Agenda 04/28/2009 Item # 8B
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 1 of 247
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046: 1M Collier Joint Venture, represented by Richard D. Yovanovich,
Esq., of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., and Wayne Arnold, of Q.
Grady Minor and Associates, is requesting a rezone of the Mirasol PUD from the Planned
Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to the ResidentialPlanned Unit Development zoning
district (RPUD) to remedy the sunsetted status of the project in compliance with LDC Section
10.02.13.D.6. The number of dwelling units originally approved, 799 dwelling units, is not
proposed to change. Ordinance No. 01-20 will be repealed and a five acre tract will revert to
Agricultural zoning. The subject 1,543 acre tract is located on the north side of Immokalee
Road, bordered on tbe east by Broken Back Road and future Collier Boulevard in Sections 10,
15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) review staffs findings and recommendations
along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the
above referenced rezone petition and render a decision regarding the petition.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The petitioner requests that the BCC consider a rezoning from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to
Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) for the Mirasol RPUD to remedy the sunsetted
status of the project in compliance with Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.02.13.D.6. The
number of dwelling units originally approved, 799 dwelling units, is not proposed to change.
Ordinance No. 01-20 will be repealed and a five acre tract will revert to Agricultural zoning.
The Mirasol POO, comprising 1,558:e acres, was zoned from Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district to
Planned Unit Development (PUD) on April 24, 2001, pursuant to Ordinance No. 01-20 to allow for
799 residential units and two, 18-hole golf courses that would feature a clubhouse and recreation
amenities. Since no development has occurred within the LDC allotted three-year time frame the
subject PUD sunsetted on April 24, 2004. The petitioner sought two, two-year PUD extensions
(from April 24, 2004 to April 24, 2008) via petition PlJDEX-2006-AR-9124 that was heard by the
Board of County Commissioners (BCC) on May 8, 2007; the BCC did not take action on that
petition because it was 'withdrawn by the petitioner on that date when he agreed to seek sunsetting
relief through the PUD amendment process instead.
At that May 8, 2007 BCC hearing, the BCC adopted a Developer's Contribution Agreement (DCA)
for the project's prepayment of impact fees to be utilized for intersection improvements at the
Immokalee Road/Collier Boulevard intersection thereby vesting the project's 799 dwelling units.
That DCA indicates that this DCA will "help finance needed improvements and additions to the
County's transportation system" and the DCA is "consistent with both the public interest and with
the comprehensive plan."
Page 1 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 2 of 247
As presently configured, this amendment petition does not propose to add any dwelling units to the
project. This petition does propose to remove the previously proposed flow way as a project
requirement. The applicant is updating the PUD document to remove redundant language from the
original POO document and to update the PUD document to put it in the currently acceptable
format. A five-acre tract that was inadvertently included in the original approval is being removed
from the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The PlJD rezoning, by and of itself, will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no
guarantee that the project, at build out, ,vill maxin1ize its authorized level of development, however,
if the PUD rezone is approved, a portion of the existing land will be developed and the new
development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities.
The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts
of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified
in the Capital Improvement Element (ClE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as needed to
maintain adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. This developer is required to pay 20
percent of the estimated Transportation Impact fee per year for the first 5 years which includes a 20
percent initial security. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building
permit review fees and utility fees associated with connecting to the County's water and sewer
system. Finally, additional revenue is gcnerated by applying ad valorem tax rates to applicable
properties, and that revenue is directly related to the value of improvements. Please note that the
inclusion of impact fees and taxes collected are for informational purposes only; they are not
included in the criteria used by Staff and the CCPC to analyze this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): A portion oftbe total subject property (340.7 acres in Section
22) is designated Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict), the remainder of
the property (1,212 acres in Sections 10 & 15) is designated AgriculturaVRural (Rural Fringe Mixed
Use District [RFMU], Neutral Lands) as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the
GMP.
Relevant to this petition, the Urban Residential Subdistrict allows residential development at a base
density of four (4) dwelling units per acre, subject to the Density Rating System provisions;
recreation and open space; and earth mining and related processing uses. The existing PUD portion
in the Urban area is eligible for a maximum of 1,363 dwelling units.
Eligible density for property within Section 22 of approved PUD:
340.7 acres x 4 DU/A = 1,363 units (1,362.8)
Eligible density for property within Section 22 of proposed PUD amendment:
340.7 acres x 4 DW A = 1,363 units (1,362.8)
The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands allows for a base density of one (I) dwelling
unit (DU) per five (5) acres; golf courses subject to specific standards; and, earth mining and related
processing. The proposed amendment would reduce the amount of property that is v.~thin this
Page 2 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 3 of 247
portion of the existing PUD, from 1,217 acres to 1,212 acres, thus reducing the maximum allowed
density on the portion of the PUD that is located in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District (Sections 10
and 15):
Eligible density for property within Section 10 and IS of approved PUD:
1,217 acres x 0.2 DU/A (1 DU/5 acs.) = 243 units (243.4)
Eligible density for property within Section 10 and 15 of proposed PUD amendment:
1,217 acres - 5 acres = 1,212 acres x 0.2 DU/A (1 DU/5 acs.) = 242 units (242.4)
The entire PUD, Urban Residential and RFMU Neutral Lands combined, is eligible for up to 1,605
DUs. The existing PUD provides for 799 DUs. The proposed PUD amendment proposes the same
amount of residential units, or 799.
The maximum amount of dwelling units allowed in Section 22, located Vvithin the Urban Residential
Subdistrict, and in Sections 10 and 15, located within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, are tD be
developed within their respective District/Subdistrict if density blending is not utilized.
Specific to the Mirasol PUD, Section 5(g) of the Density Rating System allows for density blending
between the portions of the PUD that straddles between, and only within, Sections 15 and 22. The
application documents for this PUD petition asserts that the density allowed for Section 10 is to be
clustered with the density permitted for Sections 15 and 22. Therefore, per the FLUE, if dwelling
units are not developed in Section 10, a maximum of 1,605 dwelling units is the maximum density
that can be developed within Sections 15 and 22 of the Mirasol PUD.
The proposed PUD amendment seeks to utilize the Density Blending provision of the Density Rating
System of the FLUE which reads as follows (conditions and limitations from the GMP are shown in
italics and they are followed by staffs analysis in bold):
5. Density Blending: This provision is intended to encourage unified plans of development and to
preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features that exist within properties that
straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts or that straddle Receiving and
Neutral Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. In the case of such properties, which
were in existence and under unified control (owned, or under contract to purchase, by the
applicant(s)) as of June 19, 2002, the allowable gross density for such properties in aggregate may
be distributed throughout the project, regardless of whether or not the density allowable for a
portion of the project exceeds that which is otherwise permitted, when the following conditions are
met:
1) Density Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddling the Urban
Residential Sub-District or Urban Residential Fringe Sub-District and either the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral or Receiving Lands:
a) The project must straddle the Urban Residential Sub-District or Urban Residential
Fringe Sub-District and either the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral or
Receiving Lands; (Condition met. The existing Mirasol PUD straddles between
the Urban Residential Sub-District and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District
Neutral Lands.)
Page 3 of 18
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 4 of 247
b) The project in aggregate is a lIummum of 80 acres in size; (Condition met.
Condition (g) specifically provides for Section 15 only excludes Section 10 to
utilize Density Blending. The project lands in Section 15 and 22 total 982.97
acres.)
c) At least 25 percent of the project is located within the Urban Mixed Use District
(Condition met. Conditiou 5(g) specifically provides for Section 15 only to utilize
Density Blending. Therefore, the cited minimum applies to the aggregate lands
of the Mirasol PlIO located in Sections 15 and 22 only. The project acreage in
the Urban Mixed Use District is 340.7 acres, which is 28 percent of the acreage in
those two Sections}.
d) The entire project is located within the Collier County Sewer and Water District
Boundaries and will utilize central water and sewer to serve the project unless
interim provisions for sewer and water are authorized by Collier County; (Condition
met. Sections 15 and 22 are eligible for Density Blending and are within the
Collier County Water and Sewer District boundaries and subject to the
"Availability Letter" issued by the Public Utilities Division at the time of Site
Development Plan (SDP).)
e) The project is currently zoned or will be rezoned to a PUD; (Condition met. The
subject petition is for an amendment to the Mirasol PUD.)
f) Density to be shifted to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District from the Urban
Residential Subdistrict is to be located on impacted lands, or it is demonstrated that
the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest
quality native vegetation and/or habitat on-site and to maximize the connectivity of
such native vegetation and/or habitat with adjacent preservation and/or habitat
areas; (Comprchcnsive Planning staff leaves this determination to the
Engineering and Environmental Services Department staff-----see pages 5-13 of
this report.)
g) The entire project shall meet the applicable preservation standards of the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District. (Thcse preservation requirements shall bc calculated
upon and apply to the total project area. Comprehensive Planning staff leaves
this determination to the Engineering and Environmental Services Department
staff.)
h) Section 15 (Township 48 South, Range 26 East), which straddles the boundary of the
Urban Residential Subdistrict and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, is designated
Neutral, and is in the approved Mirasol PUD, may utilize this density blending
provision, subject to the above criteria. (The Mirasol PUD application asserts
that density blending would be utilized for properties located in Section 15.)
FLUE Objective 7 and relevant policies are stated below; each policy is followed by staff analysis.
Objective 7: In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Belter Places:
The Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, and
Page 4 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 5 of 247
adhere to the existing development character oj Collier County, the fOllowing policies shall be
implementedJor new development and redevelopment projects. where applicable.
Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties
to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without
violating intersection spacing requirements oj the Land Development Code. {The Mirasol pun
Conceptual Master Plan depicts direct access to Immokalee Road (S.R. 846), an arterial road
as identified in the Transportation Element}
Policy 7_2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce
vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need Jor traffic signals.
(The Mirasol pun Conceptual Master Plan depicts internal access or loop roads.)
Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets
and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless oj
land use type. (As shown in the Mirasol pun Conceptual Master Plan, thel'e are several
proposed interconnects to the adjoining properties along the east of the projt'.ct boundary.
Native vegetation preserve and open spaces are proposed between the subject Pl'oject and the
adjoining properties to the north and most of the pI'operties to the west thereby precluding
interconnections in that area. In addition, most properties to the west are developed with
single-family homes. The main access to and from the proposed pun is from the south, or
Immokalee Road.)
Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a
blend oj densities, common open spaces, civic Jacilities and a range of housing prices and types.
(Opcn spaces and diffcrent housing types are proposcd in thc PUD document. Sidewalks must
be provided as required by the LDC as no deviations are requested.)
Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed amendment
petition of the Mirasol PUD consistent with the FLUE
Transportation Element: Transportation staff has reviewed the petition and finds it consistent with
the applicable policies of the Transportation Element. However, segment(s) of Immokalee Road that
are significantly impacted by this project are currently over capacity. The petitioner has entered a
Developer's Contribution Agreement (DCA) with the County to provide mitigation addressing
consistency with policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP over the five-year planning
period. Furthermore, the petitioner has agreed to provide fair share compensation for construction of
the north leg of the CR-9511Broken Back Road intersection with Immokalee Road, which includes
modification, replacement, or relocation of the at-grade bridge crossing the Cocohatchee Canal. The
petitioner has also agreed to dedicate to the County the future rights-of-way necessary to
accommodate extension of CR-95 I to the northerly boundary of his project, which extends to the
Lee County line. This dedication is agreed to be in exchange for impact fees; the per-acre property
value for the exchange has been established at $45,000 per acre.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): The MirasoI project is consistent
with all applicable sections of the CCME, including the following objectives and policies.
Conditions and limitations from the GMP are shown in italics and they are followed by staffs
analysis in bold. (Please refer to the Environmental Impact Statement for further detail.)
Page 5 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 6 of 247
Objective 2.2: All canals, rivers, andflow ways discharging into estuaries shall meet all applicable
federal, state, or local water quality standards. To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order
to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be
designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is
made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality ofji-esh water (discharge) to the estuarine system.
This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or
enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing interconnected dry
detention area(s}, lake(s) and a wetland(s} to provide water quality retention and peak flow
attenuation during storm evcnts. Also, the project has demonstrated that nutrients discharged
from the development's stormwater system will be equal to or less than that expected from the
pre-developed condition. The developer has also agreed to submit to the County the results of
its Water Quality Monitoring Plan as required by the SFWMD. (See Environmental Advisory
Council Recommendations for further details.) The project is also providing 150% of the
water quality volumctric requircmcnts of the SFWMD watcr quality cl'itcria and has rcccived
its SFWMD Environmental Rcsourcc Permit thus addressing State watel' quality standards.
Objective 6.1: The County shall protect native vegetative communities through the application of
minimum preservation requirements. The following policies provide criteria to make this objective
measurable. These policies shall apply to all of Collier County except for that portion of the County
which is identified on the Countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area Overlay. As descl'ibed undcr the applicable Policics, these criteria are being
met by the proposed PUD Master Plan.
Policy 6.1.1: For the County's Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area, Conservation
Designated Area, and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, Rural-industrial District and Rural-
Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved on-site
through the application of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and
criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State concern (ACSC) where the
ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply. Thc property straddles
the RFMU neutral land and the urban residential land boundary. The Mirasol PUD was
specifically authorizcd to utilize thc density blending provisions when the density blcnding
provisions were incorporated into the Future Land Use Element (I.R.S.) of the Collier County
Growth Management Plan. Thc density blcnding provisions in the Future Land Use Elemcnt
of the Growth Management Plan specifically allow thc blending of density from the urban area
to Section 15 in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. As such, the entire pl'Oject will be
required to meet the nativc vegetation preservation standards outlined in the RFMU section of
the Conservation and Coastal Managcment Element as presented below (Policy 6.1.2).
Policy 6.1.2: For the County's Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, as designated on the FLUM, native
vegetation shall be preserved on site through the application of the following preservation and
vegetation retention standards and criteria. . . for Neutral Lands: A minimum of 60 percent of the
native vegetation present, not to exceed 45 percent of the total site area shall be preserved, except
that, for Section 24, Township 49 south, Range 26 East, located in the North Belle Meade Overlay, a
minimum of 70 percent of the native vegetation present, not to exceed 70 percent of the total site
areas, shall be preserved Sections 10 and 15 are within the RFMU zoning and are designated
as Neutral lands on the FLUM. Due to the density blending standards, the cntire site will bc
considered under these RFMU criteria.
Page 6 of 18
Agenda Item No. 86
April 28. 2009
Page 7 of 247
Policy 6.1.4: Prohibited invasive exotic vegetation shall be removed /i'om all new developments.
The project has coordinated a Preserve Management Plan with state and federal review
agencies. This plan includes provisions for exotic removal and perpetual maintenance to keep
the preserves free of nuisance and exotic vegetation. This Plan is Exhibit 15 of the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In addition, all developed areas shall be kept free of
exotic vegetation.
Policy 6.1.7: The County shall require native vegetation to be incorporated into landscape designs
in order to promote the preservation of native plant communities and to encourage water
conservation. According to the EIS, native vegetation retention and restoration will be
encouraged throughout the project site. In addition, the wet detention lakes will have all
required littoral plantings indicated at the time of Site Development Plan submittal.
Policy 6.1. 8: An E1S, or submittal of appropriate environmental data as specified in the County's
land development regulations, is required..... The EIS submittal was made in accordance with
this requirement and it was forwarded to the Environmental Advisory Council (EAC).
Objective 6.2: The County shall protect and conserve wetlands and the natural functions of
wetlands pursuant to the appropriate policies under Goal 6. The following policies provide criteria
to make this objective measurable. The County's wetland protection policies and strategies shall be
coordinated with the Watershed Management Plans as required by Objective 2.1 of this Element.
Policy 6.2.1: As required by Florida Administrative Code 9J5-5.006(1)(b), wetlands identified by
the 1994-95 South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) land use and land cover inventOlY
are mapped on the Future Land Use Map series. These areas shall be verified by jurisdictional field
delineation, subject to Policy 6.2.2 of this element, at the time o.f project permitting to determine the
exact location of jurisdictional wetland boundaries. Wetland boundaries haye been delineated
and verified by the SFWMD. The jUl'isdictional lines are indicated on the SFWMD permit
exhibits as well as on tbe applicable exhibits included in tbis EIS submittal (see exhibits 2, 3, 6,
7 of EIS).
Policy 6.2.2: Wetlands shall be defined pursuant to Section 373.019 Florida Statutes. The location
of jurisdictional wetland boundaries are further described by the delineation methodology in Section
373.421 Florida Statutes. This has been done. Wetland boundaries have been delineated and
verified by the SFWMD. The jurisdictional lines are indicated on the SFWMD permit exhibits
as well as on the applicable exhibits inclnded in this EIS submittal.
Policy 6. 2. 4: Within the Urban Designated area, the County shall rely on the wetland jurisdictional
determinations and permit requirements issued by the applicable jurisdictional agency. As stated
above, a portion of the proposed project is within the Urban Designated area but since the
remainder of the project is withiu the RFMU District, the Density Blending provisions require
the entire site to be reviewed under tbe RFMU criteria.
Policy 6.2.5: Within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and that portion of the Lake
Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System which is contained within the lmmokalee Urban Designated
Area, Collier County shall direct land uses away from higher functioning wetlands by limiting
direct impacts within wetlands based upon the vegetation requirements of Policy 6.1.2 o.f this
element, the wetland functionality assessment described in paragraph (2) below, and the final
pennittingrequirements of the South Florida Water Management District. GMP Policy 6.2.5.(6)
Page 7 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 8 of 247
states, "Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetlands in order to result in no net loss
of wetland jum;:tions." In addition, the policy states, "No net loss of wetland functions" shall
mean that the wetland functional score of the proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland
functional score of the impacted wetlands. However, in no case shall the acreage proposed for
mitigation be less than the acreage being impacted. The project is proposing impacts to 586
acres of wetlands. The Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP) functional assessment
conducted for the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) pcrmit showed that the
wetlands being impacted are of lower quality and lower functional value than high quality
wetlands. The hydrological changes in the area over the past 30 years coupled with the dense
exotic vegetation infestation have depressed the functional viability of the wetlands on the
project site. However, the GMP still requires wetland mitigation such that the acrcage
mitigated can not be less than that impacted. Therefore, the County has required its own
wetland mitigation. The project has identified 515.2 acres of 586.2 acres (88 percent) of the
required wetland mitigation acreage. The remaining 71 acres of off-site mitigation shall be
identified prior to SDP approval. Furthermore, the project is providing for 5 smaller
preserve areas which contain higher quality wetlands within the development area. (Higher
quality wetlands are those that have a WRAP score of 0.65 or greater.)
Policy 6.2.6: Within the Urban Designation and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, required
wetland preservation areas, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be dedicated as conservation
and common areas in the form of conservation easements and shall be identified or platted as
separate tracts; and, in the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), these areas shall also be
depicted on the PUD Master Plan. All preservation, buffer, and mitigation areas required
under the County Codes will be placed under conservation easements prior to site plan
approval as outlined in this Policy and as required by the LDC at the time of development.
Objective 6.4: The County will protect, conserve and appropriately use ecological communities
shared with or tangential to State and Federal lands and other local governments. This PUP is
proposing to presen'e lands that will connect existing and proposed preserve lands to the west with
existing preserve lands to the east. The Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) and
the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary are also located to the east and north of the project as shown on
Exhibit 8 of the EIS.
Objective 6.5: The County shall protect natural reservations from the impact of surrounding
development. For the purpose of this Objective and its related policies: natural reservations shall
include only Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRP As) and designated Conservation Lands on the
Future Land Use Map; and, development shall include all projects except for permitting and
construction of single-jamily dwelling units situated on individual lots or parcels. 171is Objective
and its Policies shall apply only to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use district [except as noted in Policy
65.3].
Policy 6.5.2: The following criteria shall apply to development contiguous to natural reservations in
order to reduce negative impacts to the natural reservations: The proposed project is located
adjaeent to the CREW Natural Resource Protection Area. The entire boundary adjacent to
the NRP A is included in the preserve areas of the project. Adjacent preserve areas associated
with other developments will be protected through natural and structural buffers, placement
of less intensive uses such as golf course and water mllnagement areas, and through the
education of residents.
Page 8 of 18
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 9 of 247
Goal 7: The County shall protect and conserve its fisheries and wildlife.
Objective 7.1: The County shall direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and
their habitats. The County relies on the listing process oj State and Federal agencies to identifY
Jpecies that require special protection because oj their endangered, threatened, or species oj special
concern status. The project is not within a NRP A but is adjacent to one. Development and
preserve locations associated with the development have taken into account providing the
largest possible buffers between the development and the NRPA boundary.
Policy 7.1. 2: Within areas of Collier County, excluding the lands contained in the RLSA Overlay,
non-agricultural development, excluding individual single-family residences, shall be directed away
from listed species and their habitats... A Listed Species Survey has beeo coodueted on the
project site. Coordination has occurred between the project and Florida Fish and Wildlife
Consen'ation Commission (FFWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The
FFWCC has not commented on the project since the 2002 SFWMD approval but the USFWS
has reeently issued their Biological Opinion (Exhihit 17 of EIS) and indicated that the project
would not jeopardize any federally listed species.
Policy 7.1.4: All development shall comply with applicable Jederal and state permitting
requirements regarding listed species protection. The project has undergone significant review
by the FWS and the results of that review are presented in the Biological Opinion.
Policy 7.1. 6: The County shall evaluate the need for the protection oj listed plants and within one
(1) year oJthe effective date oJthis amendment adopt land development regulations addressing the
protection of listed plants. The petitioner stated in the EIS tbat the only plants from the list tbat
have been observed on the Mirasol site are the common wild pine bromeliad (TiIlandsia
fasciculata) and the buttelily orchid (EncvcIia tamoensis). These plants bave been observed io
several of the cypress areas and the vast majority will be preserved under the proposed plan.
Goal 11: The County shall provide Jor the protectiOl~ preservation and sensitive re-use oj historic
resources
Objective lJ.1: To protect historic and archaeological resources in Collier County. No
archaeological sites are known to exist on this property.
Discussion of CCME Obiective 2.1: Engineering and Environmental Services Staff Comments
(conditions and limitations from the GMP are shown in italics and they are followed by staff's
analysis in regular type):
Within the ColJier County Growth Management Plan, the Conservation and Coa~tal Management
Element Objective 2.1 states the following:
By January 2008, the County shall complete the prioritization and begin the process oj
preparing Watershed Management Plans, which contain appropriate mechanisms to protect
the County's estuarine and wetland systems. The process shall consist of
1) An evaluation oj areas for which Watershed Management Plans are not necessary based
011 current or past watershed management planning efforts;
2) An assessment oj available data and inJormation that can be used in the development of
Watershed Management Plans; and
Page 9 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 10 of 247
3) Budget authorization to begin preparation of the first Watershed Management Plan by
January 2008.
A funding schedule shall be established to ensure that all Watershed Management Plans will
be completed by 2010. 1n selecting the order of Plan completion, the County shall give
priority to watersheds where the development growth potential is greatest and will impact
the greatest amount of wetland and listed species habitats. The schedule and priorities shall
also be coordinated with the Federal and State agency plans that address Total Maximum
Daily Loads (TMDLs).
Until the Watershed Management Plans are completed, the County shall apply the following
as interim standards for development:
a) All new development and re-development projects shall meet 150 percent of the water
quality volumetric requirements of Section 5.2.1{a) of the Basis of Review for
Environmental Resource Permit Applications Within the South Florida Water
Management District (February 2006) and the retention and detention requirements,
and the allowable offsite discharge rates required by Drainage Sub-element Policy
6.2 and 6. 3, respectively;
b) Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall
be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity
on site and within or adjacent to the impacted wetland
c) Floodplain storage compensation shall be evaluated for developments within the
designated jlood zones "A ", "AE", and "VE" as depicted on the Flood Insurance
Rate Maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency with m7
effective date of November 17, 2005. Floodplain storage compensation shall also be
evaluated for areas known to be periodically inundated by intense rainfall or
sheetflow conditions.
d) All development located within areas identified on Figure 1 shall be evaluated to
determine impacts to natural wetlands, jlowways, or sloughs. For this particular
evaluation, natural wetlands, jlowways, or sloughs shall be tentatively identified as
contiguous lands having a continual preponderam::e of wetland or wet facultative
plant species and a ground elevation through the major portion of the natural
wetland, jlowway, or slough at least one (1) foot lower than the ground at the edge of
the natural wetland, jlowway, or slough. The edge of the natural wetlands, jlowways,
or sloughs shall be identified by field determination and based upon vegetation and
elevation differences from the adjacent uplands or transitional wetlands. The County
shall require the applicant to avoid direct impacts to these natural wetlands,
jlowways, or sloughs or. when not possible, to ensure any direct impact is minimized
and compensated for by providing the same com'eyance capacity lost by the direct
impact. The County shall adhere to the limiting discharge rates of each basin as
outlined in Ordinance 2001-27, adopted May 22, 2001 which amended the County
Water Management Policy and provided basin delineations where special peak
discharge rates have been established. The limiting discharge rates will be reviewed
as a part of the Watershed Management Plans, and modified according to the
analyses andfindings of the Watershed .Management Plans.
Page 10 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 11 of 247
e) All new development and re-development proJects shall ensure surrounding
properties will not be adwrsely impactedfrom the proJect's influence on st01'lftwater
sheet flow.
j) Prior to the issuance of a flnal development order, the County shall require all
development proJects to obtain the necessary state and ftderal environmental
permits.
g) Within one year of the effective date of these amendments. the County shall adopt
land development regulations to require Best Management Practices of fUture
development or re-development pro/ect.~. Best A1anagement Practices means
structural and nonstructural facilities or practices intended to reduce pollution either
through source control or treatment of stormwater.
In reviewing the Mirasol PUD, staff evaluated each of these criteria to detennine if the proposed
development activities could comply with the overall purpose of the Objective. Knowing that the
County has initiated the development of Watershed Management Plans, the proposed PUD must then
be evaluated in accordance with the interim standards for development as specified in sub-
paragraphs "a" through "g".
Compliance with Sub-paragraph "a" - The Mirasol PUD proposes to develop using a stepped water
management system that provides 150 percent of the required stonnwater quality treatment volume
before discharging into the separate offsite flow-through lake system, which will have the potential
to provide additional water quality treatment even though there are no credits provided for the
additional water quality treatment.
Compliance with Sub-paragraph "b" - The Mirasol PUD contains lakes, conveyance facilities, and
other methods designed to contain and provide storage compensation as a part of the overall
stonnwater management system.
Compliance with Sub-paragraphs "c", "d" and "e" - The Mirasol PUD was designed to incorporate
the requirements of these three sub-paragraphs through a combination of features. The Flood
Insurance Rate Maps published by FEMA identify the Mirasol property as flood zone "X" based
upon a coastal surge analysis only. However, portions of the property are known to be periodically
inundated by intense rainfall or sheetflow conditions, so that factor had to be included in the
proposed development's design.
The property is located within areas identified in the Figure I (see below) attached to the CCME
Objective 2.I.d. In considering whether or not the property would qualify for evaluation on impacts
to natural wetlands, floW\vays, or sloughs, the definition for these tenns needs to be considered on a
regional basis, as intended in the original creation of the definition, and not limited to an individual
property's boundary as the comparative condition. 1be nature of this site makes it difficult to apply
Objective 2.l.d's I-foot criteria in defining a flowway.
However, high elevation aerial photography, along with aerial topography (LiDAR imagery)
identifies a large, wide historical wetland flowway system extending from northwest of Lake
Trafford into both Collier and Lee counties. Existing development activities in both Collier and Lee
counties have tended to pinch and direct the historical regional sheetflow conditions so that it
becomes somewhat difficult to detennine specifically where the edge of the regional flowway would
be in a more natural state. Currently, the sheetflow travels across the northern tl1ird of the Mirasol
Page 11 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 12 of 247
PUD property, which is proposed to be preserved, and makes its way south to the Cocohatchee
Canal, traveling to the west of the Mirasol PUD property. C\ment conditions restrict the sheetflow,
which must pass through a 270 foot-wide gap near the Old Cypress golf course, west of the Mirasol
PUD property.
,.;ro'.
Figure 1 (as referenced in Objective 2.1.d)
Because portions of the property are known to be periodically inundated by sheetflow, the
requirements of sub-paragraph "d" require the proposed development to avoid direct impacts to
these natura] wetlands, flowways or sloughs, or, when not possible, ensure any direct impact is
minimized and compensated for by providing the same conveyance capacity lost by a direct impact.
Page 12 of 18
Agenda Item No. 86
April 28. 2009
Page 13 of 247
The Mirasol PUD property is a mixture of uplands and wetlands such that it is not possible to avoid
direct impacts to these natural wetlands, flowways or sloughs and still develop the property in a
manner consistent with the requirements for health, safety and welfare of residents. Because of
other existing developments in both Collier and Lee counties that have pinched the historical
wetland flowway, it is not reasonable to determine that the Mirasol PUD property is undevelopable
if suitable alternative measures can be provided to address the passage of historical offsite sheetflow
and floodplain storage compensation while ensuring that surrounding properties will not be
adversely impacted from the project's influence on the sheet flow. The purpose of sub-paragraph
"d" was never intended to serve as a wetland impact minimization evaluation tool. Those
requirements are covered in other portions of existing regulatory review. The purpose was to ensure
that sheetflow through natural systems was evaluated and maintained so that development activities
didn't restrict the flow or storage capacity and cause greatly increased runoff volumes or sheetflow
depths on nearby and upstream properties.
The Mirasol PUD was designed to maintain desirable wetland sheetflow elevations coming toward
the property from the northeast by only receiving them into the project's developed portion of the
property once they reach a specified elevation. A long weir at the northern edge of the development
was expressly designed to maintain existing flows and water levels on adjacent properties. Under
normal conditions a notch in the weir accepts the same amount of water into the development as
would currently be conveyed from a series of culverts located at the berm along the canal at the
southern edge of the property. As wet season water levels rise, water is allowed to overtop the weir
and flow into a chain of lakes designed to pass the sheetflow through the property and into the
downstream receiving canal along the north side of Immokalee Road. This prevents the undesirable
rise in water elevations in the flo"way to nearby properties and to the northeast, and thus addresses
many possible problems to existing developments along the boundaries of the regional sheetflow
flowway. The Mirasol PUD developed portions are served by individual stormwater management
sub-basins that each provide the required controlled discharge and comply with Ordinance 2001-27.
By addressing the three sub-paragraphs in a total package approach, staff determined that the
proposed development is in compliance with the requirements.
Compliance with sub-paragraph "f' - TIle Mirasol PUD will be required to obtain all necessary
federal, state, and local pennits before construction activities can commence.
Compliance WitlI sub-paragraph ''1;('' - This is strictly a County effort requirement and is not an issue
for any single development application.
GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as tillS
proposed rezoning to RPUD. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of
consistency or inconsistency with the applicable policies of the GMP as part of the recommendation
for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A finding of consistency
with the FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall finding that is required, and staff
believes the petition is consistent '>'lith the FLUM and the FLUE. The proposed PUD amendment is
also collSistent with the GMP Transportation Element as previously discussed. Environmental staff
is recommending that the petition be found consistent with the CCME. Therefore, zoning staff
reconnnends that the petition be found consistent with the applicable policies of the GMP.
Page 13 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 14 of 247
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT:
This request contains no provisions to address the Affordable-Workforce housing demands that it
may create.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD documents to address any
environmental concerns. This petition was required to submit an Environment Impact Statement
(EIS) and was heard by the Environmental Advisory Commission (EAC) on February 4, 2009. The
EAC voted 6 to 2 to recommend approval subject to the conditions of approval contained in the EAC
staff report. A copy of the EA C staff report is included in the back up material. Please refer to that
document for environmental review details.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ffiAC) RECOMME~1)ATION:
The EAC heard this petition on February 4, 2009. Chairman Hughes made the motion to approve
the petition subject to the following conditions:
1. Tills approval is subject to the recommendations contained in the EAC Staff Report as follows:
a. The project is proposing impacts to 586 acres of wetlands. The project has identified 515.2
acres of 586.2 acres (88 percent) of the required wetland mitigation acreage. The remaining 71 acres
of off site mitigation shall be identified prior to SDP approval; and
b. The minimum preserve acreage shall be maintained. Additional preserve acreage shall be
added onsite or offsite to compensate for any clearing needed for private access to out parcels within
the preserve.
And further subject to the following additional conditions:
2. This petition shall be subject to comi)liance with condition #33 of the South Florida Water
Management District Environmental Resource Permit SFWMD, ERP #1 1-02031-P dated September
13, 2007, issued to LM. Collier, which states "The Permittee shall implement the Mirasol Water
Quality Monitoring Plan, attached as Exhibit 6. lilly deviation from these testing and monitoring
procedures will require prior approval from the District Environmental Compliance Staff. Such
request shall be made in writing and shall include (1) reason for the change and (2) an outline of the
proposed change" into this approval.
3. The rcsults of the Water Quality Monitoring referenced above shall be submitted to Collier
County's Director of Engineering and Environmental Services.
4. If the Petitioner is not in compliance with standards in condition #2 (condition #33 of the
SFWMD, ERP referenced above), remediation shall occur at the Petitioner's expense.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Standridge. The motion passed 6 to 2 with Mr. Penniman and Dr.
Hushon voting against the motion. Dr. Hushon stated she was voting against the motion because the
petition is inconsistent with the following Sections of the GMP, Conservation and Coastal
Management Element - 2.l.d, 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5. She expressed concern that the rules currently in
place are not being implemented. Mr. Penniman stated he was voting against the motion because he
Page 14 of 18
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 15 of 247
believed the Petition violates the Goals 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5 of the GMP, Conservation and Coastal
Management Element.
Two persons spoke at the EAC voicing opposition to this petition. Nicole Ryan Conservancy of
Southwest Florida submitted a copy of GMP CCME Section 2.1 and voiced her opinion that this
project was not consistent with this policy because the project is within a High Priority Restoration
Area and the project fails to avoid and minimize wetland impacts.
Brad Comell, Collier County Audubon Society also spoke, voicing his opposition to the petition and
his concurrence with the Conservancy of Southwest Florida's position. Additionally, he added his
concerns about wildlife habitat. (Please refer to the EAC Minutes for details.)
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION:
The CCPC heard this petition on March] 9, 2009; a motion was passed to forWard petition PUDZ-
A-2007-AR-12046 to the BCC with a recommendation of approval of staffs Recommendation,
with additional changes accepted by the petitioner's agent and additional stipulations by a vote of 5
to 3 with Commissioner Vigliotti making the motion and Commissioner Schiffer seconding the
motion.
Commissioner Murray dissented, sating that he believed the petition to be inconsistent with CCME
Policy 2.1 d. Commissioner Caron stated she would not support the petition believing tlle petition to
be inconsistent with Policies 2.1.d, 2.2, 2.3, 2.3.6 and 6.25. Commissioner Caron also stated that
she would not support the petition because the Master Plan lacked detail, and because she has
concerns about the outflow from this project as it reaches the Cocohatchee Canal and the
downstream effects this project may have upon the Wiggins Pass Estuary System, which is an
outstanding waterway operating in an impaired condition. Commissioner Homiak also dissented.
Commissioner Homiak did not offer any reasons for her vote.
The recommendation was subject to the following stipulations:
1. The PUD Master Plan shall be rcvised to show the location for the proposed main clubhouse
and other community-wide uses; and
2. The PUD document itself shall be revised as follows:
a) The word "native" shall be put in front of "wildlife sanctuary" in PUD section ILA.vi; and
b) The reference to stories in the Development Standards Table 1 for the multi-family uses be
revised to limit the Maximum Zoned Height to 5 stories inclusive of parking; and
c) The maximum zoned height in the Development Standards Table I shall be limited to 50
feet; and
d) The golf course setback shall be revised to a minimum of 10 feet for all structures; and
Page 15of18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 16 of 247
e) Deviation #2 shall be revised to reflect the language read into the record by the petitioner's
agent, i.e., for any cul-de-sac greater than 1,200 feet and every cul-de-sac 1,200 feet thereafter
the developer shall provide some kind of turn-around for emergency vehicles; and
f) The EAC recommendations shall be incorporated into the approval.
In addition to the stipulations noted above, the Petitioner's agent agreed to the following additional
condition:
Section I.B (Accessory Uses) of the POO document shall be revised to show that uses numbers
7, 8 and 10 shall only be permitted in conjunction with the "main clubhouse" as that use is
shown on the Master Plan as "Conceptual Club House Complex Location."
The petitioner's agent revised the PUD documents to incorporate all the recommendations noted
above and the revised documents were approved by the CCPC on April 2, 2009 as a consent item.
Because some CCPC members did not support the motion and because there were letters of
objection submitted regarding this petition and testimony was provided at the CCPC hearing in
opposition to the petition, this petition cannot be placed on the summary agenda.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This is a site specific rezone from a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPlJD) Zoning District
to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as
the Mirasol RPUD. Site specific rezones are quasi-judicial in nature and require ex parte disclosure.
As such the burden falls upon the applicant to prove that the proposed rezone is consistent with all
the criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC),
should it consider denying the rezone, to determine that such denial would not be arbitrary,
discriminatory or unreasonable. 1bis would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not
meet one or more of the listed criteria below.
Criteria for RPUD Rezones
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for
approval or not.
I. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in
relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrowlding areas, traffic and access, drainage,
sewer, water, and other utilities.
2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contract, or
other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to
arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas
and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense? Findings and
recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney.
3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed RPUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the
GMP.
Page 16 of 18
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 17 of 247
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may
include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development?
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring
the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expanSIOn.
8. Consider: Conformity with RPUD 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 equivalcnt to literal application of such regulations.
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land
use map and the elements of the GMP?
10. Will the proposed RPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern?
11. Would the requested RPUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district
unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts?
12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed
amendment necessary.
14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood?
15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of
traffic deemed incompatible with surrolUlding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected
types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or
otherwise affect public safety?
16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem?
17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas?
18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent
property in accordance with existing regulations?
20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ("reasonably") be used in accordance
with existing zoning? (a "core" question...)
Page 17 of 18
Agenda Item No 88
April 28. 2009
Page 18 of 247
22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county?
23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use.
24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which
would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed RPUD rezone on the
availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in
the Collier County GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate
Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.1 06, art.II], as amended.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the RPlJD rezone request that the
Board of County Conunissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety,
and welfare?
The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the written
materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps,
studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the BCC hearing as these
items relate to these criteria. A supermajori ty vote of the Board is necessary for approval. The
proposed Ordinance was prepared by tlle County Attorney's Office. (HFAC)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Conunissioners find this petition consistent with the
applicable GMP goals, objectives and polices and therefore approve petition PUDZ-A-2007-AR-
12046.
PREPARED BY:
Kay Deselem, AICP, Principal Planner
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review
Page 18 of 18
Item Number:
Item Summary:
Meeting Date:
r agv I VI 4..
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 19 of 247
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
88
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members: PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046: 1M Collier Joint Venture, represented by
Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq., of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A.,
and Wayne Arnold, of O. Grady Minor and Associates, is requesting a rezone of the Mirasol
PUD from the Planned Unit Development lPUD) zoning district to the Residential Planned
Unit Development zoning district (RPUD) to remedy the sunsetted status of the project in
compliance with LOC Section 10.02.13.0.6. The number of dwelling units originally
approved, 799 dwelling units, is not proposed to change. Ordinance No. 01-20 will be
repealed and a five acre tract will revert to Agricultural zoning. The subject 1,543 acre tract is
located on the north side of lmmokalee Road, bordered on the east by Broken Back Road
and future Collier Boulevard in Sections 10.15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida. (CTS)
4/28/200990000 AM
Prepared By
Kay Deselem, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Principal Planner
Date
Zoning & Land Development Review
9/22/20089:32:49 AM
Norm E. Feder, AICP
Approved By
Transportation Services
Transportation Division Administrator
Transportation Services Admin.
Date
4/7/20097:18 AM
Approved By
Judy Puig
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Operations Analyst
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
Date
4113!2009 10:38 AM
Approved By
Ray Bellows
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Chief Planner
Date
Zoning & Land Development Review
4/13/200912:08 PM
Approved By
Nick Casalanguida
Transportation Services
MPO Director
Date
Transportation Planning
4/13/2009 2:58 PM
Approved By
Heidi F. Ashton
County Attorney
Assistant County Attorney
County Attorney Office
Date
4/13/20093:51 PM
Approved By
Susan Istenes, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Zoning & Land Development Director
Date
Zoning & Land Development Review
4/13120095:03 PM
Approved By
Joseph K. Schmitt
Community Development &
Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Environmental Services Adminstrator
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
4/16/2009 2:46 PM
ra.ge;.:.. VI.:..
Agenda Item No. 8S
April 28. 2009
Page 20 of 247
Apprond By
Jeff Klatzkow
County Attorney
County Attorney
County Attorney Office
Date
4/17/200911 :44 AM
Approved By
OMS Coordinator
County Manager's Office
OMS Coordinator
Date
Approved By
Mark Isackson
County Manager's Office
Office of Management & Budget
4/20/20099:20 AM
Approved By
Leo E.Ochs, Jr.
Board of County
Commissioners
Budget Analyst
Office of Management & Budget
Date
4/20/200912:31 PM
Deputy County Manager
Date
County Manager's Office
4/20/20097:00 PM
Agenda Item No. 88
AGENDAIf1'~kA'8.Pl009
P"age':!10T247
ey County
STAFF REPORT
TO:
FROM:
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
HEARING DATE: MARCH 19, 2009
SUBJECT:
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046, MlRASOL RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (RPUD)
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT:
Owner: 1M Collier Joint Venture
P.O. Box 10489
Naples, FL 34104
Agent: Mr. Richard D. Yovanovich
Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson Yovanovich
& Koester, P.A.
4001 Tamiami Trail N. Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone
of the Mirasol PUD from the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district to the Residential
Planned Unit Development zoning district (RPUD) to remedy the sunsetted status of the project in
compliance with Land Development Code (LDC) Section 1O.02.13.D.6. The number of dwelling
units originally approved, 799 dwelling units, is not proposed to change. Ordinance No. 01-20
will be repealed and a five acre tract will revert to Agricultural zoning.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject 1,543 acre tract is located on the north side oflmmokalee Road (CR 846), bordered
on the east by Broken Back Road and the proposed future Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Sections
10, 15 and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See location map on
following page)
PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The Mirasol PUD, comprising 1,558:e acres, was zoned from Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district
to.Plauned Unit Development (PUD) on April 24, 2001, pursuant to Ordinance No. 01-20 to allow
for 799 residential units and two, 18-hole golf courses that would feature a clubhouse and
recreation amenities. Since no development has occurred within the LDC allotted three-year time
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 eepe
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 1 of 25
coo)/"-
roO"'-
ON
ON '-
Z .0
r-~N
CO N
2:C: Q)
-D.cn
roc:{ m
D 0..
CO
(j)
OJ
<(
I ".
I .'
, . !
" ,
'-
'-
'-
, \
. \
I I
. /
/
.
;! .
,
~ i
.
~
.
oh
[~ct
~
---I
~'!.:J
0..
<(
2
CD
z
z
o
N
a:len
000
,0
~N.
o _
Ie
~
f
w
.
,
~
o
z
~
=
w
.
.
II.
I
.
z
S
o
~
.
<0 ;!
a; z
o
;:
o
w
.
en
UJ
~
UJ
en
UJ
0::
c..
o
z
<(
f-
Z
UJ
:2
c..
9
UJ
>
UJ
o
f-
Z
UJ
()
<(
...,
o
<(
d gpS p:
..s::2~~
....=' g~
~g~~
:gu ~~
Os r3- ~
~Q'lS.j.l:.,
= Il .
...: '" z~
~.g ~~
:::::= i;"s..;
~~ ~~
~og~o::-
""-1lJI <~
;::::=:: c gp-:-:-
P'S J! g
~~ u~
E-< &l
Ol;
~~
~
I
1
w
]
l
'. ",". - .~.~-. -.' '~;~;':';'~:::':~~;;:":\J:~,'~':r..,~,....>::,::;;-,:... ,'. '.'.. .'."...... CO~~E::;TY.~'
::::::: . : :::: <c:'. .):::?::::li~:c::C:':. .::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::<::: >::: >1
.... ... "..:,.,'.--'-...-..-.,........'.,.;.:.........:....,..... ........ -... -... -. -. -..
t......... ............,-,:.."...."..",.....,'.c..: ,'.........'.....................'...',..'....,..1
.' :Nr.:-: : :':':'.: '.,'::,'....:. ."','.: ..:':.:::.:.:-:.:.... . :':':-:':-:. :N:P:,:.: -:.:.:-1
l>>t-::::::} VA~T :::::'.' <<<<<:>::)
OUT PARCEL ............ ..,.... ..'.......
OWNERd'tAMAXLUl ',..',..','.....'.. ,..........
PARKLAND'
IPUD)
.............. .
.............. .
.,............ .
