114 5 Blessings, Sue Thomas KAM Concrete Pumping Inc. PO Box 990237 Naples, FL 34116 Office: 863-223-5176 Dispatch: 239-913-7277 FAX: 888-413-7844 t � ;tet 6 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2018 12:02 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: Habitat and realtor Rosemary Langkawel Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED Hello again Mrs Fiala...l hope you had a Happy 4th! My good friend and realtor/assistant broker at Premier Plus says she recently had a great chat with you about the Habitat bullies. We have pretty much been told by their horrible President again last week that they consider their going between Reflection Lakes and Naples Reserve a Done Deal. So many of us are very angry and because of their even worse attorney,we're looking for an attorney Pro Bono. We are totally against their tactics and want NO REZONING.The fact that Regal 1 Acres is pretty much a junk-heap is proof of Habitat's lies of maintaining their local properties. Bronx NY and areas of Ft. Lauderdale are SO MUCH PROOF! They also have a 501 C3 status meaning they are EXEMPT from all taxes.With a $93-95 MILLION budget,they are definitely NOT a NON-PROFIT and should be investigated by the IRS.Then,there's an additional 350 acres they also own out here that they intend to get Rezoned and build more! I truly don't know of any teachers, police, or firemen who would even want to live in Habitat's structures...just another huge Habitat lie. Regal 1 Acres is more proof of the truly bad element living there. As for affordable housing, Rosemary knows that we definitely have more affordable housing in East Naples...YOUR DISTRICT...than anywhere else in Naples! That is also why you can't get any additional stores to come out here.The former K-Mart at run-down Freedom Square which continues to be vacant is also not helping Freedom Square.The Dollar Tree there has roof leaks and is in such bad condition...the Manager can't wait to move into nice new store next year behind 5th/3rd Bank. Habitat's presence here will only bring more blight...and Naples Reserve and Reflection Lakes owners have invested so much money here to prevent blight! Rosemary also had a nasty run-in about 6 months ago with the Reverend woman totally in charge of Collier Cty Habitat at a Realtors luncheon. She tried to block Rosemary and many other Realtors from leaving early...Realtors were disgusted with this Reverend woman and her tactics.This same woman was badmouthing Reflection Lakes people at the Wesley Methodist Church on Marco Island a few weeks ago. Definitely not a so-called Christian woman! Rosemary is totally on board with with stopping Habitat. Once again our only hope is NO REZONING, but we are already feeling defeated by Habitat's plans and their thinking that it's a DONE DEAL and we need to get on board with them.The old expression that It's not over until the Fat lady sings is keeping RL and NR willing to fight until the bitter end.Thank you again for all you do. Janet O'Connell Reflection Lakes Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 1 BrownleeMichael From: Lynn Livingston <redwingnutl @me.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 6:45 PM To: FialaDonna Cc: patcogswel11@aol.com Subject: Fwd: Regal Acres II rezoning PUDZ-PL20170001733 Donna, FYI. We moved from Marco Island to retire in a peaceful community. Now they want to build Habitat homes in our backyard. Horrible! Please see forwarded message I sent to the Planning Commission. Aubrey Livingston 14587 Manchester Dr Naples, FL 34114 Begin forwarded message: From: Lynn Livingston <redwingnut1(c�me.com> Subject: Regal Acres II rezoning PUDZ-PL20170001733 Date: September 4, 2018 at 9:57:01 AM EDT To: markstraintc7i colliergov.net Cc: Judy Livingston <judydlivme.com>, patcogswelll(aol.com Dear Commissioner Strain, We are out of town for the month of September, but want to enter our comment for the hearing on September 6, 2018: My family is strongly opposed to any expansion of the Habitat for Humanity development called Regal Acres,which we understand will be called Regal Acres II.The current community called Regal Acres is an eyesore. 80%of the community has homes that are not maintained and yards that are worse. Some of the homes have 3-4 cars in the driveway, even during working hours.These are supposed to be single family homes but obviously have extended families that have moved in. The proposed Regal Acres II will literally be in our backyard on Manchester Dr. Even now,we can hear the noise and loud partying at night from existing Habitat homes.Teenagers from Regal Acres have been coming along the canal and trespassing on Reflection Lakes private property. We have seen groups of 3- 8 teenagers run through our and our neighbors'yards. Having more Habitat homes only 150 feet from the east side of Reflection Lakes will be a horrible eyesore,more noise and possible increase in trespassing. Sincerely, Judy and Aubrey Livingston 14587 Manchester Dr Naples, FL 34114 239-398-3720 1 BrownleeMichael From: DAVID KENNEDY <kennedydc@icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 1:56 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: PUDZ-PL20170001733 Categories: PRINTED, ATTENTION Dear Commissioner Fiala, I have heard that you share the concerns expressed below, which I'm sending to other names I've been given, so this may be just an FYI for you. Thank you for trying to help those in our community who will definitely be affected by Habitat's plans. I am writing to express my serious concern about Habitat For Humanity's plans to expand up to the boundaries of Reflection Lakes and Naples Reserve. They have waited twelve years to complete their original plans for this area. In the meantime these two new communities have appeared, but Habitat is proceeding with little regard or concern for the effect their new development will have on these communities. Their development will clearly have a detrimental impact on the value of a number of homes in Reflection Lakes and Naples Reserve, not to mention the quality of life for these residents. Any planning for such a project should be done in a way that meets the needs of ALL residents in the area, or else the project should be rejected by the county. It disappoints me deeply that so far there is little evidence that the county or Habitat is interested in looking after the needs of those who would be adversely affected by Habitat's plans. I hope you all will give this further consideration. Thank you. David Kennedy 14717 Sonoma Blvd. Naples, FL 34114 239-596-8489 1 BrownleeMichael From: Lenore Meurer<lenorem@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 8:52 AM To: Mike Coffee; FialaDonna Cc: orschks@comcast.net; glubbenl@mac.com; jeankungle@gmail.com; addepot@earthlink.net; jacobwingecr@gmail.com; Vicki.Tracy@comcast.net; georgedanz@outlook.com; thomasc170 @aol.com; glubbenl@mac.com; elliot_mllr@yahoo.com; syglagow@hotmail.com; jacobwingecr@gmail.com; payoung3@hotmail.com; bharris1752@comcast.net Subject: Re Again giving away our money to those who obviously do not need it Attachments: Regal Acres mass planting and landscaping done for media and public tojurs of HFH villages.JPG; HFH Regal Acres Resident Hummer.JPG; HFH Regal Acres, how many residents inb one lil house.JPG; HFH Regal Acres Tractor at home Sunday.JPG; MISC Habitat for Humanity History of Funding 2008 to 2016 (2017 06-19) (2).pdf Here is HFH Regal Acres where we just approved over a 100 more units there. These pictures are from last month on a Sunday. Also attached is the taxpayer million spent to fix Regal acres roofs??They own hummers and F150's and have multiple families in one house there.This is the same in the other HFH commuunities. They can well afford their own repairs, we are being taken for a ride and we need to get reimbursed. Where is the balance sheets from anyone asking for funds?Are we stupid and blind?Anyone see Habitats or even request it? LENORE MEVRER Original Message From: Stephen Jaron <info@renovateandrestore.com> To: Donna Fiala <donnafiala@gmail.com> Cc: Sue 0 <orschks@comcast.net>; Gary Lubben <glubbenl@mac.com>; Jean Kungle <jeankungle@gmail.com>; Lenore <lenorem@aol.com>; addepot <addepot@earthlink.net>; Jacob Winge <jacobwingecr@gmail.com>; Vicki Tracy <Vicki.Tracy@comcast.net>; George Danz <georgedanz@outlook.com>; Tom Cannon <thomasc170@aol.com> Sent: Tue, Jul 10, 2018 10:39 pm Subject: Re: Did you have a campaign event this evening Hi, Is it possible to get Crystal Kinzel (Clerk of Court) involved to begin an Audit of the Collier Housing Dept. and H4H funds? Steve On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:18 PM, Donna Fiala <donnafiala(a_gmail.com> wrote: What about finding the ACTUAL numbers of housing being built right now and what type - rental or for sale products and what classification they fall in low, affordable, work force, medium, etc. PT gets her figures from Cormac, and I'm sure the wicked one at H4H has much to do with that also. They are skewed, and everyone I know is too busy to find out how they are skewed and how to unravel those figures, so PT just keeps touting them, and we keep sputtering