'.:::-:-:-:." '.:::-:.;.:-:.;-:,
..... .',.'.....'...',.
...... .
. .......,
..........,
......... .
......... .
........ -'
. . . . . , - . . . . .
,:,:,;,:,:':.NP';.:';.:
,.......
I'" .
V.......
......... .
.. .. .. .. '1
......... .
.......... .
:.;.: 'j' . . . . . . .
.. '1
,'.:::::::::::::::::1
. ....:1
...,. .
,.,.. .
..,.,. .
..... .
. . . - . . .
....... .
(AI
VACANT
'*1:' :::::_::~i::~::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.
tl~}(~~~jI~i;tit!ji:> < <::::::::::::: <:::: <:;..
l~~'-"'" -t;:titj~if.f~~~;' :.:.:.: ',' -~'-':":':':': ::: :.:
TERAFINA
IPUD)
RIG
.1
RIG
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET t OF 3
CLIENT:
PROJEC1 NAME
Agenda Item No, 88
Anr;1 28 2009
Page 24 of 247....
- ~
le
~
"
"'
g
0..
S
..
~
<b
9
~
'"
l!;!
C5
~
s
~
M1RASD~
PROPERTY
POUNPAR'I'
IAl
VACANT
~
o 500
SCALE IN
HERIlA.(;E BAY
IPU~)
C"ftiflcalcofAutho.il"I"'hNlli_lB3N'i4~ndED3GG4
DRAWING NAME:
MlRASOLPUDAMENDMENT
I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
....I!'i\
::mrt.GNOLI
.....~D
:::::'nARBER &
......~D
::::::~DRUNDAGE, INC.
Professional Engineers, Planners & Land Surveyors
<'ollic,Cu"nlY: 7400 T~mi.miT,.il N... N;lI'Ic.. H.- .\4108 rh, (239, 597..Hll. F..: (!J9) $6<>-220.1
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT 'C2'
4
1000
FEET
DRAWN BY ROP ABS ~ No.: 7883
REVlEWIf) BY: ROP ACAO flU: NAME 94JBC2
DATE: 05/06 DRM,lJNG filE Me 9418-2
SCALf: 1~"'10CO' 5.YEF.T. 2 OF J
NOTE: FOR PLAN lEGEND AND SPECIAL NorES SEE SHEer 3 OF 3
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 2 OF 3
L
TERAFINA
(PDDI
d
1s:'lYPf
'I'L-Bot:.
RIG
4-
I
i
L
@
~ ~ f/
" " U'mE
'B't.B.e. RIG
om CYPRESS " "
(PUD' ~ "
~ "
" ~
TREE FARM
(PU.)
IS-TYPE
'S'LB.E.
Mi'A$OI<'~
PROPERTY I
aOIJNDARY :
I
~I
~
~
'lil
51
~I
I
.. "
"
MIRASOl
PROPERlY .. " tS'TYPE V
BOUNDARY 'B'LB.E.
.. "
RIG
~ ENTRY
, SIONAGE
ITYP.)
CLIENT:
PROJECT NAME
MIRASOL PUD AMENDMENT
I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
....I!~
:::::hGNOLI
.....~D
:::::'nARBER &
......~D
===:::~DRUNDAGE, INC.
Professional Engineers, Planners & Land Surveyors
C<lllicrCa""I~: 7400 T'mi~nl; 'fr..1I N. .N"",lh, fot- 54108 ~"., {Z39l597-.H11-1'.~: (13!1S66-220,1
CerrifiCl1~ Df Aurhoriulliol; N"" tB 366~ ond EB ~
DRAWING NAME:
...
~
1iE
!?l
'"
~
~
~
~
'T
~
'"
~
~
'"
S?
'"
s
il!
SFWMD
PREseRVE
"
1~ 14
.2,23
<r8
ENTRY
SIGNACE
IIYP.)
~(t' rrPE'B' L.1l.E.
lOO'PROI'OUIl9S1EXl.
R.O.W, (lEf;llCATtON
POSSIBLE
FUTURE
INTERCONNECT
POsslau A
FUTURE ~
INTERCONNECT
HERITACE BAY
(PU~I
~
o 500
SCALE IN
1000
FEET
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT 'C2'
DRAWN BY: RQP .~88 PROJECT No.: 7883
REVIEWED BY: ROP ACAD f1Lr ~AME: 9418C2
DATE: D5/08 DRAWING riLE No.: 9418 1
SCALF.: 1"""1000' SHEET: 1 or J
lEGE N D
Agenda Item No. 88
Anril 28. 2009
Page 26 of 247...
~
is
!!l
,
~
S
'"
~
'7
~
'"
l!!
;3
~
1i;
;;:
UJ
Q:
l CONCEPTUAL LAKE LOCATIONS
* RIG RESIDENTIAL I GOLf
j::::::::::::i NATIVE PRESERVE
bnY.' HI OTHER PRESERVES
~
RIGHT-Of-WAY
* LANI> USE AREAS ARE CONCEPTUAL ANI> SUBJECT TO
RELOCATION/CHANGE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING
SPECIAL NOTES:
1) WHERE APPLICABLE ALONG PROJECT BOUNDARY AND UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED PRESERVE AREAS SHAll SERVE AS BUFFERS. IF AFTER EXOTIC REMOVAL
THE PRESERVE VEGETATION FAILS TO MEET MINIMUM CODE BUFFER STANDARDS
ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIAL MAY BE REQUIRED.
NATIVE HABITAT SUMMARY:
EXISTING NATIVE HABITAT = 853.Z Ac.::!:
REQUIRED NATIVE HABITAT (60%) = 511.9 Ac. +
PROVIDED NATIVE HABITAT (ON SITE) = 461.6 Ac.::!:
NATIVE HABITAT PROVIDED (OFF-SITE) = 50.3 Ac. +
CLIENT:
PROJECT NAME
I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
MmASOLPUDAMENDMENT
E5Eem..G NOLI Corlllleotr of ^...dlOrJ~~livn N~ LB 3664 ~nd EB 3664
.....~D
:===:~nARBER &
......~D
::::mnRUNDAGE, INC.
Professional Engineers, Planners & land Surveyors
CQlII<'I" COUIllY: 7400 nmi.omi Tr::>i! N.. N'I'k>, Ft.. 341U8 Ph,; (2)9) H'7-Hl1 . J'.,~: (Z}9) 5Gf>.lllll
DRAWING NAME:
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT 'C2' LEGEND & SPECIAL NOTES
QRAI'fN BY:
REVIEWED BY:
DATE:
SCALE:
POP
ROP
05/08
1"-2000'
ASS PROJECT No.: 7883
ACAD mE NAME: 941BC2
ORA'MNG FILE No.: 9418-,3
SH[[7: .3 or J
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 27 of 247
frame the subject PUD sunsetted on April 24, 2004. The petitioner sought two, two-year PUD
extensions (from April 24, 2004 to April 24, 2008) via petition PUDEX-2006-AR-9124 that was
heard by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) on May 8, 2007; the BCC did not take
action on that petition because it was withdrawn by the petitioner on that date when he agreed to
seek sUllSetting relief through the PUD anlendment process instead.
At that May 8, 2007 BCC hearing, the BCC adopted a Developer's Contribution Agreement
(DCA) for the project's prepayment of impact fees to be utilized for intersection improvements at
the lmmokalee Road/Collier Boulevard intersection thereby vesting the project's 799 dwelling
units. That DCA indicates that this DCA will "help fmance needed improvements and additions
to the County's transportation system" and the DCA is "consistent with both the public interest
and with the comprehensive plan."
As presently configured, this amendment petition does not propose to add any dwelling units to
the project. This petition does propose to remove the previously propOsed flow way as a project
requirement. The applicant is updating the PUD document to remove redundant language from
the original PUD document and to update the PUD document to put it in the currently acceptable
format. A five-acre tract that was inadvertently included in the original approval is being removed
from the project.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: (please see attached exhibit entitled Mirasol
Adjacent Development and Preserves for a pictorial rendering of the adjacent uses.)
North: Village Walk, a developed residential project within Lee County, with a zoning
designation of Residential Plarmed Development (RPD)
East: Heritage Bay DRI/PUD, a developing project with a zoning designation of PUD that
allows a maximum of 3,450 residential units, 200 Assisted Living units, 54 golf holes, and 40
acres of commercial uses, and Agricultural (ST) zoned lands some of which are part of the Crew
Trust Lands and other undeveloped tracts
South: Immokalee Road (CR 846), and then the developed Laurelwood and Richland PUD zoned
projects
West: Terafma and the Parklands PUD zoned projects. Terafina (approved at a density of 1.3
units per acre) and Parklands (approved at a density of 2.5 units per acre) remain undeveloped.
Additionally there are smaller agriculturally zoned tracts that are used for agricultural and
residential purposes; then Olde Cypress (approved at a density of 2.1 units per acre), a developed
residential project with a zoning designation ofPUD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): A portion of the total subject property (340.7 acres in
Section 22) is designated Urban (Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict), the
remainder of the property (1,212 acres in Sections 10 & 15) is designated Agricultura1/Rural
(Rural Fringe Mixed Use District [RMFU], Neutral Lands) as identified on the Future Land Use
Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19,2009 CCPC
Rev: 314/09
Page 2 of 25
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 28 of 247
Relevant to this petition, the Urban Residential Subdistrict allows residential development at a
base density of four (4) dwelling units per acre, subject to the Density Rating System provisions;
recreation and open space; and earth mining and related processing uses. The existing PUD
portion in the Urban area is eligible for a maximmn of 1,363 dwelling units.
Eligible density for property within Section 22 of approved PUD:
340.7 acres x 4 DU/A = 1,363 units (1,362.8)
Eligible density for property within Section 22 of proposed PUD amendment:
340.7 acres x 4 DU/A = 1,363 units (1,362.8)
The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Neutral Lands allows for a base density of one (I) dwelling
unit (DlJ) per five (5) acres; golf courses subject to specific standards; and, earth mining and
related processing. The proposed amendment would reduce the amount of property that is within
this portion of the existing PUD, from 1,217 acres to 1,212 acres, thus reducing the maximum
allowed density on the portion of the PlJD that is located in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District
(Sections 10 and 15):
Eligible density for property within Section 10 and 15 of approved PUD:
1,217 acres x 0.2 DU/A (I DU/5 acs.) = 243 units (243.4)
Eligible density for property within Section 10 and 15 of proposed PUD amendment:
1,217 acres - 5 acres = 1,212 acres x 0.2 DlJ/A (I DU/5 acs.) = 242 units (242.4)
The entire PUD, Urban Residential and RFMlJ Neutral Lands combined, is eligible for up to 1,605
DUs. The existing PUD provides for 799 DUs. The proposed PUD amendment proposes the same
amount of residential units, or 799.
The maximum amount of dwelling units allowed in Section 22, located within the Urban
Residential Subdistrict, and in Sections 10 and 15, located within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District, are to be developed within their respective District/Subdistrict if density blending is not
utilized.
Specific to the Mirasol PUD, Section 5(g) of the Density Rating System allows for density
blending between the portions of the PUD that straddles between, and only within, Sections IS and
22. The application documents for this PUD petition asserts that the density allowed for Section 10
is to be clustered with the density permitted for Sections 15 and 22. Therefore, per the FLUE, if
dwelling units are not developed in Section 10, a maximum of 1,605 dwelling units is the
maximmn density that can be developed within Sections 15 and 22 of the Mirasol PUD.
The proposed PUD amendment seeks to utilize the Density Blending provision of the Density
Rating System of the FLUE which reads as follows (conditions and limitations are followed by
staff's analysis in italics):
5. Density Blending: This provision is intended to encourage unified plans of development and to
preserve wetlands, wildlife habitat, and other natural features tllat exist within properties that
straddle the Urban Mixed Use and Rural Fringe Mixed Use Districts or that straddle Receiving and
Neutral Lands within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. In the case of such properties, which
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 ccpe
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 3 of 25
Agenda Item No. 86
April 28. 2009
Page 29 of 247
were in existence and under unified control (owned, or under contract to purchase, by the
applicant(s)) as of June 19, 2002, the allowable gross density for such properties in aggregate may
be distributed throughout the project, regardless of whether or not the density allowable for a
portion of the project exceeds that which is otherwise permitted, when the following conditions are
met:
1. Density Blending Conditions and Limitations for Properties Straddling the Urban
Residential Sub-District or Urban Residential Fringe Sub-District and either the Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District Neutral or Receiving Lands:
(a) The project must straddle the Urban Residential Sub-District or Urban Residential
Fringe Sub-District and either the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral or Receiving Lands;
(Condition met. The existing Mirasol PUD straddles between the Urban Residential Sub-District
and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Neutral Lands.)
(b) The project in aggregate is a minimum of 80 acres in size; (Condition met.
Condition (g) specifically provides for Section 15 only excludes Section 10 to utilize Density
Blending. The project lands in Section 15 and 22 total 982.97 acres.)
(c) At least 25 percent of the project is located within the Urban Mixed Use District
(Condition met. Condition 5 (g) specifically provides for Section 15 only to utilize Density
Blending. Therefore, the cited minimum applies to the aggregate lands of the Mirasol PUD located
in Sections 15 and 22 only. The project acreage in the Urban Mixed Use District is 340.7 acres,
which is 28 percent of the acreage in those two Sections). The entire project is located within the
Collier County Sewer and Water District Boundaries and will utilize central water and sewer to
serve the project unless interim provisions for sewer and water are authorized by Collier County;
(Condition met. Sections 15 and 22 are eligible for Density Blending and are within the Collier
County Water and Sewer District boundaries and subject to the "Availability Letter" issued by the
Public Utilities Division at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP).)
(d) The project is currently zoned or will be rezoned to a PUD; (Condition met. The
subject petition is for the Mirasol PUD.)
(e) Density to be shifted to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District from the Urban
Residential Subdistrict is to be located on impacted lands, or it is demonstrated that the
development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the highest quality native
vegetation and/or habitat on-site and to maximize the counectivity of such native vegetation and/or
habitat with adjacent preservation and/or habitat areas; (Comprehensive Planning stqff leaves this
determination to the Engineering and Environmental Services Department staff)
(f) The entire project shall meet the applicable preservation standards of the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District. (These preservation requirements shall be calculated upon and apply
to the total project area. Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to the
Engineering and Environmental Services Department stqff.)
(g) Section 15 (Township 48 South, Range 26 East), which straddles the boundary of
the Urban Residential Subdistrict and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, is designated Neutral,
and is in the approved Mirasol PUD, may utilize this density blending provision, subject to tlle
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19. 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4109
Page 4 of 26
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 30 of 247
above criteria. (The Mirasol PUD application asserts that density blending would be utilizedfor
properties located in Section 15.)
FLUE Objective 7 and relevant policies are stated below; each policy is followed by staff analysis.
Objective 7: In an effort to support the Dover, Kohl & Partners publication, Toward Better Places:
The Community Character Plan for Collier County, Florida, promote smart growth policies, and
adhere to the existing development character of Collier County, the following policies shall be
implemented for new development and redevelopment projects, where applicable.
Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties
to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such counection can be made without
violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. (The Mirasol PUD
Conceptual Master Plan depicts direct access to 1mmokalee Road (S.R. 846), an arterial road as
identified in the Transportation Element.)
Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce
vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals.
(The Mirasol PUD Conceptual Master Plan depicts internal access or loop roads.)
Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets
and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of
land use type. (As shown in the Mirasol PUD Conceptual Master Plan, there are several proposed
interconnects to the adjoining properties along the east of the project boundalY. Native vegetation
preserve and open spaces are proposed between the subject project and the adjOining properties to
the north and most of the properties to the west thereby precluding interconnections in that area
In addition, most properties to the west are developed with single-family homes. The main access
to and from the proposed PUD is from the south, or 1mmokalee Road.)
Policy 7.4 The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a
blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types.
(Open spaces and different housing types are proposed in the PUD document. Sidewalks must be
provided as required by the LDC as no deviations are requested.)
Based upon the above analysis, Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed amendment
petition of the Mirasol POO consistent with the FLUE
Transportation Element: Transportation staff has reviewed the petition and finds it consistent
with the applicable policies of the Transportation Element. However, segment(s) of Immokalee
Road that are significantly impacted by this project are currently over capacity. The petitioner has
entered a Developer's Contribution Agreement (DCA) with the County to provide mitigation
addressing consistency with policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management
Plan over the five-year planning period. Furthermore, the petitioner has agreed to provide fair
share compensation for construction of the north leg of the CR-95 I /Broken Back Road intersection
with Immokalee Road, which includes modification, replacement, or relocation of the at-grade
bridge crossing the Cocohatchee Canal. The petitioner has also agreed to dedicate to the County
the future rights-of-way necessary to accommodate extension of CR-95 I to the northerly boundary
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19. 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 5 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 31 of 247
of his project, which extends to the Lee County line. This dedication is agreed to be in exchange
for impact fees, but the per-acre property value for the exchange has not been established as of this
time.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): The Mirasol project is consistent
with all applicable sections of the CCME, including the following objectives and policies. (Please
refer to the Environmental Impact Statement for further detail.)
Objective 2.2: All canals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estnaries shall meet all applicable
federal, state, or local water quality standards. To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to
limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be
designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is
made to enhance the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine
system. This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or
enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing interconnected dry detention
area(s), lake(s) and a wetland(s) to provide water quality retention and peak flow attenuation
during storm events.
Objective 6.1: The County shall protect native vegetative communities through the application of
minimum preservation requirements. The following policies provide criteria to make this objective
measurable. These policies shall apply to all of Collier County except for that portion of the County
which is identified on the Countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as the Rural Lands
Stewardship Area Overlay. As described under the applicable Policies, these criteria are being met
by the proposed PUD Master Plan.
Policy 6.1.1: For the County's Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area, Conservation
Designated Area, and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, Rural-Industrial District and Rural-
Settlement Area District as designated 011 the FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved on-site
through the application of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria,
unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State concern (ACSC) where the ACSC
standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply. The property straddles the
RFMU neutral land and the urban residential land boundary. The Mirasol PUD was specifically
authorized to utilize the density blending provisions when the density blending provisions were
incorporated into the Future Land Use Element (LB.5.) of the Collier County Growth Management
Plan. The density blending provisions in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management
Plan specifically allow the blending of density fi'om the urban area to Section 15 in the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District. As such the entire project will be required to meet the native
vegetation preservation standards outlined in the RFMU section of the Conservation and Coastal
Management Element as presented below (Policy 6.1.2).
Policy 6.1.2: For the County's Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, as designated on the FLUM, native
vegetation shall be preserved on site through the application of the following preservation and
vegetation retention standards and criteria for Neutral Lands: A minimum of 60 percent of the native
vegetation present, nat to exceed 45 percent of the total site area shall be preserved, except that, for
Section 24, Township 49 south Range 26 East, located in the North Belle Meade Overlay, a
minimum of 70 percent of the native vegetation present, not to exceed 70 percent of the total site
areas, shall be preserved Sections 10 and 15 are within the RFMU zoning and are designated as
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mlrasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4109
Page 6 of 25
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 32 of 247
Neutral lands on the FLUM Due to the density blending standards, the entire site will be
considered under these RFMU criteria.
Policy 6.1.4: Prohibited invasive exotic vegetation shall be removed from all new developments.
The project has coordinated a Preserve Management Plan with state and federal review agencies.
This plan includes provisions for exotic removal and perpetual maintenance to keep the preserves
free of nuisance and exotic vegetation. This Plan is Exhibit 15 of the EIS. In addition, all
developed areas shall be kept free of exotic vegetation.
Policy 6.1.7: The County shall require native vegetation to be incorporated into landscape designs
in order to promote the preservation of native plant communities and to encourage water
conservation. This shall be accomplished by: According to the ElS, native vegetation retention and
restoration will be encouraged throughout the project site. In addition, the wet detention lakes will
have all required littoral plantings indicated at the time of site development plan submittal.
Policy 6.1.8: An Environmental Impact Statement (ErS), or submittal of appropriate environmental
data as specified in the County's land development regulations, is required..... This EIS submittal
was made in accordance with this requirement and it was forwarded to the EA C
Objective 6.2: The County shall protect and conserve wetlands and the natural functions of
wetlands pursuant to the appropriate policies under Goal 6. The following policies provide criteria
to make this objective measurable. The County's wetland protection policies and strategies shall be
coordinated with the Watershed Management Plans as required by Objective 2.1 of this Element.
Policy 6.2.1: As required by Florida Administrative Code 9J5-5.006(1)(b), wetlands identified by
the 1994-95 South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) land use and land cover
inventory are mapped on the Future Land Use Map series. These areas shall be verified by
jurisdictional field delineation, subject to Policy 6.2.2 of this element, at tlle tinle of project
permitting to determine the exact location of jurisdictional wetland boundaries. Wetland
boundaries have been delineated and verified by the SFWMD. The jurisdictional lines are
indicated on the SFWMD permit exhibits as well as on the applicable exhibits included in this EIS
submittal (see exhibits 2, 3, 6, 7 of ElS).
Policy 6.2.2: Wetlands shall be defined pursuant to Section 373.019 Florida Statutes. The location
of jurisdictional wetland boundaries are further described by the delineation methodology in Section
373.421 Florida Statutes. This has been done. Wetland boundaries have been delineated and
verified by the SFWMD. The jurisdictional lines are indicated on the SFWMD permit exhibits as
well as on the applicable exhibits included in this EIS submittal.
Policy 6.2.4: Within the Urban Designated area, the County shall rely on the wetland jurisdictional
determinations and permit requirements issued by the applicable jurisdictional agency. As stated
above, a portion of the proposed project is within the Urban Designated area but since the
remainder of the project is within the RFMU District. the Density Blending provisions require the
entire site to be reviewed under the RFMU criteria.
Policy 6.2.5: Within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and that portion of the Lake
Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System which is contained within the Immokalee Urban Designated
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Miraso! RPUD
March 19, 2009 eepe
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 7 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 33 of 247
Area, Collier County shall direct land uses away from higher functioning wetlands by limiting direct
impacts within wetlands based upon the vegetation requirements of Policy 6.1.2 of this element, the
wetland functionality assessment described in paragraph (2) below, and the final permitting
requirements of the South Florida Water Management District. GMP Policy 6.2.5.(6) states,
"Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetlands in order to result in no net loss of
wetland functions." In addition, the policy states, ""No net loss of wetland functions" shall mean
that the wetland functional score of the proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland
functional score of the impacted wetlands. However, in no case shall the acreage proposed for
mitigation be less than the acreage being impacted." The project is proposing impacts to 586 acres
of wetlands. The project has identified 515.2 acres of 586.2 acres (88 percent) of the required
wetland mitigation acreage. The remaining 71 acres of off-site mitigation shall be identified prior
to SDP approval.
Policy 6.2.6: Within the Urban Designation and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, required
wetland preservation areas, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be dedicated as conservation and
common areas in the form of conservation easements and shall be identified or platted as separate
tracts; and, in the case of a Plarmed Unit Development (P1JD), these areas shall also be depicted on
the PUD Master Plan. All preservation, buffer, and mitigation areas required under the County
Codes will be placed under conservation easements prior to site plan approval as outlined in this
Policy and as required by the LDC at the time of development.
Objective 6.4: The County will protect, conserve and appropriately use ecological cornmunities
shared with or tangential to State and Federal lands and other local governments. This PUD is
proposing to preserve lands that will connect existing and proposed preserve lands to the west with
existing preserve lands to the east. The Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) and the
Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary are also located to the east and north of the project as shown on
Exhibit 8 of the EIS.
Objective 6.5: The County shall protect natural reservations from the impact of surrounding
development. For the purpose of this Objective and its related policies: natural reservations shall
include only Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) and designated Conservation Lands on
the Future Land Use Map; and, development shall include all projects except for permitting and
construction of single-family dwelling units situated on individual lots or parcels. This Objective
and its Policies shall apply only to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use district [except as noted in Policy
6.5.3].
Policy 6.5.2: The following criteria shall apply to development contiguous to natural reservations in
order to reduce negative impacts to the natural reservations: The proposed project is located
adjacent to the CREW Natural Resource Protection Area. The entire bowldary adjacent to the
NRP A is included in the preserve areas of the project. Adjacent preserve areas associated with
other developments will be protected through natural and structural buffirs, placement of less
intensive uses such as golf course and water management areas, and through the education of
residents.
Goal 7: The County shall protect and conserve its fisheries and wildlife.
Objective 7.1: The County shall direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and
their habitats. The County relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies to identify
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 8 of 25
Agenda Item No. 86
April 28. 2009
Page 34 of 247
species that require special protection because of their endangered, threatened, or species of special
concern status. The project is not within a NRP A but is adjacent to one. Development and preserve
locations associated with the development have taken into account providing the largest possible
buffirs between the development and the NRPA boundary.
Policy 7.1.2: Within areas of Collier County, excluding the lands contained in the RLSA Overlay,
non-agricultural development, excluding individual single-family residences, shall be directed away
from listed species and their habitats... A Listed Species Survey has been conducted on the project
site. Coordination has occurred between the project and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission (FFWCC) and US. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The FFWCC has not
commented on the project since the 2002 SFWMD approval but the USFWS has recently issued
their Biological Opinion (Exhibit 17 of E1S) and indicated that the project would not jeopardize any
federally listed species.
Policy 7.1.4: All development shall comply with applicable federal and state permitting
requirements regarding listed species protection. The project has undergone significant review by
the FWS and the results of that review are presented in the Biological Opinion.
Policy 7.1.6: The County shall evaluate the need for the protection of listed plants and within one
(1) year of the effective date of this amendment adopt land development regulations addrcssing the
protection of listed plants. The petitioner stated in the EIS that the only plants from the list that
have been observed on the Mirasol site are the common wild pine bromeliad (Fillandsia
fasciculata) and the butterfly orchid (EnEvclia tamoensis!. These plants have been observed in
several of the cypress areas and the vast majority will be preserved under the proposed plan.
Goal II: The County shall provide for the protection, preservation and sensitive re-use of historic
resources
Objective 11.1: To protect historic and archaeological resources in Collier County. No
archaeological sites are known to exist on this property.
Discussion ofCCME Obiective 2.1: Water Management Staff Comments
Within the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the Conservation and Coastal Management
Element Objective 2.1 states the following.
By January 2008, the County shall complete the prioritization and begin the process of preparing
Watershed Management Plans, which contain appropriate mechanisms to protect the County's
estuarine and wetland systems. The process shall consist of
(1) An evaluation of areas for which Watershed Management Plans are not necessary based
on current or past watershed management planning efforts,
(2) An assessment of available data and information that can be used in the development of
Watershed Management Plans, and
(3) Budget authorization to begin preparation of the fIrst Watershed Management Plan by
January 200S.
A funding schedule shall be established to ensure that all Watershed Management Plans will be
completed by 2010. In selecting the order of Plan completion, the County shall give priority to
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19. 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 9 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 35 of 247
watersheds where the development growth potential is greatest and will impact the greatest
amount of wetland and listed species habitats. The schedule and priorities shall also be
coordinated with the Federal and State agency plans that address Total Maximum Daily Loads
(TMDLs).
Until the Watershed Management Plans are completed, the County shall apply the following as
interim standards for development:
a. All new development and re-development projects shall meet 150 percent of the water
quality volumetric requirements of Section 5.2.1 (a) of the Basis of Review for
Environmental Resource Permit Applications Within the South Florida Water Management
District (February 2006) and the retention and detention requirements, and the allowable
offsite discharge rates required by Drainage Sub-element Policy 6.2 and 6.3, respectively;
b. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall be
compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site
and within or adjacent to the impacted wetland.
c. Floodplain storage compensation shall be evaluated for developments within the
designated flood zones "A", "AE", and "VE" as depicted on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps
published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency with an effective date of
November 17, 2005. Floodplain storage compensation shall also be evaluated for areas
known to be periodically inundated by intense rainfall or sheetflow conditions.
d. All development located within areas identified on Figure 1 shall be evaluated to
determine impacts to natural wetlands, flowways, or sloughs. For this patticular evaluation,
natural wetlands, flowways, or sloughs shall be tentatively idcntified as contiguous lands
having a continual preponderance of wetland or wet facultative plant species and a ground
elevation through the major portion of the natural wetland, flowway, or slough at least one
(1) foot lower than the ground at the edge of the natural wetland, flowway, or slough. The
edge of the natural wetlands, flowways, or sloughs shall be identified by field determination
and based upon vegetation and elevation differences from the adjacent uplands or
transitional wetlands. The County shall require the applicant to avoid direct impacts to these
natural wetlands, flowways, or sloughs or, when not possible, to ensure any direct impact is
minimized and compensated for by providing the same conveyance capacity lost by the
direct impact. The County shall adhere to the limiting discharge rates of each basin as
outlined in Ordinance 2001-27, adopted May 22, 2001 which amended the County Water
Management Policy and provided basin delineations where special peak discharge rates have
been established. The limiting discharge rates will be reviewed as a patt of the Watershed
Management Plans, and modified according to the analyses and findings of the Watershed
Management Plans.
e. All new development and re-development projects shall ensure surrounding properties
will not be adversely impacted from the project's influence on stormwater sheet flow.
f. Prior to the issuance of a final development order, the County shall require all
development projects to obtain tlle necessary state and federal environmental permits.
g. Within one year of the effective date of these amendments, the County shall adopt land
development regulations to require Best Management Practices of future development or re-
development projects. Best Management Practices means structural and nonstructural
facilities or practices intended to reduce pollution either through source control or treatment
of stormwater.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4109
Page 10 of 25
Agenda Item No 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 36 of 247
C;"
;:~~,i
...._!-,
-t- "?ii":':
;}
"tt+G111 ,,!'J
["'";'l'" ... I
i",_",,'~.'l;,!:: ,.~,
'""~ 1~;':f~'JJ;:;1
-' r;:~.H7
L~~IS.~~:i~.~' .'
~:~,:;,,-t. .~'
j~.- ~'J"~
-- :J j> }~{s;... ~\
b=:'l...J..."'....'.
~-- ~J ,n:?~,;
r'~ ~J (i1'
~, ~~~.:Z-,i Vi""
'\@;'~"~{;;;i::~!~'f~tf"~7&YO)' '~~'~~~~:;,::".
,...."......'..1....'...... ~_._.-
:::c;".:~,i;i~./i;::'~:~;,{,j ~~',~ - ~ ~-~:':;'",-",- .
".2'"';;' .
p:;,
Gel
Ii\(
"'}<''''
{~~~,. J'~;?>)
i/ .........../
~Ji:ltjj;
,.;.
Figure 1 (as referenced in Objective 2.1.d)
In reviewing the Mirasol PUD, staff evaluated each of these criteria to determine if the proposed
development activities could comply with the overall purpose of the Objective. Knowing that the
County has initiated the development of Watershed Management Plans, the proposed PUD must
then be evaluated in accordance with the interim standards for development as specified in sub-
paragraphs "a" through "g".
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19. 2009 ccpe
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 110125
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 37 of 247
Compliance with Sub-paragraph "a" - The Mirasol PUD proposes to develop using a stepped water
management system that provides 150 percent of the required stormwater quality treatment volume
before discharging into the separate offsite flow-through lake system, which will have the potential
to provide additional water quality treatment even though there are no credits provided for the
additional water quality treatment.
Compliance with Sub-paragraph "b" - The Mirasol PUD contains lakes, conveyance facilities, and
other methods designed to contain and provide storage compensation as a part of the overall
stormwater management system.
Compliance with Sub-paragraphs "c". "d" and "e" - The Mirasol PUD was designed to incorporate
the requirements of these three sub-paragraphs through a combination of features. The Flood
Insurance Rate Maps published by FEMI\ identify the Mirasol property as flood zone "X" based
upon a coastal surge analysis only. However, portions of the property are known to be periodically
inundated by intense rainfall or sheetflow conditions, so that factor had to be included in the
proposed development's design.
The property is located within areas identified in the Figure I attached to the CCME Objective
2.] .d. In considering whether or not the property would qualify for evaluation on impacts to natural
wetlands, flowways, or sloughs, the definition for these terms needs to be considered on a regional
basis, as intended in the original creation of the definition, and not limited to an individual
property's boundary as the comparative condition. The nature of this site makes it difficult to apply
Objective 2.J.d's I-foot criteria in defining a flowway. However, high elevation aerial
photography, along with aerial topography (LiDAR imagery) identifies a large, wide historical
wetland flowway system extending from northwest of Lake Trafford into both Collier and Lee
counties. Existing development activities in both Collier and Lee counties have tended to pinch and
direct the historical regional sheetflow conditions so that it becomes somewhat difficult to
determine specifically where the edge of the regional flowway would be in a more natural state.
Currently, the sheetflow travels across the northern third of the Mirasol PUD property, which is
proposed to be preserved, and makes its way south to the Cocohatchee Canal, traveling to the west
of the Mirasol PUD property. Current conditions restrict the sheetflow, which must pass through a
270 foot-wide gap near the Old Cypress golf course, west of the Mirasol PUD property.
Because portions of the property are known to be periodically inundated by sheetflow, the
requirements of sub-paragraph "d" require the proposed development to avoid direct impacts to
these natural wetlands, flowways or sloughs, OR ensure any direct impact is minimized and
compensated for by providing the same conveyance capacity lost by a direct impact. The Mirasol
PlJD property is a mixture of uplands and wetlands such that it is not possible to avoid direct
impacts to these natural wetlands, flowways or sloughs and still develop the property in a manner
consistent with the requirements for health, safety and wel1are of residents. Because of other
existing developments in both Collier and Lee counties that have pinched the historical wetland
flowway, jt is not reasonable to determine that the Mirasol PUD property is undevelopable if
suitable alternative measures can be provided to address the passage of historical offsite sheetflow
and floodplain storage compensation while ensuring that surrounding properties will not be
adversely impacted from the project's influence on the sheet flow. The purpose of sub-paragraph
"d" was never intended to serve as a wetland impact minimization evaluation tool. Those
requirements are covered in other portions of existing regulatory review. The purpose was to ensure
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19,2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4109
Page 12 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 38 of 247
that sheetflow through natural systems was evaluated and maintained so that development activities
didn't restrict the flow or storage capacity and cause greatly increased runoff volumes or sheetflow
depths on nearby and upstream properties.
The Mirasol PUD was designed to maintain desirable wetland sheetflow elevations coming toward
the property from the northeast by only receiving them into the project's developed portion of the
property once they reach a specified elevation. A long weir at the northern edge of the development
was expressly designed to maintain existing flows and water levels on adjacent properties. Under
normal conditions a notch in the weir accepts the same amount of water into the development as
would currently be conveyed from a series of culverts located at the berm along the canal at the
southern edge of the property. As wet season water levels rise, water is allowed to overtop the weir
and flow into a chain of lakes designed to pass the sheetflow through the property and into the
downstream receiving canal along the north side of Immokalee Road. This prevents the undesirable
rise in water elevations in the flO\vway to nearby properties and to the northeast, and thus addresses
many possible problems to existing developments along the boundaries of the regional sheetflow
flowway. The Mirasol PUD developed portions are served by individual stonnwater management
sub-basins that each provide the required controlled discharge and comply with Ordinance 2001-27.
By addressing the three sub-paragraphs in a total package approach, staff determined that the
proposed development is in compliance with the requirements.
Compliance with sub-paragraph "f' - The Mirasol POD will be required to obtain all necessary
federal, state, and local permits before construction activities can commence.
Compliance with sub-paragraph "g" - This is strictly a County effort requirement and is not an issue
for any single development application.
GMP Conclusion: The GMP is the prevailing document to support land use decisions such as this
proposed rezoning to RPUD. Staff is required to make a recommendation regarding a finding of
consistency or inconsistency with the applicable policies of the GMP as part of the recommendation
for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of any rezoning petition. A fmding of consistency
with the FLUE and FLUM designations is a portion of the overall fmding that is required, and staff
believes the petition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE. The proposed PUD amendment is
also consistent with the GMP Transportation Element as previously discussed. Environmental staff
is recommending that the petition be found consistent v.;th the CCME. Therefore, zoning staff
recommends that the petition be found consistent with the applicable policies ofthe GMP.
ANALYSIS:
Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the criteria on which a
determination must be based. These criteria are specifically noted in LDC Sections 10.02.13 and
10.02.13.8.5. The staff evaluation establishes a factual basis to support the recommendations of
staff. The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) uses these same criteria as the basis for
the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to
support their action on the rezoning request. These evaluations are provided as part of the Zoning
Review listed below.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19. 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 13 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 39 of 247
ElTVironmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed the petition and the PUD
documents to address any environmental concerns. This petition was required to submit an
Environment Impact Statement (EIS) and was heard by the Environmental Advisory Commission
(EAC) on February 4, 2009. The EAC voted 6 to 2 to recommend approval subject to the
conditions of approval contained in the EAC staff report. A copy of the EAC staff report is
included in the back up material. Please refer to that document for environmental review details.
Transvortation Review: Transportation Department Staff has reviewed the petition for compliance
with the GMP and the LDC. The PUD document contains numerous transportation commitments
that the petitioner and Transportation Planning staff has agreed upon to reach a point wherein
Transportation Planning staff can recommend approval of this project. Some of the commitments
are listed below:
1. The developer is to dedicate (fee simple) right-of-way for the roadway and
drainage for those areas located outside the limits of the residential/Golf Course areas
depicted as "RIG" on the PUD master plan. The developer may be eligible for
Transportation Impact Fee credits or cash reimbursement for that dedication, bnt the
Developer shall not be responsible to obtain or modify any permits on behalf of the
County related to the extension ofCR-951.
2. The Developer is to construct a multi-use pathway along the Immokalee Road
right-of-way on the North side of the Cocohatchee Canal as a part of the entrance
construction.
3. The Developer is to pay a fair share of the North leg of the CR-9511Broken Back
Road intersection with Irrunokalee Road, which includes modification, replacement, or
relocation of the at-grade bridge crossing the Cocohatchee Canal.
Refer to PUD Exhibit F for the full list of Transportation commitments.
Zoninf! Review: As previously discussed, the petitioner does not propose any changes to the uses
densities or development standards. Staff has evaluated the currently approved uses and their
intensities and/or densities; the development standards such as building heights, setbacks, landscape
buffers; building mass; building location and orientation; the amount and type of open space and its
location; and traffic generation/attraction to ensure compatibility with the adjacent land uses. The
project proposes to allow a variety of single-fanlily detached, zero-lot line, two-family/duplex,
single-family attached/townhouse and multi-family dwelling units along with a clubhouse and
recreation buildings. A minimum lot area ranging from 3,500 square feet per lot or unit for the two-
family/duplexlsingle-family attached/townhome units up to 9,000 square feet is proposed. A 20
foot front yard setback and a 15 foot rear setback will be maintained for most principal structures.
All principal structures other than the multi-fanlily and dubhouselrecreational buildings will be a
maximum of 35 feet in zoned height; the multi-family structures are proposed to be a maximum of
50 feet high in a maximwn of five stories tall, and clubhouse and recreational buildings will be a
maximum of 50 feet high with two stories over parking. The development standards proposed some
reductions in front yard setbacks for side entry garages and reductions in lot width for cul-de-sac
lots, but these reductions should not cause sidewalks to be blocked or allow reduced lot sizes for
those particular instances. Because the previously approved uses and the proposed uses and
development regulations are similar to what has been approved in the neighboring PUD zoned
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19,2009 eepe
Rev: 314109
Page 14 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 40 of 247
projects such as Terafina, Parklands and Heritage Bay, staff believes this PUD amendment remains
compatible with the neighborhood.
Deviation Discussion:
The petitioner is seeking four deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are
found in POO Exhibit E. These deviations were not approved as part of the original rezone.
Deviation #1 seeks relief from Appendix B of the LDC, entitled "Typical Street Sections and
Right-of-way Design Standards," which requires cul-de-sacs and local streets less than one
thousand feet (1,000') in length to have a minimum sixty foot (60') right-of-way width and two ten
foot (10') wide travel lanes, to allow a minimum right-of-way width of forty feet (40') for private
streets and fIfty feet (50') for spine, collector and interconnecting roads.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification that this deviation is warranted for
a variety of factors. First, most roads within the Mirasol RPUD are intended to be private rather
than public roads. Maintenance responsibility will be by the developer and HomeoWner's
Association. Additionally, the proposed forty foot (40') right-of-way width is adequately sized to
accommodate necessary infrastructure requirements including standard width travel lanes, utility
easements, and dual sidewalks. The LDC does permit a developer to deviate from standard LDC
construction standards during the preliminary platting process. The developer would like to obtain
the deviation prior to the platting process in order to be able to prepare development plans with
certainty of the approval of the deviation.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Transportation Planning staff has not voiced opposition to
this deviation, therefore zoning staff does not object since the roadways will be private and the
responsibility for maintenance will be bome by the developer. Zoning and Land Development
Review staff therefore recommends APPROV At. Staff recommends that a fInding be made in
compliance with LDC Section 10.02. 13.A.3, that the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element
mav be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community"
and LDC Section 1O.02.l3.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 #2 seeks relief from LDC Section6.06.01.J. Street System Requirements, to allow that
cul-de-sacs in excess of one thousand feet (1,000') in length. Streets with block lengths of greater
than six hundred feet (600') shall have traffIc calming devices installed at an approximate spacing
ofthree hundred fect (300').
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification that this deviation is warranted due
to the irregular shape of several of the development tracts due to environmental preserve locations,
and due to configuration of development tracts around the proposed golf course. Cul-de-sacs will
be designed with standard travel lanes and turning radius; therefore, there are no public safety
issues resulting from the increased length of a cul-de-sac.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Neither Transportation Planning nor any other reviewing
staff has voiced opposition to this deviation, therefore zoning staff does not object since the
roadways will be private and the responsibility for maintenance will be bome by the developer.
Zoning and Land Development Review staff therefore recommends APPROV At. Staff
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19. 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 15 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 41 of 247
recommends that a finding be made in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.B.A.3. that the
petitioner has demonstrated that "the element mav be waived without a detrimental effect on the
health. safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section I 0.02.B.B.5.h. the petitioner has
demonstrated that the deviation is "instified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least
equivalent to literal application of such regulations."
Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.Q. Street System Requirements, which
requires that street name markers shall be approved by the County Manager or designee for private
streets or in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived. However,
breakaway posts shall be used.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification that this deviation will permit the
developer to create a more customized streetscape, reflective of individual subdivision architectural
standards. The street markers will be sized and located in order to meet the intent of
U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. standards.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Neither Transportation Planning nor any other reviewing
staff has voiced opposition to this deviation, therefore zoning staff does not object since the
roadways will be private and the responsibility for maintenance will be borne by the developer.
Zoning and Land Development Review staff therefore recommends APPROVAL. Staff
recommends that a finding be made in compliance with LDC Section 10.02. 13.A.3. that the
petitioner has demonstrated that "the element mav be waived without a detrimental effect on the
health. safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section 10.02.B.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 #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.R Street Requirements which requires that
street pavement painting, striping and reflective edging of public roadway markings shall be
provided by the developer as required by the US Department of Transportation Federal Highway
Administration (lJ.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A). This requirement shall be waived for private roadways with
40 foot widths. Traffic circulation signage shall be in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A.
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device standards.
Petitioner's Rationale: The applicant states in his justification that this deviation will permit the
developer to create a more customized streetscape, reflective of individual subdivision architectural
standards. The street markers will be sized and located in order to meet the intent of
U.S.D.O.T.F.H. W.A. standards.
Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Neither Transportation Planning nor any other reviewing
staff has voiced opposition to this deviation, therefore zoning staff does not object since the
roadways will be private and the responsibility for maintenance will be borne by the developer.
Zoning and Land Development Review staff therefore recommends APPROV At. Staff
recommends that a finding be made in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3. that 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 "iustified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least
equivalent to literal application of such regulations."
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 CCPC
Rev: 314/09
Page 16 of25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 42 of 247
LDC Subsection 10.03.05.1.2 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." 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: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PUD findings are
designated as PUD. [Staffs responscs to these criteria are provided in non-italicized font]:
Rezone Findinf!s:
1. Whether the proposed clumge wiU be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and
future land use map and the elements of the GMP.
As noted in the GMP Consistency portion of this report, the proposed uses and development
standards would generally further the goals and objectives of the FLUE and the applicable portions
of the CCME and the Transportation Element. Therefore staff recommendation that this petition be
deemed consistent with the GMP.
2. The existing land use pattern.
As described in the "Surrounding Land Use and Zoning" portion of this report, the neighborhood's
existing land use pattern is characterized by residentially zoned and used lands (within Lee County)
to the north, and either planned, existing or developing residential uses to the west and across
Irnmokalee Road to the south. To the east is the developing Heritage Bay DRIlPUD and Crew Trust
Lands.
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The proposed rezoning would not create an isolated zoning district because, with the exception of a
five-acre tract that is being removed from the project, approval of this rezoning to PUD "''liS already
determined to be a logical and appropriate recommendation. This rezoning action is a reiteration of
the previous rezoning approvals for the same parcel to allow the same uses and resolves the
sunsetted status of the PUD.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogicaUy drawn in relation to existing conditions
on the property proposedfor change.
As shown on the zoning map included at the beginning of this report, the existing district
boundaries are logically drawn. The proposed PUD zoning boundaries follow the property
ownership boundaries. The location map on page two of the staff report illustrates the perimeter of
the outer boundary of the subject parcel.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment
necessary.
The proposed change is necessary because LDC Section 10.02.l3.D.7 (pertaining to PUD time
limits) does not allow the County to accept applications for development order approvals until the
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 eepe
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 17 of 25
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 43 of 247
zoning is "updated." Additionally, the petitioner has updated the Master Plan to show the required
preserve area contiguous to the preserve area in the neighboring Livingston Lakes PUD project.
Furthermore, the proposed zoning change is appropriate based on the existing conditions of the
property and its positive relationship to elements of the GMP.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the
GMP support the approval of the uses proposed at this location. Staff is of the opinion that the
proposed rezone is consistent with the County's land use policies that are reflected by the Future
Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Also, the PUD document provides assurances that the site
improvements will include adequate landscaping, setbacks and buffering for the development.
Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed change will not adversely influence living
conditions in the neighborhood.
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or
create types oftrnffu: 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.
It should be noted that this PUD amendment does not increase the size or intensity of the
currently approved PUD. In addition, development of the subject property is consistent with
provisions of the Transportation Element of the GMP and the trips are vested according to
Transportation Planning staff as part of the adopted DCA. However Transportation Planning
staff notes that although this POO is considered vested by Transportation Plauning staff for a
certain density, the PUD contains additional stipulations to ensure consistency. Therefore, this
project should not create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses and it
should not affect the public safety.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
Appropriate stormwater management has been provided on the Master Plan to address this issue as
part of the rezone process. The proposed development should not create drainage or surface water
problems because the LDC specifically addresses prerequisite development standards as part of the
local development order process that are designed to reduce the risk of flooding on nearby
properties. Any proposed water management and drainage system will need to be designed to
prevent drainage problems on site and be compatible with the adjacent water management systems.
Additionally, the LDC and OMP have regulations in place that will ensure review for drainage on
new developments.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
The PUD document provides adequate property development regulations to ensure light and air
should not be seriously reduced to adjacent areas. The Master Plan further demonstrates that the
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mlrasol RPUD
March 19. 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 18 of25
.L\genda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 44 of 247
locations of proposed preserve and open space areas should further ensure light and air should not
be seriously reduced to adjacent areas. Additionally, a roadway separates this project from adjacent
uses to the south along Immokalee Road.
10. Whether the proposed cllange would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
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 mayor may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value.
There is no guarantee that the project will be marketed in a manner comparable to the surrounding
developments.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulotions.
Properties around this property are already partially developed as previously noted. The basic
premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that sound application, when
combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives
reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or
development of adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed PUD amendment should not be a
deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
The proposed development complies with the GMP, 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 aI'e substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
The proposed change is necessary because LDC Section 10.02.13.D.7 does not allow the County to
accept applications for development order approvals until the zoning is "updated" to resolve the
sW1setted status of the PUD.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the
county.
The proposed development complies with the GMP subdistrict's requirements for the uses
proposed, however the density issues remains unresolved. The GMP is a policy statement which has
evaluated the scale, density and intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable throughout the
urban-designated areas of Collier County. Staff is of the opinion that the development standards
and the developer commitments will ensure that the project is not out of scale with the needs of the
community.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19.2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 19 of25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 45 of 247
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is
not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition
was reviewed on its own merit for eompliance with the GMP and the LDC; and staff does not
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 properly usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed
zoning classification.
Any development anticipated by the POO document would require considerable site alteration and
this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development
regulations during the site development plan approval process 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 GMP and as defined und
implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance.
The project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding
Adequate Public Facilities for and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals
and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by
county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning
process and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted.
18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall
deem important in the protection of the public health, safety and welfare.
To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing.
PUD Findines:
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical characteristics of the lund, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
wate~andotherutilitie~
The type and pattern of development proposed should not have a negative impact upon any physical
characteristics of the land, the surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and
other utilities. Furthermore, this project, if developed, will be required to comply with all county
regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other utilities pursuant to Section 6.02.00
Adequate Public Facilities of the LDC.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may
relate to arrangements or provisions to be madefor the continuing operation and maintenance of
such areas andfacilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 20 of 25
Agenda Item No. 8S
April 28. 2009
Page 46 of 247
Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control. The
RPUD document and the general LDC development regulations make appropriate provisions for the
continuing operation and maintenance of common areas.
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and
policies of the GMP (GMP).
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives
and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis,
staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP.
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.
The development standards, landscaping and buffering requirements contained in this petition are
designed to make the proposed uses compatible with the adjacent uses and the use mixture ",ithin
the project itself. Staff believes a finding that this petition is compatible, both internally and
externally, with the proposed uses and with the existing surrounding uses would be appropriate once
the density issue is resolved. Additionally, the Development Commitments contained in the PUD
document provide additional requirements the developer will have to fulfill.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to senle the
development.
The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum requirement of the LDC.
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
Although development of the project has not yet commenced, the timing or sequence of
development in light of concurrency requirements does not appear to be a significant problem for
this project based upon the transportation commitments contained in the PUD document and
discussed in considerable detail in the GMP Transportation section of this report. In addition, the
project's development mnst be in compliance ~ith all other applicable concurrency management
regulations when development approvals are sought. The sunsetting provision of the LDC will also
apply to this development.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
Please refer to PUD finding number 6 above.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifu:ations 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.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 1 g. 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4109
Page 21 of25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 47 of 247
This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and
deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the
most similar conventional zoning district. Staff is of the opinion that the deviations proposed can
be supported, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02. 13.A.3, the petitioner has
demonstrated that "the elements 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 deviations are "justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations."
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION:
The EAC heard this petition on February 4, 2009. Chairman Hughes made the motion to approve
the petition subject to the following conditions:
1. This approval is subject to the recommendations contained in the EAC Staff Report as
follows:
a. The project is proposing impacts to 586 acres of wetlands. The project has identified
515.2 acres of 586.2 acres (88 percent) of the required wetland mitigation acreage. The remaining
71 acres of off-site mitigation shall be identified prior to SDP approval; and
b. The minimum preserve acreage shall be maintained. Additional preserve acreage shall
be added onsite or off site to compensate for any clearing needed for private access to out parcels
within the preserve.
And further subject to the following additional conditions:
2. This petition shall be subject to compliance with condition #33 of the South Florida Water
Management District Environmental Resource Permit SFWMD, ERP #1I-02031-P dated
September 13, 2007, issued to LM. Collier, which states "The Pennittee shall implement the
Mirasol Water Quality Monitoring Plan, attached as Exhibit 6. Any deviation from these testing
and monitoring procedures will require prior approval from the District Environmental Compliance
Staff. Such request shall be made in writing and shall include (J) reason for the change and (2) an
outline of the proposed change" into this approval.
3. The results of the Water Quality Monitoring referenced above shall be submitted to Collier
County's Director of Engineering and Environmental Services.
4. If the Petitioner is not in compliance with standards in condition #2 (condition #33 of the
SFWMD, ERP referenced above), remediation shall occur at the Petitioner's expense.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Standridge. The motion passed 6 to 2 with Mr. Penniman and Dr.
Hushon voting against the motion. Dr. Hushon stated she was voting against the motion because
the petition is inconsistent with the following Sections of the GMP, Conservation and Coastal
Management Element - 2.l.d, 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5. She expressed concern that the rules currently in
place are not being implemented. Mr. Penniman stated he was voting against the motion because he
believed the Petition violates the Goals 6.2, 6.4 and 6.5 of the GMP, Conservation and Coastal
Management Element.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 CCPC
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 22 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 48 of 247
Two persons spoke at the EAC voicing opposition to this petition. Nicole Ryan Conservancy of
Southwest Florida submitted a copy of GMP CCME Section 2.1 and voiced her opinion that this
project was not consistent with this policy because the project is within a High Priority Restoration
Area and the project fails to avoid and minimize wetland impacts.
Brad Cornell, Collier County Audubon Society also spoke, voicing his opposition to the petition
and his concurrence with the Conservancy of Southwest Florida's position. Additionally, he added
his concerns about wildlife habitat. (Please refer to the EAC Minutes for details.)
l';'EIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
This petitioner has held two Neighborhood Information Meetings. The first NIM was held on
December 13, 2007, and the second was held on January 14, 2009. The synopses of those meetings
are provided below.
The agent/applicant duly noticed and held the required NIM on December 13, 2007, 6:00 PM at
Gulf Coast High School cafeteria Eleven public persons attended, as well as tlle applicant's team
and county staff. The applicant's agent(s) provided copies of the project location map upon
attendees' arrival. Following introductions by the county's principal project planner, Kay Deselem,
the applicant's agent Richard Yovanovich, stated the following facts:
· The petitioner plans to develop the project at 1.7 units per acre
· The PUD rezone/amendment is adding eighty acres for a total of 1,638 acres
· 1,917 units are proposed, (which is) allowed under the current Growth Management
Plan(GMP)/Comprehensive Plan
· The number of allowable/proposed units is under the Development of Regional Impact (DR!)
threshold number, so, there will be no DR! level review
· The zoning is still "Residential" and "Golf Course" and we're adding "Village Center" to
include 18,900 square feet of office and retail uses to be co-located on 15 acres of "Village Center"
. Preserve area is 440 acres
· Preserve aligns with Parklands to the west and southwest area with Olde Cypress
· Density blending under the Compo Plan
· The "flow way" is no longer a requirement of the PUD"
Attendees asked the following questions and the applicant's agents responded:
· Q. (will there be) "Access to Broken Back Road?
. A. Via (C.R.) 951 Extension
· Mr. Ray Pellitier asked, "What may the impact to properties to the south be now that the flow
way is not required?"
A. Army Corp of Engineers said flow way is not required
Mr. Rick Barber said, "We're providing pass through water system through control structures to the
canal, and berm structures should provide some relief."
· Q. Construction start date?
· A. No projection
· Q. Rose Boulevard property owner questioned buffering
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12D46 Mirasof RPUD
March 19, 2009 eepe
Rev: 3/4/09
Page 23 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 49 of 247
.
. A. Fifteen feet as required
. Q. Pushing water?
. A. Historical flow buffering"
The same property owner on Rose Boulevard said, "I'm excited abut the project." The meeting
concluded at approximately 6:20 PM.
The second NIM was duJy noticed by the applicant and held on January 14, 2009 at 5:30 p.m. at the
Golden Gate Fire Station #73. Twenty people from the public attended, as well as the applicant's
team (Rich Y ovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman, & Johnson, Karen Bishop of PMS, Inc. and others)
and county staff. Karen presented an overview of the requested rezone from POO zoning district to
POO zoning district to be known as Mirasol PUD. The meeting ended at approximately 6:30 p.m.
The concerns and questions raised are as follows:
I. Participants wanted to know what "sunsetting" meant? Rich explained that it's simply an
extension to the time period a project has to be built. If you have not built within your time frame,
then you need an extension to the PUD and it has to be brought up to today's standards.
2. Participants asked what how the excavation be done. The applicant stated that there would
be some blasting and that dozers, front loaders and trucks would be used. The residents wouJd also
be notified ofthe blasting times and it wouJd be done over a period of time and not on Sundays.
3. An Olde Cypress resident commented that there is currently a bike path that stops at the
Mirasol property line and water flows over it and are there any plans to extend it? Karen responded
there are plans to slope the area so the path will no longer be underwater and that the County does
require the project to install a bike path.
4. A resident 011 Rose Court asked if there was any intention on using Rose Court during the
project, as it is a private road, not maintained by Collier County, the applicant responded that there
is no intention of using Rose Court.
5. Participants asked if this project is still going to be a residential community, the answer was
yes.
6. The Olde Cypress residents wanted to know the canal/flow way would still be built through
the preserve and on Old Cypress property. Rich stated the flow way is no longer part of this PUD as
it is no longer an obligation.
7. Olde Cypress residents asked if their Master Association could be notified with a
construction scheduJe. The project manger stated that he would do the best he could with getting
that information to the association.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Plauning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition POOZ-
A-2007-AR-12046 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of
approval subject to the staff stipulations that have been incorporated into the RPOO document.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 CCPC
Rev: 314/09
Page 24 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 50 of 247
3-Lj-OCf
DATE
REVIEWED BY:
t1;:,~lJ:~ER
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
3/tf-07
DATE
Ni-i'~ A (Ji0
HEIDI ASHTON-CICKO
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
DATE
~~.\&T~
SUSAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
3/5/07
DATE
APPROVED BY:
<-3/..s- /0 1-
J PH K. SCHMITT ADMINIS RATOR ' DATE
Of1MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
/
entatively scheduled for the April 28, 2009 Board of County Commissioners Meeting
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
vV\ (M L P \j}tU~
MARK\? STRAIN, CHAIRMAN
'3--1'1-0'J
DATE
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 Mirasol RPUD
March 19, 2009 eepe
Rev: 314109
Page 25 of 25
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 51 of 247
Item VI. C
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 4. 2009
I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT
Petition No.:
Petition Name:
ApplicantJDeveloper:
Consultant:
PUDZ-A-2007-AR- I 2046
Mirasol Residential Planned Unit Development (PUD)
I M Collier Joint Venture
Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich &
Koester, P.A., and Wayne Arnold, ofQ.
Grady Minor and Associates
Turrell, Hall, and Associates
Environmental Consultant:
II. LOCATION
The subject 1,543 acre tract is located on the north side ofImmokalee Road, bordered on
the east by Broken Back Road, future Collier Boulevard in Sections 10, 15 and 22,
Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
ZONING
DESCRIPTION
N-
Planned Development (within Lee County)
residential uses
S-
Immokalee Road; then PUD
Laurelwood, Ricbland
residential projects
E-
Heritage Bay DRVPUD and
AgriculturaliST zoning
developing residential
and undeveloped areas
W - Parklands and Terafina PUD
Agricultural zoning
undeveloped
Agricultural uses
IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Mirasol PUD was approved on April 24, 2002. The existing PUD, comprising
1558* acres, was zoned from Rural Agriculture (A) zoning district to Planned Unit
Development (PUD) on April 24, pursuant to Ordinance 01-20 to allow for 799
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 52 of 247
Page 2 of12
residential units and 2 IS-hole golf courses that would feature a clubhouse and recreation
amenities. No development occurred within the LDC allotted time frame therefore the
PUD sunsetted. The petitioner sought two, 2-year PUD extensions (from April 24, 2006
to April 24, 2010) in petition number PUDEX-2006-AR-9124 that was scheduled to be
heard by the Board on May 8, 2007; the BCC did not take action on the petition because
it was withdrawn by the petitioner on that date. The petitioner agreed to seek sunsetting
relief thru the PUD amendment process instead.
At that May 8, 2007 Board hearing, the Board adopted a Developer's Contribution
Agreement (DCA) for the project's prepayment of impact fees to be utilized for
intersection improvements at the Immokalee Road/Collier Boulevard intersection
therefore vesting the project's 799 dwelling units.
As presently configured, this amendment petition does not propose to add any dwelling
units to the project. Also proposed is the removal ofthe previously proposed flow way as
a project requirement. The applicant is updating the PUD document to remove redundant
language from the original PUD document and to update the PUD document to put it in
the currently acceptable format. A five acre tract that was inadvertently included is being
removed from the project also.
V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY
Future Land Use Element
A portion of the total subject property (property in Section 22) is designated Urban
(Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Sub-district), the remainder of the property
(property in Sections 10 & 15) is designated Agricultural/Rural (Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District, Neutral Lands) as identified on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP).
Relevant to this petition, the Urban Residential Sub-district allows residential
development at a base density of four (4) dwelling units per acre, subject to the Density
Rating System provisions; and recreation and open space. No additional dwelling units
are proposed therefore the density will not change as a result of the PUD amendment
request.
Conservation & Coastal Manae:ement Element
The Mirasol project is Consistent with all applicable sections of the Growth Management
Plan, including the following objectives and policies. Please refer to the Environmental
Impact Statement for further detail.
OBJECTIVE 2.2: All eanals, rivers, and flow ways discharging into estuaries shall
meet all applicable federal, state, or local water quality standards.
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 86
April 28. 2009
Page 53 of 247
Page 3 of 12
To accomplish that, policy 2.2.2 states "In order to limit the specific and cumulative
impacts of stormwater runoff, stormwater systems should be designed in such a way that
discharged water does not degrade receiving waters and an attempt is made to enhance
the timing, quantity, and quality of fresh water (discharge) to the estuarine system.
This project is consistent with the objectives of policy 2.2.2 in that it attempts to mimic or
enhance the quality and quantity of water leaving the site by utilizing interconnected dry
detention area(s}, lake(s) and a wetland(s) to provide water quality retention and peak
flow attenuation during storm events.
OBJECTIVE 6.1: The County shall protect native vegetative communities through
the application of minimum preservation requirements. The following policies
provide criteria to make this objective measurable. These policies shall apply to all
of Collier County except for that portion of the County which is identified on the
Countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as the Rural Lands Stewardship Area
Overlay.
As described under the applicable Policies, these criteria are being met by the proposed
PUD Master Plan.
Policy 6.1.1: For the County's Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area,
Conservation Designated Area, and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, Rural-
Industrial District and Rural-Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM,
native vegetation shall be preserved on-site through the application of the following
preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria, unless the development
occurs within the Area of Critical State concern (ACSC) where the ACSC standards
referenced in the Future Land Use Element shall apply.
The property straddles the RFMU neutral land and the urban residential land boundary.
The Mirasol PUD was specifically authorized to utilize the density blending provisions
when the density blending provisions were incorporated into the Future Land Use
Element (IB.5.) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The density blending
provisions in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan specifically
allow the blending of density from the urban area to Section 15 in the Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District.
As such, the entire project will be required to meet the native vegetation preservation
standards outlined in the RFMU section of the Conservation and Coastal Management
Element as presented below (Policy 6.1.2).
Policy 6.1.2: For the County's Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, as designated on the
FLUM, native vegetation shall be preserved on site through the application of the
following preservation and vegetation retention standards and criteria for Neutral Lands:
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 54 of 247
Page 4 of]2
A minimum of 60% of the native vegetation present, not to exceed 45% of the total site
area shall be preserved, except that, for Section 24, Township 49 south, Range 26 East,
located in the North Belle Meade Overlay, a minimum of 70% of the native vegetation
present, not to exceed 70% of the total site areas, shall be preserved.
Sections 10 and 15 are within the RFMU zoning and are designated as Neutral lands on
the FLUM Due to the density blending standards, the entire site will be considered
under these RFMU criteria. .
Poliey 6.1.4: Prohibited invasive exotic vegetation shall be removed from all new
developments.
The project has coordinated a Preserve Management Plan with state andfederal review
agencies. This plan includes provisions for exotic removal and perpetual maintenance to
keep the preserves free of nuisance and exotic vegetation. This Plan is Exhibit 15 of the
EIS. In addition, all developed areas shall be kept free of exotic vegetation.
Policy 6.1. 7: The County shall require native vegetation to be incorporated into
landscape designs in order to promote the preservation of native plant communities and to
encourage water conservation. This shall be accomplished by:
According to the EIS, native vegetation retention and restoration will be encouraged
throughout the project site. In addition, the wet detention lakes will have all required
littoral plantings indicated at the time of site development plan submittal.
Policy 6.1.8: An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), or submittal of appropriate
environmental data as specified in the County's land development regulations, is
required.. : ..
This EIS submittal was made in accordance with this requirement and is part of the EAC
. review packet.
OBJECTIVE 6.2: The County shall protect and conserve wetlands and the natural
functions of wetlands pursuant to the appropriate policies under Goal 6. The
following policies provide criteria to make this objective measurable. The County's
wetland protection polieies and strategies shall be coordinated with the Watershed
Management Plans as required by Objective 2.1 of this Element.
Policy 6.2.1: As required by Florida Administrative Code 9J5-5.006(l)(b), wetlands
identified by the 1994-95 South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) land use
and land cover inventory are mapped on the Future Land Use Map series. These areas
shall be verified by jurisdictional field delineation, subject to Policy 6.2.2 of this element,
at the time of project permitting to determine the exact location of jurisdictional wetland
boundaries.
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 86
April 28, 2009
Page 55 of 247
Page 5 of 12
Wetland boundaries have been delineated and verified by the SFWMD. The
jurisdictional lines are indicated on the SFWMD permit exhibits as well as on the
applicable exhibits included in this EIS submittal (see exhibits 2, 3, 6, 7 of EIS).
Policy 6.2.2: Wetlands shall be defined pursuant to Section 373.019 Florida Statutes.
The location of jurisdictional wetland boundaries are further described by the delineatiClJl.
methodology in Section 373.421 Florida Statutes.
This has been done. Wetland boundaries have been delineated and verified by the
SFWMD. The jurisdictional lines are indicated on the SFWMD permit exhibits as well as
on the applicable exhibits included in this EIS submittal.
Policy 6.2.4: Within the Urban Designated area, the County shall rely on the wetland
jurisdictional determinations and permit requirements issued by the applicable
jurisdictional agency.
As stated above, a portion of the proposed project is within the Urban Designated area
but since the remainder of the project is within the RFMU District, the Density Blending
provisions require the entire site to be reviewed under the RFMU criteria.
Policy 6.2.5: Within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and that portion of the Lake
Trafford/Camp Keais Strand System which is contained within the Immokalee Urban
Designated Area, Collier County shall direct land uses away from higher functioning
wetlands by limiting direct impacts within wetlands based upon the vegetation
requirements of Policy 6. I .2 of this element, the wetland functionality assessment
described in paragraph (2) below, and the final permitting requirements of the South
Florida Water Management District.
GMP Policy 6.2.5. (6) states, "Mitigation shall be requiredfor direct impacts to wetlands
in order to result in no net loss of wetland functions." In addition, the policy states,
""No net loss of wetland fimctions" shall mean that the wetlandfunctional score of the
proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the
impacted wetlands. However, in no case shall the acreage proposed for mitigation be less
than the acreage being impacted." The project is proposing impacts to 586 acres of
wetlands. The project has identified 515.2 acres of 586.2 acres (88%) of the required
wetland mitigation acreage. The remaining 71 acres of off-site mitigation shall be
identified prior to SDP approval.
Policy 6.2.6: Within the Urban Designation and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District,
required wetland preservation areas, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be dedicated
as conservation and common areas in the form of conservation easements and shall be
identified or platted as separate tracts; and, in the case of a Planned Unit Development
(PUD), these areas shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan.
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 8S
April 28. 2009
Page 56 of 247
Page 6 of 12
All preservation, buffer, and mitigation areas required under the County Codes will be
placed under conservation easements prior to site plan approval as outlined in this
Policy and as required by the LDC at the time of development.
OBJECTIVE 6.4: The County will protect, conserve and appropriately use
ecological communities shared with or tangential to State and Federal lands and
other local governments.
This PUD is proposing to preserve lands that will connect existing and proposed
preserve lands to the west with existing preserve lands to the east. Corkscrew Regional
Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) and Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary are also located to the
east and north of the project as shown on Exhibit 8 of the EIS.
OBJECTIVE 6.5: The County shall proteet natural reservations from the impact of
surrounding development. For the purpose of this Objeetive and its related policies:
natural reservations shall include only Natural Resource Proteetion Areas (NRPAs)
and designated Conservation Lands on the Future Land Use Map; and,
development shall include all projects except for permitting and construetion of
single-family dwelling units situated on individual lots or parcels. This Objective
and its Policies shall apply only to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use district [exeept as
noted in Policy 6.5.3).
Policy 6.5.2:
The following criteria shall apply to development contiguous to natural reservations in
order to reduce negative impacts to the natural reservations:
The proposed project is located adjacent to the CREW Natural Resource Protection
Area. The entire boundary adjacent to the NRPA is included in the preserve areas of the
project. Adjacent preserve areas associated with other developments will be protected
through natural and structural buffers, placement of less intensive uses such as golf
course and water management areas, and through the education of residents.
GOAL 7: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT AND CONSERVE ITS FISHERIES
AND WILDLIFE.
OBJECTIVE 7.1:
The County shall direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and
their habitats. The County relies on the listing process of State and Federal agencies
to identify species that require special protection because of their endangered,
threatened, or species of special concern status.
The project is not within a NRP A but is adjacent to one. Development and preserve
locations associated with the development have taken into account providing the largest
possible buffers between the development and the NRPA boundary.
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 57 of 247
Page 7 of 12
Policy 7.1.2: Within areas of Collier County, excluding the lands contained in the RLSA
Overlay, non-agricultural development, excluding individual single-family residences,
shall be directed away from listed species and their habitats...
A Listed Species Survey has been conducted on the project site. Coordination has
occurred between the project and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
(FFWCC) and Us. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The FFWCC has not commented
on the project since the 2002 SFWMD approval but the USFWS has recently issued their
Biological Opinion (Exhibit 17 of E1S) and indicated that the project would not
jeopardize any federally listed species.
Policy 7.1.4: All development shall comply with applicable federal and state permitting
requirements regarding listed species protection.
The project has undergone significant review by the FWS and the results of that review
are presented in the Biological Opinion.
Policy 7.1.6: The County shall evaluate the need for the protection oflisted plants and
within one (I) year of the effective date of this amendment adopt land development
regulations addressing the protection of listed plants.
The petitioner stated in the E1S that the only plants from the list that have been observed
on the Mirasol site are the common wild pine bromeliad (Tillandsia fasciculata) and the
butterfly orchid (Encvclia tamvensis). These plants have been observed in several of the
cypress areas and the vast majority will be preserved under the proposed plan.
GOAL 11: THE COUNTY SHALL PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION,
PRESERVATION AND SENSITIVE RE-USE OF HISTORIC
RESOURCES
OBJECTIVE 11.1: To protect historie and archaeological resources in Collier
County.
No archaeological sites are known to exist on this property.
VI. MAJOR ISSUES
Stormwater Maoae:ement
The Mirasol project sits in the Cocohatchee River Basin and by Collier County Ordinance
2001-27, is limited to a maximum site-wide allowable discharge rate of 0.04 cfs per acre.
The Drainage Atlas of Collier County shows that flow from this portion of the
Cocohatchee River Basin is intercepted by the Immokalee Road (Cocohatchee) Canal.
Judging from the topography (Jan 2001), historical flow was possibly anywhere from
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 58 of 247
Page 8 of 12
westward to southward but the construction of Immokalee Road and the adjacent canal
intercepted the flow and sent it west into the Wigging Bay system.
The attached portion of a Soils Map is from data gathered prior to 1941, and it appears
that prior to the construction of all the roads and subdivisions in "North Naples", flow
may have been predominantly westward. The only road that existed in the area at the
time shows on the map as US 41. Another parallel portion of US 41 is to the west, and
some rail lines cut between the two. As a note of interest, the depressional cypress heads
that show on the LiDAR in section I 6 (Terrafina) and section 9 (Parklands) also show in
the same areas on these earliest soils maps.
Section 8.06.03 0.2. of the Collier County Land Development Code states "The
surface water management aspects of any petition, that is or will be reviewed and
permitted by South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), are exempt
from review by the EAC except to evaluate the criteria for allowing treated
stormwater to be discharged into Preserves as allowed in Section 3.05.07."
Mirasol received the latest Modification to their Environmental Resource Permit # I 1-
0203 I -P on 13 September 2007. Because of the configuration of the site with the
preserves being in the north part of the site and the developed area being in the south of
the site and also because of the southerly direction of the flow of water in this area, there
is no proposed use of the preserves for water retention., so the water management
aspects of the site are exempt from EAC review and discussion. The water
management system proposes to use a standard design of intercounected wet and dry
retention and detention areas to achieve water quality retention and peak flow attenuation.
This project originally proposed a "flow way" to route runoff from the north through the
site. The flow way was advocated by some agencies and opposed by environmental
groups and the approach was eventually discarded. County Engineering staff is deferring
all aspects of the storm water review to SFWMD.
Environmental
Please note that future alignments for the extension of Collier Boulevard may bisect the
proposed prescrve. This has not been addressed in the EIS or PUD exhibit. It shall be
noted that LDC Section 9.03.07 Nonconformities Created or Increased by Public
Acquisition allows properties to become legally non-conforming with requirements
including native vegetation, conservation areas, and preserves. This section applies to the
acquisition for present or planned public use. The possible alignment through the
preserve can be found on the Transportation Planning document "Collier County Level of
Service Network 2020" on their website: www.colliergov.net/lndex.aspx?page=580.
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 59 of 247
Page 9 of 12
1. Site Description
The project site is approximately 1,543.7 acres and consists of both urban (340.8 acres)
and RFMU neutral lands (1,202.9 acres) within the proposed PUD boundary. The
majority of the site has been infested to varying degrees by melaleuca. The 1,543.7 acre
PUD footprint contains about 262.7 acres of upland habitats and 1,281 acres of wetland
habitats. Of the 1,543.7 acres, approximately 853.2 acres meet the County definition of
native habitat. The remainder of the property is dense melaleuca (See Exhibit II).
2. Wetlands
The site contains 1,281.0 acres of wetland habitats. Approximately 586 acres of wetlands
(46% ofthe PUD wetlands) will be impacted by the proposed development. The Wetland
Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP) functional assessment conducted for the Unite
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) permit showed that the wetlands being
impacted are of lower quality and lower functional value than high quality wetlands. The
hydrological changes in the area over the past 30 years coupled with the dense exotic
vegetation infestation have depressed the functional viability of the wetlands on the
project site.
3. Preservation Requirements
The project has a total of 1543.7 acres of which about 853.2 acres are existing native
habitat. The property must therefore preserve at least 511.9 acres (60% of853) of native
habitat either on-site or through a combination of on and off site sources. The 511.9 acres
required does not exceed 45% (45% x 1543.7 = 694.7 acres) ofthe entire site.
Native habitat acreage is being preserved throughout the site plan. The project is
providing a large preserve contiguous with adjacent preserves to the east and west and is
also providing 5 smaller preserve areas (which contain higher quality wetlands) within the
development area. Higher quality wetlands are those that have a WRAP score of 0.65 or
greater. High quality wetlands are third in the preserve selection ranking criteria as
defined by the GMP Policy 6.1.2. and LDC section 3.05.07.A.3. All together, these
preserves contribute approximately 461.6 acres of native habitat preservation. The
remaining 50.3 acres of required native preservation will be met off-site with lands
preserved in NRPA Sending Lands in Section I I immediately east of this project.
Selection of native vegetation to be retained as preserve areas shall reflect the following
criteria in descending order of priority:
a. Wetland or upland areas known to be utilized by listed species or that serve
as corridors for the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in
order to facilitate the continued use of the site by listed species or the
movement through the site, consistent with the requirements of Policy 7.1.1
and 7.1.2 of this element.
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 60 of 247
Page 10 of 12
b. Xeric Scrub, Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks.
c. Onsite wetlands having functionality scores of at least 0.65 WRAP or 0.7
UMAM (Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method).
d. Any upland habitat that serves as a buffer to a wetland area
e. Dry Prairie, Pine Flatwoods, and
f. All other native habitats.
4. Listed Species
A Listed Species Survey has been conducted on the project site. Species observations
have been underway for the past five years. The FFWCC has not commented on the
project since the 2002 SFWMD approval. The USFWS has recently issued their
Biological Opinion and concurred with the USACE that the project "may affect" the
endangered Florida panther and wood stork. Regarding wood storks, the Biological
Opinion concludes there will be a loss offish biomass that is the basis of their Take
estimation. The Opinion did state that there would be no direct take of and any incidental
take of either species would be difficult to detect. Please refer to the conclusions on page
61 and 82 of the Biological Opinion (Exhibit 17 ofEIS).
Big Cypress fox squirrel, Florida black bear, snowy egret, great egret, tricolored heron,
great blue heron, green-backed heron, white ibis, and wood stork have been observed on
and adjacent to the project site during the wildlife survey.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval ofMirasol PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 with the following conditions:
Stormwater Manae:ement:
None
Environmental:
I. The project is proposing impacts to 586 acres of wetlands. The project has identified
515.2 acres of586.2 acres (88%) of the required wetland mitigation acreage. The
remaining 71 acres of off-site mitigation shall be identified prior to SDP approvaL
2. The minimum preserve acreage shall be maintained. Additional preserve acreage shall
be added onsite or offsite to compensate for any clearing needed for private access to out
parcels within the preserve.
Mirasol EAC StaffReporl
Page 1] ofl2
PREPARED BY:
TANCHRZANO KI,P.E.
ENGINEERING REVIEW MANAGER
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
~1 ;tffLr,~
-SUMMER ARAQ
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
~L~~
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
-----
-
r<~\S o-f-F
~l{y-rl\
.l>;~I~.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 61 of 247
/l, ..rIdN (j9
DATE
/0 (hHl 09
DATI;
//d,O/09
,
DATE
Mirasol EAC Staff Report
Agenda Item No. EJB
April 28, 2009
Page 62 of 247
Page 12 of 12
REVIEWED BY:
/-tfo-{)Q
DATE
ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
G AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
!~
uP. _ ~ I /"\..
LLIAM D. L NZ, r., P.E.
ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
OI-2,p-oq
DATE
-1lvc A- Crt?
/-21-01
DATE
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY
APPROVED BY:
1-../ ~L4 fAit",
JOSEPH K. SCHMITT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
l ADMINISTRATOR
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. O~ ZONING & lAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COlllERGOV.NET
(j)
Agenda Item No. 86
April 28. 2009
Page 63 of 247
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6968
PETITION NO (AR)
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT NUMBER
DATE PROCESSED
ASSIGNED PLANNER
PUDZ-A-2007 -AR-12046
MIRASOL PUD
Date: 1/14/09
NAME OF APPLlCANT(S) 1M COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
ADDRESS PO BOX 10489 CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34101
TELEPHONE # 239-596-9067 CelL #
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
FAX #
NAME OF AGENT RICHARD YOVANOVICH (GCJY&K) / WAYNE ARNOLD (QGM&A)
ADDRESS 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL N. #300 /3800 VIA DEL REY CITY NAPLES / BONITA SPRINGS STATE
FLORIDA ZIP 34103/34134
TelEPHONE # 239-435-3535/239-947-1144 CELL # FAX # 239-435-1218/239-947-6783
E-MAil ADDRESS:RYOVANOV1CH@GCJLAW.COM/WARNOLD@GRADYMINOR.COM
BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF
ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS.
Application For PubJjc Hearing For PUD Rezone OIJ1SJ07> rev 2/l2l08
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 64 of 247
Hi1i","i.~~:T!"jij'~'I,.11IiMlCj;tJ~i,;,'",jj;t1;i:tt:;~;jlI",ii~,"~~!~;;;:;;;<iiif~"~~I":'if~:v~~,~~..Ili;;r.;~:p:"~i4'ii:I!'~i!l:~;'-';~~;""i~'"'H,-~,,!C,,;,,~...~t,.'I-'''']li'>j]~;~1~~:i:!';:ii~~1!~;~:''I~1',l~'~:~j:~\'~'i'~,iifii,""it;i~~~lf~ii[~l~~!St:ir.iii;B!il:~~:'\1~~":IJ;b":;.i:!~_';'
~~~~l: :~~I~ rl~~', ,,'~i~i~r.r.~~ ~"1?HJlft,~!~~~!~! ~~~iJ :ltl~I~~~~~)~~~~:!~~S(}"" ,:' '~l:l_v,t,JS'.,'I~!~~~~!~<!iI"'~:~:~:'I",$:~~:~_~~~:~~~~~~~ml~:~~~~::~ild:~fflB:i~~~,~~IeI'~~~';"'~;!~~;;:'
..,_~~n ~ .~lk' ~t. .~~..,,,.", ,'r.. ,.f' ..,.,.:f1Ir~s~~I~~t:1.m.., ,.;':i,!<,_,lflffif. ,'!"~ '1!1~., :!l.. !L~,"lo;.i".,.,.,. J~"-"'~~,""'" ' ,., "..~,,,,",,~_..,.,~_.. .,"~.. I' "....'.."...,~'l:I... c.,,,,, _-'If ".-"'_,'m'..,":"..c,,,,,,l,~ _ "...."""_.~.t.",I~;t;;;~.':.., .il,"," ;!>..!"];i,.._~~,~.;;, N:{
Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this
petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the
Board of County Commissioner's website at http://www.collierClov.net/lndex.aspx?paCle=n4
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: PEBBlEBROOKE lAKE MASTER ASSOCIATION
MAILING ADDRESS 8610 PEBBLEBROOKE DRIVE CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34119
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: IBIS COVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION C/O R & P PROPERTY
MAILING ADDRESS 265 AIRPORT ROAD SOUTH CITY NAPLES STATE flORIDA ZIP 34104
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: NAPLES HERITAGE GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB PROPERTY
OWNER ASSOCIATION / NAPLES HERITAGE PROPERTY OWNER ASSOCIATION/SF HOMES
MAILING ADDRESS 7890 NAPLES HERITAGE DRIVE /7768 NAPLES HERITAGE DRIVE CITY NAPLES STATE
FLORIDA ZIP 34112
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: OLOE CYPRESS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION
MAILING ADDRESS 889 IIITH AVE NORTH #202 CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34108
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
,:!j~~;l!m'~~~~i~~I~~~m~~11~~1~.~]!~~~~~~~~]~f~~:~~~~~j~EjgtY~~f~:~fi~~r.~~I:lllifQrm~:fi~~j'~~~~~~uf?~'~~1f~H~~~~1~~~I~~ili~~i~i~i~~:~~~~~iil~~lJf~:'
a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety,
tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as
well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheefs if necessary).
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
Application For Public Hearing For P1.ID Rezone 0]11&/07, rev 2/12108
J
Agen:a Ilem 1'0. 2~
Apn128.200
age ob ot L
b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and
the percentage of stock owned by each.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percentage of interest.
Name ond Address
Percentage of Ownership
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name
of the general and/or limited partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
Mirasol Development LLC, managing member: Robert Claussen 50%
North Naples LLC, managing member: J.D. Nieewonder 50%
See attached sheet for more details
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 0 III 8/07 . rev 2/12/08
e.
If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual orAF.i'c?f.Jl~~q)~~'k~~
Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract ~~","r$47
below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
Date of Contrael:
f. If any contingency clause or contrael terms involve additional parties, list all
individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
Name ond Address
g. Date subject property acquired IZI leased 0 Term of lease 2001/7 yrs.fmos.
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
Date of option:
Date option terminates: , or
Anticipated closing date
h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contraels for purchase occur
subsequent to the date of application, but prior 10 the dale of the final public hearing,
it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit
a supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Detailed legal description of the property covered bv the application: (If space is inadequate, ol1ach
on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district, include separafe legal
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 0]/1&/07. rev 2/12/08
description for property involved In each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of\8El'e~ilrll~r\)l~8B
(completed within the last six months, maximum I" to 400' scale) If required to do so ~PfIl~7~orf~~~
I. t' t' g
upp lea Ion mee mg.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning
the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required.
Sectlon/Township/Range 22,15,10/ 48S / 26E
lot:
Plat Book
Block:
Subdivision: Mirosol PUD
Page #:
Property I.D. #: See Attached Exhibit "0"
Metes & Bounds Description: See Attached Exhibit "E and E2"
Size of propertv:
ft. X
ft. :: Total Sq. Ft.
AcresI543+/-
Address/generallocation of subject propertv:
PUD District (lOC 2.03.06): ~ Residential 0 Community Facilities
o Commercial
o Industrial
~~i~\~~'~~~~~r:~'1~H)i1~,~~~~i~~~~1~!~:~~~~~~~~~~~j~~Ktitt~~i~~nmi~tm~ln~~gm~iJ!~ifJ~~ji!~~~~~~:~~l~~1~~1~!~~;~~~~l~~~~~~~~~!~~~j~~~~)~
Zoning
Land use
N MU/PD
SR.O.W.
E DRI, Ag
W PUD
Moderate Density Residential - lee County
Immokalee Road
Heritage Bay DRI, Vacant Ag & Goverment
Terrafina, Parklands 8. Old Cypress
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to Ihe subject property? If so,
give complele legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inadequate, attach on
separate page).
Section/Township/Range 11 /48S /26E
Lol:
Plat Book
Block:
Subdivision:
Page #:
Property 1.0. #: 00179800005
Meles & Bounds Description: The North 1/2 of the North 1/2 of Section 11, Township 48S, Range 26E,
Colli er Co u nty
Application For Public Hearing For POO Rezone 01/18/07. rev 2/12108
This application is requesting a rezone from the PUD zoning district(s) to the PUDA zonin:grs'fa~~l~8~~o6~
Present Use of the Property: Vacant Page 68 of 247
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: 799 residential units, maximum of 36 holes of golf with
additional associated amenities
Original PUD Name: Mirasol PUD Ordinance No.: 01-20
~~~~,t;~,~1~~.:~ij~ij~~~~~1t~f~>~~~i~t;~~~~~~~~j~~1~~~J~.~~i*~!~~~~,~:~M~TJQB~~mtf~ml~~l?:~l~~!!i~!r!~~~j:t~~~~~;~r:~~@~~]~~m~~ll~~~f&i~~~1~j~f~~:~
Pursuant to Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County land Development Code, staff's analysis and
recommendation to the Planning Commission, and fhe Planning Commission's recommendation to the
Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below.
Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted
below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request.
PUD Rezone Considerations (WC Section 10.02.13.B)
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, drainuge, sewer, water, and other
utilities.
This 1543+/- acre site is located northwest of the Immokalee Road and Collier
Boulevard/CR. 951 intersection with frontage on both Immokalee Road and Broken Bock
Road. This project extends from Immokalee Rood north 3 miles to the Collier County Line.
This area hcrs undergone extensive urban development and has experienced maior
additions in terms of community and essential services. A full range of utHity
infrastructure exrsts in the areo. Necessary educationar fadlities exi~rng in the immediate
area are Laurel Oak elementary school, Oakridge Middle School and Gulf Coast High
school. North Naples Fire and Golden Gate Fire each have a station within 1.5 miles of
the site and there is afso a government parcel located with the Heritage Bay PUD.
Miraso/ is located adjacent to Activity Center # 3 which contains approximately
771,000 square footage of commercial including a government center parcel. Significant
roadway improvements ore underway on both adjacent arterial roads, with
partidpationby Mirasollhough a DCA, May 8, 2007 towards the Immokalee Road and
Collier Boulevard intersection.
The Mirasol project is compatible with the surrounding area through the internal
arrangement of tracts, the placement of land use buffer~, open spaces and its' significant
natural features and lakes. The proposed project consists of a residential component with
a proposed density of .52 units per acre with a maximum of two golf cours.es, and
945+/- acre on and off-site preserve orea. To the south of Mirasol lie the residential
communities of laurel lakes at 5.96 units per acre, Ibis Cove at 5.50 units per acre, and
Pebblebrooke lakes at 3.10 units per acre with activity center commercial. To the west
lies Olde Cypress, a residential golf course community at 2.10 units per acre with 0
commercial component, T erafina at 1.30 units per acre, and Parklonds at 2.50 units per
ocre. To the eost lies Tree Farm at 7.22 units per acre with activity center commercial
and Heritage Bay DRI a residential golf course community at 1.30 units per acre with
activity center commercia/. Some scattered residential homes are adjacent the east and
west sides along Nursery tone, Rose Rood and Broken Back Road. No changes have
occurred in this area that raise compatibility issues. Clearly the surrounding land is urban
impacted with a residential environment and is therefore Mirasol is 0 complimentary and
compatible development. Therefore, the uses proposed in this PUD remain compatible
with proposed uses in the area.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone OJ/18107. [e\' 2/12/08
2.
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 69 of 247
Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or
other instruments, or fOT 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 mointained at public expense. Findings and
recommendations of this type shall be made only after cansultation with the county attorney.
The Mirasol boundary is the result of assembling over 100 different parcels. Evidence of unified
control has been provided. A Community Development District was formed in 2002 to provide for
the continuing operation and maintenance of the proposed project infrastructure, buffers and
common area and structures at no expense to the public. A Master Association will be formed to
maintain any areas for the project that are not maintained by the CDD.
3.
Canformity of the propased PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth
management plein. (This is to include identifying what Sub-district, policy ar other provision
allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that
Sub-district, policy or other provision.)
FLUE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Policy 5.2, All applications and petitions for proposed development shall be consistent witl1 this
Growth Management Plan, as determined by the Board of County Commissioners.
The Mirosol project is consistent with the Growth Management Plan.
Policy 5.4, New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding
land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04.41, adopted June 22, 2004
and effective October 18, 2004, as amended).
The Mirasoi project compatibility was reviewed and approved with the o,;ginal PUD as well as
the withdrawn PUD extension request. The surrounding tand is urban impacted with a residential
environment and therefore Mirosol is stili a compfimentory and compatible development.