but we are never prepared to challenge those figures. And if each person who got up and supported H4H, first they should be asked where THEY live! It really stopped that one guy cold while he figured out what to say. Also, someone should actually write a letter to the editor and ask why the other commissioners voted NOT to distribute the housing equitably! Were they afraid of getting some in their back yard? If so, why??? If its so wonderful, they should be happy to help out! AND, I still say we really need to arm ourselves with figures and true facts in order to gain some credibility. The way we are, we shove our tail between our legs and walk away with our head down, and again they win, and more importantly WE LOOSE! I wonder if Habitat REALLY is looking for other land or whether that was another rouse. I'm sure I'm like you about now. It looks like we loose and there's no way of winning. Who at the State can we ask to help us with the concentration concern. Maybe someone at HUD in the Federal Government, or SHIP in the State. I have a HUD name from when I was in Washington last year, and also a man close to the stop who can strip through any smoke screen, and he writes to me often. If wrote him, how would I compose it? What facts and figures can use to make a point that can be verified? I've asked Mike to write to Nick Koulaharis (or however you spell it) and ask for the list of the 2,000 people who had applied this year for a home but had to be turned away. I'll copy you on any of that, if I get an answer. I'd also like to visually see all the office work they have for each homebuyer that verifies they screened them. That would be interesting. I talked to a lady Trail Ridge the other day. She & her husband are retired and are volunteers, and she asked me to call her regarding Habitat. I just found her phone number again this evening, so I'll call her in the AM. I put it is such a safe place, even I couldn't find it. Donna 2 On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:46 PM, Sue 0 <orschkscomcast.net> wrote: Donna, It is quite obvious that PT doesn't give a whit about her County constituents. I believe that, in her mind, they are of no significance. And unfortunately, they aren't paying attention. When Berkshire Commons starts looking like the East Trail, someone will wake up. She is very happy to accept Nick Kouloheras's explanation that there is no concentration in East/South Naples— per Nick, there are 60,000 residents in our community and HFH has built 1100 homes here. The numbers came from permits and from some third party Nick used. Nick is a slick one— is quick with numbers that don't need to make sense. It is curious how we are labeled as NIMBYs—although we have, by my count, 1440 HFH existing or approved. I find it so interesting that every discussion centers around housing for professionals— teachers, EMS, etc. —but not even Regal II is for them. It's an amazing shell game. I don't think a letter to the NDN would be printed. The Chamber, NCH, NDN, etc. all want housing for the low income worker. There is a statistic I need to get about the percentage of low income workers who will be employed in our five county area by 2040—something like 48%? Don't hold me to that— I will get the official wording. But I believe that is the driving force behind this mess. Yikes! I need an alka-seltzer! Sue From: Donna Fiala <donnafialagmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 6:01 PM To: Stephen Jaron <inforenovateandrestore.com> Cc: Gary Lubben <glubben1@mac.com>; Jean Kungle <ieankunglegmail.com>; Orschell, Sue <orschks(a�comcast.net>; Lenore <lenoremaol.com>; addepot<addepota(�earthlink.net>; Jacob Winge <jacobwingecr(c�gmail.com>; Vicki Tracy <Vicki.Tracycomcast.net>; George Danz <qeorqedanzoutlook.com>; Tom Cannon <thomasc170(a�aol.com> Subject: Re: Did you have a campaign event this evening Sue did you see the BCC meeting today same way as did? Maybe I'm too emotional! This is the way I saw it. But here is my version. If anyone was watching the BCC meeting today I asked that the million dollars the county was again giving to Habitat, plus another $800,000, should go to buying or building in other parts of the county where none exists. Penny made the motion without that addition and Burt seconded it. I said that part should be in there, they asked her if she wanted to add it and she said NO, she wanted it without it, and by their vote, they did too! ! ! They voted and approved it that way without spread equitably. That shows you that even thought 2/3's of her district lives in E.N., she wants all the affordable housing here and not in other parts of the county, which shows you what she thinks of us, and actually she tried minimized our numbers in all the affordable housing. I blew up at that, and the Chairman said to me that was uncalled for. I wanted to ask how many of them had H4H in their 3 district then, two of the speakers from Pelican Bay said WE say NIMBY! I asked the one guy,when he said it where do you live??'?'?? He stammered, but finally answered Miramar Lakes. I explained earlier to them that all we ask is that the affordable housing developments be evenly distributed no one voted with me AGAIN! on another note! Also, Penny violates the employee rules by bringing her large dog to work with her almost every day, and at tax payer expense has her aide walk the dog and clean up after it. She also brings her granddaughter to work all during the summer and after work during school. If she is such a good commissioner, why don't the rules extend to her? She's the only one that violates them and continuously! What happened to a professional office??? Sorry, I just got home form work and the BCC meeting and I'm still steaming mad. Anyway, it should be brought up to the E.N. voters who feel we have enough affordable housing, that she wants it all to be located here. If they agree with her (which Democrats will do) then so be it. If they don't, they need to vote for YOU, Steve! ! ! Someone should watch the meeting and write a letter to the editor or a few letters. Donna On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 6:49 AM, Stephen Jaron <infoCa�renovateandrestore.com> wrote: Hi Donna, Yes, last night was the Greater Naples Leadership debate at the Orange Blossom library Headquarters. I believe it went very well! My phone# is 239-293-0575cel1. Thank you, Stephen Jaron On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 11:09 PM, Donna Fiala <donnafiala(cr,gmail.com> wrote: 4 If so, how did it go? I don't have your phone number or anything, so I couldn't call you. I need to get that into my phone! Donna Stephen M. Jaron Renovate and Restore, LLC Echelon Construction Co., LLC 3784 Bayshore Drive Naples, FL 34112 Tel. 239-254-1002 Fax. 239-352-6380 www.RenovateandRestore.corn FL License # C6C1508194 Stephen M. faron Renovate and Restore, LLC Echelon Construction Co., LLC 3784 Bayshore Drive Naples, FL 34112 Tel. 239-254-1002 Fax. 239-352-6380 www.RenovateandRestore corn FL License # C6C1508194 5 BrownleeMichael From: Office Manager<officemgr©kamconcrete.corn> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 11:12 AM To: StrainMark, BellowsRay; FialaDonna, SolisAndy; SaundersBurt, TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject: Regal II Categories: ATTENTION, PRINTED 1 '9 +L m 4 Naples Florida 34114 June 27, 2018 Collier County Commissioners and Planning Commission L Growth Management Dept. Zoning Services Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Dear Mr. Bosi. Mr, Cohen, Mr. Bellows, Ms. Fiala, Mr. Soli McDaniel. Mr. Mark Strain: Our community gathered for a meeting with Habitat for Hur June 26, 2018 in Reflection Lakes. The goal was to reach ag -facilitate compromise via additional building plan modificat those residents bordering the preserve area separating both d 184 to 300 units will, only increase noise and opportunity foi neighborhood. This was the second meeting and this the second letter Ref1 their concerns. As homeowners, we foresee inevitable secur 1 Blessings, Sue Thomas 863-223-5176 2 BrownleeMichael From: Vicki Smith <vicki14534@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2018 11:50 AM To: McDanielBill; FialaDonna; StrainMark; TaylorPenny; BellowsRay; SolisAndy; Sue Thomas; HomiakKaren; penny.fisher@naplesnews.com Subject: Rezoning decision on 9/6 Categories: ATTENTION People bought land in Reflection Lakes, wasn't cheap and promised woodland preserve behind their homes. Habitat buys land; intends to build in what you folks know is already saturated with low income housing per your own 2015 report. It is your decisions that created lower income areas,own it. Just because one buys land doesn't mean you must let them build. Let them farm the land. Clearly there is bias towards, Habitat,who has the most money and it is not our community who has money to fight this. If you don't say no,then add stipulations to divide our communities. Habitat has the money. Millions. This Rezoning is devastating to what we were promised. Plans to build there must not be granted OR, Habitat must augment plans under new stipulations. The current development out there is not