Policy 5.5, Encourage the use of land presently designated for urban intensity uses before
designating other areas for urban intensity uses. This shall occur by planning for the expansion of
County owned and operated public facilities and services to existing lands designated for urban
intensity uses, the Rural Settlement District (formerly known as North Golden Gate), and the Rural
Fringe Mixed Use District, before servicing new areas.
The Mirasol project is located within urban and RFMU bounda,;es. These areas ore designated for
expansion of the County owned and operated public facilities.
Policy 5.6, Permit the use of clustered residential development, Planned Unit Development
techniques, mixed-use development, rlJral villages, new towns, sateHite communities, transfer of
development rights, agricultural and conservation easements, and other innovative approaches, in
order to conserve open space and environmentally sensitive areas. Continue to review and amend
the zoning and subdivision regulations as necessary to allow and encourage such innovative land
development techniques.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01118/07, rev 211.?J08
The Mirasol project is a mixed use project incorporating Planned Unit Developme.iflll,'tH~Mr18N~o~~
along with the use of clostered residential development. The substantial preserve area~f;f'!!4 7
is consistent with the conservation of open space and environmentally sensitive areas.
Policy 7.1, The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their
properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made
without violating intersection spacing requirements of the land Development Code.
The Mirasol project has connected their property to Immokalee Road and Beck Boulevard.
Policy 7.2, The County sholl encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce
vehicle congestIon on nearby collector and arteriol roads and minimize the need for traffic
signals.
The Miresa/ PUD has internal access roads to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby arterial
roads.
Policy 7.3, All new and existing developments sholl be encouraged to connect their local streets
and their interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of
land use type.
The Miraso! project has provided interconnection to adjoining properties at 011 appropriate
locations, specifically to the proposed activity center on the southeast corner of the project Clnd a
public access from rhe Tree Farm Rood PUD to the proiect entry adjacent to Beck Boulevard.
Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communlties with 0
bfend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types.
The Mirasol project wiH be providing a profect with different product types which will vary in
pricing. The extensive recreation and open space this project is proposing will provide ample
opportunity to provide Q walkable ~ommunity.
Policy 7.6: The County shall explore the creation of on urban 'Igreenway" network olong existing
major conal banks and power line easements.
Mirasol has designed the project's frontage along the Immokalee Road conal to substantially
enhance the urban greenway system the County envisions.
FUTURE lAND USE DESIGNATION
1.A.l. Urban Residential Subdistrict, The purpose of this Subdistrict is to provide for higher
densities in on Qrea with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned public
facilities are concentrated. This Subdistrict comprises approximately 93,000 acres and BO% of
the Urban Mixed Use District. Maximom eligible residential density shall be determined through
the Density Rating System but shall not exceed 16 dweliing units: per acre except in accordance
with the Transfer of Development Rights Section of the land Development Code.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07. rev 2/12108
The Mirasol PUD has 340.7 acres located within the Urban Mixed Use District. A_ell'hlil'ffil ~I'. 8B
the project's density will be located within this district the density for the urban area iSp'~~lri~~~g~~
units per acre.
I.B.l.a. Density Rating System Application: Within the applicable Urban Designated Areas, a
base density of 4 residential dweliing units per gross acre may be allowed, though not an
entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted depending upon the location and
characteristics of the prolect. For purposes of calculating the eligible number of dwelling units for
a project (gross acreage multiplied by eligibie number of dweliing units per acre), the total
number of dwelling units may be rounded up by one unit if the dwelling unit total yields a fraction
of a unit .5 or greater. Acreage to be used for calculating density is exclusive of: the commercial
and industrial portions of a proied.
The approved density of the Mirasol PUD is consistent with the GMP. The lands within Section 22,
located within the Urban, Urban-Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict consists of
340.7+ /- acres thus yielding 1362.8 units. The lands within Section 15, Township 485, Range 26E
and Section 10, Township 485, Range 26E are outside the urban boundary, designated as
Agriculture/Rural, Agriculture/Rural - Mixed Use District on the Future Land Use Map with density
assigned as 1 unit per 5 acres. These 1202.92+/- acres would yield 240.58 units. The total base
density would be 1602.58 units for a gross density of 1.04 units per acre. The Mirasol PUD is
currently approved for 799 units for 0 gross density of 0.52 units per acre. The aJrrenf request is
not increasing the density from 799 units.
II.B.l.B. Rural Fringe Mixed Use District.
The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District is identified on Future land Use Map. This District consists of
approximately 93,600 acres, or 7% of Collier County's total land area. Significant portions of
this District are adjacent to the Urban area or to the semi-rural, rapidly dev;'loping, large-lot
North Golden Gate E>lates platted lands. Agricultural land uses within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District do not represent Cl significant portion of the County's active agricultural lands. As of the
date of adoption of this Plan Amendment, the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District consists of more than
5,550 tax parcels, and includes: at [east 3,835 separate and distinct property owners. Alternative
land use strategies have been developed for the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, in part, to
consider these eXisting conditions.
The Mirasol project has1202.92+/- acres of the 93,600 acres allocated as RFMU within its
boundary which represents approximately 1 % of the total designated land area. This project os
identified on Exhibit LIB" Rural Fringe Area represents the most western location designation in the
county. Much of this designated property had been utilized as agricultural use.
The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District provides a transition between the Urban and Estates
Designated lands and between the Urban and Agricultural/Rural and Conservation designated
lands farther to the east. The Rurai Fringe Mixed Use District employs a balanced approach,
including both regulations and incentives, to protect natura! resources and private property rights,
providing for large areas of open space, and allowing, in designated areas, appropriate types,
density and intensity of development. The Rural Fringe Mixed Use Distrid allows for a mixture of
urban and rural levels of service, including limited extension of central water and sewer, schools,
recreational facilities, commercial uses and essential services deemed necessary to serve the
residents of the District. In order to preserve existing natoral resources, including hab1tot for listed
species, to retain a rural, pastoral, or park-like appearance from the major public rights-ofwway
within this orea, and to protect private property rights, the following innovative planning and
development techniques are required and/or encouraged within the District.
Application FOf Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/l&/07, rev 2112/Q8
Agenda Item No. 88
. .. . April 28, 2009
The Mlrasol RPUD employs a balanced development approach WIth Its signifIcant pre'l"'~i9'2 of 247
commitment. The project, ofter over ten years of planning, which included consultation with all local
environmental interests and permitting through the South Florida Water Management as well as
the Army Corps of Engineers, allows for an overall design focused to protect natural resources
and private property rights. The primary goal of the designation is providing for large areas of
open space, and allowing, in designated areas! appropriate types, density and intensity of
development.
II.B.l.B. Neutral Lands: Neutral Lands have been identified for limited semi-rural residential
development. Available data indicates that Neutral lands have a higher ratio of native
vegetation, and thus higher habitat values, than lands designated as Receiving landsr but these
values do not approach those of Sending Lands. Therefore! these lands are appropriate for
limited development, if such development is directed away from existing native vegetation and
habitat. A lower moximum gross density is prescribed for Neutral Lands when compared to
Receiving Lands. Addmonalfy, certain other uses permitted within Receiving Lands are not
authorized in NeutTal lands. Within Neutral lands, the following standards shall apply,
1. Maximum Density, 1 dwelling unit per 5 gross acres (0.2 units per acre).
The lands within the Mirasol RPUD designated as Neutral equal 1202.92 +/- acres. These
1202.92 +;. acres (x) 1 unit per 5 acres (0.20) = 240.58 units
2. Clustering: Clus1"ering of residential development is allowed and encouraged.
Where dusl'ered development is employed, it shall be in accordance with the following
provisions:
a) If within the boundaries of the Rural Transition Water and Sewer District, and consistent with
the provisions of the Potable Water and Sanitary Sewer Sub-elements of this Plan, central water
and sewer shall be extended to the project. Where County sewer or water services may not be
available concurrent with development in Neutral Lands, interim private Welter and sewer facilities
may be approved.
The Mirosol project has utilized clustering by moving the density and development area adjacent
to the urban area which will be served by Collier County utilities.
b) The maximum lot size is one acre.
The proposed Mirosol RPUD is utilizing clustering and does not hove one acre Jots.
c.) The clustered development shall be located on the site so as to provide to the greatest degree
practicable, protection for listed speeles habitat; preservation of the highest quality native
vegetation; connectivity to adjacent natural reservations or preserveltion areas on adjacent
developments; and, creation, maintenance or enhancement of wildlife corridors.
The FLUCFCS data submitted by the applicant illustrates the majority of the proposed preserve as
shown on the master plan does not at this time qualify as native vegetation but represents the
forges contiguous area which promotes connectivity with offslte preserves. The wildlife survey
summary and a map of wildlife sittings was induded as part of this petition request. According to
the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) the entire site is considered Florida panther and indigo
snake habitat. Additionally, all wetlands wilh less than 90% melaleuca have been determined to
be wood stork foraging habitat. This determination has been provided in tne March 1/ 2007
Application For Public Hearing For POO Rewne OllJ 8/07, re,- 2/12/0&
Biological Opinion. Early in the development stage, the project was also coordl.l'a'f,}8d~~JI!1BN~o~~
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC - James Beever). Their OPlJWr7<1f tIIf~47
time was that the entire property could be considered potential habitat for fox squirrel, black
bear, and Florida panther. They (FFWCC) also opined that the wetlands on the property were
potential habitat for all of the local protected wading birds including wood storks.
With these determinations, it should be dear that the majority of the proposed preserve areas will
continue to function as habitat for FlorIda panmer, black bear, wood stork, wading birds, fox
squirrel, and indigo snokes. Known nests and bedding areas of fox squirrels are being preserved,
wood stork foraging habitat is being improved, and the existing corridor across the SITe rs being
maintained.
d) The minimum project size shall be at least 40 acres.
The Mlrasol project is 1543.62+(- acres.
3. Allowable Uses:
b) Single-family residentIal dwelling units, including mobile homes where a Mobile Home Zoning
Overlay exists.
The Mirasol RPUD has included single-family residential dwelling units.
c) Multi-family residential structures shall be permitted under me Residential Clustering provisions
of this plan, subject to the development of appropriate development standards to ensure that the
transitional semi-rural character of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District is preserved. These
development standards sholl include, but are not limited to: building heights, design standards,
buffers, and setbacks.
Clustering has been the primary focus of the Mirasol development since the Board of the Collier
County Commission on April 24, 2001, requested that the proposed second golf course located in
Section lObe relocated and consolidated with the overall development to the south providing for
o greater area of off-site connected preserve. Although the Mirasol MPUD is in the RFMUD, it is
the most westerly parcel and is actually surrounded by more urban impacts than the other
92,387.22 acres of 93,600 acres of Rural Fringe as depicted on Exhibits "B" & "B-1 '".
j) Golf courses or driving ranges, subject to the following standard"
(1) Golf courses shall be designed, constructed, and managed in accordance with
the best management praclices of Audubon International's Gold Signature Program and the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
(2) In order to prevent the contamination of soil, surface water and ground water
by the materials stored and handled by golf course maintenance operations, golf courses sholl
comply with the Best Management Practices for Golf Course Maintenance Departments, prepared
by the Florida Department of Environmental Pratection, May 1995.
(3) To protect ground and surface water quality from fertilizer and pesticide
usagel golf courses shall demonstrate the following management practJces:
(a) The use of slow release nitrogen sources;
(b) The use of soil and prant tissue analysis to adjust timing and amount of fertilization
applications;
(c) The use of an integrated pest management program "sing both biological and chemical agents
to control various pests;
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/181.07, rev Z/12/08
(d) The coordination of pesticide applications with the timing and app*g,'tml~~t~~8~~O~~
irrigation water; Page 74 of 247
(e) The use of the procedure contained In IFAS Circular 1011, Managing Pesticides for
Golf Course Maintenance and Water Quality Protection, May 1991 (revised 1995) to select
pesticides that will have a minimum adverse impact on water quality.
14) To ehsure water conservation, golf courses shall incorporate the following In their design ond
operation:
(0) Irrigation systems shall be designed to use weather station information and moisturewsensing
systems to determine the optimum amount of irrigation water needed considering soH moisture and
evopotranspiration rates.
(b)As availabler golf courses shall utilize treated effluent reuse water consistent with Sanitary
Sewer Sub-Element Objective 1.4 ond its policies;
(c) Native plant> shaJi be used exclusively except for special purpose areas such as golf greens,
fairways, and building site~. Within these excepted areos, landscaping plans sholl require that at
least 75% of the trees and 50% of the shrubs be freeze-tolerant native Floridion species. At least
75% of the required native trees and shrubs shall also be drought tolerant species.
(5) Stormwater management ponds shall be designed to mimic the functions of naturol
systems: by establishing shorelines that are sinuous in configuration in order to provide increased
length and diversity of the littoral zone. A Littoral shelf shall be established to provide a feeding
drea for water dependent Clvian species. The combined length of vertical and rip-rapped walls
shall be limited to 250/0 of the shoreline. Credits t.o the site preservation areo requirements, on an
acre- to- acre basis, shall be given for littoral shelves that exceed these littoral shelf area
requirements
(6) Site preservation and native vegetation retention requirements shall be the same as
tnose set forth in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District criteria. Site preservation areas are intended
to provide habitat functions and shall meet minimum dimensions as set forth in the land
Development Code. These stondards shall be established within one year.
The Mirasol RPUD recognizes the go if course design standards required. Aithough the golf course
design is not required at zoningr at the time of golf course plan approval request the appropriate
plans will be provided as required by the We.
q) Parks, open space, and recreational uses.
The 1543.62 + /- acre Mirosol RPUD has set aside approximately 853.2+/- acres of notive
preserves which includes the 511.9+/- acres of on-si1-e and offwsite required native preserve
areas. On~slte native preserves are 461.6+/- and 50.3+/- acres are off-site preserves. The total
945 acres of on.site and off-site preserve, as well as on-site recreational areas and open areas
far exceed on)' minimum requirements.
4. Native vegetation and preservation requirements: Native vegetation snail be preserved as set
forth in CCME Policy 6.1.2
The Mirasol project has retained native vegetation as per CCME Policy 6_1.2 and os explained in
further detail below.
II_B.2. Buffers Adiacent to Major Public Rights-of-way, In order to maintain and enhance the rural
character within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, within one year of adoption of this
amendment, Cotlier County will adopt land development regulations establishing buffering
standards for developments adiacent to existing or proposed arterial and collector public
roadways. These standards sholl include, but are not limited to: applicability provisions, including
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/IS/07, rev 2/J 2/08
establishing a minimum project size below which these requirements shall not apPfWl1IIfi~~~~i't~. 88
which water features, including water management lakes and canals, may be a part (;ft1&~ 75 ~f ~~~
buffer; credits for existing native vegetation that is to be retained; and, credits toward any open
space and native vegetation preservation requirements.
The future extension of C.R. 951 alignment will be adjacent to over a mlle of preserve area within
rile Rural Fringe Mixed Use District which satisfies the goal to maintain and enhance the rural
character.
II.B.4. Exemptions from the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Development Standards -
The requirements of this District shall not apply to, affect or limit the continuation of existing uses.
Exist1ng uses sholl include: those uses for which all required permits were issued prior to June 191
2DD2; or proiects for which a Conditional use or Rezone petition has been approved by the
County prior to June 19, 2DD2; or, land use petitions for which a completed application has been
submitted prior to June 191 2002. The continuation of existing uses shall include expansions of
those uses if such expansions are consistent with or clearly ancillary to the ex.isting uses. Hereafter,
such previously approved developments shall be deemed to be consistent with rile Plan's Goals,
Obiectlves and Policies and for the Rural Frlnge Mixed Use District, and they may be built out in
accordance with their previously approved pions. Changes to 1l1ese previous approvals shall also
be deemed to be consistent with the Plan's Goals, Polides and Objectives for the Rural Fringe
Mixed Use District as long as they do not result in an increase in development density or intensity.
Mirosof's completed land use petition opplication was submitted prior to June 19,2002 os well as
receiving the Rezone approval April 24th, 2D01 which is prior to June 19, 2DD2 and is exempt
form the RFMU District development standards. The continuation of existing uses shall include
expansions of those uses if such expansions are consistent with or dearly ancillary to the exi>fing
uses. Therefore the previously approved developments shall be deemed 1'0 be consistent with the
Plan's Goals, Obiectives and Polides and for 1l1e Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, ond they may be
built out in accordance with ,.heir previously approved plan.
CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
PLAN
GOAL 1: THE COUNTY SHALL CONTINUE TO PLAN FOR THE PROTECTION, CONSERVATION,
MANAGEMENT AND APPROPRIATE USE OF ITS NATURAL RESOURCES.
This Goal mainly applies to the County's process and objectives in establishing and implementing
protective meClsures for natural resources. It is not really applicable to any individual project
review.
GOAL 2: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT ITS SURFACE AND ESTUARINE WATER RESOURCES.
OBJECTIVE 2.1:
By January 2DD8, rile County shall complete the prioritization and begin the process of preparing
Watershed Management Plans, which contain appropriate med10nisms to protect the County's
estuarine and wetland systems. The process sholl consist of (1) an evaluation of areas for which
Watershed Management Plans are not necessary based on current or past watershed
management planning efforts, (2) an assessment of available doto: and information that can be
used in the development of Watershed Management Plans, and (3) budget authorization to begin
preparation of the first Watershed Management Plan by Januory 20D8. A funding schedule
shall be established to ensure that all Watershed Management Plans will be completed by 2D1 O.
Application For Public Hearing For POO Rezone 0111&/07. rev 2/12/08
In selecting the order of Plan completion, the County sholl give priority to watersh~%ii;"'~~~llN~O~~
development growth potential is greatest and will impact the greatest amount of wetldi11J:9g~ of 247
listed spedes habitats. The schedule and priorities shall also be coordinated with the Federal and
State agency plans that address Total Maximum Dally loads (TMDls). Until the Watershed
Management Plans are completed, the County sholl apply the following os interim standards for
development,
We CJre not cwore of any finalized and/or approved Watershed Management Plan that has
been prepared by the County relative to this property location. However, this project has on
approved SFWM Permit, which has been provided as a part of the application.
a. All new development and re-development projects shall meet 150% of the water
quality volumetric requirements of Section 5.2.1 (a) of the Basis of Review for Environmental
Resource Permit Applications Within the South Florida Water Management District (February
2006) and the retention and detention requirements, and the allowable offsite discharge rates
required by Drainage Sub-element Policy 6.2 and 6.3, respectively;
In accordance with the Basis of Review, the project has been designed to meet the 150% water
quality requirement by containing the necessary volumes within the detention areas prior to
discharge. Dry detention basins and wet detention lakes are specIfied for ochievrng water
quality and for the attenuation of the 25-yr and 1 OO-yr storm events. The project's five controlled
water management basins have been designed to discharge at or below the permitted allowable
discharge rate.
b. Loss of storage or conveyance volume resulting from direct impacts: to wetlands shall
be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capacity on site and
within or adjacent to the impacted wetland.
The volume lost by the proposed wetlond impocts is accommodated by the pass through system
which permits a conveyance through the project while maintaining the existing stages upstream.
The wet detention lakes within the project's basins provide the necessary volume to contain the
site-generated runoff while discharging at the permitted rate.
c. Floodplain storage compensation shall be evaluated for developments within the
designated flood zones. "A", "AE", ond ''YEn os depicted on the Flood Insurance Rote Mops
published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency with on effective date of November
17, 2005. Floodplain storage compensation sholl also be evaluated for areas known to be
periodically inundated by intense rainfall or sheetflow conditions.
The components of the proposed pass through system were designed to prevent a 1055 of storage
to the flood plain. This wos accomplished by performing sheetflow modeling of the watershed to
determine the pre~development existing conditions stage at the profect's northern boundary for
the design storm events (25-yr, 100-yr). Then the necessary weir, culvert, and lake dimensions
were calculot"ed to allow the passage of the upstream flow while maintaining that existing stage.
Additional lakes within the project's basins provide stormwater attenuation and storage for the
site.
d. All development located within areas identified on Figure 1 sholl be evaluated to
determine impacts to natural wetlands, flowwoysl or sloughs. For this particular evaluation,
natural wetlands, flowways, or sloughs shall be tentatively identified CIS contiguous lands having a
continual preponderance of wetland or wet facultative plant species and a ground elevation
Application For Public Hearing For POO Rezone 01/18/07, rev 2/12108
. . AoendaJtl'm No. 86
through the malar portion of the natural wetland, flowway, or slough at least one 1') f'P.'IlrlP~r2009
than the ground at the edge of the narural wetland, flowway, or slough. The edge offl~e<1'fllI~247
wetlands, flowways, or sloughs shall be identified by field determination and based upon
vegetation and elevation differences from the adiacent uplands or transitional wetlands. The
County shall require the appllcant to avoid direct impacts to these natural wetlands, flowways, or
sloughs: or, when not possible, to ensure any direct impact is minimized and compensated for by
providing the some conveyance capacity lost by the direct impact. The County shall adhere to the
limiting discharge rates of each basin as outlined in Ordinance 2001-27, adopted May 22, 2001
which amended the County Water Management Policy and provided basin delineations where
special peak di;charge rates have been established. The limiting di;charge rates will be reviewed
as a part of the Watershed Management Plans, and modified according to the analyses and
findings of the Watershed Management Plans.
During the rainy season, water generally flows across this site from the northeast to the southwest
direction. According to this sub. paragraph, the site may not be identified as a slough or fiowway
in that the ground elevation within the wetland is not 1 foot lower in elevation thon the natural
ground adjacent to the wetlands. The site has become a de-facto flowway due to the surrounding
development and flow obstacles (berms, roads, etc.) that have served to concentrate and back up
water onto this site. However, the project has provided increased conveyance capacity across the
site to compensate for the storage lost through the direct impacts proposed.
The design calculations implement the peak allowable discharge rate of 0.04 cfs/ acre which has
influenced the minimum rood centerline/perimeter berm and finished floor elevations of the
project.
e. All new development and re-development projects shall ensure surrounding properties
wifl not be adversely impacted from the project's influence on stormwater sheet flow.
As previously mentioned, the modeling of the proposed pass through system demonstrates that the
existing upstream stages will be maintained during the post development condition with the use of
wet detention \akes interconnected by box culverts and regulated by inflow and outflow weirs.
This design permits a portion of the upstream flow from the north to be routed through the project
during the design storm events and allow discharge southward to the Cocohatchee Canal. With
this increased conveyance capacity across the site, the surrounding properties will not be
adversely affected or impaded as a result of the project's influence on stormwater sheet How.
f. Prior to the issuance of a final development order, the County shall require all
development projects to obtain the necessary state and federal environmental permits.
Both the SFWMD and the US Army Corps of Engineers permits have been issued for the project.
g. Within one year of the effective date of these amendments, the County shall adopt
land development regulations to require Best Management Practices of future development or re~
development projects. Best Management Practices means structurel and non-structural facilities or
practices intended to reduce poflution either through source control or treatment of stormwater.
The project Intends to implement appropriate BMPs within the site to address both source control
and treatment of stormwoter. Such BMP's will include: straw bale barriers, sUt fence, and storm
inlet drain protection. These will be more fully explained at the time of Site Development Plan
review.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01118/07. r~ 21t2l08
OBJECTIVE 2.2: Agenda Item No. 8B
Apnl 28. 2009
All canals, rivers, and flow ways disdlOrging into estuaries shall meet all applicable F~e178 of 247
State or local water quality standards.
The proposed master surface water management system provides full water quality based on one
tnch over the site. In the sales center areo, clubhouse/amenity center! C1nd golf course maintenance
facility area, one half inch dry pretreatment is alsa provided. In addition to the aforementioned
required water quality volume, the system provides an additionai 50% water quality volume
treatment per SFWMD requirements. An Urban Siormwater Management Program and
Construction Pollution Prevention Pion specifications and guidetines are part of the required water
quality. No adverse water quality impacts are anticipated to result from this project. The
SFWMD has reviewed the proiect plans and has determined that applicable state water quality
standards will be met by the project. In addition, all manufacturers and EP A guidelines for
chemical use in aquatic habitat and landscape areas will be followed throughout the site to
protect against long term or chronic degradation of the downstream watershed.
Policy 2.2.2: In order to limit the specific and cumulative impacts of stormwoter run off, stormwater
systems should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving
waters and an attempt is made to enhance the timing, quantity and quality of fresh water to the
estuarIne system. Non-structural methods such as discharge and storage in wetlands are
encouraged.
The Mircsol proiect has received its water quality permit from SFWM. The stormwater systems
should be designed in such a way that discharged water does not degrade receiving waters.
GOAL 3: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT THE COUNTY'S GROUND WATER RESOURCES TO
ENSURE THE HIGHEST WATER QUALITY PRACTICAL.
OBJECTIVE 3.1:
Ground water quality shall meet all applicable Federal and State water quality standards.
Ground water quality shall be monitored in order to determine whether development activIties
are contributing to the degradation of Collier Countyls ground water quality. Ground water data
and land use activities will be assessed annually to determine long-term trends and whether the
County is meeting Federal and State regulatory standards for ground water quality. The County
shall require ground water monitoring of land uses in accordance with Chapters 62-520, 62-550
and 62-777 of the Florida Administrative Code. Upon the detection of any ground water
degradation determined through the monitoring process, the County will notify the appropriate
regulatory agendes.
The property Is not within 0 wellhead protection area and all ground water use will be subject to
a water use permit from the SFWMD. In addition, the project has agreed to implement a water
quality monitoring program as port of its SFWMD permi!. The information obtained through the
monitoring program will be shared wi1n County staff.
GOAL 4: THE COUNTY SHALL CONSERVE, PROTECT AND APPROPRJA TEL Y MANAGE THE
COUNTY'S FRESH WATER RESOURCES.
OBJECTIVE 4.1 :
Collect and evaluate data and informotion designed to more accurately determine water use in
Coiiier County such as the County's database tracking all permitted wells and wells having
consumptive use permits.
Application For Public Hearing For P1JD Rezone 0 l/J gj07, rev 2112/08
This project will hove a SFWMD consumptive use permit and data collected regcf.'mr,~'s~~~i~'o~~
use on-site will be part of the monitoring requirements of the project. Page 79 ~f 247
OBJECTIVE 4.2:
The Collier County Water-Sewer District and the Coliier County Water and Wastewater Authority
will continue to promote conservation of Collier County's potable water supply and will continue to
develop, Implement and refine a comprehensive conservation strategy, which will identify specific
goals for reducing per capita potable water consumption.
The project will promote on-site source control and water conservation features such os native
plantings, irrigation controls, moisture sensors, and other landscaping BMPs aimed at minimizing
water use on the site. In addition, re-Use water will be used wherever available and feasible to
do so in an effort to minimize the use of potable water.
Policy 4.2.2: The County sholl negotiate agreements with area golf courses to accept and use
treated wastewater effluent for irrigation when and where such treated effluent is available from
existing and futul"e -wastewater treatment plants:.
The project will contain golf course play areas and will faithfully negotiate with the County with
regords to reclaimed water irrigation use.
GOAL 5: THE COUNTY SHAll PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIA TEL Y USE ITS MINERAL
AND SOil RESOURCES.
OBJECTiVE 5.1:
Allow the extraction or use of mineral resources in the County provided such activities comply with
applicable industry ond government standards regarding healili, safety, and environmental
protection.
No mineral extraction is proposed for the prolect other than the excClvation of the on~site lakes..
OBJECTIVE 5.4,
The County shall maintain its program to control soil erosion through its regulations identifying
criteria to control and reduce soil erosion and sediment tronsport from construction and other
nonagriculturolland disturbing activities.
All applicable BMPs will be utilized during cn-site construction activities to protect adfacent lands
and waters from soil erosion. Silt barriers, hay bales, soil stabilization, plontings, and wind rows
are all soil erosion methods that may be used on the proiect site.
GOAL 6: THE COUNTY SHAll IDENTIFY, PROTECT, CONSERVE AND
APPROPRIATELY USE ITS NATIVE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AND WilDLIFE HABITAT.
OBJECTIVE 6.1:
The County shall protect native vegetative communities through the application of minimum
preservation requirements. The following policies provide criteria to make this objective
measurabie. The,e policies shall apply to 011 of Collier County except for that portion of ilie
County which is identified on the Countywide Future land Use Map (FLUM) as the Rural lands
Stewardship Area Overlay.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18107, rev 2/12/08
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
As described under the applicable Policies, these criteria ore being met by the propo>e.!JI'liO of 247
Moster Plan.
Policy 6.1.1, For the County's Urban Designated Area, Estates Designated Area, Conservation
Designated Area, and Agricultural/Rural Mixed Use District, Rural-Industrial District and Rural-
Settlement Area District as designated on the FLUM, native vegetation sholl be preserved on-site
through the apptication of the following preservation and vegetation retention standards and
criteria, unless the development occurs within the Area of Critical State concern (ACSC) where the
ACSC standards referenced in the Future Land Use Element sholl apply.
The property straddles the RFMU neutral land and the urban residential land boundary. The
Mirasol PUD wa' specifically authorized to utilize the density blending provisions when the density
blending provisions were incorporated into the Future land Use Element of the Coiner County
Growth Management Plan. When the density blending provisions were adopted, County Stoff
advised the Deportment of Community Affairs and the BCC that Section 15 is eligible for density
blending and Section 10 is not eligible for density blending aithough both sections ore designated
neutral lands. The density blending provisions in the Future Land Use Element of the Growth
Management Pian specifically allow the blending of density from the urban area to Section 15 in
the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. Based upon the express language in the Future Land Use
Element of the Growth Management Pian the Mirasol PUD qualifies for density blending if it
satisfies criteria (el" The project is currently zoned or will be rezoned to a PUD" and (f) HDensity to
be shifted to the RFMU district from the Urban Residential Sub-District is to be located on
impacted lands, or the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve and protect the
highest quality native vegetation and/or habitat on-site and to maximize tne connectivity of such
native vegetation and/or habitat with adjacent preservation and/or habitat areas" of the density
blending criteria. As set fortn in this EIS, the Mirasol PUD satisfies these criteria.
The proiect straddles either the Urban Residential Sub-District or Urban Residential
Fringe Sub-District and either the RFMU district Neutral or Receiving Lands.
The project in aggregate 15 at least 80 acres in size (Sections 22 and 15 add up to
about 965 acres).
At least 25% of the project is located within the Urban Mixed Use District [340.7
(35%) acres of the 965 acres eligible for density blending is located within the urban district).
The entire project is located within the Collier County Sewer and Water District
Boundaries and will utilize central water and sewer to serve the project unless interim provisions
for sewer and water are authorized by Collier County (The entire project will utilize central water
and sewer services).
'. The project is currently zoned or will be rezoned to 0 PUD (The project is zoned PUD
and is currently under review for a PUD Amendment)..
Density to be shifted to the RFMU district from the Urban Residential Sub-District is to
be located on impacted lands, or the development on the site is to be located so as to preserve
and protect the highesl" quality native vegetation and/or habitat on-site and to maximize the
connectivity of such native vegetation and/or habitat with adjacent preservation and/or habitat
areas (The project has been designed to preserve a large preserve contiguous with adjacent
preservation areas to both lhe east and west of the project. This preserve contains the rargest
contiguous native habitat area on the property~)
The entire proiect shail meet the applicable preservation standards of the RFMU
district os set forth in Chapter 4. These preservation requirements shall be calculated based upon,
and apply to, the total project area. (The RFMU preservation standards ore being applied to the
entire prolect.)
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01118/07, rev 2/12/08
. .,. .. Aql'nda Item No. 8B
As such, the entire project wIll be required to meet the nctlve vegetctoon preservanon ~lln?2B~~009
autlined in the RFMU section of the CCME and presented below (Policy 6.1.2). Page 81 of 247
Policy 6.1.2: For the County's Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, as designated on the FlUM, native
vegetation shall be preserved an site through the application af the following preservation end
vegetation retention standards and criteria:
Preservation end Native Vegetation Retention Standcrds:
b. Neutral lands:
A minimum of 60% of the native vegetation present, not to exceed 45% of the total site crea
shall be preserved, except that, for Section 24, Township 49 south, Range 26 East, located in the
North Belle Meade Overley, a minimum of 70% of the native vegetation present, not to exceed
70% of the total site areas, shall be preserved.
Sections 10 and 15 are within the RFMU zoning and are designated as Neutral lands on the
FLUM. When the density blending provisions were adopted, County Staff advised the
Department of Community Affairs and the BCC that Section 15 is eligible for density blending and
Section 10 is not eligible for density blending. Because of the density blending standards, the
entire site will be considered under these RFMU criteria. The proiect has a total of 1543.62+/-
acres of which about 853.2 acres are existing native habitat. The property must therefore
preserve at least 511.9 acres (60% of 853) of native habitat either on-site or through a
combination of on and off site sources. This number is less than 45% of the entire site (45% ·
1543.7 = 694.7 acres). The 511.9 acres required does nat exceed 45% of the entire site.
Native habitat ccreage is being preserved throughout the site plcn. The project is providing c
large preserve contiguous with adjacent preserves to the east and west and is olso providing 5
smaller preserve areas (which contain the highest quality habitat) within the development area.
All together, these preserves contribute approximately 461.6 ccres of native hobitat
preservation. The remaining 50.3 acres of required native preservation will be met off-site with
lands preserved in Section 11.
e. Provisions c. through d. above shall also be consistent with the wetlands protection
policies set forth under CCME Objective 6.2.
The proposed preserve areas do include higher quality wetlands currently found on the project
site. In addition, as further described under Objective 6.2 of this analysis, mitigation and
enhcncement of on and offcsite wetlands offset the proposed impacts of the project and make this
project consistent with current GMP and LDC provisions.
(1) For the purpose of this polky, "notive vegetotionfl is defined os a vegetative
community having 25% or more canopy coverage or highest existing vegetative strata of native
plant spedes. The vegetation retention requirements specified in this policy Clre calculated on the
amount of Unative vegetotion"1i1ot confl?rms to this definition.
Approximately 853.2 aCr'es of the site meet this native vegetation definition. Since the native
vegetation retention requirement is to preserve 600/0 of this, approximately 511.9 acres of native
vegetation will be preserved to meet this criterion
(2) The preservction of native vegetation shall include canopy, under-story and ground
covert emphasizing the largest contiguous area possible, which may inclode connection to off site
preserves~ The purpose for identifying the largest contiguous area is to provide for 0 core area
that has the grectest potential for wildlife hcbitct by reducing the interface between the preserve
orea and development which decreases the conflicts from other fond uses~ Criteria for
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01118/07, rev 2/12108
d .. h d . I d d f h b. h L AQeDda Item No 88
etermmmg t e ImenSfono stan or sot e preserve are to e s.et out In t e anC3 De~R~nlo09
Code. Page 82 of 247
The proposed preserves associated with this profect have been designed to form the largest
contiguous area(s) possible. In oddition to the contiguous preserves, higher quality wetland areas
(higher function areas) have been preserved within the development footprint. Site development
has been clustered into the southern portion of the site with occess from an established roadway.
This allows for a larger more contiguous preserve area in the northern portion of the property tnat
is better insulated and buffered from the proposed development. This northern preserve area
also acts QS a corridor between existing and proposed preserves on the west site of the property
and existing preserves on the east side of the property. Even the smaller infernal preserves have
been mode as large as possible. These internal preserves contain the highest quality wetland
areas on the srte. The preserves hove been proposed around these higher quality areas but also
include additional lower quality wetland or upland areas to increase the preserve sizes and
provide some buffer to the higher quoHty areas from the proposed development. Since these
internal wetland preserve areas provide foraging areas for listed woding bird species and fox
squirrel as welt as valuable wetland functions within the development, they have been included in
the native preservation calculations for the project.
(3) Areas that fulfill the native vegetation retention standards and criteria of this policy
shall be set aside as preserve areas. On~site and off~site preserve areas snail be protected by a
permanent conservation mechanism to prohibit further development, consistent with the
requirements of this policy. The type of conservation mechanism, including conservation easements,
required for a specific development may vary based on preserve area size, type of development
approval, and other factors, as set forth in the County's land development regulations.
The proiect will place conservation easements over all of the proposed preserve areas.
(4) Selection of native vegetation to be retained os preserve areas shall reflect the
following criteria in descending order of priority:
a. Wetland or upland areas known to be utilized by fisted species or that serve as corridors for
the movement of wildlife shall be preserved and protected in order to facilitate the continued use
of the site by listed species or the movement of wildlife through the site. This criterion shall be
consistent with the requirements of Policy 7.1.1 and 7.1.2 of this element.
b. Xeric Scrub, Dune and Strand, Hardwood Hammocks.
c. Onsite wetlands preserved pursuant to Policy 6.2.5 of this Element;
d. Any upland habitat that serves os a buffer to a wetlond area, os identified in [4)c. above.
e. Dry Prairie, Pine Flafv.roods, and
f. All ather native habitats.
This property lies between existing and proposed preserve areas on the east and west sides of
the project. The project has proposed a relatively wide (over 1 mile) corridor that maintains the
connectivity between the preserve areas on the west and the preserve oreas on the east.
According to the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) the entire site is considered potential Florida
panther and indigo snake habitat. Additlonaliy, all wetlands with less than 90% melaleuca have
been determined to be wood stork foraging habitat. This determination has been provided most
recently in the March 1, 2007 Biological Opinion. Early in the development stage, the project was
also coordinated with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission [FFWCC - James
Beever). Their opinion at the time was that the entire property could be considered potential
habitat for fox squirrel, black bear, and Florida panther. They (FFWCC) also opined that the
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Re7..one 01/18/07, rev 1/12/08
. . Aaencj'l.I.\em No. 88
wetlands on the property were potential hab,tat for all of the local protected wadIng 9J.\li'~ 28, 2009
including wood storks. Page 83 of 247
Based on the fact that the review agencies have considered the entlre site listed species habitat
and the main preserve areas will provide both enhanced habitat (over what Is currently present)
and a viable wildlife corridor linking other preserves, the majority of the proposed preserves
meet the highest ranking priority under this polky. The three preserves, internal to the
developmentl that are not directly contiguous with off-site preserves were proposed for
preservation because of their higher wetland functional value and quality (per the density
b~ending criteria). These wetland preserves are cypress areas that remain in relatively good
shape despite the widespread exotic infestation over the maiority of the site. They meet the
highest priority in that they will provide habitat for wood stork, wading bird, and fox squirrei
foraging and they also meet the third ranking priority as higher quality wetlands. As such, the
native habitat being preserved in these internal areas will also be counted towards the
preservCltion requirements of the project.
The large northern preserve will continue to function as habitat for Florida panther, black bear,
wood storkt wading birds, fox squirrel, and indigo snakes. The smaller internal preserves will
provide habitat for wood stork; wading birds, fox squirrel, and indigo snakes. Known nests and
bedding areas of fox squirrels are being preservedt foraging habitat for fox squirrels is being
improved, wood stork (and other wading bird) foraging habitat is being improved, and the
existing corridor across the site is being maintained and enhanced. In addition1 wetlands consist of
the majority of the proposed preserve areas and all efforts have been made to preserve those
wetlands of highest functional vaiue,
The preserve areas proposed by the project have been reviewed and approved by both the
SFWMD and the ACOE. Higher quality wetland areas have been preserved and large areas of
wetlands (over 306 acres) will be restored and enhanced as part of the proposed preserve
management plan.
(5} The uses allowable within preserve areas are limited to:
a. Passive recreational uses that do not impact the minimum required vegetation or couse
a loss of fund-ion to tne preserve area. Criteria identifying what constitutes 0 loss of function shall
be set forth in the land development regulations and will address various types of construction that
ore compatible with the function of the preserve. The land development regulations will also
provide criteria to define appropriate passive recreational uses. The criteria will be established
to allow for passive recreational uses such as trails or boardwalks that provide for access within
the preserves, providing the uses do not reduce the minimum required vegetation or cause harm to
listed species.
Trails or boardwalks within the internal development preserves may be considered though none
are proposed at this time. If troils are proposed at a later date, they will have to be reviewed
by County staff for consistence with current GMP and lDC standards.
b. Receipt of treated stormwater discharge where such use1 including conveyance,
treatment and discharge structures, does not result in adverse impacts on the nohJrally occurring,
native vegetatlont to include the loss of the minimum required vegetation and the harm to any
listed species Clccording to the policies associated with Objective 7.1, os determined by criteria
set forth in the land development regufations. Discharge 10 preserves having wetlands requires
treatment that will meet water quality standards as set forth in Chapter, 62-302 F.A.C. and wili
conform to the water quality criterio requirements set forth by the South Florida Water
Management District.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/1&/07. rev 2112/08
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
One of the internal development preserves is connected to the project's surface water Page 84 of 247
management system. Any water entering these preserves from the surface water management
system w1ll be pre~treoted os required and will not adversely affect vegetation or listed species
utitizatlon.
(6) A management plan shall be submitted for all preserve areas identified by specific
criteria in the land deveiopment regulations to identify octions that must be taken to ensure that
the preserved areas will function as proposed. The plan shall include methods to address control
and treatment of invasive exotic species, fire management, stormwater management (if
applicable), and maintenance of permiited facilities. If applicable, a listed species monitoring
progrom shall be submitted pursuant to Policy 7.1.2 (2)(i).
A Preserve Management Plan has been coordinated with all relevant stote and federal review
agencies and is submitted for review by County staff.
(7) Off-site preservation shall be allowed to provide flexibility in the project design.
a. Within Receiving and Neutral Lands, off-site preservation shall be allowed for up to
50'% of the vegetation retention requirement.
1. Off-site preservation areas shall be allowed at a ratio of 1,1 if such off-site
preservation is located within designated Sending Lands or at a ratio of 1.5: 1 anywhere else.
2. like for like preservation shall be required for Tropical Hardwood and Oak Hammock
vegetative communities.
Since the entire project is being reviewed as Neutrollonds, this provision applies to the project
site. In addition to the PUD property, the petitioner also owns 160 acres in Section 11 which is
designated as Sending iands in the FLUM. Approximately 89.2 acres of this property meet the
native vegetation definition of the County./is. such, vegetation requirements for the property
could be provided at a 1,1 ratio from the Section 11 property to make up for any deficit on-site.
It is anticipated that approximately 50.3 acres of the off-site native habitat will be used to meet
the native vegetation requirements though this wrll not be finalized until Site Development Plan
review.
(8) Density bonus Incentives shall be granted to encourage preservation amounts greater
than that required in this policy, as provided for in the FLUE for Receiving Lands and Rural
Villages. Within one (1) year of the effective date of these amendments, Collier County shall
adopt specific land development regulations to implement this incentive program.
This provision is not applicable to the proposed project.
(9) Onrsite preservation areas shall olso conform to the Open Space requirements as
specified in the Future land Use Element. These preservations shall be part of and counted
towards the Open Space requirements.
This requirement is met by the proposed Master Plan
(1 O)Existing native vegetation that is located contiguous to the natural reservation shall be
preserved pursuant to Policy 6.5.2 of this element. Naturaf reservation is defined as that
specified in CCME Obiective 6.5 of this eiement.
Application For Public Hearing For PDQ Rezone 01/] 8/07, rev 2/] 2/08
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
The northem portion of the property is located next to the CREW NRPA. All of the p)jll'l!lEttl5 of 247
adjacent to thIs reservation is being preserved. In addition, as part of the SFWMD and ACOE
permits, 160 acres of land within the NRP A are also being preserved.
(11 )Should the amount of wetland vegetation exceed the minimum vegetation requirements as
specified herein, retention of wetland vegetation having significant habitat or hydrologic value is
encouraged. Increased preservation shall be fostered through incentives including, but not limited
to: clustered development, reduced development standards such os open space, setbacks, and
landscape buffers, to allow for increased areas of preserved wetland vegetation. Significant
habitat or hydrologic value is determined by wetland function, not the size of the wetland.
The amount of wetland vegetation on the property does exceed the minimum vegetation
requirements. In order to maximize wetland functions. within the site plan, contiguous preserves
have been provided wherever possible. Three isolated preserve areas are also proposed due to
the higher relative quality of those three areas and their incorporation into the site plan has been
reviewed and approved by both the SFWMD and the ACOE. lower impact uses such as golf
course an.d lakes have been -placed adjacent to preserves to buffer them from the development,
and higher quality wet'land areas (higher function areas) have been preserved within the
development footprint.
Policy 6.1.4: Pronibited invasive exotic vegetation sholl be removed from all new developments..
(1) Applicants for development permits shall submit and implement plans for invasive
exotic plant removal and long-term control.
(2) Maintenance plans shall describe specific techniques to prevent re-invasion by
prohibited exotic vegetation of the site in perpetuity.
(3) The County shali maintain a list of prohibited invasive exotic vegetation in the land
Development Code and update it as necessary.
The project has coordinated a Preserve Management Plan with state and federal review
agencies. This plan includes provisions for exotic removal and perpetual maintenance to keep the
preserves free of nuisance and exotic vegetation.
Policy 6.1.5: Agriculture shall be exempt from the above preservation requirements. contained in
Policies 6.1.1, and 6.1.2 of this element provided that any new clearing of land for agriculture
sholl not be converted to non agriculturot development for 25 yeors. For any such conversions in
less than 25 years, the requirements of Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this element shall be applied to
the site at the time of the conversion. The percentage of native vegetation preserved shall be
calculated on the amount of vegetation occurring at the time of the agricultural clearing! and if
found to be deficient, a native plant community s.hall be restore,d to re~create a native plant
community in all three strata (ground covers, shrubs and trees), utili:z:ing larger plant materials so
as to more quickly re-create the lost mature vegetation. Agricultural clearing within the Rural
Lands Stewardship Area (RlSA) Overlay shall be allowed and guided by the RLSA policies found
in the FLUE.
There are no cleared agricultural parcels included within this PUD proposal.
Policy 6.1.7: The County shall require native vegetation to be incorporated into landscape designs
in order to promote the preservation of native plant communities and to encourage water
conservation. This shall be accomplished by:
(1} Providing incentives for retaining existIng native vegetation in landscaped areOSi
Apptication For Public Hearing F{lr PUD Re'.!one 01118/07, rev 2/12/08
Agenda Item No. 88
(2) Establishing minimum native vegetation requirements for new landscaping; a~ril 28, 2009
(3) Wet detention ponds within the Urban Designated area shall have a Iittorcll'~i8Willf 247
an area equal to 2.5% of the ponds surface area measured at the control elevation and be
planted with natrve aquatic vegetation. Wet detention ponds within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
Districtr shall have a littoral shelf with an area equol to 300/0 of the ponds surface area measured
at the control elevation and be pronfed with native aquatic vegetation.
(4) Stormwater management systems within the Rural lands Stewardship Area (RLSA)
Overlay shall be designed pursuant to the RLSA policies found in the Future Land Use Element.
Native vegetation retention and restoration will be encouraged throughout the project site. In
addition, the wet detention lakes will have all required littoral plantings indicated at the time of
SDP submittal.
Policy 6.1,8, An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), or submittal of appropriate environmental
data as specified in the County's land development regulations, is required, to provide a method
to objectrvely evaluate the impctct of a proposed developmentl site alteration, or project upon the
resources and environmental quality of the project area and the community and to insure that
planning and zoning decisions are made with a complete understanding of the impact of such
dedsions"upon the environment, to encourage proiects and developments that will protectr
conserve and enhance, but not degrade, the environmental quality and resources of the particular
protect or development site, the general area and the greater community. The County's land
development regulations shalf establish the criteria for determining the type of proposed
development requiring an EIS, including the size and nature of the proposed development, the
location of the proposed development in relation to existing environmental characteristics, the
degree of site alterations, and other pertfnent information.
An EfS was submitted in accordance with this provfsion to the county staff
Policy 6.1.9, The county shall provide for adequate staff to implement the policies supporting
Objective 6.1.
The county has provided adequate stoff for review of this application in accordance with this
policy.
OBJECTIVE 6.2,
The County shall protect and conserve wetlands and the natural functions of wetlands pursuant to
the appropriate policies under Goal 6. The following policies provide criteria to make this
obiective measurable. The County's wetland protection policies and strategies sholl be
coordinated with the Watershed Management Plans as required by Objective 2.1 of this Element.
Policy 6.2.1, As required by Florida Administrative Code 9 J5.S.006( 1 )(b), wetlands identified by
the 1994-95 SFWMD land use and land cover inventory are mapped on the Fuwre Land Use
Map series. These areas shall be verified by a jurisdictional field delineationr subject to Policy
6.2.2 of this element, at the time of proied permitting to determine the exact location of
jurisdictional wetland boundaries~
Wetland boundaries have been delineated and verified by the SFWMD. The jurisdictionall1nes
are indicated on the SFWMD permit exhibits as well as on the applicable exhibits included in the
EiS submittal.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD ReZOne 01lIS/07, rev 2/12/08
Policy 6.2.2, Wetlands shall be defined pursuant to Section 373.019 Florida Stafu~~~~~~8N~"O~~
location of jurisdictional wetland boundaries are further described by the delineation Page 87 ~f 247
methodology in Section 373.421 Florida Statutes.
This has been done. Wetland boundaries have been delineated and verified by the SFWMD.
The jurisdictional lines are indicated on the SFWMD permit exhibits as well as on the applicable
exhibits included in the EIS.
Policy 6.2.3, Collier County shall implement a comprehensive process to ensure wetlands clOd the
natural functions of wetlands are protected and conserved. This wetland preservation and
conservation process shall be coordinated with the Watershed Management Plan process, as
referenced In Objective 2.1 of this Element. However, the process outlined within this policy is
primarily based on directing concentrated population growth and intensive development away
from large interconnected wetland systems. These wetland systems have been identified based on
their type, vclues, functions, sizes, conditions and locations: wrthin Collier County. These systems
predominantly occur east of the County's Urban boundary, as delineated on the Countywide
Future Land Use Map (FLUM), within the Future land Use Element (FLUE). Many of these wetlands
fall within public lands or land targeted for acquisition. High quality wetlands systems located on
private property are primorily protected through native vegetation preservation requlr:ements, or
through existing PUD commitments, conservation easements[ or Stewardship Sending Area
Designations, or via the NRPA or Sending designations within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District
or land/easement acquisition or innovative landowner incentives. Protection measures for
wetlands and wetland systems located within the northeastern portion of Collier County, excluding
the community of Immokalee, are contained in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area Overlay (RLSA
Overlay) of the FLUE (and as depicted on the FLUM). Protection measures for wetlands and
wetland systems located within Ine Urban and Estates designated areas of the County shall be
based upon the jurisdictional del"erminations made by the applicable state or federal agency.
Where permits issued by such state or federal agencies allow for impacts to wetlands within
Urban and Estates designated areas: and r~quire mitigation for such impacts, the permitting
agency's mitigation requirements sholl be deemed 10 preserve and protect wetlands and their
functions, except for wetlands that are part of a Watershed Management Plan preserve crea.
The County shall direct impacts away from such wetlands.
The petitioner is unaware of any current Watershed Management Plan in place for the area
around this property. The property also doe, not fall into any of the other designated categories
of this Policy (Conservation Designation, Big Cypress Area of Critical Slate Concern, Natural
Resource Protection Areo, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending land, or Flowway Stewardship
Area). The northern portion of the properly is adjacent to the CREW NRP A and the entire common
boundary has been included in the proposed preserve area.
On a project-specific basis, wetlands and wetland functions shall be protected through the
following mechanisms:
(1) Federal and State jurisdictionai agency review and wetland permitting;
(2) Vegetation preservation policies supporting CCME Objective 6.1;
(3) Wetland prolection policies supporting CCME Objective 6.2,
(4) Clustering provisions specified in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District of the FLUE
(5) The protection of wetlands that are part of an established watershed management plan, as
per Objective 2.1 of this Element.
(6) Land or easement acquisition.
[7} land owner incentives, such as transferable development rights, tax relief, or USDA grants for
restoration.
Application For Publje Hearing for PUD Rezone 01118/07, rev 2112/08
.. . Agenda Item No. 88
The proposed project has obtained both SFW MD and ACOE permits for the proposed April 28, 2009
development. As explained above, the proposed plan adheres to the native vegetatiSQge 88 of 247
preservation policies described in Objective 6.1 of this Element. A large contiguous wetland
preserve will be enhanced and restored as a result of this proiect. This wetland preserve will
maintain a wildlife corridor as well as a sheet flow corridor for existing plows across the site. All
development has been concentrated into the southern portion of the property where odjacent uses
are more consistent with the development.
Policy 6.2.4, Within the Urban Designated area, the County shall rely on the wetland jurisdictional
determinations and permit requirements issued by the applicable jurisdictional agency.
As stated above, a portion of the proposed project is within the Urban Designated area but since
the remainer of the proiect is within the RFMU District, the Density Blending provisions require the
entire site to be reviewed under the RFMU criteria, In addition to this, the proposed project has
obtained both SFWMD and ACOE permits.
Policy 6.2.5, Within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, and that portion of the Lake
Trafford/Camp Keals Strand System which is contained within the Immokalee Urban Designated
Area, Coilier County shall direct land uses away from higher functioning wetlands by limiting
direct impacts within wetlands based upon the vegetation requirements of Policy 6.1.2 of this
element, the wetland functionality assessment described in paragraph (2) below, and the final
permitting requirements of the South Florida Water Management District. A direct impact is
hereby defined as me dredging or filling of a wetiand or adversely changing the hydroperiod of
a wetland. This policy shall be implemented as follows.
(1) The County shall apply the vegetation retention requirements of Policy 6.1.2 of this
element to preserve an appropriate amount of native vegetation on site. Weticmds shall be
preserved as port of this vegetation requirement according to the following crrteria:
a. The acreage requirements of Policy 6.1.2 of this element shall be met be preserving
wetlands with the highest wetland fundionality scores.. Wetland functionality ass.essment scores
shall be those described in paragraph (2) of this policy. Wetlands having a WRAP score of at
least 0.65 or a Uniform Wetlands Mitigation Assessment Method score of 0.7 shall be preserved
on site. This policy is not intended in all cases to require preservation of wetlands exceeding the
acreage required by Policy 6.1.2 of this element. Within one year, the county shall develop
specific criteria to be used to determine when wetlands having a WRAP score greater than 0.65
or a Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method score of greater thon 0.7 sholl be required
to be retained exceeding the acreage required by Policy 6.1.2 of this element.
The petitioner is aware that this criterion must be met at the time of SDP submittal. Tne provided
EIS explains how the current proposed PUD Master Pion meets: the native vegetation and wetland
preservation requirements of the GMP. The proposed preserve areas also retain and enhance the
highest quality wetlands remoining on the site. A summary of the WRAP scores used by the
proiect during their state and federal permit review has been Included with the acreages
adjusted according to the differences in the jurisdictional boundaries between the state and
federal agencies. The state claimed less wetlands that the ACOE. This WRAP summary shows that
the pre-project WRAP score is 587.79 functional units. Tne post proiect summary consists of four
parts according to the mitigation activities. being proposed by the project. The infernal and main
wetiand preserves within the PUD boundary contribute 33.65 and 507.66 functional units
respectively. The activities to be conducted in off-site property within Section 11 contribute 33.21
functional unrts and the applkant is purchasing 27.38 functional units from an approved mftigation
bank. AlIlogetherr file project has 0 post project wetland functional value of 601.9 functional
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rt=wne 01/18/07, rev 2112108
units which is higher than the pre-project value of 587.79 functional units so thereA~{jl'W~e~~;~b~~
wetland function as a result of this project. Page 89 of 247
Efforts have been made to preserve the largest contiguous preserve area(s) as well as to preserve
those wetlands with the highest functional values but it is possible that the SDP submittal wiii be
required to make minor modifications to the PUD Master Plan should time or conditions alter the
site or the functional values during the time period between the PUD approval and the SDP
submittal or approval.
(2) In order to assess the values and functions of wetlands at the time of prolect review,
applicants shaH rate functionality of wetlands using the South Florida Water Management
District's Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedures (WRAP), as described in Technical Publication
Reg-DOl, dated September 1997, and updated August 1999, or the Uniform Wetlands
Mitigation Assessment Method, F.A.C- Chapter 62-345. The applicant shall submit to County staff,
agency accepted WRAP scores or Uniform Wetland Mitigation Assessment Method scores. County
staff shall review this functionolity assessment as" part of the County's EIS provisions and sholl use
the results to direct incompatible land uses away from the highest functioning wetlands according
to the requirements found in paragraph (1) above.
A WRAP analysis has been provided as a part of the EIS.
(3) All direct impacts shall be mitigated for pursuant to the requirements of paragraph (6)
of this policy.
This has been done under the SFWMD and ACOE permits. The WRAP analysis done for the
ACOE review and !he on- and off-site mitigation proposed result in no net loss of wetland
functions. The WRAP summary shows that the pre-project functional assessment score is 587.79
functional units. The post project summary consists ot four parts according to the mitigation
activities being proposed by the project. The internal and main wetland preserves within the PUD
boundary contribute 33.65 and 507.66 functional units respectively once the restoration and
enhancement activities take place. The actlvitles to be conducted in off-site property within
Section 11 contribute an additional 33.21 functional units and the applicant is aiso purchasing
27.38 functional units from an approved mitigation bank. All together, the project has a post
project wetland functional value of 601.9 functional units which is higher than the pre-project
value of 587.79 functional units so there Ivill be no loss of wetland function as a result of this
project.
(5) The County shaH separate preserved wetlands from other land uses with appropriate
buffering requirements. The County shall require a minimum 50-foot vegetated upland buffer
adjacent to a natural water body, and for other wetlands a minimum 25-foot vegetated upland
buffer adjacent to the wetland. A structural buffer may be used in conjunction with a vegetative
buffer that would reduce the vegetative buffer width by 50%. A structural buffer shall conform
to the following standards.
a. The buffer shall be measured landward from the approved jurisdictional line.
b. The buffer zone sholl consist of preserved nati,ve vegetation. Where native vegetation
does not exist, native vegetation compatible with the existing 5oHs: and expected hydrologic
conditions shall be planted.
c. The buffer shall be maintained free of Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by
the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council.
Application For Public Hearing ForPUD Rezone 01/18/07, rev 2/1210&
Agenda Item No. 88
d. The following land uses are considered to be compatible with wetland functlqmi! cml;I2009
are allowed within the buffer, Page 90 of 247
1. Passive recreational areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters;
2. Pervious nature f"oils;
3. Water management structures;
4. Mitigation crees;
5. Any other conservation and related open space activity or use which 1s comparable in
nature with the foregoing uses.
e. A structural buffer may consist of a stem-wollr berm, or vegetative hedge with suitable
fencing.
Appropriate buffers will be provided for all preserves, both wetland and upland. If structural
buffers are utilized, they will be defined at the time of Site Development Plan and will meet the
applicable County criteria.
(6) Mitigation shall be required for direct impacts to wetlands in order to result in no net
loss of wetland functions:
o. Mitigation Requirements:
1. "No net loss of wetland functions" shall mean that fhe wGtlcmd functional score of the
proposed mitigation equals or exceeds the wetland functional score of the impacted wetlands.
However, in no case shall the acreage proposed for mitigation be less than the acreage being
impacted.
As per the WRAP analysis summary, the post project wetland functional score (601.9) is greater
than the pre-project score (587.79) 50 the project demonstrates that there will be no net loss of
wetkmd functions. The lift in wetland functions ossociated with the enhancement and restoration
actrvities onMsite, in addition to the off-site activities and the purchase of mitigation credits is,
according to both the USACOE and the SFWMD, is enough to mitigate fully for the proposed
impacts. With respect to the acreage, 586 acres are being impacted. The mitigation for these
impacts is derived from the enflOncement and restoration of 785.7 acres on-site {within PUD
boundary}, 160 acres off-site, and purchase of 27.38 mitigation credits from a mitigation bank.
Therefore, more acreage is being preserved than is being impacted (586 acres impacted vs. 945
preserved, not including the mitigation credits). Of the 945 acres of preserve, 694.7 acres are
wetlands so there are olso more wetlands being preserved than are being impacted. However,
County staff reviewers have opined that none of the acreage being used to meet the native
vegetation retention requirements (as defined in Policy 6.1.2) can be used to meet the wetland
mitigation requirements. Of the 945 ccres of preserve, 511.9 acres are being used to meet the
native vegetation requirements. The remaining 433.1 acres can then be u5ed, under the staff
interpretation, towards meeting the wetland mitigation acreage requirement. In addition to the
enhancement and restoration activities, the project is also purchasing 27.38 wetland mitigation
credits. These credits equate to 82.1 acres (3 ocres/credlt). In total, the project has 433.1 acres
of on and off site enhancements and 82.1 acres in conjunction with the mitigation credits for a toto!
of 515.2 acre, of wetland mitigation acreage currently proposed (in addition to the 400.7 acres
of wetlands preserved as part of the native vegetation preservation). Based on the Staff
interpretation, the project has identified 515.2 acres of 586.2 acres required (88%). The
remaining 71 acres will have to be identified prior to SDP approval.
2. loss of storage or conveycmce volume resulting from direct impacts to wetlands shall
be compensated for by providing an equal amount of storage or conveyance capac1ty on site and
within or adjacent to the impacted wetland.
Application For Public Hearing FQrPUD Rczont>; 0111 8/07, rev 2112/08
. . Aaend,a Item No. 88
The volume lost by the proposed wetland Impacts IS accommodated by the pass th~oug\l\~"t~B', 2009
which permits a conveyance through the project while maintaining the existing stages ~@1II.of 247
The wet detention lakes within the proiect's basins provide the necessary volume to contain the
site-generated runoff while discharging at the permitted rate. See comments related to Policy 2.1
also.
3. Protection ,hall be provided for preserved or created wetlond or upland vegetative
communities offered as: mitigation by placing a conservation easement over the land in perpetuity,
providing for initial exotic plant removal (Class I invasive exotk plants defined by the Florida
Exotic Pest Plan Council) and continuing exotic plant maintenance.
Conservation easements will be placed over all preserve areas and exotic and nuisance plant
control will be undertaken in perpetuity. It is the intent of the project proposal to give the land
along with 0 maintenance fund to the CREW Trust once the exotic removal and restoration
activities have been completed.
4. Prior to issuance of any final development order that authorizes site alteration, the
applicant shall demonstrate compliance with paragraph, (6)a.l, (6)a.2, and (6)a.3 of this policy.
If agency permits have not provided mitigation consistent with this policy, Collier County will
require mitigation exceeding that of the iurisdictional agencies.
Both the SFWMD and the ACOE permits have been issued and both require mitigation that makes
the proiect consistent with the County requirements. The SFWMD permit authorizes impacts to 595
acres of wetlands and requires enhancement and preservation in perpetuity of 945 acres. Based
on the County staff's interpretation, they are requiring mitigation exceeding thot of the
jurisdictional ogencies {71 acres more as described under 6.2.5(6)(a)(1 I}. Staff has stated that
the remaining 71 acres must be identified prior to SDP approval.
b. Mitigation lncentjves~
1. Collier County shali encourage certain types of mitigotion by providing a variety of
incentives in the form of density bonuses and credits to open spote and vegetation retention
requirements. Density bonuses shall be limited to no more than 10%. of the allowed density.
2. Preferred mitigation activities that wotJ~d qualify for these incentives include, bot are
not limited, to the foliowing,
(a) Adding wetland habitat to or restoring wetland functions within Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District Sending Lands;
(b) Creating, enhancing or restoring wading bird habitat to be located near wood stork,
and/or other wading bird colonies.
The proposed PUD project i, not asking for any mitigation incentive, even though it would qualify
for the incentives because the project preserves will provide enhanced and restored Wood Stork
foraging habitat within the Core Foraging areas of three wood ,tork colony sites. This
enhancement has been verified and is outlined in the FWS March 1, 2007 Biological Opinion.
The project will also be preserving and enhancing another 160 acres of Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District Sending Land as part of its mitigation.
Policy 6.2.6, Within the Urban Designation and the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, required
wetland preservation areas, buffer areas, and mitigation areas shall be dedkated as
conservation and common areas in the form of conservation easements ond shall be identified or
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone Ol/] 8107, rev 2/12/08
Agenda Item No. 88
platted as separate tracts; and, in the case of a Planned Unit Development (PUD), thes~cl58. 2009
shall also be depicted on the PUD Master Plan. These areas shall be maintained free fM!IjWt~sl>f 247
and debris and from Category I invasive exotic plants, as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant
Council. Land uses allowed in these areas shall be limited to those listed in Policy 6.2.5(5)d of this
element and shall not include any other activities that are detrimental to drainage, flood control,
water conservation, erosion control or fish and wildlife habitat conservation and preservation.
All preservation, buffer, and mitigation areas required under the County Codes will be placed
under conservation easements as outlined in this Policy. The proposed preserves are shown on the
proposed PUD Master Plan though it is known that these preserves may have to be modified at
the time of SDP submittal in order to comply with the ranking and priority criteria in affect at the
time of the submittal. Maintenance and monitoring will also be provided.
OBJECTIVE 6.4:
The County will protect, conserve and appropriately use ecological communities shared with or
tangential to State and Federal lands and other local governments.
This PUD is' proposing to preserve lands that'will connect existing and proposed preserve tands to
the west with existing preserve lands to the east. CREW and Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary are
also located to the east and north of the project.
OBJECTIVE 6.5:
The County shall protect nawral reservations from the impact of surrounding development. For the
purpose of this Objective and its related policies, nawral reservations shall include only Nawral
Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs) and designated Conservation Lands on the Future Land Use
Mapi andt development shall include all projects except for permitting and construction of single-
family dwelling units situated on individual lots or parcels. This Objective and its Policies shall
apply only to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use district [except as noted in Policy 6.5.3J.
Policy 6.5.2, The following criteria shall apply to development contiguous to natural reservations in
order to reduce negative impacts to the natural reservations:
(1) The required open space shall be used to provide a buffer between the project and
the natural reservation. Open space allowed between the project's non~open space uses and the
boundary of the natural reservatton sholl include those areas of natural preservest natural or man-
made lakes, golf courses, recreational areas, required yard set-back areas, and other natural or
man-made open space requirements. Existing agricultural operations shall be allowed within tbe
open space requirements with additional agricultural clearing allowed subject to best
management practicesr consistent with the provisions of the Right to Farm Act.
o. The following open space uses are considered acceptable uses contiguous to the
natura! reservation boundary:
(1) preservation areas;
(2) golf course roughs maintained in a natural Slate;
{3} stormwater management areas;
{4} pervious nature trails and hiking trails limited to use by non-motorized vehicles.
The proposed project is located adjacent to the CREW Natural Resource Protection Area. The
entire boundary adiacent to the NRP A is included in the preserve areas of the project. Adjacent
preserve areas associated with other developments will be protected through natural and
structural buffers, placement of less intensive oses SlJch os golf course and wafer management
areas, and through the education of residents.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/]8107, lev 2/12108
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
b. The uses in paragraph a above are encouraged to be located as to provi8'IS@el:ililfGf247
between the natural reservation and more intensive open space useSf including playgrounds, tennis
courtsl golf courses (excluding Toughs maintained in c natural stote), and other recreational uses
and yards for individual lots or parcels, or open space uses that ore impervious in nature. Within
the Rural Fringe Mixed Use Distrlctt these more intensive open space uses may not be located
closer than 300 feet to the boundary of the natural reservation.
The proposed project has no development or other intensive open space use within 1 800 feet of
the NRPA boundary.
c. In addition, where woodstork (Mycteria omericana) rookeries, bald eagle (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) nests, and wading bird roosts are found in the odjacent natural reservation, the
open spaces identified in sub-sections 1.a.{ 1) through (3) are considered acceptable for
placement within a buffer as specified below,
(1) Woodstork (Mycteria americana) rookeries, bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nests-
1 ,500 feet;
'12) Wading bird roost- 300 feet;
(3) These buffer distances shall only apply to the identified entity within the natural
reserv cHons.
(4) These requirements shall be modified on a case by cose basis, if such modifications
are based upon the review and recommendations from the USFWS and the
FFWCC. Any such changes shall be deemed consistent with the Growth
Management Plan.
There is a known woodstork rookery within the CREW NRPA but it is over 5 miles away from the
proposed project development areo..
d~ Existing native vegetation that is locoted contiguous to the natural reservation shall be
preserved as part of the preservation requirements specified in Policy 6.1.1 and 6.1.2 of this
element.
Nanve vegetation adiacent to the NRPA has been preserved as part of the project proposal.
e. Where wildlife corridors exist for listed species, provision shall be mode to
accommodate the movement of the listed species through the proiect to the natural reservation.
The County shall consider the recommendations from the USFWS and the FFWCC in the
delineation of the corridors. Appropriate accommodations include:
(1) Use of fences, walls or other obstructions to encourage wildlife to use natural corridors
or to separate wildlife corridors from areas of human activity,
(2) Location of roads away from identified corridors;
(3) Use of appropriate roadway crossings, underpasses and signage where it is
unavoidable for roadways to cross wildlife trails;
(4) Any other techniques recommended by the USFWS and the FFWCC.
The proposed preserve enhances and maintains a corridor between the CREW NRP A and other
existing and proposed preserves to the west of tne project.
f. Outside of this open space buffer, other permitted uses shall be located in such a
manner as to place the most intensive land uses the furthest' distance from the narural reservation.
Application Fw Public Hearing For POO Rezone 01118/07, rev 2112/08
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
As stated above, no development activities are proposed within 1800 feet of the NRPJi\age 94 of 247
. boundary.
g. The County shall consider the recommendations by the USFWS and the FFWCC when
considering the placement of open space next to natural reservations and setback distances from
listed species as noted above. Any such changes shall be deemed consistent with the Growth
Management Plan.
Both the FFWCC and the USFWS have reviewed and commented on this project over the course of
the ERP permitting.
(2)
So noted.
The wildlife protection criteria of Policy 7.1.1 ,hall also apply.
(3) Within the Rural fringe Mixed Use District, stormwater management systems
discho"rging directly to 1he natural reservation shoil meet the Outstanding Florida Water criteria
of one-half inch of dry retention or retention pretreatment as specified in Section 5.2.2(b), of the
SFWMD's Basis of Review for Environmental Resource PermIt Applications within the South Florida
Water Manogement District, August 2000.
The project discharges into the Cocohatchee canal though it still provides additional Water quality
treatment over that required by the Basis of Review.
(4) Proposed development shall demonstrate that ground water table drawdowns or
diversions will not adversely impact the natural reservation. Detention and control elevations shall
be set to protect the natural reservation and be consistent with surrounding land and profect
control elevations and woter tables. In order to meet these requirements, proiects shall be
designed in accordance with Sections 4.2.2.4, 6.11 and 6.1 2 of SFWMD's Basis of Review.
Information provided to the SFWMD as part of the water use permit application demonstrated
tOot no adverse draw down would occur as 0 result of the project.
GOAL 7, THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT AND CONSERVE ITS FISHERIES
AND WILDLIFE.
OBJECTIVE 7.1,
The County ,hall direct incompatible land uses away from listed animal species and their habitats.
The County relies on the listing process of Stole and Federal agencies to identify species that
require special protection because of their endangered, threatened! or species of special concern
stotus. Listed animal species are those species that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission has designated as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern, in
accordance with Rules 68A-27.003, 68A-27.004, and 6BA-27.005, F .A.c. and those species
designated by various federal agencies as Endangered and Threatened species published in 50
CFR 17.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07, re\' 2112JOE
, Agenda Item No, 88
Policy 7.1.1: Incompatible land useS are directed away from listed species and their h~ffil:!'8>)Q009
the following mechanisms: Page 95 of 247
(3) Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRPAs)
The purpose of Natural Resource Protection Areas (NRP As) is to support State and Federal
agencies' efforts to protect endangered or potentially endangered species and their habitats
(Reference CCME: Objective 1.3). These areas describe large, intact and relatively unfragmented
habitats important for many listed species:. Allowable land uses, vegetation preservation
standards, development standards, and listed species protection criteria wIthin NRPAs are
specified in the FLUE. (Reference the FLUE for the specific requirements.) The NRP A Overiay is
intended to direct incompatible land uses away from listed species and their habitats.
The project is not within a NRP A but is adjacent to one. Development and preserve locations
associated witn the development have taken into account providing the largest possible buffers
between the development and the NRPA boundary.
Policy 7.1.2: Within areas of Collier County, excluding the lands contoined in the RLSA Overlay,
non-agricultural development, excluding individual single-fomily residences, shall be directed
oway from listed species and their habitats by complying with the following guidelines and
standards:
(1) A wildlife survey shall be required for all parcels when listed species are known to
inhabit biological communities similar to those existing on site Of where listed species are directly
observed on the site. The survey shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) guidelines. The County shall notify the FFWCC and VSFWS of the existence of any
listed species that may be discovered.
A listed Species Survey has been conducted on the proiect site. Species observations have been
underway for the past eight years. Coordination has occurred between the project and FFWCC
and FWS. The FFWCC has not commented on the project since tile 2002 5FWMD approval but
the FWS has recently issued their Biological Opinion and indicated tllat the project would not
jeopardize any federally listed species.
(2) Wildlife habitat management plans for listed species shall be submitted for County
approval. A plan shall be required for all projects where the wildlife survey indicated listed
species are utilizing the site, or the site contains polential habitat for listed species. These plans
shall describe how the project directs incompatible land uses away from listed species and their
habitats.
(a) Management plans shall incorporaj'e proper techniques to protett listed species and
their habitat from the negative impacts of proposed development. Developments shall be
clustered to discourage impacts to listed spedes habitats. Open space and vegetation
preservation requirements shall be used to establish buffer areas between wildlife habitat areas
and areas dominated by human activities. Provisions such as fencing, walls, or other obstructions
shall be provided to minimize development impacts to the wildlife and to facilitate and encourage
wildlife to sue wildlife corridors. Appropriate roadway crossings, underpasses, and signage shaU
be used where roads must cross wildlife corridors.
The project has prepared Wildlife Management Plans with the SFWMD, ACOE, FWS, and
FFWCC.
App-lication For Pub! ic Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07. rev 2/1 U08
Agenda Item No. 88
1. The following references shall be used, as appropriate, to prepare the requi?e\!lil 28, 2009
management plans, Page 96 of 247
A list of references used will be provided with the Habitat Management Plans.
2. The county shall consider any other techniques recommended by the USFWS and the
FFWCC, subject to the provisions of paragraph (3) of this policy.
Guidelines and management recommendations are provided in the FWS Biological Opinion and
the project will incorporate these measures into the habitat management plan and monitoring
activities on the site.
3. When listed species are directly observed on site or indicated by evidence, such as
denning, foraging or other indications, priority shall be given to preserving the listed species
habitats first, as a port of the retained native vegetation requirement contained in Policy 6.1.1
and Policy 6.1.2 this element. The County shall also consider the recommendations of other
agencies, subject to the provisions of paragraph (3) of this policy.
One area around a historical fox squirrel nest tree is being preserved olong the western property
line in Section 22. Even though the nest is no longer present{ the nest tree and open area adjacent
to the nest tree will be preserved. Additionai buffer and foraging area will be provided by the
development through the placement of golf course holes (known to be highly used by squirrels)
olong the preserve boundaries.
(b) For parcels containing gopher tortoises (Gopherus polyphemus), priority shall be given
to protecting the largest most contiguous gopher tortoise habitat with the greatest number of
active burrows, and for providing a connection to off site adiacent gopher tortoise preserves.
Two possible tortoise burrows have been observed on the property. One was focated in Section
lOon the spoil prle next to the cattle pond and one along the eastern fence line of southern
Section 22. Both of these burrows appeared to have been used by other species (armadillo and
skunk) and also appeared to be abandoned in the latest wildlife surveys and no other potential
tortoise burrow locations were observed. Due to the annual wet season water levels on the
property, there is only marginally suitable habitat present. It is likely that if these burrows were
created by tortoises, they were dug by transient or released animals as a temporary shelter
before migrating to more suitable habitat. However, another tortoise survey will be conducted
prior to any clearing activities to insure that no tortoises are present.
(c) Habitat preservation for the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), shall
conform to the guidelines contained in Technical Report No. B, Florida Game and fresh Water Fish
Commission, 1991. The required Management Plan shaH also provide for a maintenance program
and specify an appropriate fire or mechanical protocols to maintain the natural scrub community.
The plan sholl also outline a public awareness program to educate residents about the on-site
preserve and the need to maintain the scrub vegetation. These requirements shall be consistent
with the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery plan, May 1999, ,ubiect to the provisions of
paragraph (3) of this policy.
No suitable scrub jay habitat is present on the property.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07, rev 2/12/08
Agenda Item No. 88
(d) For the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), the required habitat managllqlei(lt:>~lqm09
shall establish protective zones around the eagle nest restricting certain octivities. Th.f'FlWiiSlihefJ247
olso address restrictIng certain types of activities during the nesting season. These requirement s
shall be consistent wilh the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, May 1999, subject
to the provisions of paragraph (3) of this policy.
No known bald eagle nests are present on or adiacent to the property.
(e) For the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), the required habitat protection
plan shall outline measures to avoid adverse impacts to active clusters and to minimize impacts to
foraging habitat. Where adverse effects cannot be avoided, measures shall be taken to minimize
on-site disturbance and compensate or mitigate for impacts that remain. These requirements shell
be consistent with the UFWS South Florida Muhi-Species Recover Plan, May 1999, subject to the
provisions of paragraph (3) of this policy.
The FFWCC and FWS do not believe that RCW utilization wlll occur on the property. No known
colonies are in the area and no evidence of cavity trees or foraging utHization has been
documented during subsfantial survey efforts.
(f) In areas where the Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) may be present,
the management pions shalf require that garbage be placed in bear-proof containers, at one or
more centrallocanons. The management plan shaH also identify methods to inform iocal residents
of the concerns related to interaction between black bears and humans.. Mitigation for impacting
habitat suitable for black bear shall be considered in the management plan.
Black bear education and management will be conducted at the project site. Pet control, feeding,
garbage management and interpretational education will inform residents with regards to the
possible presence of bears and best means for dealing with potential interactions.
(gl For projects located in Priority I and Priority II Panther Habitat areas, the management
plan shall discourage the description of undisturbed, native habitats that are preferred by the
Florida panther (Felis concolor coryl) by directing intensive land uses to currently disturbed areas.
Preferred habitats include pine flatwoods and hardwood hammocks. In turn, these areas shall be
buffered from the most intense land uses of the proiect by using low intensity land uses (e.g.,
parks, passive recreational areas, golf courses). Golf courses within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use
District shall be designed and managed using standards found in that district. The management
plans shall identify approprlate lighting controls for these permitted uses and shan also address
the opportunity to utiHze prescribed burning to maintain fire-adapted preserved vegetative
communities and provide browse for white-tailed deer. These requirements shall be consistent witn
the UFWS South Florida Multi-Species Recovery Plan, May 1999, subject to the provisions of
paragraph (3) of this policy.
The property is located within the Panther Consultation area of the FWS. The potential impact of
the project on panthers was reviewed in the FWS Biological Opinion and a determination of no
jeopardy was made. The intent of the petitioner is to donate the main preserve area to CREW
and allow them to manege the property once the success criteria for enhancement and restoration
are completed. Prescribed burning will be a management tool on the property and all residents
will be made aware that burning will occur in the preserve area5~
Application Por Public Hearing For POO Rezone 01/1 8107, rev 2112/08
Agenda Item No. 88
i) The Management Plans shall contain a monitoring program for developments greater4ii\5i\ 4'€l 2009
acres. Page 98 of 247
A monitoring program for the preserves has been reviewed and approved by the SFWMD and
the ACOE. 'J!1e criteria of the monitoring program have been Incorporated into the Preserve
Management Plan included with the EIS.
(3) The county shall, consistent with applicable GMP policies, consider and utilize
recommendations and letters of technical assistance from the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission and recommendations from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in issuing
development orders on property containing listed species. It is recognized that these agency
recommendations, on a case by case basis, may change the requirements contained within tnese
wildlife protection policies and any such change sholl be deemed consistent with the Growth
Management Plan.
As stated above, a Biological Opinion has been issued by FWS and 1he guidelines presented in
that document will be complied with by the development.
FLUCFCS data submitted by the applicant illustrates that a good portion of the proposed
preserve as shown on the master plan does nof qualify as native vegetation but represents the
largest contiguous area which promotes connectivity with offsite preserves. The wildlife survey
summary and a map of wildlife sitings have been included as part of this EIS. According to the US
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) the entire site is considered potential Florida panther and indigo
snake habitat. Additionally, all wetlands with less than 90% melaleuca have been determined to
be potential wood stork foraging habitat. This determination has been provided in the March 1,
2007 Biological Opinion. Early in the development sfage, the project was also coordinated with
the Florida fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC - James Beever). Their opinion at
the time was that the entire property could be considered potential habitat for fox squirrel, block
bear, and Florida panther. They (FFVvCC) also opined that the wetlands on the property were
potential habitat for all of the local protected wading birds including wood storks. FFWCC also
acknowledged that the removal of the melaleuco and preservation and enhancement of a large
900+ acre preserve would be an overall benefit to listed species in the area around the project
site.
The majority of the proposed preserve areas will continue to function os habitat for Florida
panther, black bear, wood stork, wading birds, fox squirrel, and indigo snakes. Known nests and
bedding areas of fox squirrels are being preserved, wood stork foraging habitat is being
improved, and the existing corridor across the site is being maintained.
Policy 7.1.4,
All development shall comply with applicable federal and state permitting requirements
regarding listed species protection.
The project has undergone significant review by the FWS and the results of that review are
presented in the Biological Opinion.
Policy 7.1.6,
The County shall evaiuate the need for the protection of listed plants and within one (1) year of
the effective date of this amendment adopt land development regulations addressing the
prol"ection of listed plants.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Re:;?Ame Oll18/D7, rev 2112'08
. d d h C ff . I k' d AQenrl.a l~em,,No, 88
The petitIoner un erstan stat ounty sta IS current y wor 109 on a protecte pront Ij!\pfllr21li',"2009
County. The only plant from the list that has been observed on the Mirasol .ite is the ~<9\)V(j1<t47
pine bromeliad (Tillandsia fasciculata). This plant has been observed in several of the cypress
areas and the vast majority will be preserved under the proposed plan.
GOAL 8: THE COUNTY SHALL MAINTAIN COLUER COUNTY'S EXISTING
AIR QUAliTY.
OBJECTIVE 8.1:
All activities in the County shall comply with all applicable Federal and State air quality
standards.
The project will comply with all applicable standards. Prescribed burning will occur upon
coordination with local fire Districts, CREW managers, DOF managers, and other appropriate
parties.
GOAL 9: THE COUNTY SHALL APPROPRIATELY MANAGE HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS AND WASTE TO PROTECT THE COUNTY'S POPULOUS AND NATURAL RESOURCES
AND TO ENSURE THE HIGHEST ENVIRONMENTAL QUAliTY.
The proiect will not create any hazardous waste otfler than what is normal for a residential and
golf course community. All appropriate labels and protections will be adhered to in the
application of any herbicides or chemicals.
GOAL 11: THE COUNTY SHALL PROVIDE fOR THE PROTECTION,
PRESERVATION AND SENSITIVE RE-USE OF HISTORIC
RESOURCES
OBJECTIVE 11.1:
To protect historic and archaeological resources in Collier County.
No archaeological sites are known to exist on this property.
Pelky 11.1.3: If, during the course of site dearing, excavation, or other constwctionot activities, an
archaeological or historical site, artifact, or other indicator is discovered, development activities at
that specific archaeological site shall be immediately stopped and the appropriate agency
natified. Development will be suspended for a sufficient length of time to enable the County or a
designated consultant to assess the find and determine the proper course of action jn regard to its
salvageability. The County will respond to any such notification in a timely and efficient manner
so os to provide only 0 minimal interruption to any constructional activity.
The project will comply with this Policy.
GOAL 12: THE COUNTY SHALL MAKE EVERY REASONABLE EFFORT TO
ENSURE THE PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH AND WELFARE OF PEOPLE AND PROPERTY FROM THE
EFFECTS OF HURRICANE STORM DAMAGE.
A panic file will be kept on site with guidelines for procedures to follow in the event of a
Hurricane or other emergency situation.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01118/07, rev 2112/08
Agenda Item No. 8B
."'pril 28, 2009
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions Iffay; 1~ti..ai?4 7
restrictions on locafion of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening
requirements.
The internal proposed uses mirror the exiting external uses within the neignborhood. This project
will provide for more than 7 miles of buffers which will exceed all screening requirements. The use
of a common neighborhood design criteria will further add to the continuity of the overall project.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development.
The Mirasol project has provided over 785 acres of usuable open space in the form of preserves.
Additional open space will be provided as buffers, lokes and recreational area. The total amount
of open space will be more than adequate to serve the development.
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private,
The timing and sequence of development will assure the adequacy of available improvements and
facilities.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
The location of Mirasol is in on area specifically designated for expansion as aU activity center
areas. The appropriate facilities exist or will exist fo accommodate the project. The size of the
proiect IS more than appropriate for expansion.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulalions in the
particulC1r case, based on determination that such modifications of justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalenf to literal application of such regulations.
This project when firsl approved in 2001 conformed with ali applicapable PUD reguiatlons. The
proposed modification updates the PUD to 0 new document format as well as aHows a rereview
of the previously approved zoning. There are no major changes proposed to this: zoning.
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions, however, many
communities nave adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association
in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether Of not the request is affected
by existing deed restrictions.
Previous land use oetitions on the subiect oroDertv: To your knowledge, hos a public hearing been held
on this property within the last year? kSJ Yes 0 No
If so, what was the nature of that hearing? PUD extension request
Application For Public Hearing For POO Re7.0ne 01/l &/07. rev 2/12108
~
April 28, 200
NOTICE: Page 101 of 24
This application will be considered "open" when the detemination of "sufficiency" has been made and
the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered "closed"
when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to suooly necessary
inforrnation to continue orocessina or otherwise actiyely oursue the rezonina for a period of six (6)
months. An applicotion deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and an application
"closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrown. An application deemed "dosed" rnoy be re~
opened by submitting a neW applicotion, repayment of ail application fees and granting of a
determination of ~'suffkiency". Further review of the project will be subject to the then current code.
(LDe Section lO.03.05.Q.)
Application FDr Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01118/07, rev 2/12/08
PMS. Inc. of Naples
Project Management Services
Aaenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 102 of 247
MlRASOL PROJECT NARRATIVE
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046
MIRASOL PUD
Date: 1/14/09
Land Use Historv:
The Mirasol boundary is the result of assembling over 100 different parcels of land. The
existing zoning and use of these parcels was Agriculture. The general size of the project
is approximately three miles long starting at Immokalee Road north to the Collier County
line and a mile wide in its widest point. The property north of Mirasol in Lee County had
been utilized for faIming since the seventies.
Prior to the 1999 PUD application, a plan for a rural subdivision was submitted to the
county for approval whi.ch was subsequently withdra\'\'ll. The Mirasol Planned Unit
Development (PUD) was originally approved on April 24, 2002, pursuant to Ordinance
01-20 to allow for 799 residential units and 2 18-hole golf courses that would feature a
clubhouse and recreation amenities. The total acreage of the Mirasol PUD was 1548 +/-
acres. The number of dwelling units per gross acre was approximately 0.52 units. The
project as approved derived the density of 0.52 dwelling units per acre from tbe Growth
Management Plan which allowed 4.0 UJJ.its per acre as a ba<;e density on the project lands
located within the Urban, Urban-J\.1ixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict,
Section 22, Township 48S, Range 26E consisting of 340.7 acres thus yielding 1362.8
units. The lands within Section 15, TowllBhip 488, Range 26E and Section 10, Township
48S, Range 26E, outside the urban boundary, designated as Agriculture/Rural,
AgriculturelRuraI - Mixed Use District on the Future Land Use Map with density
assigned as 1 unit per 5 acres. This 1207.3 acres yield 241.5 units. The Master Plan was
arranged to utilize clustering of development tracts to provide for significant land
conservation as well as participation of the cOnsl..""llction of a regional flow way
conveyance.
The application for the rezone petition was submitted prior to the 1999 Governor and the
Cabinets temporary moratorium and was approved prior to the Growth Management Plan
changes adopted June 19, 2002 that did not legally take effect until the [mal order was
issued by the Florida Department of Community Affairs on July 22, 2003. Staff deemed
the project exempt from the Final Order at the hearing for zoning approval.
The project proposal was to construct a residential and golf course community along with
a flow-way conveyance feature that was required as part of the South Florida Water
Management District permit. The SFWMD approved of the project on February 14,2002
but the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had several issues \'\~th the flow-way that were not
resolved to their satisfaction and they finally denied the combined residential and flow-
way conveyance project on December 7, 2005. As a result of negotiating with the Army
Corps, the petitioner submitted a revised development proposal with the understanding
that the SFVlMD would be pursuing the permits for the flow-way conveyance portion of
the project at a later time, once the issues concerning the flow-way conveyance were
resolved between the SFWMD and the Army Corps of Engineers. The responsibility to
2335 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 40S. Naples, FL 34]03 1(239) 435-9080 x.31F3X (239) 435.-9082/Emall:
Karc:nBishop@pmsna,ples.com
1
April 28, 2009
Page 103 of 247
Q
PMS, Inc. of Naples
Project Management Services
participate in the flow-way still rests with the development. The SFWMD issued the State
permit for the development without the flow-way conveyance on October 12,2006. The
ACOE application has been issued,
Because of the e'X-u-aordinary delays involved with the USACOE permitting, the 5 year
POO approval expired and an extension request was submitted, reviewed and approved
by staff. In conjunction with the TranspOltation Department, a Developer Agreement was
proposed for the project's prepayment of impact fees to be utilized for intersection
improvements at the Immokalee Road / Collier Boulevard intersection. However, the
BCC bad a preference for the PUD to go through the amendment process for are-review
by the county staff and public, which was agreed upon at the hearing for the POO
extension.