well cared for. We all thought East Naples was the new direction for Growth. No one will buy here if you press forward with more subsidized housing communities. Build these people houses or renovate houses in other neighborhoods to help their property maintain its value. Building subsidized neighborhoods is not the answer. Vicki L Smith i BrownleeMichael From: Vicki Smith <vicki14534@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 10:09 AM To: SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; McDanielBill; FialaDonna; TaylorPenny; StrainMark; BellowsRay; SaboJames Subject: reject rezoning (PL20170001733)west of Greenway Road 34114 Attachments: 8.28.18newcommissionersReflection Lakes Community.docx Categories: ATTENTION Vicki L. Smith 1 BrownleeMichael From: Tom Custer<tcuster49@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 5:51 PM To: FialaDonna; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Cc: Mara Foley; Nick Kouloheras; Mike Yancon Subject: Regal Acres RPUD Rezoning Petition Categories: PRINTED Commissioners, Related to the petition submitted by Habitat for Humanity to expand the existing Regal Acres RPUD, currently on the BCC Agenda for consideration on 10/23/2018. I am a resident of Naples Reserve who will be directly impacted by future developments if this petition is approved, and wanted to express my support for approval. Clearly however, due to misrepresentation by representatives of those whom I dealt with to purchase my home saying the beautiful reserve and the serenity of it and the wildlife would NOT ever be affected I would naturally oppose it. Notwithstanding, I/we clearly do not have the right to impact the opportunity for others who need affordable housing to do so since we have been so blessed to have what we have. Since learning of the petition, I, along with my neighbor, have met with Habitat leadership on several occasions to discuss reasonable options for improving the buffer zone between NR and the proposed expansion. The result of these discussions is an 8 ft concrete wall with heavy foliage on both sides (above and beyond what is required by code) to be installed and run along the north and east sides of Habitats property line. Habitat's Landscape Architect provided drawings indicating the physical location of the wall and what it would look like at installation and approximately 5-10 years from installation and submitted these to the CCPC during their 8/6/18 meeting to be considered as part of the overall development proposal. of which I attended and spoke. Considering all of the above, I feel Habitat's leadership team has gone above and beyond to address our concerns relating to the preserve area that will be developed. In addition, they agreed to communicate to their designers and Trade Contractors to ONLY remove what non-native plants that must be and preserve as many existing plants and trees from their landscape mound to the fence on NR property line with the hopes and expectation little has to be removed. Clearly, as can be seen in the next phase of Winding Cypress along the East Trail and in Beach Resort off 951, little care was given to the removal of trees and plants there. Respectfully, Tom Custer 14603 Topsail Dr. Naples FL 34114 1 BrownleeMichael From: Vicki Smith <vicki14534@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 9:28 PM To: McDanielBill; SaundersBurt; FialaDonna; TaylorPenny; SolisAndy Subject: Say no to Rezoning between Reflection Lakes and Naples Reserve It appears Habitat's rezoning is very political and obviously very bias towards neighboring communities that have sent all of you letters to block this rezoning. We even tried to compromise ; however now Nick is trying to make deals so no one fights the rezoning decision near Reflection Lakes for the Sept 6 meeting. He met with 3 members of our community. See the report of this meeting below. When commissioners make decisions without respecting letters opposing this, then Habitat makes deals so there is no push back at their meeting despite our requests for compromise( solid wall, limit houses, and relocate basketball court since this development is in our backyard), and government ignoring compromise; what recourse does any law abiding citizen do? Many letters were sent to all board members for their consideration. Our future votes will need to be our recourse. "Hi Vicki...Pat Cogswell, Jane Kraska, and myself were asked to go to a meeting with Habitat's President Nick at his office last week. It was informative and courteous. Unfortunately, the 3 items we were hoping for are probably not going to happen. Pres Nick is planning a 6ft chain- link fence with some tree buffers along Manchester line. When I asked him to please be open to the Wall, he wasn't promising. He has found RL's attitude troubling and he doubts that he can convince his Board to be more conciliatory. There is a possibility that if we don't fight Habitat on Sept 6th , then Habitat might be open to some possibilities. The 22 houses closest to Manchester will also be built due to costs, and the playground area cannot be moved due to lack of more space. I gave a full report via email of all of this to our Master Board and have told them that they have to take this on, because they can't ignore it and will need to talk directly to Pres Nick. Frankly, any kind of filibuster idea is not going to work and is too late. I am 99.99% certain that the Rezoning will be done for Habitat. I for one have tried to help our community, but lack of support from Master Board and the majority of our residents has not been there. Pres. Nick does want to be a Good Neighbor and we in turn have to also consider the same. You cannot fight the wealthiest, most endowed Habitat in the USA. Naples Habitat has a $93+MILLION budget for 2018 and a month ago the Collier County Commission gave them another Million in taxpayers Grant! Habitat has also finalized the purchase of the entire 23 acres behind us. It truly is almost a Done Deal. You can't fight this kind of money. Thank you for your suggestions! You can also blame the prior Board for doing nothing about any of this, because sounding the alarm 2 yrs ago would have given us more time to organize and maybe could have helped our cause." Vicki L Smith 2 BrownleeMichael From: Janet OConnell <janetoc8@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2018 4:53 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: Today's Commission Meeting Categories: PRINTED Commissioner Donna Fiala...l just want to thank you for trying today re the Habitat grant. I was/am truly shocked at Commissioner Taylor's motion and seconded by Commissioner Saunders and then approved.Just so you know, not that it will make any difference, Mrs.Pat Cogswell's statistics were 100%accurate. President Nick's permit information was not accurate whereas Commissioner Taylor did not even want to listen to Mrs. Cogswell. Instead she glared at her. She fortunately smiled at me, because I taught her Granddaughter last summer at a church program! You have been a true gift to East Naples for many years. As I mentioned that I was a retired educator, it definitely is possible by working hard (maybe even 2 jobs), following a set budget, and having determination and self-pride, one can find decent housing without relying on any organization for assistance.The truth is Charlee Estates,Trail Ridge, and most of Regal 1 Acres are not being maintained and are definitely already blighted. I did tell this to Pres. Nick, who is a decent young man, but he has blinders on. I also told him that Reflection Lakes will work with him if the Rezoning does go his way,which it probably will, but we will want a Wall,the line of 22 houses too close to our Manchester Drive to be eliminated, and the basketball court moved to another area to minimize excessive noise. He was pleasant and agreed to talk further. Please know that I am completely dismayed and frankly feel defeated over what is happening to Collier County overall. It will be another Broward County in less than a decade. I doubt I will attend another Commission meeting again, because to me it is not worth my time and emotional distress. It was nice to see your honoring your employees! My 30 years with Broward County Schools did not give me any recognition, except that I know I was appreciated by many students and parents in Coral Springs. Keep up the good work. Most respectfully, Ms.Janet M. O'Connell Reflection Lakes Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android October 22,2018 Dear Commissioner Fiala, I am writing in opposition to the expansion of Regal Acres.I am not against the concept of Habitat for Human- ity,but I do not believe building these large communities is the best solution.The HOAs do not run like other community HOAs in that they do not enforce any of the rules,the communities suffer,and less and less they take pride in their home ownership. I believe one of the reasons for this is many of the residents are from different cultures and prefer not to embrace ours,but rather want us to tolerate theirs.Do you know of any communities where you are allowed to park on the grass,have 5 or more cars parked day after day,don't keep up with landscaping,allow people to move in without being vetted by the association,or let repairs continue to pile up?Habitat says they are rectifying this, but we have not seen it come to fruition.How many times can a person call code enforcement when the issues are daily?Plus there is no way for anyone to verify who is actually living in a home except through the HOA, which appear not to be concerned and do not know if asked. Speaking of parking,on the proposed PUD changes,they state there are currently 121 PM peak hour two-way trips and the proposed additional 116 single family residential units will generate approximately 120 PM peak hour two-way trips.Note...184 units that are there now generates 121 trips(not even one car per household)and adding 116 would generate 120 trips(one car per household plus 4 extras)...makes no sense.The difference between 184 units and 116 units is 68.So the 116 units generates more trips than the 184 there now. They also state the bonus units are intended to accommodate housing opportunities for low or moderate-income residents.According to the Collier County affordable housing chart for 2 persons income,this is the 80% ($44,640)to 120%($66,960)category. According to Habitat their 2 persons criteria is maximum$36,000,so neither of these categories will actually be served. Habitat is already advertising this new community on their website before it has even be approved.This cer- tainly gives the impression if they ask for it,they get it.Again,is there anyone else in the county that assumes this.They have already purchased many parcels of acreage in that area that is zoned agricultural.Are we to assume the zoning and density will be approved on these parcels regardless?And we will have more concentra- tion in one area. I do not understand why these projects are not being built in other parts of the County.It is illegal to concentrate in one area,and anyone that lives in Collier knows where the more affordable homes are,East Naples.Or as the planning map also shows,South Naples.It's not a secret,but has been stated by County officials,it's not true. Habitat states the reason is land costs.Why are we not making it mandatory that any monies granted to them for land acquisition is to be used to subsidize their land costs,not the actual purchase price.This would make it more reasonable to pay more for land in higher priced areas and would spread the lower income properties throughout. So in closing,I would ask the Commissioners to reject this expansion,the adjacent residents do not want it,and East Naples has shouldered the majority of all"affordable"income housing in the County,aside from Immokalee,which also has their fair share.The Regal Acres community is large enough already. Sincerely, can Kungle Resident BrownleeMichael From: Donna M. Messer<dmc@carlryanassoc.com> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 4:44 PM To: SolisAndy; McDanielBill; TaylorPenny; FialaDonna; SaundersBurt Subject: October 23, 2018 Agenda Items 9A& 11E Categories: PRINTED Good Afternoon Commissioners, I have been a Collier County resident for 13 years and believe in being an active part of the community. To that end, I've been involved with several projects designed to study housing affordability issues through the Collier Citizens Council as well as Greater Naples Leadership.Through CCC, I worked on a team assisting Kim Grant with research in preparation for the Community Housing Plan. It's my belief those who work in and support our community and are not able to take advantage of living here, should be given increased opportunities to facilitate that effort. I urge you to vote YES on Habitat's project, endorse the rezoning, and advocate for those who support us everyday. Thank you! Donna M. Messer I Carl Ryan Associates LLC 1214.870.1915 1 BrownleeMichael From: Raymond williams <raymondwilliamsjr@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2018 7:52 PM To: FialaDonna Subject: Regal Acres II Categories: PRINTED I'm board member in Westwind Estates in East Naples. I'm contacting you about Regal acres to development being discussed tomorrow at the council meeting. Habitat for Humanity reached out to us in late April early May about their development we had concerns about some issues. And they listen to our concerns and came back with a proposal that was Far exceeded our expectations I just wanted to let you know that on your decision process tomorrow. Thank you Raymond Williams Westwind Board of director Make everyday the best it can. Life is to short not too. Sent by Outlook for Android 1 r AGENDA ITEM 9-B Cotler County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION—ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 2018 SUBJECT: PUDZ-PL20170004414 RUSSELL SQUARE PROPERTY OWNERS/APPLICANT/AGENT: Applicant/Contract Purchaser: Agent: Neal Communities of Southwest FL, LLC D. Wayne Arnold,AICP James Schier,Vice President Q. Grady Minor and Associates,P.A. 5800 Lakewood Branch Boulevard N. 3800 Via Del Rey Sarasota, FL 34240 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Owners: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Cross and Thompson LLC, John D. Bruce, Coleman, Yovanovich&Koester, P.A. Kathleen M. Tetrault Revocable Trust and 4001 Tamiami Trail N. Suite 300 Robert L. Tetrault Revocable Trust. Naples, FL 34103 Please, see Property Ownership Disclosure Form for more details. REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application to rezone the property from the Rural Agricultural(A)zoning district with a portion of the property in a special treament (ST) Overlay to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a residential housing project known as Russell Square RPUD. The property is comprised of seven parcels under a contract purchase agreement. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consists of 32.89 acres and is located east of Santa Barbara Road and south of the intersection of Santa Barbara and Davis Boulevard in Section 9,Township 50 South,Range 26 East, Collier County (see location map, page 2). The proposed Master Plan is included as Attachment B. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 1 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 IM. CUE 11.... 11alriini 11131111 111.11=11 _ �ti.11/21 AM a 3 H 1". imi di INES KM WE men ULM 11121 ',rail WM liall War Kilt :- i a. i -- /1 sa. IPIIIIIII -11 '4 M S0 c4 r ` U . aitimaimi iiiiiiiirli .1 N llimmmillIllimilalmlli Il�Aiq�-�� -cr ° 3 _} „ !11tS 2! _ it c FQ- ..'— ii iii, o lv Z ' ,° 'r a: :, 11 ° o ; _er/ 91 s N J Z Cl N i* ' \ titInniiiiONL \_,.Z` . i tO' i 00 4 ' E '.r 8 ithon mossiNia I 4,s elli ....siall i r-- . „„,w.,,.),4,4, \ .......,.07,.... 21 iliiillii 111".- � I ! E. 1 : E- � ... 4 2 t q _W a � 111411111g' C � 11 1�111M ' a i , t.m.h e.t Q o I 1 —II N ' II Ebi 1,41 07013 mamma ques- LW 5 , � � 11--- \ h I \\ 1,„--- -- ,u-r.-) , , , ' 1 t,1 >.\--,,/ , , , 1 , /% I 1 : PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 2 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petitioner is requesting a rezoning from Rural Agricultural to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) for the purpose of constructing 230 multiple-family residential units. The rezoning proposal is to assemble parcels under separate ownership on 32.9 acres of land and establish a new PUD named Russell Square. The roadway layout, preserve areas, water management areas, amenity and residential areas, required buffers, and requested deviations are detailed on the proposed Master Plan. The general pattern and style of the proposed housing development will be very similar to the multiple-family product developed at the Avalon of Naples PUD, which is also being developed by Neal Communities LLC. The applicant has proposed Development Standards and Developer Commitments. The applicant is requesting several deviations. Specific details for these requests are in the Deviation Discussion Section of this report. The base density permitted is four dwelling units per acre(DU/A),and the project is located within a Residential Density Band. The applicant is seeking three additional dwelling units per acre increasing the total DU/A to seven. The total number of dwelling units proposed is 230 units. The density bonus calculation review is detailed in the GMP Consistency Review of this report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Vacant,zoned MPUD Taorimina Reserve 5.79 DU/A, A Rural Agricultural South: Vacant,zoned A Rural Agricultural East: Vacant, single-family houses, zoned A Agricultural, PUD Naples Heritage Golf 1.43 DU/A West: Multiple-family residential, zoned PUD Falling Waters 5.07 DU/A PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 3 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 Aerial Map (Coun Proper Appraiser) .# i'ill#410,„ , #,,- 1,14104.1.-...14.4tapineomem er§4t..1 ‘ 1*,1 .,, . 4,_ -:4.1. 4.4 . ,t.,,,,4 ..,..,_ „,-- ,w, oil , _ 6 - , ‘, Iv ,...,, s. .46. „ i.... „. ill •* ° hh, 4, , , 4.4 . s1° N--; , ......,.r.,:., sk.)A.... i . 4s®tis M ...,'...: #. rrt+.. .. 