Site Permitting History:
A more detailed chronology of the Federal, State and local permitting has been provided
as an attachment for review as Exhibit "A", There has been a series of permits filed since
the approval of the POO, A permit for the Project entry bridge was issued in 2001 which
has been constructed and utilities extended, The Community Development District
(CDD) was approved by the Board of County Commissioners in February of 2002, A
Preliminary Subdivision Plat (pSP-2002-AR-35 16) has been approved, Three flow-way
applications (AR# 3318, #3820 & #3823) were submitted, reviewed and approval was
pending the fInal USACOE pennit iSSU2J)ce, which did not happen and these applications
have been withdrawn until the resolution of the design between the USACOE, SFWMD
and other interested parties. A.n excavation permit was applied for and approved pending
final permits from SF\\TMD and USACOE and a Site Development Plan application was
submitted to the County in April of2005 (SDP-2005-AR-7605) which were never issued
due to the timing of the USACOE permit which came after the sunsetting of the POO.
Synopsis of Adiacent Land Uses:
To the west, the property is adjacent to the Parklands PUD/DRl that was approved for
1,603 dwelling units; the Terafina PUD that was approved for 850 dwelling units and
5,000 square feet of commercial uses; and Agricultural zoned properties, some of which
are vacant and other are developed with dwelling units. To the north, residential
development located on Lee County property. Immokalee Road is immediately to the
south of the subject property. To the south of Immokalee Road is Richland PUD that is
approved at 3.10 units per acre aIld 231,000 square feet of activity center commercial
uses; Laurel Lakes at 5.96 units per acre, and Ibis Cove at 5.50 units per acre. To the west
lies Olde Cypress, a residential golf course community at 2.10 units per acre with a
commercial component of 165,000 square feet, Terafina at 1.30 units per acre, and
Parklands at 2.50 units per acre. To the east lies Tree Farm at 7.22 units per acre with
175,000 square feet of activity center commercial and Heritage Bay DRl a residential
golf course community at 1.30 units per acre with 200,000 square feet of activity center
2335 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 408. Naples, FL 341031 (239) 435-9080 x3/Fax (239) 435.9082/Email:
KarenBishop@pmsnaples.com
2
PMS. Inc. of Naples
Project Management Services
Agenda Item No. 88
April Lb, LUU::d
Page 104 of 247
commercial. Some scattered residential homes lie adjacent the east and west sides along
Nursery Lane, Rose Road and Broken Back Road.
Current Land Use Request:
The proposed 1543.62+/- acre project consists of a residential component, up to two golf
courses, and a 945+/- acre preserve area. The requested 799 units yields a proposed
density of .52 units per acre. This project will be utilizing density blending and therefore
requires that native preservation will be increased from the original PUD requirement of
25% to 60%, resulting in a required 511.9+/- acres of native preserve. This preservation
is a combination of 461.6+/- on-site acres and 50.3+/- off-site aCres.
The current access along Immokalee Road and Beck Boulevard has not changed and
interconnect to the adjacent activity center is still anticipated.
The previous flow-way requirement has been removed from the current document.
2335 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 408, Naples, FL 34] 031 (239) 435-9080 x3 /Fax (239) 435~90g2lEmail:
KarenBishop@pmsnaples.com
3
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Green - EPA
Blue - Non Profrt
Purple - Public I County
6/99
12/16/99
5/1/00
10/12100
10/27/00
11/8/00
11/20/00
12/13/00
1/5/01
1/16/01
1/22/01
1/24/01
2/14/01
3/5/01
317101
3/9/01
3/21/01
4/3/01
4/5/01
4/18/01
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 105 of 247
EXHmIT "A"
MIRASOL PERMITTING CHRONOLOGY
Mirasol PUD Application submittal to Collier County
Meeting with ACOE in Jacksonville to discuss project and status within EIS
Initial South Florida Water Management Environmental Resource Permit and
Army CorpS of Englneers (ACOE) Permit application submittal
Meeting l'<ith Sldp Bergman of the ACOE regarding jurisdictional line and project
parameters
Letter to Robert Barron (ACOE) regarding Mirasol's place in EIS
Meeting in West Palm Beach with Environmental Protectinn Agency (EP A),
Veronica Fasselt and Richard Harvey
Site visit with Veronica Fasselt (EP A), Andy Eller (USFWS), and Jim Beever
(FFWCC)
ACOE jurisdictional line signoff request
Meeting with Regional Planning Council staff, Ft. Myers
SFWMD Big Cypress Basin ROW application for entrance bridge
Meeting with Ed Carlson and Mike Dnever of Corkscrew Swamp
Meeting with Nancy Peyton of the Florida Wildlife Federation (FWF)
Turrell meeting with USFWS staff in Vero Beach
Presentation and Q&A with Audubon Society members
Mirasol POO application review at the Collier County Environmental Advisory
Council
Information package to ACOE (flow-way and Pnblic Notice info)
Public Workshop on Mirasol held at Gulf Coast High School
Turrell meeting with Conservancy staff to review project
Mirasol POO application review at the Collier County Planning Commission -
Approved
Meeting with Skip Bergman (ACOE) regarding project details
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies:
Oree.n - EP,A.
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I County
4/24/01
4/23/01
5/1/01
5/16/01
5125/01
6/1/01
617101
6/22101
1116101
7/19/01
7/23101
8120/01
8/29/01
10/12101
11/9/01
11/15/01
11/21101
12/18101
1/11102
1/14/02
2/6/02
2/14/02
2/26/02
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 106 of 247
MirasoI PUD application review at the Collier Board of Connty Commissioners
Approved for 799 units, density blending, 2 golf courses and floWl'l'ay
Official Jurisdictional Line signofffrom ACOE
Meeting with Skip Bergman (ACOE) regarding project details
Meeting with Skip Bergman (ACOE) regarding project details
ACOE Public Notice of Mirasol Permit
Collier County Right-of Way Permit for Entry Bridge
Meeting with Christine Hahn of Congressman Goss' office regarding project delays
James Slack (USFWS) letter to Co!. James May (ACOE) regarding USFWS review
of project plans
SFWlIID Big Cypress Basin ROW permit issued for entrance bridge
Verbal request to USFWS for technical assistauce, refused by USFWS
Written request to USFWS for technical assistance
Meeting with Kim Dryden of USFWS for RCW technical assistance
Public notice comments from ACOE
Applicant response to pnblic notice comments, copy sent to USFWS and EPA
Letter to Andy Ener (USFWS) reqnesting Section 7 consultation
Phone call from Andy Ener(USFWS) refusing to meet until ACOE letter issued
Community Development District (CDD) application submittal to Collier County
Entrance Bridge construction completion
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) sign-off to SFWlIID
requiring a wildlife management plan
Biological opinion from Turrell and Associates to ACOE and USFWS
Meeting with USFWS: Andy Eller at Naples office
SFWMD Environmental Resource Permit approved
Community Development District (CDD) approval at Collier County Board of
Commissioners
Color KeY:
.Black - Agencies
Green - EP A
Blue - Non Profit
'Purple - Public I County
3/11102
4/12/02
4/16/02
4/26/02
4/29/02
4/30/02
5/3/02
5/6/02
5/13/02
5/21/02
5/24/02
5/31/02
6/1/02
6/6102
6/6/02
6/11/02
6/13/02
6/13/02
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 107 of 247
Letter from John Hall (ACOE) to James Slack (USFWS) requesting concurrence
with wildlife determinations
Agnoli Barber & Brundage letter to EP A with supporting worksheet documents
On-site meeting with USFWS
SnbmittaI to Andy Eller (USFWS) with requested backgrouud info
E-mail response from Bruce Boler (EP A) re: 4/12 documents provided by project
engineer ARB
E-mail to Andy Eller (USFWS) re: non-concurrence with ACOE wildlife
determinatious
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - Pre Application meeting with
Collier County staff
E-mail response from Agnoli, Barber and Brundage to Bt'uce Boler (EP A) re: 4129
e-mail
E-mail response from Bruce Boler (EP A) to Agnoli, Barber aud Brundage re: 516 e-
mail
Memo from Steve Lewis (Lewis, Longman and WalkerlLLW) to Linda Ferrell
(USFWS) regarding initiation of consultation
E-mail response (with attachments) from Agnoli, Barber aud Brundage to Bruce
Boler (EPA) re: 5/13 e-mail
Turrell and Associates request for mitigation, monitoring and maintenance
schedule modification due to delay in ACOE permitting
Phone conversation with Andy Eller (USFWS) regarding potential outstanding
issues
E-mail response from Bruce Boler (EP A) to Agnoli, Barber and Brundage re: 5/24
e-mail
Fax: Tim Hall (Turrell & Associates) to Andy Eller (USFWS) - groundwater study
report
E-mail: Andy Eller (USFWS) to Joss DeLestang (ABB), cc Rick Barber (ARB) and
Tim HaD (Turrell), regarding future site visit
E-mail: Fred James (USFWS hydrologist) to Andy Eller (cc Rick Barber, Joss
DeLestang, and Tim Hall) regarding questions for the upcoming 6/25 meeting on-
site
Letter from Congressman Porter G<lss to Todd Tnrrell regarding request for
assistance with USFWS coordination
I Color Kev:
Black-Agencies
Green-EPA
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - PubUc I County
6/18/02
6/25/02
6/26/02
7/1102
7/08/02
7/18/02
7/22&23/02
7/25/02
7/30/02
8/1/02
8/5/02
8/8/02
8/9/02
8/9/02
8/9/02
8/12/02
9/10/02
9/12/02
9/17/02
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 108 of 247
Agnoli, Barber and Brundage letter to EP A with supporting worksheet documents
(latest version of BOD water quality analysis)
Tim Hall, Joss DeLestang, Rick Barber meeting with Andy Ellcr and Fred James of
USFWS, in Vero
E-mail response from EP A to Agnoli, Barber and Brundage re: 6/6 letter
Letter from Tim Hall (Turrell & Associates) to Andy Eller confirming USFWS
questions raised at 6/25 meeting
SFWMD Modification to monitoring schednledue to ACOE permitting delays
Letter from Tim Hall (Turrell & Associates) to Andy Eller (USFWS) answering
questions raised at 6/25 meeting, confirm future meeting on-site 7/23
E-mail wrrespondence from Tim Hall (Turrell & Associates) to Andy Eller
(USFWS) attempting to confirm USFWS current position regarding endangered
species
Fax: Tim Hall (Turrell & Associates) to Andy Eller (USFWS) - habitat evaluation
hydrological parameters
Meeting on-site with Andy Eller, Todd Turrell, Rick Barber, and Fred
James (follow-up meeting scheduled for 8/13 with USFWS in Vero)
Letter to Andy EUer from Todd Turrell confirming resolved and remaining
concerns ofUSFWS (cc Skip Bergmann, ACOE)
E-mail from Andy Eller to Tim Hall regarding questions remaining for USFWS
Turrell and Associates receives letter sent by USFWS to ACOE dated 7/11
USFWS cancels meeting schednled for 8/13
Joint letter from EP A and USFWS expressing mutual concerns regarding the
project
ABB letter to EP Are: 6/26 e-mail
Letter from USFWS to ACOE summarizing the USFWS remaining concerns
E-mail from Skip Bergmann to Tim Hall regarding potential unanswered USFWS
issues
E-mail from Skip Bergmann to Andy Eller regarding any additional information to
be sent to USF\\'S
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phase I - AR#3516 - Pre Application meeting with
Collier County staff
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Gran - EP A
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I County
9/19/02
9/24/02
10/4/02
1017102
1017102
10/9/02
10/10/02
10/22/02
10/22/02
10/31/02
\ 11/5/01
11/5/02
1117102
11/14/02
11/18/02
12/6/02
12/13/02
12/13/02
12/16/02
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 109 of 247
Letter to Skip Bergman from Lewis, Longman and Walker (LLW) regarding
USFWS requested materials
Meeting with ACOE, USFWS, EP A, SFWMD and project consultants /
representatives
Letter to Colonel May from LL W regarding USFWS and EP A issues with Mirasol
Meeting at ACOE with Skip Bergman, Todd Turrell, and Tim Ball; presented a
draft USFWS letter
Sent ACOE a response to questions from the 9/24 meeting
Letter to Congressman Bill Nelson regarding USFWS response time for Mirasol
E-mail from ABB to EP A re: revised supporting worksheets
Pbone call from Tim Ball to Skip Bergman; regarding USFWS submittal; submittal
has not yet been forwarded
Turrell & Associates sends USFWS submittal previously sent to ACOE directly to
USFWS (Corkscrew Swamp surface water stages)
Draft letter of concnrrence for USFWS sent to Skip Bergman
Letter to Skip Bergman (ACOE) inquiring about the status of several pending
permits, including MirasoL
Phone call from Todd Turrell to Skip Bergmau
Phone call from Todd Turrell to Skip Bergman
Letter to ACOE from South Florida Water Management District rebutting the
questions from USFWS and EP A regardiug the District's conclusious.
Meeting at EP A Ft. Myers, attendees: Bruce Boler (USFWS), Joss DeLestaug
(ABB), Rick Barber (ABB) anuual analysis overview
Andy Eller request via phone to obtain the Pine Forest study done by Tim Ball.
Study sent same day.
Letter from John Ball (ACOE) to James Slack (USFWS) requesting a date for tbe
Biological Opinion (BO), lInd confirmation of status of consultation on Wood stork
and panther.
Meeting witb Conservancy of Southwest Florida staff on-site
Coordination meeting with USFWS and Senator Nelson's staff at the Senator's
Orlando office
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Greerl - EP A
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I COWlty
12/17/02
12/17/02
12/19/02
1/7/03
1/08/03
1/9/03
1/17/03
1/22/03
2/7103
2/14/03
2/19/03
2/21/03
2/27/03
2/28/03
3/4/03
3/5/03
4/8/03
4/16/03
4/16/03
4/21/03
4/28103
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 110 of 247
Meeting at EP A Ft. Myers, attendees: Bruce Boler (USFWS), Joss DeLestang
(ARB), Rick Barber (ARB) preview annual analysis
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phase 1- AR#3516 - Submitted to ColIier County
Meeting with Conservancy of Sonthwest Florida staff
ABB submittal to EP A, USACOE: anuual BOD analysis, supporting worksheets
SFW:MD Modification to monitoring schednle
On-site meeting with Dave Ceiley (Conserva.ncy of Southwest Florida) to discuss
project impacts
Andy Eller (USFWS) requests spot elevations in a digital format
Letter from Linda Ferrell (USFWS) to John Hall setting a date for the BO as
2/21/03, confirming initiation of consultation on the panther, and expressiug non-
concurrence with stork determination.
ARB revised annual BOD analysis, supporting worksheets, sent to Richard Harvey
(EPA), Bruce Boler (USFWS), and Skip Bergmann (ACOE)
Draft Biological Opinion submitted from USFWS
Letter from Turrell and Associates to ACOE in response to draft Biological Opinion
Final Biological Opinion submitted to ACOE
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - Submitted to Collier County
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phase 1- AR#3516 - County comments received
Meeting at ACOE Ft. Myers: consultants, ACOE and EP A to discuss hydrology,
mitigation, water quality
E-mail from EP A to ACOE (Bergmann) re: outstanding issues
Meeting v>ith Tim Hall and Ed Carlson (Corkscrew Sanctuary') to discuss Wood
stork and hydrologic monitoring
SFWMJ> Modifica.tion to monitoring schedule
USFWS letter to ACOE, withdrawal of IV(3)(d) - will not request a higher level of
review
Meeting: project consultants and CREW to discuss shifting control of mitigation
land to CREW
Letter from Tim Hall to Allen Webb (USFWS) regarding clarification of flow-way
calculations
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Green-EPA
BEue - Non Profit
rurple - Public I County
4/30/03
5/8/03
5/9/03
5/12/03
5/22/03
6/12/03
6/13/03
6130/03
7/11/03
7/25/03
7/28/03
7/30/03
8/25/03
8/26/03
8/27/03
8/29/03
9/11103
9/16/03
9/18/03
10/22/03
10/23/03
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 111 of 247
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - County comments received
4/28 letter returned undeliverable - resent via Fed-Ex overnight.
Information sent to USFWS from Tim Hall re: hydrologic and wood stork
monitoring plan
On-site meeting with CREW for overview of existing conditions of mitigation
area
E-mail from Tim HaD to Allen Webb (USFWS) regarding lack of response to flow-
way clarification and monitoring proposal
Project team meeting with EP A to discuss outstanding issues
Re-sent draft VI'ood stork plan to USFWS
Project team meeting with ACOE at ARB re: South J-ee Connty watershed
and Mirasol Flow-way and project team meeting with ACOE and EP A on-
site
Submittal to EPA from Lewis Longman & Walker re: Mirasol history
Draft Wood stork monitoring plan to Corkscrew Sanctuary for comment
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - Resubmitted to County
Meeting at ACOE in Jacksonville with project consultants and John Hall,
John Studt and Ron Silver of the ACOE
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - County comments received
Letter to ACOE re: lack of comments from USFWS re: wood stork plan
FAX from Audubon/Corkscrew Sanctuary to Tim Hall Re: Wood stork
plan comments
E-mail from USFWS to Tim Hall Re: Wood stork plan
Snbmittal from ABB to ACOE re: additioual information requested at
meeting
On-site meeting/tour with Haynes Johnson and others from EP A
Su bmittal from Turrell to EP A re: requested aerial exhibit
Meeting between project engineers (ARB) and Graham Story of ACOE
ABB submittal to ACOE (Story) regarding requested materials from 10/22
meeting (overall summary, additional flow-way documentation, and
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Green- EPA
Blue - Non Profit
Purple- Public I County
10/23/03
11/17/03
11/1 S/03
11/19/03
11/20/03
11/26/03
1/5/04
1/9/04
1/16/04
1/26/04
2/04
2/5/04
2/6/04
2/12/04
2/13/04
2/18/04
3/8104
3/30/04
4/20/04
5/11/04
5/12/04
5/18/04
6/11/04
Agenda Item No< 88
April 28, 2009
Page 112 of 247
design ontline)
Meeting between Todd Turrell aud Bob Baron of ACOE in Jacksonville
Pu blic info meeting at Corkscrew Sanctuary with Tim Hall
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phase I - AR#3516 - Resubmitted to County
SFWMD Modification to monitoring schedule
Public info meeting at Watershed Council with Tim Hall
Response letters from Tim Hall to National Wildlife Federation,
Conservancy of Southwest Florida, and EP A Re: project comments.
ACOE Request for Additional Information
P,'eliminary Subdivision Plat Phase 1- AR#3516 - County comments received
Response to ACOE Request for Additional Information
Collier County Excavation Permit - Submitted
Collier County Excavation Permit -comments received from staff
Letter from ACOE to Steve Walker (LLW) re: additional concerns
E-mail from ACOE re: clarification of additional information reqoested
ACOE RAI
Letter from Steve Walker to ACOE re: status of project and resolving remaining
issues
E-mail from ACOE re: additional lands in section 11
Additional ACOE comments
Response to ACOE Request for Additional Information
Collier County Excavation Permit - Resubmitted to County addressing staff
comments
Revisions to FLUCCS and WRAP for ACOE based on 3/30/04 site visit
Collier County Excavation Permit - Review at the B()ard of C()mmissioners
CREW letter re: donation ofland aDd fnnds
Revised Request for Additional Information response to ACOE
Mirasol Flowway Site Devel()pment Plan AR#3318 - Resubmitted to County
addressing staff comments
Color Kev'
Black - Agencies
Green - EP A
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I County
6123/04
7/1104
7/19/04
7/23/04
7/26/04
7/28104
7/29/04
8/20/04
8131/04
9/7/04
9/8104
9/10/04
9/15/04
9/23104
9/30/04
10/04
10/25/04
10/25/04
10/28/04
10/29/04
1lI1/04
11/3/04
i\genda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 113 of 247
Collier Clmnty Excavation Permit - additional County comments received
E-mail from ACOE to EP A re: removal of EP A objection to Olde Cypress
modification
Flow-way revisions for ACOE
Draft of Special Conditions from ACOE
Copy of draft permit from Turrell to EP A
Mirasol FlowwaySite Development Plan AR#3318 - additional County comments
received
E-mail from EP A to Tnrrell and ACOE re: comments on 7/23 package (special
conditions)
Collier County Excavation Permit - Resubmitted to County addressing staff
comments
Copies of SFWMD and EP A water qnality permits to ACOE
ACOE Request for Additional Information
Collier County Excavation Permit - additional County comments received
E-mail to ACOE re: 7/29 and 8/12 eo-mailed comments from EP A (Haynes)
ACOE requests reo-initiation ofUSFWS consultation
National Wildlife Federation (NWF) and Conservancy Letter NWF, FWF, Florida
Panther Society letter
Response to ACOE Request for Additional Information
NWF comments
Letter to USFWS reo information for re-initiation of consultation
USFWS Baseline Environmental Information
NV\1F, FWF, Conservancy, Audubon of FL letter to EP A .
Lewis, Longman, and Walker letter re: 9/23/04 comments
Collier County Excavation Permit - Resubmitted to County addressing staff
comments
NWF, FWF, Conservancy, Audubon ofFL, Collier County Audubon letter to
EPA
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Green - EP A
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - PublicI County
11/9/04
12/2/04
12/9/04
12/29/04
1111/05
1I13f(}5
1118/05
2/1105
2/10/05
2/11/05
2/15/05
2122/05
2/24/05
3/7/05
3/8/05
3/ll/05
3/23/05
4/19/05
4/20/05
5/05
5/05
5/6/05
5/10/05
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 114 of 247
Revision to SFWMD monitoring schedule
USFWS Baseline Environmental Information
Revisions to ACOE permit attaehments
Copy of archaeological assessment and historical resources letter to ACOE
Copy of seagrass plan to ACOE
Collier County Excavation Permit - additional County comments received
Bonita Springs Utilities BiologiCal Opinion
Collier County Excavation Permit - Resubmitted to County add.-essing staff
comments
E-mail from USFWS re: additional information
USFWS exhibits
Package to USFWS re: information requested
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - Resubmitted to County
addressing staff comments
EP A comments re: Special Conditions
National Wildlife Federation commeut letter to USFWS and ACOE
Mirasol Flow'way Site Development Plan AR#3318 - additional County comments
received
USFWS Revised Biological Opinion
Site Development Plan Phase 1 799 units AR#7623 - Pre Application meeting with
Collier County staff
Site Development Plan Phase I 799 units AR#7623 - submitted to Collier County
Audubon of FL and Collier County Audubon letter to ACOE and EP A
USFWS miscellaneous information
NWF and Audub<ln comment letters
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phase 1- AR#3516 Resubmitted to county
NWF, and Florida Panther Society letter to USFWS and ACOE
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Green - EPA
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I County
5/13/05
5/19/05
5/23/05
6/9/05
6/23/05
8/05
8/3/05
8117/05
8/18/05
8/18/05
8/29/05
9/1105
9/2/05
9/9/05
9115/05
9/20/05
9/27/05
10/5/05
10/5/05
10/6/05
10/6/05
10/13/05
10/13/05
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 115 of 247
Florida Wildlife Federation (FWF) letter to ACOE
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Phase 1- AR#3516 - Approved with conditions
NWF, FWF, Conservancy of SWFL, Audubon ofFL, Collier County Audubon
letter to EP A and ACOE
Memo to Everglades Advisory Council West Coast Task Team from Everglades
Foundation re: review of Mirasol project hydrologic modeling.
Site Development Plan Phase 1 799 units AR#7623 - received comments from
County staff
ACOE Request for Additional Information (from August meeting)
E-mail from EP A re: comments
Mirasol Flow-way Wetlands Hydrological Analysis to ACOE
Response to ACOE Request for Additional Information
Copy of cell-by-cell analysis to EP A
Copy of South Golden Gate Estates information to ACOE for reference
Letter to ACOE re: FWF letter dated 5/13/05
Letter to EPA from ACOE providing a final opportunity to provide comments.
Letter to EP A sending CD of GPS information spreadsheets
Letter to LL&W from EPA - saying they are cur~ently wo~king on review
Email from EP A to Lieberman re: presentation of historical and ongoing work.
Collier County Excavation Permit - Review at the Board of Connty Commissioners
(requested by Brad Cornell)
Emai! from EPA to ACOE reo GPS information
Email to ACOE re: above
Emai! from EP A - GPS information
Emai! to EPA- GPS information
Letter from City of Bonita Springs to ABB - East Bonita watershed and the
Conservancy haudout from the 10/5 meeting.
Documents to EP A - exhibits dealing with wrap aualysis
Color K.ll;
Black - Ag:encies
Green- EPA
Blue - Non Profit
Pu.-ple - Public f County
10/17/05
1117105
11/9105
11/9105
11/15/05
11/16/05
1217/05
1/26/06
2/6/06
3/3/06
3/8/06
3/8/06
3/13106
3/14106
3/31/06
4/24/06
4/24/06
5/05/06
5/8/06
5/12/06
5/23/06
6/21/06
6/21/06
6121/06
7/14/06
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 116 of 247
Letter to ACOE - exhibils dealing with wrap analysis for Mirasol
SFWMD Monitoring Schedule Revision
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - Resubmitted to tbe County
addressing staff commenls
Pre-Application meeting for PUD extension
Collier County Excavation Permit - Review at the Board of Commissioners
Mirasol Flowway Site Development Plan AR#3318 - County comments received
ACOE Permit Denial
P1JD extension application snbmittal to Collier County
Applicant's request for Appeal (RFA) to ACOE Permit Denial
PUD Extension application - Received comments from County staff
Supplemeut to Request for Appeal to ACOE Permit Denial
Final Plat - Pre Application meeting with Collier County staff
SFWMD Big Cypress Basin ROW Permit Extension Submitted #12226
SFWMD Big Cypress Basin ROW Permit Extension granted #12226
PUD Extension application - Resubmitted to County addressing staff comments
PUD Extension application - Received commenls from County staff
Letter to Goodlette, Coleman et al from Collier County re: Mirasol PUD exteusion.
ACOE resubmittal
Letter to ACOE from LLW re: permit application for project
SFWMD Permit Modification Application
SFWMD resubmittal
SFWMD - Request for additional information
Letter from Audubon to SFWJ\fD re: Parklauds-CollierlRontD ERP modifications
application.
Letter to ACOE from LLW re: withdrawal of request for appeal.
Response to 6/21/06 Request for additional iuf"nnatiou from SFWMD
Color Kev:
Black-Agenc.ies
Green - EP A
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I County
7/14/06
7/21/06
818106
8/8/06
8/9/06
8/11/06
8/16/06
8/17/06
8/21/06
8/23106
8/24/06
8/25/06
8/25/06
8/28/06
8/29/06
8/30106
9/5106
9114/06
9/22106
9/26/06
9/26/06
9/28/06
9/28/06
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 117 of 247
SFWMD - Request for additional information
Letter to USFWS from ACOE
PUD Extension application - Resubmitted to County addressing staff comments
Letter to SFWMD from Audubon
ACOE Public Notice withont flow way in this phase of development
SFWMD - Request for additional information
Letter to ACOE reo adjacent property information and property aerials.
Letter from ABB to SFWMD re: revised information and Request for additional
information response.
Email from SFWMD re: clarification of items.
Letter from SFWMD to Clausen reo Notification of Complete Application.
Email from SFWMD reo summary of discussion reo staff report
Response to 8/21/06 email from SFWMD
Fax from Rick Barber re: copy of Staff Report
SFWM Dewatering Permit submitted by Missimer
Letter to SFWMD re: revised staff report and copy of draft deed of Conservation
Easement.
ROW Permit for canal improvements submitted to Big Cypress
not approved yet - waiting for Maintenance Agreement from attorney.
Letter to SFWMD reo copy of draft easements and mouitoring map
Letter from NWF to USF&WS re: panther take
Response to ACOE Public Notice - Audubon
Response to ACOE Public Notice - EP A
Letter to SFWMD from Panther Island Mitigation Bank reo credits
Letter to SFWMD re: bank credit determination
SFWMD Staff Report
SFWMD Water Use Permit, Application 060831-14 review receipt
Color Kev;
Black - Agencies
Green - EP A
Blue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I County
10/12/06
10/23/06
10/24/06
11/25/06
12/14/06
12/21/06
01108107
2/01107
2/14/07
5/03/07
5/25/07
7/24/07
9/13/07
10/05/07
SFWMD Permit Modification
Emai! from ACOE re: site visit
Letter to ACOE re: copy of SFWMD permit and staff report
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 118 of 247
Mirasol Flo'\\'Way Site Development Plan AR#3318 - SDP cancelled by County
Letter to ACOE re: supplement to 6/20/06 Application
Site Development Plan Phase 1 799 units AR#7623 - resubmitted
Response to ACOE Request for Additional Information dated 1/04/2007.
County Comments AR#7623
Biological Opinion #3
FWS Biological Opinion #4
ACOE letter of intent
Administration Hearing Order (SFWMD)
SFWMD Permit
ACOE Permit issuance
TERAFINA FLOWW A Y SDP AR#3823
5/3/02
2/28/03
4/30/03
7/28/03
8/25/03
6/11104
7/28/04
8/20/04
2/1105
4/7/05
5/23/05
12/13/05
1/20/06
1lI25/06
Pre App meeting
Submitted
County comments received
Resubmitted
Connty comments received
Resubmitted
County comments received
Resubmitted
County comments received
Resubmitted
County comments ,'eceived
Resubmitted
County comments received
SDP cancelled by County
OLDE CYPRESS FLOWW A Y SDP AR#3820
5/3/02 Pre App meeting
2/28/03 Submitted
Color Kev:
Black - Agencies
Green - EP A
Biue - Non Profit
Purple - Public I County
4130/03
7/28/03
8/25/03
6111/04
7/28/04
8120/04
2/1/05
4/7/05
5123105
12/13/05
1/20/06
11125106
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 119 of 247
County comments received
Resubmitted
Couuty comments received
Resubmitted
County comments received
Resubmitted
County comments received
Resubmitted
County comments received
Resubmitted
Connty comments received
SDP cancelled by County
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 120 of 247
EXHIBIT "B"
.'ia .
,._::.:>"5;:;:::.:~.:,;~',-', ;'.:
_,,~.,:l"-"'-'"~:.;;..:'.i:ffl,.'
. .~._---_.._---,---'-- ..,---'~.\
.,",. .,.,..",,~, ..:1',
,\':'"..
...i.
,,'I,'
. "\'
I
..1.
. .':[
'1' f~J' ,.,_,:'~:;:'~r:'/,:
I" ,,.,,'''',.If,.;.ili!..... ,." '\' -.,'" ".""".,.,."
. .,.'.-..." , ~t... ....".. ,",
:llt):J'~";f"i'
~'_.'"":;. "'," :~Y.hl".'.t:'\';., ) . "J'~' "."
..' '. "',,.. .':"...:....l',..:,j.,~.:.
j. ,
". t.(.:;)[,,:,;;,;:
0: ,{l:;li; s;.:"~',:~; i;:, llJ:'tr:.;..;::!~l'.r;i:;?{'f'
'~~!i~~'"
~ . '1 ~.';~:,:;;:~,
....i:;..':.. ,'j'),.
."j. ., .."
::,~'!t!)2:~:.~i;i;:~:' ~'iJ':
11....",.,,,,.,...'1
. .....~.,..]'\,it'~:'~jf'i.l(
:>, !,~:...' :.:":-r:!
~.__.:it, .' t-.,:" .r" ,~~,\, :'::~i
?~~';2_2:~.$r .1, .-.
I.L~7'~~~"f"2,,-L~iil ..:.
~-:..w_~_";",~_":-,,,,,-,-_~
:~,
\.'... -.
:([
";;-r{iiiktE:~,Ri:N~;:~~~-'
"~d.i:~::~::'~r;tr.J?~ ~.~'/ ~'~"~";\7~?:.'{~::t.:~~:,'r:{i_::.:t. ".::
I.'
~', l
<-,
.,:."
:':;~:~T;:',
. r~'
, ~',! " -
, '_' ,"C'
MIRASOL NEUTRAl.g,iX~EA
i~~;i?;:::::ffi!;\':,' '
.C",;C"-
.
,.
.;.:{.'~':. ;,:
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 121 of 247
EXHIBIT "B-1"
.~-
MIRASOL
.....~
'i
~....~............."
~ ~,~."
~...~
URBAN DESIGNATION
MIXED USE DISTRfOT
o UReAl... RESIDENTIAL SU9D1STP.ICT
o RE~IOENnAl DENSITY e.A.tIDS
~ UR8AH CO.A.STAl FRINGE SJeoIS~ICT
~ URBAN RESIDENllAL F'RlWGE SUBDlSlRiCT
or:;:1CE: AND LNFltL COMMtR'ClAL Sl..A3DlSTR1CT
PI!D t-EIGH600HOOO VILLAGE CElmF SU3D1Sl1'ICT
RESl08>JrlAL MIXED USE HEJGHBORHOOD SUBD1STP.1C1
COl.fM€RCI t..L MIXED USE SUBD1SlRICT
BUSJWESS PARK SUBDIS1RICr
RESEA.?CH AND 1ECHt>l:OL.OQ:Y PARi< SUaolSTP.IGT
_ AGRICULTURAL r RURAl
DESlGNA liON
o AGJUOULTURA.URURAl UIXB) USE l)1BTRlCT
FtURAL COl,4MEPCIAL SUBDl51PlC1
- ~~9mJCT
fI1 ~CEMNG LANDS
III SEHOOlG lJ.tVS
~ NOJTJl"Al
COMlAEII~ll N$TRIC>T
. MI~ED USE
ACn1Tl' CENTEP. SUEDlSTFI:-
EXHIBIT C
EO OH'...
000<;-
,ON
ON_
Z .0
00 '"
ENgJ
a;=..-
- ~
- 0-", 0
co <( OJ z
u '" ~
c: CL tt
C])
Q)
<(
.
.
~ 11 ~
~ I
0 .
z
~
~
"
~ .
i "
z
0
g ~
w 0
~ = w
0 ~ w
.J (j)
w
>
0' 0::
W
(j)
W
0::
Q..
W 0
Z
<l::
I-
~ ~
Q..
0
~ ....J
W
>
W
0
- I-
Z
W
()
<l::
....,
0
<l::
~.5E&3
H......<"">=
~~~~~
3 0 ~~
o::IC,) ~ ~
...-, ..... --
gs .rt;
CIJ:::: _lo'..
<~l
_y 0 a:i:;g
'WO.!::l ..8 ;:;
--- j; '3~
c:a u.l ~;:g
~~ ~~,
__....fU -:;~
a::>.S it;..;:
t.::;a ... '"
;:3::S ~~
E--< '"
;;l;
:Q~
~
1
~
&,
~
c::
E
'"
Mirasol Folio Numbers
Exhibit D
Section 15. Township 48B. Ranl!'e 26E
Parcel1- 00181760007
Parcel2- 00181800006
Bection 22. Township 48B. Ranl!'e 26E
00190040705
00187840002
00181440004
00187200008
00188520004
00187320001
00188320000
00187800000
00187960005
00188160008
00187640008
00187040006
00187000004
00188280001
00188240009
00186960006
00187880004
00188080007
Section 10. Township 48B. Ranl!'e 26E
00178280008
00179680102
00179480001
00179320006
00179200003
00178720005
00177920000
00178120003
00178520001
00178600002
00179400007
00179440009
00179520000
00179560002
00179600001
00179360008
00179280007
00179680403
00179160004
00178840008
00178920009
00179000009
00179120002
00178800006
00178640004
00178680006
00178880000
00178240006
00178320007
00178360009
00178200004
00178160005
00178080004
00178040002
00178000000
00177960002
00178560003
00178440000
00178480002
00179080003
00179680005
00179680209
00179680306
00179640003
00178400008
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 123 of 247
cncnf'-
C007
,ON
ON~
Z .0
~~<<::t
_ N
QJ="--
::::: D. Q..l
ro <( en
u ro
c 0..
OJ
Ol
<(
\ ~~
I -........ ~l
I___J.._ .....- j t..
I",.. ~M
~I I'~~ I I
l' ",.., I"'" \
.~a !-""f"W~ I
'"":"',J: ...- _+________-1
I J I I
l.~ ....~ :-:: I I
!IX~... I !
l________~ I
I ~......!_
L _... I ___"'r~r,......
\ ~-::ur-_ I ._J_..
",,"" ; I ---'T'~"'- _ __ _________
~~-------r------~~~~--- - i
L-:..v I 1 I
,~.. I 1 I
I 1 I I
.;________-1 I I
~ 1 I I I
j-:';:!.. t I .1
- l~~=I---+--------1 ; ~~ --------
s .~i ..?..J.._.. :-___LnJ ,; '-',:- JJ
*. _,._ , J '
~ ~ rf t\:' ",,'WJ I N'~~ ..0
. '" ~,! ..:::] ~~{ ,;;m~ ~~
H ~ ~--
,
~
~
~
~l
>,
..
l~t~
.."
--""",
~~i
....
ai
'i
, I
_____~__1
,
, I
,
;
,
L!
~ ~ i ~
!~~i: ii1
~~~hi!d
......!l;Q
l
,
i
Ii iI',
~.~~~ ~"
UJ ~:' r: i -Y
~m~ ud. Ur.!
""j''''lhi
~J!~JHg~ikil:
e_o'.
~ ~mu~~~~~li;
~
~..
.::=..1'Zllr" ~w
_.._tfflIlI':J}
a~OWIIi_
-- - --j~
~-:;'I
i- -I, -
i ;;.~
,
1
I
I ,
l "".?,!
f-------
I
,
1
,
!:lfil ..%'
1 ~-------":: '"
i
I
L
I'::~
i";i; :- ....
:~ I
U t ~1 I~'S-
;X I I I t
!'S;1 ,n. \'i~1~~~~ a
I 1......I.....AI~. ! 1
\ I 1~11 ,~
1_____1__1 g;'~;" ~________.L/
1 II I 1 H; it ~111
~J .:~:.: ~ ~.!\'S~i j! l\ .
-- I ~. , ""~ ~' '.1, I. ~,l ,
-::::. >;;;;;:I_I...J ~" t iil 'I
~, '~'::;'J . . 'l~'<." glt
'r~ ::;;;~~;.::: \ ' (' d l -
I 5~ii;';.;$-ij ~I<t
.,.. __+__"1>\", - . . - -- ...'"
'=.' -~ -, .,~ ~
I ~~s I ....",.,( "l
I 1 I ....11 1
I \ \ Ii....., I
:e.i I .... I ~; I ~,"; ~-I~'';:;ril .:::~
I I H1~ !iil~.\ M
\ : I 11 I
I , I t~ l~ I~ 1\" I
\ I I ~ \!i!!:} '1i a
----'----T----'---- 4!-- --
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
..r..1!1
'M
1M
~::: :
-, .
t~
-\lI
~::
-:';;;
~~
&; -
I~~
.......-...,
---'"
-.0
,
,
,
,
!----
, ,
, ,
...::$ \ ::ti \ , ::
----'-- - - -+- -- --- ----+------ -- - +...- --'-- --
\ ~~~~~ l
7::.:& l \ \
________--1 \ I
, ' I
1 _____.,........ I
-tAl; : .--:.~~~:- \
__ ______ _I..- __ __ ____~---_ ---- -1----- ----
~u.~ I
I '
, I
, '
, '
, '
_,:-::;:;:::::::.~ I I
-.iW ::
~ _:: ___ _ ____ __ _ -- __-1_ -- ---- ---+----,----
I I 1_
\ 1 L....."".::.
-:~ 1:: ~~
l__________________...J, l----4~---
...::.-= : l 1
-= J"
.,,~ ";::ffl 1 I
-'>;.;J ..- """ ~
"'
l!
,
.-
"'ell
.
..:''":1
-;~-;:
,..l'>5
...... I ............ ,,-,
I ~ '
,I II' ! 1
! : , f " I t I'
! ~ ~ , ... , ~.l'.
id fjPi dn~ i i"'P:
i~i d'~ qq~ ! ~ ~l!
.;' ~ll, ~dll ~~P,!
II 1 ........ ~ ... b ... .. ~ !. l~ X . t
it ~~q ~~~t... ~~~"'i~
,n 11illil1kl,k'"',;,,
~l . ~ R " I I I"' . t. ~ t~
'l~~x~r~~l~llll~l~Xb~ yl
~ .~"""'~b"'~"'bi~.b..S~.~
~ll~~ It!nt!S~~ 'iE'i~~~~ ~!
~ii i~ 9! i t: i ~ ~ i!~ ~i s!.; i L~!
~~J;;hrI~r~~IIx,:!d~ l~~~l~
! I
:S:~
! n
i n
l bb
. ~!
1'1
i L
. "
I ~
, U
I..
. ..
! >;:>;:
i ~i
i,
. !
t" i
!! Ii
~! I 'I :1
~ ( i i~ I'
,HII'!!
'I', I'i
il! IHlll
:'1!! i I
.' \" H' d
t1 i ~: ~ I
i!!!!i 11 !II
..
..~
""lill
! ,.
{y
,
!
,
I!
:1
~~
'I
II
! ~~
f ~~"
; iii
i ~~i
'\'1
~\ .1.
g i l~l
_U!
"
.
~,~
'-il
,
\
l
,
,
. "
! n'3
ii" II
"II.
l'kl"I
t!,...;b
11 ~; j;
i" "I!' i
~~ l l
~il P t
,~ .. , t "
III ~a ~ t S r
~ i!~ U h
1:1 ...Ii ! l I ~
~ ~~. , ~ 0 .
-iJfj
-M
,"!
'1'
;~t~
lill
'!',
ill!!
HII
f ,!.ll
~ l!!"
3 ~h I
~'I:!~i
t .!lll
;<!
u "
~ ~
latilR
i1l....Ci>
I &.Hl
~9~
~[g~
" i5>!~
.1, ~~a:
, ~.,o
Ii !3~lt
II ;~~
r lQ ...
~I tA ~
!;
!
L
"!
;~
'IU".
J~
~'~R
l~;
'~M
u~ll
I'
nli ~~
gi!',:
U1IJ'
.~H~l ~
"~'" ", l'
"..~" '" .,
&3i1!l~f ~ n~ t 1
!!iR!!! il! I
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 125 of 247
EXHIBIT E2
FOR MIRASOL RPUD
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SECTION 10
ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4)
PARCELS:
1) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
2) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF TIffi SOUTHEAST 1/4,
3) THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF TIffi SOUTHEAST 1/4,
4) THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF TIffi
SOUTHEAST 1/4
SECTION 15
ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 15, TOIVNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COllIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
LESS & EXCEPT
THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHWEST 1/4, AND THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4,
SECTION 22
ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUI'H, RA..'NGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE P ARTICULARL Y DESCRlBED AS
FOLLOWS;
THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE
NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF TIffi SOUTHEAST 1/4,
THEEAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
Y:\COMP ANY\Claussen\Mirasol\PUD Amendment 2007\4th resubmittal\OOl25 LEGAL DESCRlPTtON 5 21 08 (2).doc 11
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 126 of 247
THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 114; A..'ID THE WEST 1/2 OF THE
NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 114,
THE EAST 112 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,
THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE NORTH: 1/2 OF TH:E WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHEAST 1/4,
THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTH\VEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4,
THE WEST 1/2 OF SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4, LESS & EXCEPT
THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE WEST 3/4 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST
1/4, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET
Y:\COM?ANY\CIaussenlJvfirasol\PUD Amendm:'l1t 2007\4lh resubmittal\O0125 LEGAL DESCRIPT10N 5 21 08 (2).doc 12
PMS, Inc. of Naples
Project Management Services
Agenda Item No. 88
Page 127 ~f 247
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 REV: 5
MIRASOL PUD
Project: 19990012
Date: 11/13/08 DUE: 12/] 5/08
Deviation Justifications for the Mirasol RPUD
1. Deviation #1 seeks relief from Appendix B of the LDC, entitled '"Typical
Street Sections and Right-of-way Design Standards", which requires cul-de-
sacs and local streets less than one thousand feet (1,000') in length to have a
minimum sixty foot (60') right-of-way width and two ten foot (10') wide
travel lanes, to allow a minimum right-of-way width of forty feet (40') for
private streets and fifty feet (50') for spine, collector and interconnecting
roads.
J nstification
A deviation from the LDC requirement that local roads have a minimum right-of-way
width of sixty feet (60') to permit a minimum of forty feet (40') in width is warranted for
a variety of factors. First, most roads within the Mirasol RPUD are intended to be private
rather than public roads. Maintenance responsibility will be by the developer and
Homeowner's Association. Additionally, the proposed forty foot (40') right-of-way width
is adequately sized to accommodate necessary infrastructure requirements including
standard width travel lanes, utility easements, and dual sidewalks.
The LDC does permit a developer to deviate from standard LDC construction standards
during the preliminary platting process. The developer would like to obtain the deviation
prior to the platting process in order to be able to prepare development plans with
certainty of the approval of the deviation.
2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.J. Street System
Requirements, which requires that Cul-de-sacs may not exceed the one
thousand foot (1,000') length shall be waived. Streets with block lengths of
greater than six hundred feet (600') shall have traffic calming devices
installed at an approximate spaeing of three hundred feet (300').
Justification
This deviation is warranted due to the irregular shape of several of the development tracts
due to environmental preserve locations, and due to configuration of development tracts
around the proposed golf course. Cul-de-sacs will be designed with standard travel lanes
and turning radius; therefore, there are no public safety issues resulting from the
increased length of a cul-de-sac.
2335 Tamlam; Trall N., Suite 408, Naples, FL 34103/ (239) 435~9080 y.3lFax (239) 435-9082IEmail: KarenBishop@pmsnaples.com
Agenda Item No. 88
Page 128 of 247
PMS, Inc. of Naples
Project Management Services
3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.Q. Street System
Requirements which requires that street name markers shall be approved by
the County Manager or designee for private streets or in conformance with
US.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. shall be waived. However, breakaway posts shall be
used.
Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.R. Street Requirements
which requires that street pavement painting, striping and reflective edging
of public roadway markings shall be provided by the developer as required
by the U.S.D.O.T.F.H.WA will be waived for private roadways with 40'
widths. Traffic circulation signage shall be in conformance with
U.S.D.OTF.H.W.A. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device standards.
Jnstification for Deviation #3 and 4
These deviations will permit the developer to create a more customized streets cape,
reflective of individual subdivision architectural standards. The street markers will be
sized and located in order to meet the intent ofUS.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. standards.
2335 Tamiami Trail N., Suite 408, Naples. FL 341031 (239) 435-90&0 x'3/Fax (239) 435-9082/Email: KarenElishop@pmsnapll!:s.com
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 129 of 247
.,
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE
PERMIT MODIFICATION NO. 11-02031-P
DATE ISSUED: SEPTEMBER 13, 2007
l"OG..olIll1S,
1...._5
PERMITl'EE: I.M, COLLIER J.V.
(MIRASOLI
6074 LONE OAK 8L VD.
NAPLES, FL 34109
ORIGINAL PERMIT ISSUED:
ORIGINAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
FEBRUARY 14.2002
AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT TO AUTHORIZE THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WHICH SERVES A 1713.7 ACRE RESIDENTIAL ANO GOLF COURSE
DEVELOPMENT AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 52.76 ACRE CONVEYANCE CHANNa WHICH EXTENDS OFF-
SITE THROUGH DiE ADJACENT WILDEWDOD LAKES AND OLOE CYPRESS DEVELOPMENTS. DiE SYSTEM
DISCHARGES TO THE COCDHATCHEE CANAL.
MODIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT 11-o2031-P TO AUDiORIZE A SURFACE WATER
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SERVING A 1.713.45 ACRE RESIDENTIAL AND GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT
KNOWN AS MIRASDL, WITH DISCHARGE INTO DiE COCOHA TCHEE CANAL.
COLLlERCOLi,.NTY, SECTION IO,t5,22 TWP48S RGE26E
SeE! Special Condition No.1. See attached Rule 40E-4.321. Florida Administrative COde.
APPROVED MODIFICATION:
PROJECT LOCA TION:
PERMIT DURATION:
This Permij Modificauon is approved pursuant to Applicalion No. 060524-2, daled May 24, 2006. Permittee agrees to hold and save the South
Florida Waler Management District and its successors harmless [rom any and aU damages, claims or liabilities which may arise by reason of the
construction, operation, maintenance or use of any activities authorized by this Pennil This Permit is is;sued under the prOVisions of Chapter 373.
Part IV Flarida Statutes(F.S.), .and the Operating Agreement Concerning Regulation Under Pa1t IV. Ghapter 373 F.S. between South Florida
Watel Management District and the Department at Environmental Protection. Issuance or this Permft constitutes certificalion of compliance with
state water quality standards where necessary pursuant to Section 401, Pubfic law 92-500. 33 use Section 1341, untess this Permit is issued
pursuant to the net improvement provisions 01 Subsections 373.414(1)(b), I';.S., or as otherwise stat~d herein.
This Permtt Modfficatlon may be revoked, suspended, or mod~ied at any time pursuant to the appropriate provisions of Chapter 373, F.S., and
~- .~tions 4OE-4.351(1). (2), and (4), Florida Administrative Code (FAG.). This Permit Modification may be translerred pursuant to the appropriate
. . ',ions of Chapter 373, F.S.. and Sections 40E.1.6107(1) and (2). and 40E-4.351(1), {2), and (4), FAG,
AJi spec~icalions and special and limiting/general conditions attendant to the original Permll.unless specifically rescinded by this or previous
modifications. remain in effect.
This Permit Modification shq,U be subject to the Environmental Resource Permit sel forth in Rule 40EA4.381, F,A.C., unless waived or modified by
the Governing Board. The Application, and Environmental Resource Permtt Staff Review Summary of the Application, Including ali conditions, and
all plans and specifications incorporated by reference, are a part of this Permit Modification. All actMties authorized by this Permit Modification shall
be implemented as set forth in the plans, specifICations, and penormance criteria as set fonh and incorporated in the Environmental Resource
Permij Staff Review Summary. Within 3D days .~er gompletion 01 construction of the pennittlng activity, the Permittee shall submit a written
8latement of completion and certification by a reglsfer~ professional engineer or other appropriate individual, pursuant to the appropriate
~rovlsions of Chapter 373, F.S. and Sections 40E-4.361 and 40E-4.3B1, FAC.
In the event the property is sold or othelWise conveyed, the Permittee win remain liable for compliance with this Permit unW transfer is approved by
the District pursuant 10 Rule 40E-1.6107. FAG.
IPECIAL AND GENERAL CONDmONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
SEE PAGES Z - 6 OF 9 (33SPECIAL CONDITIONS).
SEE PAGES 7 - 9 OF 9 (19 GmERAL CONDITIONS).
'ERMIT MODIFICATION APPROVED BY THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
l:.
BY
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
JACKI MCGORTY
DEPUTY CtERK
ON
PAGE 1 OF 9
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 130 of 247
PERMIT NO: t 1-02031.P
PAGE 2 OF 9
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1. The conslruction phase of this permit shall expire on September 13, 2012.
2. Operalion of the surface water management system shall be the responsibility 01 Fiow Way Community Development
District, established by Ordinance 2002-09, passed and adopted by Ihe Board of County Commissioners of Collier County.
on February 26, 2002 (submitted with the application and retained in the permit file as an exhibit to this permit by
reference). Within one year of permit issuance or concurrent wllh the engineertng certification of construction compietion.
whichever comes first, the permittee shall submit a dedication from the property owner 10 Ihe COD.
3. Discharge Facilities:
Basin: Basin 1
Structure: WCS-01
1-.62' dia. CIRCULAR ORIFICE with invert at elev. 13.4' NGVD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drop inlet with crest at elev. 16.2' NGVD.
Receiving body: Lake 10 (pass-through system)
Control elev: 13.4 feet NGVD.
Structure: WCS.10
1-.25' dia CIRCULAR ORIFICE with invert at elev. 14' NGVD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drop inlet with cresl al elev. 15.45' NGVD.
Receiving body: La ke 22 (Basin 1)
Canlrol eiev: 13.4 feel NGVD.
Basin: Basin 2
Structure: WCS.02
1-.69' dia. CIRCULAR ORIRCE with invert al elev. 13.4' NGVD.
1.3.0S' W X 2' L drop inlet with crest at elev. 16.4' NGVD.
Receiving body: Lake 11.(pass-through system)
Control eiev: 13.4 feet NGVD.
Basin: Basin 3
Structure: WCS-03
1-1.1' WX .5' H RECTANGULAR ORIFICE with invert at elev. 13.5' NGVD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drop intet with crest at etev. 16.1' NGVD.
Receiving body: Lake 6 (pass-through system)
Control elev: 13.5 feet NGVD.
.Slructure: WCS-06
1-25' dia. CIRCULAR ORIFICE with invert at elev. 14.2' NGVD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drop inlelwilh crest al elev. 16.25' NGVD.
Receiving body: Lake 32 (Basin 3)
Control elev: 13.5 feet NGVD.
Structure: WCS-07
1-.25' dia. CIRCULAR ORIFICE wilh invert al elev. 14.25' NGVD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drDp Inlet with crest at elev. 16.2' NGVD.
ReceivIng body: Lake 31 (Basin 3)
Control elev: 13.5 feel NGVD.
Structure: WCS-0S
1-.25' dia. CIRCULAR ORIFiCE with invert at elev. 14.25' NGVD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drop inlet wilh cresl at elev. 16.2' NGVD.
Receiving body: Lake 35 (Basin 3)
Control elev : 13.5 feet NGVD.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 131 of 247
PERMIT NO: 11-02031.P
PAGE 3 OF 9
Basin: Basin 4
Structure: WCS-04
1-2.7'W X .5' H RECTANGULAR ORIFICE wIth invert at elev. 13.5' NGYD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drop Inlet with crest at elev. 16.45' NGVD.
Receiving body: Lake 5 {pass-through system)
Control elev : 13.5 feet NGVD.
Basin: Basin 5
Structure: WCS-05
1.2.45' W X .5' H RECTANGULAR ORiFiCE with Invert at elev. 13.5' NGVD.
1-3.08' W X 2' L drop inlet with crest at elev. 16.3' NGVD.
Receiving body: Lake 4 (pass-through syste m)
Control elev: 13.5 reet NGVD. .
4. . The permittee shall be responsible for the correction of any erosion, shoaling or water quality problems that resull from the
construction or operation of the surface water management system.
5. Measures shafl be taken during construction to insure that sedimentation ancJfor turbidity violations do not occur in the
receiving water.
6. The District reserves the right to require that additional water quaiity treatment methods be incorporated into the drainage
. system If such measures are shown to be necessary due to the ongoing water quality monltorill9.
7. Lake side slopes shall be nD steeper than. 4:1 (hDrizDntal:vertlcal) to a depth of twD feet below the cantrol elevatiDn. Side
slopes shall be nurtured or planted from 2 feet below to 1 fDot above control elevation to insure vegetative grDWlh, unless
shown on the plans.
8. Facilities other than those stated herein shEdl not be constructed without an approved madirication of this permit.
9. A stable, permanent and accessible elevation reference shall be established on or withIn one hundred (100) Jeet of ail
permitted discharge structures no iater than the submission of the certification report. The location of lhe elevation
reference must be nated Dn or with the certification report.
10. The permittee shall pravide routine maintenance of all of the cDmponents of the surface water management system in
order to remDve aU trapped sediments/debris. All materials shall be properly disposed of as required by law, Failure to
properly maintain the system may result in adverse flooding conditions.
11. This permit is issued based on the applicant's submitted information which reasonably demonstrates that adverse water
resource related impacts wiil not be caused by the completed permit activity. Shoutd any adverse impacts caused by the
completed surlace water management system occur, the District will require the permittee to provide eppropriate mitigation
to the District or other Impacted party. The District wiil require the permittee tD modify the surlace water management
system, if necessary, to eliminate the cause of the adverse impacts.
12. Minimum building rIoor elevatlDn:
BASIN: Basin 1 - t6.85 feet NGVD.
BASIN: Basin 2 - 17.05 feel NGVD.
. BASIN: Basin 3 - 16.75 feel NGYD.
BASIN: Basin 4 - 17.20 leet NGVD,
BASIN: Basin 5 - 17.20 leet NGVD.
13.
Minimum road crown elevatiDn:
Basin: Basin 1 - 16.20 feet NGVD.
Basin: Basin 2 - 16.40 feet NGVD.
Basin: Basin 3 - 16.10 feel NGYD.
-'.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 132 of 247
PERMIT NO: 11-02031.P
PAGE 4 OF 9
Basin: Basin 4 - 16.45 feet NGVD,
Basin: Basin 5 - 16,40 feet NGVD,
14. The Permittee shall utilize the criteria contained in the Construction Pollution Prevention Plan (Exhibit Nos. 4,0-4,9) and on
the applicable approved construction drawings for the duration of the projects construction activities,
15. The Permittee shall utilize the criteria contained in the Urban Stormwater Management Program (Exhibit Nos. 5.0-5.4) for
post construction activities,
16. A Waler Use Permit must be obtained prior to dewatering actjv~ies.
17. Construction of the pass-thorugh system, Including Lakes 1 through 11, lake interconnections, the intake weir for Lake 1
and the' outfall weir from Lake 11 . shall be constructed prior to constructing the remainder of the proposed development.
18. The Extemal and Intemal Preserve Areas (designated as wetland preserves and conservation preserve areas on Exhibits
2,2 and 3.2) may in no way be altered from their natural or permitted state. Activities prohibited within the Extemai and
Inlemat Preserve Areas include, but are not limited to: construction or placing of buildings on or above the ground;
dumping or placing soil or other substances such as trash; removal or destructian of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation -
with the exception of exotic vegetation removal; excavation, dredging, or removal of soli materials; diking or fencing; and
any other activities detrimental to dreinage, flood control, water conservation, erosion controt, or flsh and W1ldlffe habitat
conservation or preservation, , .
19. Extemal and Internal Preserve Areas (designated as wetland preserves and conservation preserve areas on' Exhibits 2 ~
and 3.2) shall be dedicatad as conservation and common areas in the deed restrictions as well as on Ihe plat ff the projl
will be platted. Restrictions for use of the conservation! common areas shall stipulate: .
The Extemal and internal Preserve Areas (designated as wetland preserves and conservation preserve areas on Exhibits
2.2 and 3,2) are hereby dedicated as conservation and common areas, The conservationlcommo~ areas shall be the
. pervetual responsibility of the Flow Way Commun!ty Development District and may in no way be altered from their natural
or permitted state as documented in Sooth Florida Water Management District Permit No. 11.02031-P with the exception
of permitted restoration activities. Activ~ies prohibited w~hin the conservation areas include, but are not limited 10':
construction or placing soil or other substances such as trash; removal or destruction oj Irees, shrubs, or other vegetation -
with the exception of exatic/nuisance vegetation removal; excavation, dredging, or removal of soU malerial; diking or
fencing; and any other activities detrimental to drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, or fish and
wildlife habitat conservation or preservation.
Copies of recorded docurnents shall be submitted to the District's Environmental Resource Compliance staff in the Lower
West Coast Service Cenler concurrently with engineering certificalion of construction compietion.
20. Endangered species, threatened species and/or species of special concem have been observed onsite and/or the project
contains suitable hab~al for these species, It shall be the permittee's responsibility to coordinate with the Aorida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission and/or the U,S, Fish and Wildlife Service for appropriate guidance, recommendations
and/or necessary permits to avoid impacts to listed species,
21. Prior to the commencement oj construction and in conformance with the work schedule in Exhibit 3,6, the permittee shall
provide an original letter of credit in the amount of $4,6B7,loo and supplemental original letter of credit in the amount of
$73,700 to ensure the permittee's financial ability and commitment to complete the proposed mitigation. monitoring and
maintenance plan as shown on Exhibit No. 2.2, 3,2, 3,5 and 3,6. The lettar of credit shall utilize the form attached as
Exhibit No, 3,7, The letter of credit shall remain in effect for the entire period of the mitigation and mDnltoring program.
Notification of the District by the flnanciai inslitutlon that the letter of credit will not be renewed or is no longer In effecl shall
constRute nan-compliance with the permit.
22. A monitoring program shall be implemented in accordance with Exhibit Nos. 3,5 and 3,6. The monitoring program sho
extend for a period of 5 years with annual reports submitted to Dfstrtct staff, At the end of the first monitoring period the
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 133 of 247
PERMIT NO: 11.02031.P
PAGE 5 OF 9
Intemal and Extemai preselVe areas shall contain an 80% sUlVival of planted vegetation. The 80% survival rale shall be
maintained throughout the remainder of the monitoring program, wnh repianting as necessary. II native wetland,
transitional. and upland species do nol achieve an 80% coverage within the initial two years of the monitoring program,
native species shall be planted in accordance with the maintenance program. At the end of the 5 year monitoring program
the entire mJtigation area shall contain an 80% sUlVival of planted vegetation and an 80% coverage of desirable obligate
and facultative wetland species. In addition, the monlioring program for the Extemal PreselVe area includes a plan to
install three water level data loggers and two logging type rain gauges with the Extemal PreselVe boundaries. The water
level data will be collected in accordance with the Mitigation, Monitoring and Maintenance Plan (Exhibit 3.5) and submitted
in the annual monitoring report to the District.
. 23. The areas to be temporarily disturbed by the installation of control stl\lctures in wetlands will be oackfilled and replanted
within 30 days of installation. Monitoring of temporary impact areas shall be done concurrently with other required
monitoring for the Mirasol development.
-...
24.' A mitigation program for Mirasol shall be Implemented In accordance with Exhiolt Nos. 2.2, 3.2 and 3.5. The permittee
shall preselVe and enhance a total of 830.89 acres of wetlands and 109.58 acres of uplands.
25.
A maintenance program shall be Implemented in accordance with Exhibit No. 3.5 for the preselVed and enhanced wetlands
and uplands .on a. regular basis to ensure the integrity and viability .of lhose areas as permitted. Maintenance shall be
cOnducted in perpetuity to ensure that the conselVation areas are maintained free from Category I and II exotic vegetation
(as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant' Council at the time of permn issuance) immediately following a maintenance
activity. Maintenance in perpetuity shall also insure that conselVation areas, including buffers, maintain the species and
coverage of native, desirable vegetation specified in the permit. Coverage of exotic and nuisance plant species shall nDt
exceed 2% of areal coverage of anyone stratum or 4% areal coverage of all strata between maintenance activities. In
addition, the permittee shall manage.the conselVation areas such that exotic/nuisance plant species dD nct dominate any
one section of those areas.
26.
The District reselVes the ri9ht te require remedial measures to be taken by the permittee if menitoring or other infDrmation
dem<?nstrates that adverse impacts to onsite or offsite wetlands, upland conservation areas or buffers, or ather surface
waters have occurred due to project related activities.
27.
Silt screens, hay oales, tumidity screens/baniers or .other such sediment control measures shall be utiDzed during
construction. The selected sediment control measure shall be installed landward of the upland buffer zones around all
protected wetlands and shail be property "trenched' etc, in accordance with Exhibtl 2 and construction best management
practices. All areas shall be stabiUzed and vegetated immediately after construction to prevent erosion into the wetlands
and upland buffer zones.
28.
Activities associated with the implementation of the mitigation, monitoring and maintenance plan{s) shall be completed in
accordance with the work schedule attached as Exhioit No. 3.6. Any deviaticn from these time frames will require prior
approval from the District's Environmental Resource Compliance staff. Such requests must be made in writing and shall
Include (1) reason for the change, (2) proposed startlfinish andlor completion dales; and (3) progress report on the status of
the project development or mitigation effort.
29.
A time zero monitoring report for Mirasol shall be ccnducted in accordance with Exhibit No. 3.5 and 3.6 for all enhanced
wellands. The plan shall include a sUlVey or the areal extent, acreage and cross-sectional elevations of the enhanced
areas and panoramic photographs for each habitat type. The report shall also include a description of planted species,
sizes, tctal number and densities of each plant species whhin each habitat type as well as mulching methadology.
30.
A) Prior to the commencement of construction and in accordance with the work schedule shown as Exhibit 3.6, the
pennittee shall submit for review and approval, two (2) copies of the following:
1. Project map identifying conselVation areas
2. Legal description of conseNation areas
3. Signed ccnselVation easements
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 134 of 247
PERMIT NO: 11-(J2031.P
PAGE 6 OF 9
4. Sealed boundary survey of conservation area(s) by professional Land surveyor
5, Title Insurance commitment for conservation easement naming District as beneficiary using approved valuellon.
6. Formatting in accordance with paragraph F (below) if available,
The above information shall be submitted to the Environmental Compliance Enforcement staff in the District ser/ice center
where the appiication was submitted.
B) The real estate information referenced in paragraph (a) above shall be reviewed by the District in accordance with the
District's real estale review requirements. The easement shall not be recorded until such epproval is received.
C) The permitlee shall record the conservation easement(s) over the real property designated as a
conservationIpreservation areas (identified as Extemal and Intemal Preserve Areas in this staff report) on attached Exhibits
2.2 and 3.2. The easements shall be granted free of encumbrances or interests which the District determines are contrary
to the intent of Ihe easement. The conservation easements shall be granted 10 the District using the forms attached as
Exhibits 3.3 and 3.4. Any proposed modifications to the approved forms must receive prior written consent from the
district.
D) The permittee shall record the conservation easements in the public records of Collier County within 14 days of
receiving the District's approval of the real estate information. Upon recordation, the permittee shall submit two certified
copies of the recorded conservation easements lor the External and Internal Preserve Areas, and title insurance policy, to
the Environmental Resource Compliance staff in the District service center where tha application was submitted.
E) In the event the conservation easement real estate Information reveals encumbrances or interests in the easement
which the District determines ere contrary to the intent of the easement, the permittee shall be required to provide relea":
or subordination of such encumbrances or interests. If such are not obtained, permittee shall be required to apply fo,
modification 10 the permit for altemative acceptable mitigation. . .
F) The permittee shall submit two certified copies of each of the recorded conservation easements for the External and
Internal Preserve Areas. The data should also be supplied in a digital CAD (.dxf) or GIS (ESRI Coverage) formal. The files
should be In the Florida State Plane coordinate syslem, East Zone (3601) with a data datum of NAD83, HARN with the
map units in feel. .
G) The permittee shall submit two certitied copies of each of the recorded conservation easements (Intemal Preserve
Area and External Preserve Area). The data shall be supplied in a digital ESRI Geodatabase (mdb), ESRI Shapefile (shp)
or AuloCAD Drawing Interchange (dxf) file format using Florida State Plane coordinate system, East Zone (3601), Datum
NAD83, HAAN with the map unils in feel. This data shail 00 submitted as a paper map depicting the Conservation
Easemenl over the best available salellite or aerial irnagel)'. This data shall also reside on a CD or floppy disk and 00
submitted to the District's Environmental Resource Compliance Division in the service area office where the application
was submitted.
31. No work shall occur within the Cocohalchee Canaf right-of-way until all necessal)' right-of-way occupancy permits are
obtained authorizing the proposed work in the Distrtct's right-of-way.
32. Prtor ta to commencement of construction in wetlands and in accordance with the work schedule in Ex:hibit No. 3.6, the
permiltee shall submit documentation that 11.36 freshwater forested credils have been deducted from the ledger for
Panther Island Mitigation Bank.
33. The permiltee shall implement the Mirasol Water Quailiy Monitortng Plan, attached as Exhibit 6. Any deviation from lhese
testing and monitoring procedures will require prior approval from the District Environmental Compliance Staff. Such
requests must be made in writing and shall include (1) reason for the change and (2) an outline of the proposed change.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 135 of 247
,
~
PERMIT NO: 11.02031-P
PAGE 7 OF 9
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. All activities authonzed by this permit shall be Implemented as set forth in the plans, specifications and performance
criteria as approved by this permll. Any deviation from the permitted activity and the condhions for undertaking that
activity shall constitute a violation of this permit and Part IV, Chapter 373. F,S,
2. This permit or a copy thereof, complete with all conditions, attachrnents, exhibits, and modifications shall be kept at the
work site of the permitted activity. The complete pennIt shall be available for review at the work site upon request by
District staff. The permittee shall require the contractor to review the complete pennit prior to commencement of the activity
authorized by this permit.
3. Acllvitles approved by this permIt shall be conducted in a manner which does not.cause violations of State water quality
standards. The permittee shall implement best management practices'for erosion and pollution control to prevent violation
. of State water quality standards. Temporary erosi{lri control shall be implemented prior to and' during construction, and
permanent control measures shall be completed within 7 days of any construction activity. Turbidity barriers shall be
installed and maintained at all locations where the possibmty of transfsning suspended solids into the receiving waterbody
exists due to the permitted work. Turbidity barriers shall remain in place al all locations until construction is compieled and
soils are stabilized and vegetation has been established. All practices shall be in accordance with the guidelines and
speclflcations described in Chapter 6 of the Flonda Land Development Manual; A Guide to Sound Land and Water
Management (Department of Environmental Regulation, 1988), incorporated by reference in Rufe 40E-4.091, FAC.
unless aproject.specific erosion arid sediment control plan Is approved as part of the permIt. Thereafter the permittee
shall be responsible for the removal of the barriers. The pennittee shall correct any erosion ar shoaling that causes
adverse impacts to the water resources.
4. The permittee shall notify ihe District of the anticipated construction start dale witl)in 30 days of the date that this permit is
..\ Issued. At least 48 hours prior to commencement of.activity authorized by this permtt, the penntttee shall submit to the
District an Environmental Resource Permit Construction Commencement Notice Form Number 0960 indicating the actual
.start date and the expeCted construction completion date.
5. When the duration of construction will exceed one year, the pennittee shall submtt construction stalus reports to the District
on an annual basis utilizing an annual st<:,tus report form. Status report forrns shall be subniitted the following June of each
. year.
6. Wrthln 30 days after completion of construction of the permitted activity, the permilee shall submit a written statement of
completion and certification by a professional engineer or other individual authorized by law, utilizing the supplied
Environmental Resource/Surface Water Management Permit Construction Compietion/Certification Form Number OBB1 A,
or Environmental Resource/Surface Water Management Permit Construction Completion Certification . For Projects
Pennilled prior to October 3, 1995 Fonn No. 0881 B, incorporated by reference in Rule 40E.1.659, FAG. The statement
of completion and certification shall be based On onsite observation of construction or review of as.built drawings for the
purpose of determining if the work was completed in compliance with permitted plans and specifications. This submittal
shall serve to notify the District that the system Is ready for inspection. Additionally, if deviation from the approved
drawings are discovered during the certification process, the certification must be eccompanied by a copy of the approved
pem1lt drawings with deviations noted. Both the onginal and revised speelfications must be clearly showl1. The plans must
be clearly labeled as "as-bu"" or "record" drawings, All surveyed dimensions and elevations shall be certified by a
, registered surveyor.
7.
The operation phase of this permit shall not become effective: until the pelTTIittea has complied with the requirements of
condition (6) above, and submitted a request for conversion of Environmental Resource Permit from Construction Phase to
Operation Phase, Form No. 0920; the District determines the syslem to be in complia1lCe with the permitted plans and
specifications; and the entity approved by the Distnct in accordance with Sections 9.0 and 10.0 of the Basis of Review tor
Environmental Resource Pennit Applications within the South Florida Water Management Distnct, accepts responsibility
for operation and maintenance of the system. The permit shall not be transferred to such approved operation and
maintenance entity until the operation phase of the permit becomes eftective. Following inspection and approval of the
pennitted system by the District, the permittee shall initiate transfer of the permtt to the approved responsible operating
entity if different from the permittee. Until the permit is transferred pursuanlto Section 40E.1.6107, F,A.C., the permittee
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 136 of 247
PERMIT NO: t 1.0203t.P
PAGE B OF 9
shan be liable for compliance with the terms of the permit.
8. Each phase or independent portion of lhe permitted system must be completed in accordance with the permitted plans and
permit conditions prior to the inmation of the permitled use of site infrastructure located within the area served by that
portion or phase of the syslem. Each phase or independent portion of the system must be completed in accordance with
the permitted plans and permit conditions prior to transfer of responsibility for operation and maintenance of the phase or
portion of the system to a iocal government or other responsible entity.
9. For those systems that will be operated or maintained by an entity that will require an easement or deed restriction in order
to enable that entity to operate or maintain the system in conformance with this permit. such easement or deed restrictlon
must be recorded in the public records and submilted 10 the District along with any other final operation and maintenance
documents required by Sections g.o and to.O. of the Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit applications
within the South Florida Water Management District, prior to iot or units sales or prior to the completion of the system,
whichever comes first. Other documents conceming the establishment and authority of the operatlng entity must be filed
with the Secretary of State, 'county or municipal entities. Final operatlan and maintenance documents must be received by
the District when maintenance and operation of the system is accepted by the local govemment entity. Failure 10 submit
the appropriate linal documents will result in the permittee remaining nable for carrying OUI maintenance and operation of
the permitted system and any other perma conditlons.
10. Should any other regulatory agency require 'changes to the permitted system, the'permittee shall notify the District in
writing of the changes prior to implementation so that a determination can be made wheth.er a permit modification is
required.
11.' This permit does not eliminate the necessity to obtain any required federal, slate, iocal and special district authorizatio'
prior to the start of any activity approved by this permit. This pennit does not convey to .the permittee or create in L
permittee any property right, or any interest in real property, nor does it autholize any entrance upon or activities 0
property which is not owned or controlled by the permittee, or convey any lights or privileges other than those specified In
the permit and Chapter 40E-4 or Chapter 40E-40, FAC..
12. The permittee is hereby advised that Seclion 253.77, F.S. states that a person may not commence any excavation,
construction, or other activity involving the use of sovereign or other lands of the State. the litie to which is vested In the
Board of Trustees of the Intemal improvement Trust Fund w~tiout obtaining the required lease, license, easemenl, or other
form 01 consent authorizing the proposed use. Therefore, Ihe permittee is responsible for obtaining any necessary
authorizations from the Board of Trustees prior 10 commencing activity on sovereignty lands or other state-owned lands.
13. The permittee must obtain a Water Use permit prim to construction dewatering, unless the work qualifies for a general
permit pursuant to Subsection 40E-20.302(3), F.A.C., elso known as the 'No Notice' Rule.
14. The permittee shall hold and save the District harmless from any and all damages, claims, or liabilities which may arise by
reason of the construction, alteration, operation, maintenance, removal, abandonment or use of any system aulhorized by
the permit.
15. Any delineation of the extent of a weiland or other surtace waler submitted as part of the permit application, including plans
or other supporting documentation, shall not be considered binding, unless a specific condition of this perrn~ or a formal
determination under Section 373.421 (2), F.S., provides otherwise.
16. The permittee shall notify the District in wliting within 30 days of any sale, conveyance, or other transfer of ownership or
control of a pennitted system or Ihe real property on which the permitted system is iocated. All transfers of ownership or
transfers of a permit are subjecl to the requirements of Rules 40E-1.610S and 40E-1.6107, FAC.. The pennlttee
transferring the permit shall remain liable for corrective actions thal may be required as a result of any violations prior to
the sale, conveyance or other transfer of the system.
17, Upon reasonable notice to the permillee, Dislrtct authorized staft with proper identification shall have pe rmission to ente:
inspect, sample and lest the system to insure conformity with the plans and specifications approved by the permit.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 137 of 247
PERMIT NO: It-02031.P
, PAGE 9 OF 9
lB. 1/ historical or archaeological artifacts are discovered at any time on the project site, the permittee shall immediately notify
the appropriate District service center.
19. The permittee shall immediately notify the District in writing of any previously submitted information that is later discovered
to be inaccurate.
~.
Agend~W~~l.~~
Page 138 of 247
Jennifer Castillo
From: BrownAraqueSummer [SummerBrown@colliergov.netj
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 1 :05 PM
To: Richard Yovanovich
Cc: burgeson_b; DAMilarcik@aol.com; Karen Bishop; Tim Hall; wayne; SchmittJoseph; iorenz_w
Subject: Mirasol: Response to questions from 8/21/08 Meeting
Environmental staff met with Joe Schmitt and discussed these Issues. Below are the kay points resulting from our
discussion.
The isolated preserves at the southern portion of the project s~e will count as part of the County required preserve
as long as the Wetland preserves are high quality (at least 0.65 for WRAP or 0.7 for UMAM per GMP
requirements). Otherwise, staff is in agreement with the preserve locations, except for the linear preserve along
the eastern property boundary that does not connect to offsite preserve. We understand that you are in
agreement with this conclusion.
For the wetland impacts, we find that the project is required to mitigate for the wetland impacts pursuant to Policy
6.2.5. There shall be no net loss of wetland functions as measured by the wetland functional scores of mitigated
and impacted wetlands. In no shall case shall the acreage proposed for tile mitigation be less than the acreage
impacted. Therefore, wetlands being retained onslte cannot count towards the mitigation requirements of 6.2.5
because there shall be no net loss of acreage.
Acceptable forms of mitigation are:
Existing "other preserve" uplands can be restored to create wetlands with the created preserve
standards set for in the LDC;
The applicant can purchase acreage from any mitigation bank. The purchase needs to be on an acre for
acre basis taking into account both functional score and acreage.
Purchase of we~ands off site;
Any combination of above to account of totai acreage impacted.
Regards,
Summer 'E. ..7traque
Senior Environmental SpecialistlEAC Liaison
Collier County Environmental Services Department
2800 N Horseshoe Dr.
Naples, FL 34104
Phone: 239-252-6290
My Desk Fax: 239-252-6719
~ please consider the environment before printing thIs email
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 REV: 5
MlRASOL PUD
Project: 19990012
Date: 11/13/08 DUE; 12/15/08
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 139 of 247
Disclosure of interest Details
IMCOLLlER JOINT VENTURE:
A Joint Venture between North Naples LLC and Mirasol Development LLC
1ST MEMBER
NORTH NAPLES LLC:
Members are:
North Naples Land Trust
Shenandoah Apartments LLC
J. D. Nicewonder
NORTH NAPLES LAND TRUST:
Members are: J. D. Nicewonder
Red Robertson
Paul Wisman
Peter Moran
Nick Drepanos
Per Eldh
74.42%
10.51%
15.07%
81.71%
2.12%
3.13%
6.88%
2.75%
3.41%
SHENANDOAH APARTMENTS LLC
Members are: J. D. Nicewonder 22%
Sherry Nicewonder 26%
Mark Nicewonder 26%
Carol Nicewonder 26%
2nd MEMBER
MIRASOL DEVELOPMENT LLC
Member is: CCMS Development LLC 100% (Managing Venturer)
CCMS DEVELOPMENT LLC
Members are: Robert Claussen
Chris Claussen
Don Milarcik
Jack Sterling
45% (Managing Member)
25%
20%
10%
North Naples Land Trust: Trust under Indenture dated June 1, 1989 between J. D.
Nicewonder, as Donor, Paul Wisman as Trustee, and J. D, Nicewonder as beneficiary.
PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046 REV: 5
MlRASOL PUD
Project: 19990012
Date: 11/13/08 DUE; 12/15/08
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 140 of 247
i~'
"
, ~ :>
.~
h..
;i{;,
II
.1':
<-
:U
; ~
,;'
,(
i\.
AMENDED AND ,RESTATED
~:i
11
!"
IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT
between
Ii
i
I
NORTH NAPLES, LLC
AND
MIRASOL DEVELOPMENT, LLC
d/b/a
IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 141 of 247
AMENDED AND REST ATED
IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT
:;
THIS AGREEMENT, made this Z- day of (l1.4-IL, 2005, by and between the
NORTH NAPLES, LLC ("North Naples"), at 148 Bristol E. Road, Bristol, Virginia 24202 and
'~l
, MlRASOL DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Florida limited liability company ("Mirasol, LLC"), at
6704 Lone Oak Boulevard, Naples, Florida, 34109, (North Naples and Mirasol, LLC are
sometimes collectively called the "Venturers" and individually a "Venturer").
\U1T~CC!Ct:''''t.J'.
'.
d,
m
-1::;,1_
il
~i' .
r
h
:11-
"I
i~
'.".:,'/
H
i"I':'
'.
'IL,
,
,I,
i,
:
i
,.
i
,~l'
,
'.J
)",'
,.
,
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 142 of 247
i!
"
!
. ~
Mirasol, LLC is a Florida limited liability company, and CCMS Development, L.L.c., a
..
,.
;;
.'
I
,~
'I
Florida limited liability company is its managing member. Robert G. Claussen is the managing
member of CCMS Development, L.L.C. North Naples, LLC is a Florida limited liability
company, and JD. Nicewonder and Peter Moran (as Managing Member of Collier Development,
LLC, a Massachusetts limited liability company) are its Co-Managing Members. North Naples,
LLC is an affiliate of the North Naples Land Trust, which is a land trust, established by that
certain Land Trust Agreement dated June I, 1989, and as amended, with Paul Wisman as sole
I
i
i
Trustee, and J.D. Nicewonder and Peter Moran as successor co-trustees.
NOW, lliEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants herein
contained, the parties hereto hereby mutually covenant and agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1.
FORMATION
Section 1.1. Formation.
1.(1) The Venturers hereby confirm the formation a joint Venture (hereinafter called the
UJoint venture") as a partnership under the Uniform Partnership Act and pursuant to all pertinent
laws of the State ofFiorida upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
1.(2) Each Venturer shall execute, and the Joint Venture shall promptly file or record (or
cause to be filed or recorded) and shall publish, if requited by law, such certificates or other
instruments as may be necessary or desirable under the laws ofthe State of Florida in connection
with the formation of the Joint Venture and the commencement and carrying on of its business.
Section 1.2. Nam" ofTointV~ntnr~
4
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 143 of 247
(c) confessing a judgment against the Joint Venture in connection with any threatened or
pending legal action;
(d) possessmg any Joint Venture property or subdividing, selling, exchanging,
transferring, assigning or leasing the rights ofthe Joint Venture in specific Joint Venture property
for other than a Joint Venture purpose;
(e) admitting any other person as a partner or venturer, except as provided in this
Agreement;
(f) executing or. delivering any assignment for the benefit of creditors of the Joint
Venture;
(g)
(g) entering into any contract in an amount in excess of $250,000.00 for the purchase of
goods or the performance of services. The Venturer shall respond to the requesting Venturer with
its approval or disapproval in a Timely Manner, which shall be defined for aU purposes herein as
within five (5) business days.
6.2.2. MirasoI, LLC (the "Managing Venturer") is to be the Managing Venturer of the
Joint Venture pursuant to Section 7.1 of this Agreement and shall be responsible for performance
. ,
of the responsibilities set forth therein. Except as otherv:.ise specifically provided for herein,
however, Managing Venturer is expressly prohibited from doing any of the following without the
prior written consent of North Naples:
A. selling, exchanging, transferring, assigning or leasing properties on behalf of the Joint
Venture to or from Managing Venturer or its affiliated entities or entering into any transaction or
15
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 144 of 247
Section 15.15. Renefit.
Except as herein otherwise provided, this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to
the benefit of the parties hereto, their successors and assigns.
Section 15.16, A1tomey~' fe~~.
In the event of a breach of terms and/or conditions of this Agreement, the prevailing
party, in any judicial, mediation, ADR or arbitration proceeding whether through litigation,
settlement or otherwise and whether at the trial or appellate level, shall be entitled to reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs incurred.
Section 15.17. ArnitrAtion.
All controversies, claims and other matters in question between the parties arising out of
or relating to this Agreement shall be attempted to be resolved through non-binding.arbitration by
an arbitrator agreed upon by both Venturers prior to the filing of any claim or suit in a court of
competent jwisdictioll.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date
first above written.
Mirasol Development, L.L.C., a Florida
limited liability company, a Venturer
By: . '. CCMS Development, L.L.C., a
. Florida limited liability company,
::m:Jl1~~
Robert G. Claussen, Managing
Member
39
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 145 of 247
North Naples, LLC, a Florida limited liability
company, a Venturer
(.U;
//. .
By: Collier Development LLC, Co-
~ngM~
By:" . .~
........ .
Peter Moran, Managing Member
"N:\C!ienu'JMCOLUEt."OI9S\!Olnt VemUft'.Agl1lemtnc'.Jf'll(:oUier Join! Vmlur~Atra:.mC1ltVefsion H 2.1 (}~.ooc
40
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 147 of 247
.
Articles Of Organization For
Florida Limited Liability Company
The undersigned, for the purpose offonning a Limited Liability Company \Ulder the Florida
Limited Liability Company Act, F.S. Chapter 60S, hereby make, acknowledge and file the f.Bllo~\ng
Articles of Organization. 'D ;,:;.;:
-""l" ..- -.
ARTICLE 1- NAME ~~ ~~\;
I'~, ~~~'.:"
..s:- n"':
The name of the limited Liability Company is:
CCMS Development, L.L.c., hereinafter "Company".
G)
~::~ ~~
~J~I,"
~i~~,
j::> ...~
-1-:"-
~tn
v,
-ry
:-A:
ARTICLE 11 - ADDRESS
(..)
GO
The mailing address and street address of the principal office of the Limited Liability
Company is:
2405 Piper Boulevard
Naples, FL 34110
ARTICLE III - DURATION
The Company shall commence its existence on the date that these Articles of Organization
are filed by the Florida Department of state. The Company's existence shall terminate not later
December 31, 2020, unless the Company is earlier dissolved as provided in these Articles of
Organization.
ARTICLE IV - TERMINA TlON OF EXISTENCE
The Company shall be dissolved upon the death, bankruptcy, retirement, insanity,
resignation, expulsion or dissolution of any member or manager, or upon the occurrence of any other
event that terminates the continued membership of a member in the Company, unless the business
of the Company is continued by the consent ot all the remaining members, provided there is at least,
one remaining member,
ARTICLE V - ADMISSION OF NEW MEMBERS
No additional members shall be admitted to tbe company except with the unanimous written
consent of all the members-ofthe Company and on such tem1S and conditions as shall be detennined
by all of the members. A member may transfer his or her interest in the Com puny as set forth in the
regulations ofthe Company, but the transferee shall have no right to participate in the management
of the business or affairs of Company or become a member unless all the other members of the
Company other than the member proposing of his or her interest approve onhe proposed transfer
by unanimous written consent.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 148 of 247
Page two, Articles of Organization for Florida Limited Liability Company
CCMS Development, L.L.C.
ARTICLE VI - MANAGEMENT
The Company is to managed by a Managing Member and the name and address of such
Managing Member is:
Robert G. Claussen
2404 Piper Boulevard
Naples, FL 34110
The Managing Member shall hold the exclusive voting interest in the Company and the
exclusive power to adopt, alter, amend or repeal the regulations of tbe Company.
ARTICLE VII - MEMBERSHIP AND CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TIle Affidavit of Membership and Contributions for the company is attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit "A".
ARTICLE VIII - REGISTERED AGENT AND OFFICE
The Certificate of Designation of Registered AgentlRegistered Office for the Company is
attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "B",
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned organizers have made and subscribed these
Articles of Organiz.ation on the 21st day of April, 1999.
~
ORGANIZER:
ORGANIZER:
ORGANIZER:
ORGANIZER:
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 149 of 247
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 21 day of April, 1999 by Robert G. Claussen, who
is personally known to me.
(SEAL)
.." --"
1(A~lliA.61'1J!.n
./~~ .t. -- _ "'1')"'~""'i\
/.:'?>------~:r.... r,~" Cc.l":"'",G i:.',(n, '..,..:.::>/';17
1~"'~~'''V,~l't.. ;.": ,-,"' co -,' 7~(;I
t- ,'".N~""~'~'~""') Q........~(..o B4. ,~ef\ lee u.o.o:-
["'0' 1'l>- [;vl.~............ ::-
\S"\l''-,);;'''''J' \<0 CC.t929\4
~ // .
..--=:. \??.t.~IlliJ''::;'C'''''''' llO\!.o:rI.O.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
12 - /}/-""
c,c,U L tI. l!hJ/f--
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 21 day of April, 1999 by Christopher G. Claussen,
who is personally known to me.
(SEAL)
/O~~ t..~'J::S :\.. ;:~?:~~!.- fe;.
./.{....:...._"..'~ ~,..,l.._.......-:-~t:..~_\;. ~,_:J;"9
1:"7:'"..."" ~,<:':~';\ :~'-} ......~.-;_ ::- . ..:."".,. 7_~
.. ..';."".~;......'" ',_ .... '~I"'''''..l t...~t..;.;:.'\~""""'.u~
i'-' :;. . ..,,_..;.:u......
,'-'\fe;:S12C)' 1-"::_ C,':',00(7"S
\: / '''''' .",,"..
\~' ,,, ..
~./ V:1:]1o~~r;:'''lc''''O 1.1QlJu:'l'~l).
YiL",:.& (). ,0,jL
STATE OF FLORIDA .
COUNTY OF COLLIER
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 21 day of April, 1999 by Donald A. Milarcik, Jr.,
who is personally known to me.
(SEAL)
.......... ,.,,;)"1""10
~~~_ ~ ~pJ:..!i:. ;~. i:iA~"'-~
/.<I::"l~ .:"??-:.. :-~ (--~n Ei\.\'": 9/)5/99
(;/!.~~~~~~~~;:~~B)', S~,;()~ ire,
.....\!:..,.-::.~,....!)' ,.TO CC,",lf.;..9~4
\~~ ~F'~:~~~~-o llo<.~L1).
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLlER
~~~G tl. xL,<<'d
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this 21 day of April, 1999 by Jack J. Sterling, who is
personally known to me.