1-4„; '0 00, , ,,.. �: , -- f) = 1 f. I GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject site is identified as Urban Designation, Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and it's within a Residential Density Band (Mixed-Use Activity Center#6) on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the GMP. Policy 5.3 in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) states, in part, "All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan." Staff reviewed the proposed land use for consistency with the FLUE. The FLUE states, "Urban designated areas will accommodate... (a) Residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts, and Overlays..." A base density of residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed in the Urban Designated Area, though this is not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted as determined through the Density Rating System depending upon the location and characteristics of the project. As stated in the Future Land Use Element, "The purpose of the Urban Residential Subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public facilities are concentrated. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 4 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 The Density Rating System states, "(b). Proximity to Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center: If the project is within one mile of a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center and located within a residential density band,three residential units per gross acre may be added. The density band around a Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center shall be measured by the radial distance from the center of the intersection around which the Mixed Use Activity Center or Interchange Activity Center is situated. If 50% or more of a project is within the density band, the additional density applies to the gross acreage of the entire project. Density bands are designated on the Future Land Use Map." Because this project site is located within one mile of Activity Center #6 at the intersection of Davis Blvd.(SR84),and Santa Barbara Blvd.,it is eligible for the Residential Density Band Bonus. The FLUE also states, "The final determination of permitted density via implementation of this Density Rating System is made by the Board of County Commissioners through an advertised public hearing process(rezone or Stewardship Receiving Area designation)." This project is eligible for a base density of four residential DU/A and is eligible for a density bonus of three additional dwelling units per acre for being located within the Residential Density Band for Activity Center#6—for a total eligibility of seven DU/A(4 DU/A base+3 DU/A density band bonus = 7 DU/A). The maximum number of dwelling units allowable is 230 dwelling units (32.9 acres * 7 DU/A = 230.3 dwelling units rounded to 230.) The petitioner's request for 230 dwelling units is consistent with the FLUE. The Consistency Review is included as Attachment C. Based upon analysis by the Comprehensive Planning Division,the proposed PUD rezone may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan. 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 PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 5 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 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 Residential PUD request 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 development will impact the following roadway segments: Roadway Link 2017 Current Peak 2017 AUIR AUIR Hour Peak Remaining Existing Direction Service Capacity LOS Volume/Peak Direction Santa Barbara Davis B 3,100/South 2,098 Boulevard Boulevard to Rattlesnake Hammock Road Santa Barbara Davis B 3,100/North 1,537 Boulevard Boulevard to Radio Road Davis Santa Barbara C 2,200/East 1,584 Boulevard Boulevard to County Barn Road Davis Santa Barbara to B 2,900/East 2,037 Boulevard Radio Road Based on the 2017 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the projected trips for the proposed PUD within the 5-year planning period. Transportation Planning Staff is recommending approval of the petition with the following condition: The Master Plan shall be revised to show an interconnection north to the Taormina Reserve PUD. A developer commitment will be added to the PUD Document that requires the interconnection to be included as part of the first SDP or Plat or ROW permit approval and constructed before the first CO of any residential units. Staff is basing this condition of approval on the following: PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 6 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Transportation Element Policy 9.3,which states: "The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout the road network. The LDC shall identify the circumstances and conditions that would require the interconnection of neighboring developments and shall also develop standards and criteria for the safe interconnection of such local streets." LDC 4.07.02.J.4 4. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to encourage smooth traffic flow and minimize hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic.Merging and turn lanes and/or traffic dividers shall be required where existing or anticipated heavy traffic flows indicate need. The interconnection of collector and local streets within the PUD to adjacent lands or developments shall be required except where determined by the County Manager or designee that an interconnection is not feasible or warranted due to existing development patterns, transportation network needs, or the like. Interconnection of local streets shall be designed to discourage through traffic, and not adversely impact local streets in the neighboring residential areas. Where streets within the district intersect adjoining streets, visibility triangle shall be maintained. At issue with this zoning request is the northern extension of Sunset Boulevard providing interconnection to the Taormina Reserve PUD which contains a developer commitment to provide interconnection of Sunset Boulevard. In making this determination staff finds, consistent with LDC 4.07.02.J.4, that the required interconnection is an extension of a local roadway and neighborhood network to adjacent land and developments. Staff further finds that the interconnection is feasible. The interconnection is not likely to adversely impact the local streets, because it is a new extension and continuation of an existing roadway to the future mixed-use development at Taormina Reserve. TRANSPORTATION STAFF CONDITION OF APPROVAL: The Master Plan shall be revised to show an interconnection north to the Taormina Reserve PUD. A developer commitment will be added to the PUD Document that requires the interconnection to be included as part of the first SDP or Plat or ROW permit approval and constructed before the first CO of any residential units. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 7 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 Conservation and Coastal Management Element(CCME): Environmental review staff has found this project to be consistent with the Conservation&Coastal Management Element(CCME). The project site consists of 13.88 acres of native vegetation and tree preservation requirement of hundred ten (110)trees. A minimum of 3.47 (25%) acres of the existing native vegetation shall be placed under preservation and 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 (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. Drainage: The proposed PUD rezone 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: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the RPUD petition to address environmental concerns. The PUD Master Plan provides a 3.47-acre preserve, which meets the minimum 25% native preservation requirement in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07.A.1. In addition to the 3.47-acre preserve,28 native trees (25%of the existing 110 trees)will be required. The four parcels located adjacent to Santa Barbara Boulevard have been partially cleared and historically used as pasture land. LDC section 3.05.07.A.2 requires tree preservation of existing trees on land where the understory has been removed and maintained as lawn or pasture. The trees will be located in areas in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07.A.2. as follows: This planted open space shall be in addition to the area used to satisfy the minimum landscape requirements pursuant to 4.06.00. In lieu of using actual canopy coverage, the following average diameter for tree canopies may be used to calculate canopy coverage of existing trees:slash pine 40 feet,cypress 25 feet, live oak 60 feet, and cabbage palm 10 feet. Open space areas not normally planted with trees,such as stormwater retention areas or lake banks not planted to meet the LSPA requirement, may be used to satisfy this requirement. Trees planted to satisfy this requirement shall be set back a minimum of 30 feet from principal structures and impervious parking areas. No listed animal species were observed on the property. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends Approval of this PUD request with the recommended transportation planning condition. Landscape Review: The landscape buffers depicted on the Master Plan are consistent with the LDC requirements. The petitioner is seeking a deviation, Deviation #9, to allow for no buffers where the preserve and water management area abut Taormina Reserve's existing preserve areas, as depicted on the Master Plan, Exhibit C. See Deviation Discussion Section. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 8 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 School District: At this time, the School District has not provided a review. However, they may provide a review at a later date for concurrency and to ensure there is capacity within the concurrency service area. 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 not readily available but will be extended to the project from existing infrastructure along Whitaker Road and possibly Falling Waters Blvd. System capacity must be confirmed at the time of development permit(SDP or PPL)review,and a commitment to provide service will be established upon permit approval. Zoning Services Review: Zoning Division staff has evaluated the proposed uses related to their intensity and reviewed the proposed development standards for the project. The Zoning Division also evaluated the location project and the potential traffic generation. The proposed multiple-family residential project is located south of Davis Boulevard and north of Rattlesnake Hammock Road in an area that is still largely zoned Estates. The applicant, Neal Communities intends to assemble several Estates zoned lots for their project. However,there has been additional higher density residential development along this portion of Santa Barbara.Falling Waters PUD is across the street to the west with 5.07 DU/A and the proposed Russell Square PUD rezone is intended to be a similar density project.The proposed site is currently vacant and wooded with several single-family homes on Estates lots. There are two nearby neighborhoods developed as PUD,which are Taorimina Reserve,Naples Heritage Golf. Both adjacent PUD's are developed with lower density. The Taorimina Reserve PUD was approved at 5.79 DU/A and the Naples Heritage Golf PUD was developed at 1.43 DU/A. The intensity of the development appears to be reasonable and has been found consistent with the GMP. With respect to Development Standards, the proposed standards are appropriate based on the multiple-family residential use. The Development Standards are included in the backup material. 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": (Zoning Division staff responses in non-bold) 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land,surrounding areas,traffic and access, drainage,sewer,water,and other utilities. Zoning Division staff has reviewed the proposed rezoning request and has concluded the uses and property development regulations are compatible with the development approved in the area. The Public Utilities Division further states water and wastewater services are not readily available but will be extended to the project from existing infrastructure along PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 9 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 Whitaker Road and possibly Falling Waters Blvd. There is adequate water and wastewater treatment capacity to serve the proposed PUD. 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 were reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and demonstrate unified control. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the petition and analyzed it for consistency with goals,objectives, and policies of the GMP.They have found the proposed amendment to be consistent with the GMP. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on the location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Landscape Division staff is of the opinion that the proposed project will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Master Plan proposes the appropriate perimeter landscape buffers. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. There is no deviation from the required usable open space as submitted. Compliance with approved standards would be demonstrated at the time of SDP. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of ensuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Compliance with all other applicable concurrency management regulations is required, including but not limited to plat plans or site development plans. The Transportation Division further states the roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the consistency review, however for consistency with the GMP Transportation Element, Staff is providing the condition of approval noted. The Public Utilities Division further states Collier County has sufficient treatment capacity for water and wastewater service to 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 development plans. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 10 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. For the proposed multi-family residential use, there is adequate supporting infrastructure to accommodate this project, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains. Adequate public facility requirements will be addressed when future development approvals are sought. The Public Utilities Division further states that the area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water mains, to accommodate this project. The scope of any system improvements will be determined at the time of SDP or PPL permit review. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations,or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on a determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to the literal application of such regulations. Nine deviations are proposed in the request to rezone to RPUD. Please see the Deviation Discussion Section of the report. 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 the proposed change in relation to the following when applicable." Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans'compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: (Zoning Division staff responses in non-bold): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals,objectives,and policies of the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)and the elements of the GMP. Comprehensive Planning staff has determined the petition is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the FLUM and other elements of the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern. The existing land use pattern related to surrounding properties is described in the Surrounding Land Use and Zoning section of this report. The proposed multiple-family residential uses will not likely change the existing land use patterns in the area.Both Naples Heritage Golf and Taorimina PUD's are developed with a single-family residential pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The property is zoned Rural Agricultural with some RPUD residential uses near the property. The application is to rezone to RPUD,which would not create an isolated district. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 11 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The existing district boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed RPUD boundaries are logical and appropriate. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The proposed change is not specifically necessary. However, the applicant believes the rezoning is necessary to accommodate the construction of multiple-family residential units in Collier County. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change is not likely to adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The existing neighborhood is lower density residential and the proposal is additional residential dwellings that are multiple-family. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review, however for consistency with the GMP, Transportation Staff is providing the condition of approval noted. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. It is not anticipated that the rezone request to RPUD will create drainage problems in the area. 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 environmental staff will evaluate the stormwater management system and design criteria at the time of SDP or PPL. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed rezone to RPUD is not likely to reduce light or air to adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent areas. Property value is affected by many factors. It is driven by market conditions and is generally a subjective determination. Zoning alone is not likely to adversely affect the property values. Generally, market conditions will prevail. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 12 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Most of the adjacent property is already developed as residential use. The approval of the rezone request from A to RPUD is not likely to deter development activity of surrounding property. 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 rezone to RPUD complies with the GMP and is found consistent, then it is consistent with public policy and the change does not result in the granting of a special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is determined to be consistent with public welfare. 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, it is near other residentially developed property, and the applicant intends to utilize the density band bonus. Additionally, the applicant cannot use the property as they have proposed without rezoning to RPUD and getting approval. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County. The Zoning Division staff determination is the proposed uses are not out of scale with the needs of the community. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The application was reviewed and found compliant with the GMP and the LDC. The Zoning Division staff does not review other sites related to a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. Any development anticipated by the proposed rezone request to RPUD would require significant site alteration. The site is vacant and wooded with lower density single-family uses. Both razing and land balancing would be required prior to any development activity at the site. The development standards would be applied during the SDP and plat 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 PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 13 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance,as amended. The project must comply with the criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF) and must be consistent with applicable goals and objectives of the GMP related to adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by Comprehensive Planning staff for consistency with the GMP as part of the amendment process, and they find it to be consistent. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review.The Public Utilities Division further states the activity proposed by this proposed rezoning 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 petitioner is seeking nine deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The petitioner's rationale and staff analysis/recommendation is outlined below. Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height,to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area and 8 feet in height. The temporary banner sign shall be limited to a maximum of 90 days during season defined as November 1 to April 30 per calendar year. This Deviation will remain valid until 90% of the units are sold or until December 31, 2024, whichever comes first.At such time,the Deviation will be void. Petitioner's Justification: The proposed deviation will allow for a banner sign located on the proposed wall along Santa Barbara Boulevard in order to advertise new homes available within the community. The 4 square foot banner sign permitted by the LDC provides minimal visibility and likely will be difficult to read by motorists traveling along Santa Barbara Boulevard, a 45 mph 6-lane roadway. Additionally, the applicant is requesting that the banner be allowed for up to 90 days per calendar year to allow display throughout the peak winter season for home sales. Due to the property's location on a busy road and high travel speeds along the roadway. The Applicant is seeking an increase to the allowable banner size to ensure visibility of this new community. The requested banner size is in accordance with deviations approved for similar residential projects throughout the County. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as the applicant has proposed an end date of December 2024 for the proposed deviation. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10' from edge of roadway paved surface or back of curb,to allow a setback of 5' from edge of roadway paved surface or back of curb. This deviation excludes public roads. Petitioner's Justification: This deviation will provide locational flexibility for directional signage internal to the RPUD.A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal.All directional signage will meet the Clear Sight Distance PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 14 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 requirements in accordance with LDC Section 60.06.05.Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the master planned developments throughout Collier County.All roads and drives will be privately owned and maintained. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable as the signs will meet applicable LDC standards and the roads are private. Deviation#3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C,Fences and Walls,Excluding Sound Walls,which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height,to permit an 8-foot high wall on top of berm along Cope Lane right-of-way and 12 foot high wall on top of the required water management berm along the Santa Barbara Boulevard right-of-way. Petitioner's Justification: The additional wall height is necessary to provide a buffer from the adjacent 6-lane traffic noise, and the ground must be altered to meet water management criteria. The wall height is consistent with the wall height constructed for Falling Waters west of Santa Barbara Boulevard due to noise concerns associated with the 6-laning of Santa Barbara Boulevard. StaffAnalysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6 (a) and 5.06.02.B.6 (b), On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts, which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet and a minimum setback from all property lines and road right-of-way of 10 feet, to permit two signs, not at the project entrance, of up to 80 square feet (per sign face) to be located along the Santa Barbara Boulevard frontage of the property on the project's wall and to exceed the maximum sign height of 8 feet for a maximum of 12 feet in height measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation with a minimum setback of zero feet from the property line.This Deviation is conditioned upon owner's relocation of the wall and sign at its own expense, in the event it conflicts with a county road expansion or project. Petitioner's Justification: The project access will be located on Cope Lane and not Santa Barbara Boulevard. Cope Lane is not a through street and project signage is not visible at the project entrance for motorists traveling on Santa Barbara Boulevard, the arterial roadway located along the project's western boundary. Providing signage on Santa Barbara Boulevard will meet the intent of the Collier County Sign Code by lessening hazards to pedestrians and motorists by providing project identification signs in a visible location along the project's frontage to aid residents and guests in identifying the project. Santa Barbara Boulevard is a 6-lane arterial roadway with high travel speeds. Having the additional signage square footage is essential for visibility and readability for motorists. The height of the signage will be consistent with the proposed wall height on which it is proposed to be located. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable based on the 6- lane arterial roadway. Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.02.A.2, Sidewalks, Bike Lane and Pathway Requirements,which requires dual sidewalks on local roads internal to the site,to allow a sidewalk on one side of the roadway where the property is permitted with single loaded home sites. Appropriate crosswalks shall be provided at crossing locations. PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 15 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 Petitioner's Justification: A portion of the PUD will be developed with homes located on only one side of the internal street. This internal street segment is approximately 255 feet in length. No residents would have direct access to a sidewalk in this location; therefore, eliminating the need for a sidewalk in this location of the PUD. Appropriate crossroads will be provided to provide safe street crosswalks at each street crossing. StaffAnalysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable based on a single loaded street. Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.A.5, Preservation Standards, which requires preservation areas shall be interconnected within the site and to adjoining off-site preservation areas or wildlife corridors,to allow the onsite preserves to be non-contiguous. Petitioner's Justification: The proposed project site is composed of several parcels, which have been previously impacted by residential and agricultural uses. The highest quality remaining native habitats are not contiguous on the project site and are actually located at opposite sides of the site. One area is a small wetland on the western boundary of the site that was left in place during the construction of Santa Barbara Blvd, and the other proposed preserve area is a wetland on the east side of the site that will remain contiguous with the platted preserves adjacent to the property. Both of these wetland areas are jurisdictional to the Corps of Engineers and are being preserved to meet the avoidance and minimization criteria of the Corps and the SFWMD. Both areas meet the hierarchal criteria of the Collier County LDC 3.05.07.A.4 and will provide greater assurances of viable habitat areas as opposed to trying to restore agricultural pasture or residential areas around the wetland to meet the County required acreage. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable based on the quality of remaining native habitats. Deviation#7 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i,Architectural and Site Design Standards, which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road, including all rights-of-way, shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4., D.10.,D.13.,D.15.,E, and F. Compliance shall be limited to the building façades facing the arterial or collector road to allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. Petitioner's Justification: This Section of the LDC would be applicable to a building located in the amenity area of the project. It is the intent of the developer to install solid walls on their Santa Barbara Boulevard and Cope Lane property boundaries. The wall along Santa Barbara Boulevard will be 12 feet in height, making the amenity building largely impossible for the public to see. Requiring additional architectural embellishments for the amenity building is unnecessary. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation appears reasonable, but the deviation request presumes that the 230 families within the proposed Russell Square PUD would not benefit from PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 16 of 18 Revised: August 20, 2018 • architectural embellishments required in the LDC. The amenity area of the proposed PUD may be the best location for architectural embellishments for the future residents of the neighborhood. Deviation #8 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Parking Space Requirements, which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities,to allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. Petitioner's Justification: The project will have sidewalks throughout allowing residents the ability to walk to the project amenity area. Parking on-site will be provided. It has been this developer's experience that the proposed reduction in required parking provides ample on-site parking for residents and guests and that the LDC requirement results in excess parking for the on-site amenity area. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation appears reasonable, but the deviation request presumes there will be ample parking for the amenity area. Deviation #9 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02, Table 2.4, Buffer Requirements,which requires a 15' wide type"B" landscape buffer to allow no buffer in the areas adjacent to the Taormina Reserve PUD preserve area as depicted on the Master Plan. Petitioner's Justification: This deviation is justified due to the location of the proposed Russell Square preserve area and its adjacency to the preserve areas located within the Taormina Reserve PUD. Providing a landscape buffer either between the preserve areas, or adjacent to the preserve on the Russell Square property provides no benefit to either PUD. the nearest single-family development tract in Taormina Reserve is over 800 feet away with preserve areas located between the Russell Square multi family tract and the single-family tract in Taormina Reserve. Please see attached exhibit identifying the distances between the Russell Square RPUD and Taormina Reserve development tracts. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: The deviation is reasonable and justifiable. The Landscape Division further states that given the extent of the preserve in the abutting PUD, staff supports this deviation. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on May 10,2018, 5:30 PM, at the Shepard of the Glades Lutheran Church 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road Naples,FL.For further information,please see the NIM Summary information in the backup material. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This project does require Environmental Advisory Council(EAC)review,as this project did meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 17 of 18 Revised:August 20, 2018 County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, a deviation is being requested to allow the preserves to be non-contiguous as shown in the Master Plan. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's Office reviewed this staff report on August 28, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning Division staff recommends the CCPC forward petition PUDZ-PL20170004414 Russell Square to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval with the following condition: 1. The Master Plan shall be revised to show an interconnection north to the Taormina Reserve PUD. A developer commitment will be added to the PUD Document that requires the interconnection to be included as part of the first SDP or Plat or ROW permit approval and constructed before the first CO of any residential units. Attachments: A) Proposed RPUD Ordinance, Russell Square B) Proposed Master Plan, Russell Square C) FLUE Consistency Review PUDZ-PL20170004414; Russell Square Page 18 of 18 Revised:August 20,2018 (11' ' o bier CountyPt4 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 CPDD 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 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 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(CPDD). PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 1 of 18 Revised August 16, 2018 I GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: Tilt 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 PUDA-PL20180000049 1-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 2 of 18 Revised: August 16, 2018 L.,, ,...__ 1 1,i , • . OmT ' QJam • S aW a • .�.. = E' Z� a o �7ZQ fl. = CL • W Al Fill 11111)\1 , ; c-cj'LI ,g ®P 1111 Ir Eu`i 0 H O a N =U� O w W a } a w 2 u, m Z I w d 0) J X Ill Lu 5gc7 d 3 p0 O�C�7Ch CD 4 CJ ii tJCO N J N IE W LLl-Y z f. z a c WC 14 o0 yoW 0 QxH.I ? �We q ff per, J o CL al LL _ - i to �w UU W F-W }/ � i:p0 OCCW ` i I--w sz ci.gz (} I i.1cci WG 4 m �gw Ill ...IL'po O j OW g � 2 I1) Y9g g 9 U4Q \> ouw 0 cc R i of,,. PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 3 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 PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 4 of 18 Revised: August 16, 2018 P'M { ,} i , fl F W to e{ n J44,':. p ash - }' w w3� 4. _ y 3t, N 1 't ' b . f.;-. ATE E- .,� s i i'.4.*,;.,1;-11'..:...::.--.......'''''. ta‘„ ' r'' t fi C7k"� ire � ' rK I .1\ ;f �. .E c t z F ;+.. jE=k ,.. M f INIli ....k .hµ `p Nef 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 tof 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 PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 5 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 Current Peak 2017 AUIR AUIR Hour Peak Remaining Existing Direction Service Capacity LOS Volume/Peak Direction Davis Radio Road to B 2,900/West 1,572 Boulevard Collier Boulevard Collier Golden Gate C 2,300/North 825 Boulevard Main Canal to (CR 951) I-75 PUDA-PL20180000049 1-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 6 of 18 Revised: August 16, 2018 Collier I-75 to Davis B 3,600/North 2,027 Boulevard Boulevard (CR 951) Collier Davis C 3,000/North 1,082 Boulevard Boulevard to (CR 951) Rattlesnake Hammock Road 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. PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 7 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. PUDA-PL20180000049 1-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 8 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 PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 9 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 western 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 development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage,sewer,water, and other utilities. PUDA-PL20180000049 1-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 10 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 PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 11 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. PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 12 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 PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 13 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 proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The petition was reviewed for compliance with the GMP and the LDC, and staff does not specifically review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 14 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. PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 15 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." PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 16 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. PUDA-PL20180000049 I-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 17 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 PUDA-PL20180000049 1-75/Alligator Alley CPUD Page 18 of 18 Revised:August 16, 2018