(SEAL)
::,: r.?~ 't~';/\!-!.x- .\.. ~~.,~.u~~:..,~. :,"\::)
tf;"~0"""" ~. I C-.....'~.I J-.'X'!" ..1~...'1,1-,
.~r.'~...<,~,:";/:'C\ ~:,.':.~ :;.~~.~:: ~':..,.:"..... in;:'
I"";"" .-..-.....J)'..... :....-r...,.'i,.,~' .)'-';\ lL..,...<.;)
I';\'~~"."_ ,. "".....o'~ -., ." '.' ..
~ .......;.;..~,.. t. C"j"".;f...:..
\.. ,,0. ... ..-"
" ." I.J)
.~ i~r~f<'~h:;":""" tl~
71u.f~ (I ;1,,;y-L
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 150 of 247
EXHlBIT"A"
AFFIDA VIT OF MEMBERSHIP ANi; CONTRIBUTIONS
The undersigned member or authorized representatives of a member of
CCMS Development, L.L.C.
certifies:
J. The above names Limited Liability Company has at least two memb~rs.
2, TIle total amount of cash contributed by the member(s) is: $100.00
3. If any, the agreed value of property other than cash
contributed by member(s) is: $ -0-
(A description of the property is attached and made a pm'! hereto.)
4.
The total amount of cash or property anticipated to' be
contributed by member(s) is:
(This total includes amounts from 2 and 3 above.)
$100.00
Signaturc of Membcr or
Authorized Representative of a Member:
~~\M (~'IA~~
Robert G. Claussen
in accordance with Section 608.408.(3), Florida Statues, the execution of the Affidavit constitules an affimlalion under
penalties of perjury that the facts stated herein are true,
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 151 of 247
..
EXHIBIT "B"
CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION OF
REGISTERED AGENTIREGISTERED OFFICE
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 608.415 or 608.507, FLORlDA STATUES,
THE UNDERSIGNED LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING
STATEMENT TO DESIGNA TEA REGISTERED OFFICE AND REGISTERED AGENT IN THE
STATE OF FLORIDA.
]. The name of the limited liability company is:.
CCMS Development, L.L.C.
2. The name and the Florida street address of the registered agent are:
Jack Sterling
2405 Piper Boulevard
Naples, FL,34110
Having been named as registered agent and to accept service of process for the above stated limited
liability company at the place designated in this celtificate, I hereby accept the appointment as
registered agent and agree to act in this capacity. I further ~gree to comply with the provisions of
all statues relating to the proper and complete pcrfonnance o'fmy duties, and I am familiar with and
accept the obligations of my position as registered agent.
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 152 of 247
November 18, 1999
JACK STERLING
CARLTON LAKES
2405 PIPER BLVD.
NAPLES, FL 34110
Re: Document Number L99000003238
The Certificate of Amendment to the Articles of Organization for TOS
DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. which changed its name to MIRASOL DEVELOPMENT,
L.L.C., a Florida limited liability company, was filed on November 17, 1999.
The certification you requested is enclosed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please telephone {850)
487-6051, the Registration Section.
Trevor Brumbley
Document Specialist
Division of Corporations
Letter Number: 499A00055520
Division of Corporations - P.O, BOX 6327 -Tallahassee, Florida 32314
\
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 154 of 247
CERTIFICA TE OF AMENDMENT
TO
ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION
OF
TOS DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C.
(A Flol.id" Limitcd Liahility Company)
I
FIRST: Thc datc of filing thc articlcs of organizntion was Junc 7,1999.
SECOND: Thc following :lI11cndment to thc articlcs of organi:r,ation were adopted by the
limited liability comp:ll1Y:
That name of this limitctlliability company be changed from:
TOS Developmcnt, L.L.C
Document #L99000003238
to:
MIRASOL Development, L.L.C.
Datcd Novcmber 16, 1999
W~~~
Robert G. Clanssen, Membcl.
r~'_ ,
(~. : ,': <; ;
'.",
~:::.:
i.I'
--I
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY 017 COLLIER
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before mc this 16'h day of November, 1999, by Robert G.
Clausscn and .Jack J. Sterling, who arc both pcrsonally known to me.
(SEAL)
--.- .
'-, -,.
.
Ja
.~;~i~tf~/f;:,. Marie A Smllh
!,; A ;:j MY COMMISSION ~ CCR60J); EXPIRES
:.,:\...Jit.:t~ Scplembe' 75 1003
.~~. ~~.t.~~':..,,,, I1CWtlf{, ", II'V l1!OV;':'lN I~I~IJ~IINCL INC
/} /).j
'//'/1,; <"_ Ii 0,; ~/
Notary' Public
,.
-.-.- -- -- -----
-------~--- -
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 155 of 247
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Katherine Harris
Secretary of State
.~.
June 7,1999
JANNA WILSON
ese
TALLAHASSEE, FL 32301
The Articles of Organization for TOS DEVELOPMENT, L.LC. were filad on
June 7,1999, and assigned document number L99000003238. Please refer to
this number whenever corresponding with this office.
The certification you requested is enclosed.
A limited liability annual report will be due this ollice between January 1 and May
1 of the year following the oalendar year of the file date. A Federal Employer
Identification (FEI) number will be required before this report can be filed. Please
apply NOW with the In!emal ReVenue SeNice by calling t -800-829-3676 and
requesting form 88-4. '
Please be aware' if Ihe limited Ilabi\il~ company address changes, it is the
responsibility of the limited liability to notify this office.
. Should you have any questions regarding ltlis matter, please telaphone (850)
487-6051, the Registration Section.
Diane Cushing
Corporate Specialist
Division of Corporations
.
Letter Number: 499A00030694
i.
Accountucunber:072100000032
Account charged: 337.50
Division of Corpor.at;ons. P.O: BOX 6327 -Tallahassee, Florida 32314
----~"--_.-_..__..._- ---.'.
._----. ---.- ---'-'---'--'--
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 157 of 247
Articles Of Organization For
Florida Limited Liability Company
The undersigned, for the purpose of forming a Limited Liability Compar,y under the Florida
Limited U.bilil)' Company Act, F.S. Chapter 608, hereby mnke, acknowledge and file the following
Articles of Organi711tion.
ARTICLE J - NAME
-;.:(/"1 to
Tile name o[thc limited Liability Company is: ';~:~ :
2 '1
TOS Development, L,L.C., hereinafter "Company". i~~:..:, r
~~~.i . -.J f11
ARTICLE II - ADDRESS", ;~ 0
J"''':''
g~:.- l>;i
The mailing address and street address of the principal office of tlle Liril[tAA Lblhility
Company lS: .:> D
2405 Piper Boulevard
Naples, FL 34110
ARTI CLE III . DURA TroN
>
'Dle Company shall commence its existence on the date that these Articles of Organization
are filed by the Florida Department of state. The Company's existence shall terrninate not later
December 31, 2020, unless the Company is earlier ciissolved as provided in these. Articles of
Organimtion,
ARTICLE IV - TERMINATION OF EXISTENCE
The Company shall be dissolved upon the death, bankruptcy, retiremcnt, insanity,
resignafion, expulsion or dissolution of any member or manager, or upon the OCClUTence of any other
e.vent that terminates the continued membersl-Jp of a member in the Company, ua1ess the business
of the Company is c<lntinued by the consent of all the remaining mw,bw, provided there is at least
one remaining member.
ARTICLE V - ADMISSION OF NEW MEMBERS
No additional members shall be admitted to the company except with the unanimous written
consellt of all the members oftOC Company and on such tenJlS and conditions as shall be detelmined
by all of the members. A member may lJ1lnSfer his or her interest in !he Company as set forth in the
regulations of the Comp?JIY, blltthe transferee shall have no right 10 participale in the management
of the business or affairs of Company or become a member unless alllhe Qt."er member, of the
Company other than the member proposing of his or her interest approve of the proposed transfer
by unanimous written consent.
---"---- -- ~-"--
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 158 of 247
Pa~e two, Artide~ of Organization for Florida Limited Liability Company
105 Development, L.L.C.
ARTICLE VI - MANAGEMENT
The Company is to managed by a Managing Member and the name and address of such
Managing Member is:
-I (0
CeMS Development, L. L. C. ).:::~-:; <J:)
Robert G. Claussen, Managing M,mber t P % 11
2404 Piper Boulevard
Naples, FL34110 re.. ~ ;=;;
". :J< 0
. The Managing Member shall hold the. exclusive voti'lg interest in the CQrn!1~)j;an~e
exclusIVe power to adopt, alter, Bnlend or repeal the rcgulations of tho Comp'lny. ';i::':: ;
.':::,:-"\ 0
ARTICLE VII - MEMBERSHIP AND CAPITAL CONTRIBlTTONS
The Affidavit of Membership and Contributions for the (-Ornpany is art..ached he,reto and
incorporated herein ..s Exhibit "An.
ARTrCLE VHl- REGISTERED AGENT AND OFFICE
The Certificate of Designation of Registered AgenVT<.egistered Office for th." Compa..~y is
attached hercto and inccrporated herein as Exhibit "B",
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undcrsigned organizers have made and subscribed these
Artide~ of Organitation on the 1" day of JltIle, 1999.
ORGA..NJZER,
Vlj~f (Vfu~
Robert G. Claussen
STATE OF FLORIDA
COlJNTY OF COLLIER
SWOR.."l TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this l' da)' of June, 1999 by Robert G. Claussen, who
is personally blOwn to me.
(SEAL) y7u~ (/ )j~
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: '11,,-,. Ir 'j
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 159 of 247
EXHIBIT "A"
AFFlDA VIT OF MEMBERSmp A.ND CONTRIBUTIONS
The undersigned member or authorized representatives of a member o~-" ^
:;,-.<0'"
1'_1.1
r- (""';.
TOS Development, L.L.C. ;,::;-:.
;:. .
:., 1 ;~.
certifies:
.:,':'
{'I'I "
;;i ,-.
. -
1.
The above names Limited Liabilil)' Company has .at kJlSt O!le membei~: 0
~:j ;-.-,..
--_I
The total amount of cash Gontributed by the me01ber(s) is; $] 00.09_ \-;:"
]..
3. {(any. the agreed value of property other than cash
contributed by member(s) is: j~
(A description of the property is attached and made il part hereto.)
4.
The tota] amount of cash or property anticipated to be
contributed by member(s) is;
(This total includes amounts from 2 and 3 above,)
$100.00
Signature of Member or
Authorized Representative of a Member:
-~d.~Qh~
cf'
'.0
'-
,= "1l
:;:::. -
,. r
--'
;11
~ 0
~
0
CJ
In llccord<U1ce. with Section 608.40&,(3), F~OT)dt. Statucs, the execution of1he Affid~vi{ conS:l.itutes an ",ffimntkm under
penalties of perjury {hat the facts. :statoo herein are true.
-------~._-
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 20'09'
Page 160 of 247
GXHIBlT HB"
CERTIFrCATE OF DESIGNATION OF
REGISTERED AGENTfREGISTERED OFFICE
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS or; SECTION 608.415 or 608.507, FLORlDA STATUES,
THE UNDERSIGNED LIMITED LIABIUTY COMPANY SUBMITS THE FOLLO\VlNG
STATEMENT TO DESIGNATE A REG!STERED OFFICE AND REGISTERED AGENT N THE
STATE OF FLORJDA.
I. The name of the limited llability company is:
Jack Sterltng
2405 Piper Boulevard
Naples, FL 3411 0
-, 'D
:I>~ <.0
;::n
:::,:'"~ '-
c:: "T\
1;" ~. "" -
.' - I {-
v':'"
(C.. -I
"
..::c f1l
",., -'" 0
.- ,. ""
3::: r;;
=-:::'--1 0
j;~" 0
,
10S Dcvelopment. L.L.C"
2. The narne and the Florida street address of the registered agenl ar~:
Having been named as registered agent and to accept service of proces~ [.)r the abo,'e sl1lted limited
liability company at ihe place designated in this certificate, I hereby ~ccepl the appointment as
registered agent and agree to act in this capacity. 1 further agree to comply with the provisions of
all statues reJati.ng to the proper and complete performance of my duties, and I am f.miliar with and
accept the obligations of my position Il.S rcglstcrcd agent.
'1
~.
I
I
"
f,
~ l
~l
i.
I
\
:1
I
"
:~
~'
L\
1-.
~i "
~IJ
;'.-1
);~ \
~r
'l:
:lj
'::1:
I,d
q
'.11
'f'i
'~I'."
" ...
:!/i.1i
'i:j'
"1
'r'l
,: I.
\
~,j,' 1 ,
p.i'
", ~,
)];
,;.
.;'\~:l'
'liJ"
.",1
":}i,
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 161 of 247
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ST ATE
Division of Corporations
April!3,2006
IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE
6704 LONE OAK BOU LEV ARO
N AI'LES, FL 341 09
Subject: IMCOLLlER JOINT VENTURE Renewal Number: G06999040954
This will acknowledge the Fictitious Nanie Registration Renewal for
IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE, filed on Apri!12, 2006. This renewal
cODtinues the original registration number - GO 1233900274 until December 31,
2011.
Ifthe mailing address ofthis business changes, please notify this office in writing
and reference t!1e original registration number.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter you may contact our office
at 850-245-6058.
Division of Corporations
/JD
P.O. BOX 6327 - Tallahassee, Florida 32314
www.swlbiz.org - Department of State
Home
Contact Us
Filing History
E-Filing Services
Document Searches
Forms
Help
.,. Do'clJm~nt#Se~rch
,- ,
Fictitious Name Detail
Fictitious Name
IMCOLLlER JOINT VENTURE
Filing Information
Document Number
Status
Filed Date
Expiration Date
Current Owners
:';ounty
Total Pages
Events Filed
FEI Number
G01233900274
ACTIVE
08/21/2001
12/31/2011
2
COlliER
2
1
65-1126360
Mailing Address
6704 LONE OAK BOULEVARD
NAPLES, FL34109
Owner Information
NORTH NAPLES,LLC
148 BRISTOL E.ROAD
BRISTOL, VI 24202
FEI Number: 58-2637023
Document Number: L01000011606
MIRASOL DEVELOPMENT,L.L.C
6704 LONE OAK BOULEVARD
NAPLES, FL 34109
h,1 Number: 59-3584687
Document Number: L99000003238
Document Images
08/21/2001 -. REGISTRATION ,:;;,;;:<y;,~y;.:lfirt~ge:ijJ)Poidqhnq\:'i<1
04/12/2006 - RENEWAL"':J!~i~iii.~Ym~'~~iH'f':9Jj\T.bTn,~t?:.:"1
Note: This is not official record. See documents if question or confiict.
Eilina Histo[)l'
';' . Oocull1en} #Searc!i
Home Contact us Document Searches EeFiling Se.rvices FomlS Help
Copyright iind Privacy ?Qlicies
l~.L.L_.iJ.~..~~" .....~l...:_ ,,_..../___:_...ni.I::_:...1_~ __._
..,.,,",^I"'r
,...
c
E
....
CJ
IJ)
U)
N
t::
o
'';:;
u
C1l
U)
APPl.ICATION FOR
REGISTRAtiON OF FICTITIOUS NAME
Agenda Item No, 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 163 of 247
~f-,\"qU'Jl:L
t f\l I Jh.l("
_ __......-.---!':,<II\.._l_
, '1(
FIU:U '.
'....
1. .
Imcollier Joint Venture
At;tiVous Nama to 00 Aegts\efOO (9SO: InstnJcUons tr natlle1ncludoo "Corp" or"lnc")
0\ ~UG 21 AH2: Ti
. ~ . ~_._~~_ . _._._ u ___.~
SEWETAHY OF S}"!E
'Al.INiA~EE. Pl~lPJi'
2. r./o ,7.00 'l'~mii'lmi Trail Nort:'h~ Suite 200
M;dltrtg Address of Bu:s:ln~s:
-----.-
-----
Naples Florida
a~ S~~
3. Florida County of principal place of business:
34103
Zip Code
Collier COURty
4. FEl Number: 65-1126360
This space for office use only
A. Owner(s) of Fictitious Name If IndlVldual(s}: {Use an attachment If necessary}:
1. &
Lasl
Rm
M.L
M.1.
l1is1
Fust
Addreu
Address
euy State ZIp COde Cltl' Stale
SS# _' _ SS# ---.:___
B. Owner(s) of Fictitious Name If other than an individual: (Use attachment If necessary):
1. "Mirasol Development, L.L.C. 2. NorthNaples, LLC
Entity Name Errtity Nama
6025 Carlton Lakes Blvd. 148 Bristol E. Road
Zlp Cod.
Address
Bristol., Virginia 24202
- ."
Address
Naples, Florida 34110
city Stats Zip Col:Ie
Florida Registration Number L99000003:<38
FEI Number: 59-3584687
o Applied for 0 Not Applicable
aty s.... . Zl1l6'&
Florida Registrag~f2.~6'5'}~e:f3L010000 1 6
FEI Number. '
o Applied for 0 Not Applicable
M
t::
o
:;:;
<>
III
U)
I (we) lhe undersigned, being the sole (all tha) partyOes) owning interest In the above flClIl10us name, Cf!rtUy that the lnfonnat:iol1 indicated ~n this
form Is true and accUrate. I {we} furttv=>....r cerUfy that 1he tictlUous name shown to Section 1 of thls fonn has been advertised et leasl once in a
newspaper as defined In .chapter 50, RoridaSlatutes, in the county where lhe applicant's principal place 01 business Is klcated. t (we) under-
stand that the sig;iature{s) below shall have th~ same legal effect as U made urtder oath, (~t Le.ast One Signature ReqUired)
See Page 2 attached hereto
-..-
Siij"""'t"'o-'
Phone Number:
Signalure of Owner Date
Phone Number: (94l.) 598-1166
FOR CANCELUmON COMPLETE SECTION 4 ONLY:
FOR FICTITIOUS NAME OR OWNERSHIP CHANGE COMPLETE SECTIONS 1 THROUGH 4;
"l"
co
o
:;::
()
"'
III
I (we) the undersigned, hereby cancel the fictitious name
. which was registered on
and was assigned
'-::0 123:::"::jCII::.!~;!:4--S
- -Ui:l.l2i701--UWc):;--0
_,' .*""....100.00
Da\1I ~
registration number
S1gnswre oC Own!' .
S\W141l.m! of OwtIer
o.ts
Mark the applicable boxes, ).. IIJ Certificate of Status - $10 JtJ Certified Copy - $30
, FlUNG FEE: $50
Note: Acknowledgements/certificates wiil be sent to the ad'dress in,Section' only. CR4E..o01 (1219B)
1,\...
..
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 164 01247
IRoQu8l:tOT'S Nam!l)
FILINGS, INC. TERESA ROMAN
2805 UTTLE DEAL ROAD
(.AddrllBS)
TALLAHASSEE. FLORIDA 32308
385-6735
OFFICE USE ONLY
iCilY. StB\o$. Zip)
(Phof'lo #)
CORPORA nON NAME(S) & DOCUMENT NUMBER(S) (irknown):
1. :tMCOL~/e.V ;50;17--1- ()QI77iLy.x:,
{Corporation Name)
2.
{Documont ,)
IDocument , l
ICorporaUon Name)
3.
{Documont 'I)
lCorporation Namel
4.
tDocume-nt ,,)
rnwalk in
(Corporation !'Jama)
;2.00
Jd]Cerlified Copy
ffiPick up lime
o Mail out
NE\V FILINGS
Profit
N onProfi1
Limited Liability
Domestication
Other
-
OTIlER F1L1NGS
Annual Report
y FiC1itious Name
Name Reservation
CR2EOl \ (\ 0191)
o Will wait
dIDCertificale of Status
""
:5 =
U> ~
D ".. ;;;J
:r: <= rn
0 C> 0
" N
(') f71
0
:.:; :c.- <
"
co "'" m
"" 0
;;>. ..
:=! a
co -<
'2:
o Pbotc>copy
AMENDMENTS .
Amendment
Resignation of R.A,OfficerlDirectDr
Change of Registered Agent
DissolutionlWtthdrawal
Merger
REGISTRATIONI
QUALIFICATION' '
Foreign
Limited Partnership
Reinstatement
Trademark
I Other
jExaminer's initials 1 1
\~t ~~i
SECRETARY OF.$.tf.~E
~
.
flORIDA DEPARTMENT Of STArE
DIVISION of CORPORATIONS
April 28, 2009
FILE&1650f247
Apr 12, 2006 8:00 am
Secretary of State
04.]2.200690061 034 ....50.00
G06999040954
FILE TO RENEW NOW:
FICTITIOUS NAME WILL EXPIRE ON 12/31/06
.1'" .:
APPLICATION .FOR RENEWAL OF FICTlTIOUa'NAME
. ;,REGtSTRATION# ".G01233900274
1. Na'me and Mailing Address
="7 D\ FP'0352. .~.'IIlSRT HI 0 1rol3<103
IMCOWER JOlt{( ;VEtffilRE
C/O 3200 TAMiAMl'TIwL NORTH
SUm: 200" :,'
IW'LES FL 34101'
... .
11111111111\ 1II11 11111 1111I11111 11111 111\1 11111 IIlII 11111 111I\ 11111111
90014959
GO 1233900274
KCHECK HERE IF MAKING CHANGES
II nbWfl mailing Ilddr~i i:l; 1ncorrllcl n any W_'1. ~ne.ll1l'ough iroeorred nhJITM"D\ and IlOklr <<J{TOCIion In Block:z.
Suite. Apt. II, alc_
3. County of Principal
Place or Business
4. Date R~gistered
2. Maillng Addrtlss change if applicabli:l:
. L6}J[: C2 I<
COWER
08i21 1200 1
City
i;; :s
State
I-
~. Cer1ilicata of Status Desired
o $t 0 Addilional Fee Required
AN OWNER THAT IS A. CORPORATiON, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OR OTHER BUSINESS ENTITY
MUST BE REGISTERED AND ACTIVE WITH THIS OFFICE.
6. CUrI;RENT OWNER (8 7. ADDITIONS/CHANGES TO OWNERS '"
0
OOCUMEN1J L99000003238 OOaE1E OOCUMOO, \ilcmn" o Addilmn <:;
IO' 59-3584ll87 fEll ~
IW.<E MIRASOL OEVELOPME~,LLC ""' w
b1ol/ t-oto>CT' tJt1-t:: But), ~
smEf'! ADOOESS 6025 CARLTON lAKES BLVD a:
mUtADr>>\SS f!.
O1Y~ST.Z1P NAPLES FL 34110 CI1Y.SHLP AI trp Ler.. r1.- 3'1lfJ
[II)Cl.IMWTI LDl000011600 OOELfTE OOCUMWI OCh311Qll' o Mdi\iQI'I
rul 58-2637023 rol
"'"' NORlli NAPlES.LLC ""'
slliEE1..1.(lO~5S 148 BRISTOL E.ROAn STREE1AOllflESS
ClTY.ST.ZJIl BRISTOL VI 24202 cm.S1-2Ip
OOCUMEtn ,- Ooam OOCUIt.afT1 QChana! OA6dilkm
rul FEI1
'"'"' ,,",
S'I\EH~DRESS ST/ltfTI.ODRESS
WY-$i'-Zlf> Crry.ST.lIP
DOCUhEtlTl O!f.Lm OOClJI.lfNII OC"'noe OMli"'"
WI m,
'"ME ,,'"
STflffiADooess STRU1~DRESS
tnT.ST-ll/' CITY-ST.!)P
8. I {we) the underslgned. being the sole (all the) partyQas} owning in1ereslln Ihe above fictitious name, certify that th9Jn1ormation indicated on this form Is
lrue and a.ccurate. I (we-) understand that the signature(s) belOw shall have the same legal ef1ect as if made under oath. 1 fur\her certIfy that the names 01
individua.ls listed on this lorm d not quallly for an exemptIon conlained in sectlon 119. Rorida Stalules, (A1lElast one stgnalure required)
~~
Signa lure 01 Owner
~ (.) ok,
==
~=
-=
=-
...
...~
- ..
-
u_
_0
_u
~
-
o::f1 ~
C::>!:;
...... =
c;--...J 8Joot:
""
- ..
..... Del ~
C,!:l ~ t>
P-. a a.<
u <..>
o
'-D ~ ""
C'.J 0 =
C"'..J ~..Q
~ :3_
<..> ""
- '"
.... .::0::......
0::: ~ ~
c:> S::!
l.C) ;: ~
r-t ~.;;
c-- -
l...(""'> .:i~
...... ~ '"
c::> c ~
~.......~
=~
---
:i!~
0_
<..>~
-=
""
Agenda Item r.o. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 166 of 247
DEVELOPER AGREEMENT
MIRASOL
THIS DEVELOPER AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement") is made
and entered into this ~ of May, 2007, by and between IM Collier Joint Venture, a Florida
Venture, with an address at 6704 Lone Oak Blvd., Naples, FL 34109 (hereinafter referred to as
"Developer"), and COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida (hereinafter referred to as "County"). All capitalized terrru; not defined herein shall have
the same meaning as set forth in the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance,
Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended.
RE C I TAL S:
WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of approximately 1,558 acres of land located on the
north side of Immokalee Road immediately west of Collier Blvd. in Collier County, Florida,
known as the Mirasol PUD, more particularly described in Ordinance No. 2001-20; (hereinafter
referred to as the "Development"); and
WHEREAS, as set forth in th . .~s GIW~ !bat the Development will at build-out
contain 799 residential units; and (p~ !V.r..,t.:
WHEREAS, County w'she Ct:,taiu irNpmvemAts be ad to its transportation system as
set forth in Exhibit A, and o~~ Un ovem ts et forth in Exhibit B, with
engineer's costs estimates fo ea ~
( ( Vi .
WHEREAS, Develo ~. ~ 's on iq '""'greements and relationships,
believes that it can design, p ..-<. and construct thes~o rojeS Vat a lower costs than that set
forth in Exhibit C; and ~~ ~ ! !.~O
T' h.G
WHEREAS, as detailed b {;>A- ~';b of its project for transportation
concurrency purposes, and in exchinie'A:'~IL~ its in the lesser of the sum of the
engineer's cost estimates or actual pr~ , set forth below, Developer is willing to
design, permit, construct and provide a CEl acceptable to Collier County for the improvement
project described in Exhibit A, and, if County exercises its option, for the project set forth in B as
well; and
""
'"
'"
~
-
WHEREAS, County is willing to grant Developer concurrency rights for this
Development in order to accelerate the needed improvements to this intersection; and
~
=...
~ - WHEREAS, the Transportation Administrator has recommended to the Board of County
: Commissioners for approval of this Agreement, which will help finance needed improvements
::: ~ and additions to the County's transportation network; and
'" -=
...--
"'~
~. - ~ ~
~ S :;; :. WHEREAS, after reasoned consideration by the Board of Commissioners, the Board
"" <.> - - finds and reaffinns that this Agreement will help finance needed improvements and additions to
the County's transportation system; that this Agreement, when viewed in conjunction with other
existing or proposed plans, including those from other developers, will not adversely impact the
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 167 of 247
cash flow or liquidity of the County's road impact fee trust accounts in such a way as to frustrate
or interfere with other planned or ongoing growth-necessitated capital improvements and
additions to the County's transportation system; and that this Agreement is consistent with both
the public interest and with the comprehensive plan, including the most recently adopted five-
year capital improvement program for the County's transportation system, the Long Range
Transportation Plan and complies with the requirements of the Collier County Consolidated
Impact Fee Ordinance.
WIT N E SSE T H:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and
valuable consideration exchanged amongst the parties, and in consideration of the covenants
contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
~
c::>
~ 1. All of the above RECITALS are true and correct and are hereby expreSsly
incorporated herein by reference as if set forth fully below.
C)
p...
....0
c--I
c--I
""'"
. .
r:x:=
C)
t , 07, County may exercise its
.(0 CEI acceptable to County for
eloper shall be responsible for all
4. For a period of nine months, commencing with the date first above written,
Developer may perm811ently reserve roadway capacity for up to 799 residential units, at any mix
of single family units and multi-family units chosen by Developer. To exercise this right,
Developer shall prepay to County one-half (112) of the COlmty's estimated Road Impact Fees for
the Development less the estimated costs for the improvements. If the estimated costs of the
project(s) exceed the actual costs of the project(s), Developer shall pay County the difference
between the two within 30 days of providing County with a reconciled statement as set forth
below. Upon payment of these fees, Developer shall receive a Certificate of Adequate Public
Facilities ("Certificate") vesting the Developer's Project to construct up to 799 residential units
solely for the purposes of meeting the County's Transportation Concurrency requirements, and
Page 2 of6
'-<:>
c::>
.......
<"'.J
~
~
<.0
<"'.J
C"'-JI
~
c:::
c::>
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 168 of 247
unless specifically required by law, the County shall not thereafter withhold the issuance of any
Certificate of Occupancy based on the County Transportation Concurrency requirements. Final
calculation of the remaining road and other impact fees due will be based on the impact fee
schedule in effect at the time of the issuance ofbuiJding pennits for such units. Payment of these
fees vests the Development entitlements for which the Certificate applies on a continuous basis
for three (3) years unless otherwise relinquished. This initial 50 percent impact fee payment is
non-refundable after payment and receipt of the Certificate.
5. Not later than 90 days prior to the expiration of the three-year period for the
Certificate, the County shall notify Developer via registered mail of the remaining balance
due for the estimated transportation impact fees up to 50 percent (50%), based on level of
building permits already issued. The balance of the impact fees due will be calculated at the
rate schedule then currently applicable. The Developer may elect to pay the balance of the
estimated transportation impact fees for the entitlements for which the Certificate applies or
modify the Certificate to a lesser entitlement and calculate the balance of the transportation
impact fees on the revised entitlements. The Certificate shall be modified to include only the
entitlements for which the estimated transportation impact fees are paid. Once the balance of
the estimated transportation impact fe~ . those estimated fees are non-refundable.
The Certificate runs continuous !("~"RtJk:~. . perpetuity after all estimated
transportation impact fees hav ald. As . ~ emits are drawn down on the
entitlements, the estimated tr~ tion impact fees al y aid shall be debited at the rate
of the impact fees in effectr;th l~t!Q,,~ If t e imated transportation impact
fee account becomes deplet d, t e Deve e all pay the curre . y applicable transportatlOn
impact fee for each buildin' p ~a~~~' 1\ "" ,,,", U,,, ."'" 1mild.
out of the Development esS"m. 'ed\ tr~ spb ti)~ ,~a s rre bill unspent, the remaining
balance of such estimated i$e ~ . to . t ~proved project within the
same, or adjacent transpo ~ n impact fee di .ct, pr. d any vested entitlements
associated with the unspent ~ sferred trans i n ~ ct fees are relinquished and
the Certificate is modified to d~ ose entitlements. 0
"\, 0 :\.
'- ./> -() '"
6. It is understood and a F .l!i'aC~ e foundations of this Agreement is
Developer's belief that it can complete these projects at a cost less than the estimates set forth in
Exhibit C. Developer is therefore willing to bear all risks that its costs will exceed that set forth
in the estimates, and will receive no adjustment whatsoever from the County should the costs be
higher. At the completion of the project(s), Developer shall provide County \vith, a reconciled
statement of the actual costs Developer incurred in designing, permitting, constructing and
providing a CEl for the project(s), and shall be entitled to impact fee credits for these actual
costs, not to exceed the engineer's estimates set forth in Exhibit C.
7. This Agreement shall not be construed or characterized as a development
agreement under the Florida Local Government Development Agreement Act.
8. The burdens of this Agreement shaH be binding upon, and the benefits of this
Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement. Upon giving
written notice to the County, Developer may assign all or part of the Road Impact Fee Credits,
utilizing the County's then current form of assignment, to successor owners of all of part of the
Page 3 of6
I:"-
<:::>
..-.
c---J
~
P-o
u::>
c---J
"""
"""""
c:x:;
C>
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 169 of 247
Development, or as otherwise provided for in the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance.
9. Developer acknowledges that the failure of this Agreement to address any permit,
condition, term or restriction shall not relieve either the applicant or owner, or its successors or
assigns, of the necessity of complying with any law, ordinance, role or regulation governing said
permitting requirements, conditions, terms or restrictions.
10. In the event state or federal laws are enacted after the execution of this
Agreement, which are applicable to and preclude in whole or in part the parties' compliance with
the terms of this Agreement, then in such event this Agreement shall be modified or revoked as
is necessary to comply with such laws, in a marmer which best reflects the intent of this
Agreement.
11. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement shall only be amended by
mutual written consent of the parties hereto or by their successors in interest." All notices and
other communications required or permitted hereunder (including County's option) shall be in
writing and shall be sent by Certified Mail . . t requested, or by a nationally recognized
overnight delivery service, and ad~ :;liliiilbv.GO UA
/(,?"'v~ <V-f'
To County: 0 To Deve
Harmon Turner Building
Naples, Florida 34112
Attn: Norman E. Feder,
Transportation Division
...-'-
Phone: (239) 774--8872 tr\
Facsimile: (239) 774--937 ?p
+
Notice shall be deemed to 9);1
the courier waybill if sent by national
12. Developer shall execute this Agreement prior to it being subrnitted for approval
by the Board of County Commissioners, TIlls Agreement shall be recorded by the County in the
Official Records of Collier County, Florida, within fourteen (14) days after the County enters
into this Agreement. Developer shall pay all costs of recording this Agreement. The County
shall provide a copy of the recorded document to the Developer upon request.
13. In the event of a dispute under this Agreement, the parties shall first (me the
County's then-current Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure. Following the conclusion of
this procedure, either party may file an action for injunctive relief in the Circuit Court of Collier
County to enforce the terms of this Agreement, said remedy being cumulative with any and all
other remedies available to the parties for the enforcement ofthis Agreement.
14. An annual review and audit of performance under this Agreement shall be
performed by the County to determine whether or not there has been demonstrated good faith
compliance with the terms of this Agreement and to report the credit applied toward payment of
Page 4 of 6
<l"-<.
co
c::>
.-.
C"'-J
c:!)
0...
u:>
C"'-J
C"'-J
-d"
t:x:
c:>
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 170 of 247
road impact fees and the balance of available unused credit. If the Collier County Board of
Commissioners finds, on the basis of substantial competent evidence, that there has been a
failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement, the Agreement may be revoked or
unilaterally modified by the County.
REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW
Page50f6
0-.
c::>
.........
C"l
r:!::I
P-c
u:>
C"l
C"l
.....
0::
c::>
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 171 of 247
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
by their appropriate officials, as of the date first above written.
; '~.~!
Attest: - , '.
DWIGHr,~, ;aRo.9;!<, 'Glerk.
~:~)~(U
~'.,i(/~f,lr.;~
~l t "'"~r~~uty Clerk
$ ORa urt 011 If "_
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
S COLETTA, Chainnan
AS TO DEVELOPER:
Signed, sealed and
delivered in the presence of:
IM Collier Joint Venl1rre
a Florida Venl1rre
By: Mirasol Development, L.L.C.;
'da limited liability company
.:Do"""'<-\") II^Xl..."'~c:....:t\c... yrf:RIGQ.., Venturer
~~ ov~h
0/ By: CCMS D~:eIop ent L.L.c.;
gna Ld 0 . a r d bility company
..:To;. AJ 7: S~, I g. gin er
Printed Name ~CC
n
~\
~+ (;0
OPri{E . CJ6
The foregoing instrument. w ~. ged before me this ..3 0 day
of ~:S~I ~ 2007, by Robert Claussen, as Managing Member of IM Collier Joi~t Venture,
((;JllU n y Irnown to ~r has produced as Identification.
~~ .
Print Name; .::TO t .-..J ~:5 /2:7t u A.J9
My Commission Expires: 'f /2..0/0
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
Ap ro
an e
......~.
.~.
~",..I
Notary Pul>llo Sill.. of Florida
John ,I S1erfrno
My Commission D0518651
E,pi""Q.4105I21JIG
Page 6 of6
.t..vv
((}mf'-
COD"
.ON
ON_
Z .0
~roNN
CO "-
ill ==..,..-
=o...QJ
CV c:{ 0;
D ro
Iii CL
OJ
<(
5l
0/1
<I)
_W
!?::
<(
Z
~
II
"-
f21I1
o::t:
w!!!
u..:x:
ll!~
'"
Zo
~i
u.
::>...,
~~
(/)0..
Zw
OW
~~
wO
0:;;
Z:;;
:J_
<I:
"
-J
o . I-
~<I:I-I
o:Um
01-1
......
L I
X
w
~
...J
...J
~
(')
Z
Z
~
ill s.lIvm
0::
?; a:-
Z
0 fil ~
i= 0::
Z w w
w :x: u
\<a:-~ b it
w~n. >- 0::
I- -~ !B. ::>
O::...J- Ul
w~LIi w w
~ 0:: ...J 0::
0 ""
:J~<( 0..
U 0 ...J ci
x<(o a. o=!
o:J<I) u.. ::>
00(') w III C)
~ a:: ~
w
U >
0 0 o.l:>o
...J
ill ..J ['oJ
a:: o=! ['oJ
:;; en
'"d
Q
......,
f-"
f-"
<:::>
.J
'.. ....~:" ' ,.
.,
o
~ ~
~a.. s:
U>- J:
>cn ';t
e:. " oc
:: 0 1:>
uu.. ~
0::0
::,.~
N.
,.,'
/" ."
,
o
lr;, ",
w
w.
-l
;2.
0-
::a;.
::a;
(~S6) 'OA1S eJ31l10:J
aJo>1--
roO"-
00J
o.~_c
C0
I--
-~
~.~Q)
ro <( Q)
U <1l
C CL
<ll
OJ
<(
~
:i!
o
"i
.....
!, ~. oi. '00 ~_'
0.-. Jr-- ..,_,
<<: o. ,
~ I
:)
CI)
~ s:~
"" 0
CL_ ci fr.
~11.='ClI
-W"::;) ~
c- ~g;l@tii
~ ()""1- w -
'!:, i:LfiJo:: >0 ~
mL<::' ~::;:w 0
(;"W" go o!l ~ ;;!
~g; J-.o::~ ::;:
ZI- 11.0
Wo:: :ct;:""
o~ CD 0:: <11
- 0::
s: ~:)
0:) W()
WCl CD
Cl)oIl
0<11
0..0::
0::>
g:()
~
~
a..
~
..J
~
o
0::
<t:
:)
(!)
en
z~
08
J::i
().
::;)3
0:: a::
\i;o..
Zw
Ow
()..J
O::;Z
Wo
0::;:
5~
ell
~
~~ 0
~ ::;:0
CD
0::- ~ Ul ooi
w!!! a tlj0::3
11.:C O~ll:
:iU5 Q a.
..J a.1-0..
" 0.._ ~Ulw
11. CD
w we:: a.~~
w t;:~
~ t:;::;o
()J-. ~gj::;
00
0 ..J~ 01-::;:
W<l1 <t:CD_
~ ll:~
~
en
...J
o . l-
(/)<[......
<[urn
0::0......
...... I
2:: X
W
C>
:::0
.-
l'-..>
l'-..>
c:r-.
>-a
Q
l'-..>
.......
.......
.......
OJ aH-
COD"
.ON
ON_
Z .0
~ CON "
C r--
a;=-=..-
- ~
-c:...Cl)
'" <( OJ
" (1J
c CL
Q)
OJ
<(
'ENGINEERS ESTIMATE ~ IMMOKALtE RD It COLUI!R BLVD INn.I.SECTION (PHASE 1- EAST LEG)
EXmBIT C ~ TASK A
"'"
..--f
..--f
"'"
..'
,
,
,
,
1
'"
'"
- ~ --..so
_ ~2.
''''
._'-~
'"
"'-l
"\6:00;
--l7iD
'-;00
"'"
--i~
~1'0
">00
-i.667
...
-~Ml
""
,.
"
"<i
l~
,
,
"
12::1
,
.;;>:U
-~
...
j,j:/:9
---:~
.
14~
I:..?
P-o
'-Co
"'"
c--..J
'd'
,::>::;
c::>
an
0.25 loll
11 ~
.. LI'
200 ~LF
200 U'
, -c;
4~
. '^
MIRASOt . COLUER COUNTY
-
Unil
Jtr.mDe$.cri "1111
ca.l'eCiQR'I'l.~Y
~...ce
"
."
"
is
'!'
"
"(:Y"
i.(i.i',
..~-
ED
ii
-CF'
-EA"
-~~~
cr
-r;f'
,0
sr
.ff"
sr
,y
.~y
m
m
T>l
m
ci
CY
Ul
'^
'^
.Lf.
-'!.
'^
LI'
ui
sr
.T>1
LI'
c.
'SY'
~..~
S ...E~<<J
S ).'j,lXXl.Oll
s '-l".OiI.ri>
i .!.5OO.oo
S....l~,OOQ.W
S 37.!;iO
,'---60.00
s' 'ii.OO
s'---'-wLio
. ...,
-_C =C::--:-uf~
- s.--- lZOl
----. $---- ..00-
. ------. S~---15'OO
-..----. ------ s--u:o;
. J.5O
s" -10.00
5--'100.00
S "90.00
S l:zO'1iii
.~-~_.
."'"
;:l.b~
__ .?,oo
"'"
9000
'.:,' V.'~2DjX)
I"'" . _.J,soo~
~. 5 ._f-SO
'~,-~\ngl
C4TEGORYI.IlOot.DWA.'I'lUT --
'r
""""""".
~~INC^~P^~~GS
CATEGORY 1_ 5IGH1H{; & r...VC.....ENT
Tar...
CImlGOIrr.M~
<S UCHnNC
C4 TeGORY. - UGHTlHG Tor AI.
Cl.1eCan''''~~
FITTINGS Dl (J' &:.IJ ~1OlNT) {lNCt.UDfSSOUOSLU:\'tS w ICt..o.NC6)
pjPE6r(FIr.I)~IOlNT)~'fuso)-'-- -'"
P1PEPvC-O'i1i~/OINll{lrpll2OOi- ---
PlPEPVC(f"J1~}Ol/'oTJ(l6'MiiOJ
'1;.L.VE ASSadel.YfAii Rft.EASEIWArf:RJ
'AlViA.ssn1l1tyi"'lJl REl.E.ASE{I!CW)
^lYEA.~YI":III~i.EAsE:~! ..
'00000
""'"
S IJIJ.OO
$~ro
s '.'SAXl.oo
So 5.000.00
S-5~~
CATEGORY rv-l111UTIE$ TOTAl..
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION EXHIBIT A
TOTAL DESIGN!:XHIBIT A
TOTAL CEI EXHIBIT A
TOTALPR.O crcOSTEXHIBIT A
c:::.a.IlU.BT.
S 225.DOOJXl
S "----t5)i,).oo
S .~~~
~ UQl.OO
~ -~
s --"--'I25,cooJi1
s-. . ,.ocKl.IXI
So ._-----lAOOAl
$_ i.LDi:OO
S:. ..-------2:'O.ro
s -----.l~
, '......
s. ..,-6If.Dci
s---' -:ts.iiiiiii
L_,,_.~~-!X'
So 10.000.00
So 6~.lI)
L-_ 16,X1l.OO
S 21~
S,._--7i~
S 'l5.lOO.oo
s ----~.oo
s ~1JOO.((I
s nl..zao.ro
So j;iJFJJiJ
,___ . ')llOO
S 9.cmoo
~.. 35~.oo
~____ ~3~~_
S JI~.~
C--" )1>.5[1).(1)
S.----6~'
s' --,.~
~ i~
, =
So .-- 39iiSJjj
S-.- 36,llOO.00
~.-'m,bll1.ro
S_. 14,400.00
S ..umm
So __~~.~
1796.234.lXl
lOL'OJ.OO
lO.l1.l).OO
._~~.oo
"00000
.
.~-
L!. .
"
i
.
.
..!?,fOO.oo
"'00000
.~~~
"000""
-1IJfI':!J~.
"00000
l(J~.oo
293000.00
$- 2,.12u.;u.oo
S 190..000.00
$ 2&0.1)00.00
. 2.S71.>>&.oo
+<
+<
+<
C""">
.........
.........
........
e:J
p..,
u::>
........
........
'""'"
eX:
c::>
+<
-. +<
>c
Agenda Item No. 8B
i'\pr~, 28, 2009
Page i 5 of 247
ENGlN'EERS ESTIMATE. IMMOKALEE RD "' COLLIER BL YO INTERSECTION (PHASE 1 . EAST LEG)
EXHIBIT C " TASK B
Q1Y Unit
[:.",. .'
MIRASOL - COLLIER COUNTY
412512007
Ib!:M Description
CoICI'ElllORrI._
. - '~.;' :' .:
1 LS M081llZATION
1 L5 P'ROVtDEJMAINTAIN ~AS IStJ[L:r P1..ANi
LS lPR.OVIDECONS'I'RUCIlON SURVEYING AND LAYOUT
LS MAlNl'ENANCE OFnw=FlC
I.F fTAXE05U.TFENCE('ITI"EDI)
EA <OCK !lAGS
LS cr...t.\RINGANDGRUB8WG
5Y PAVEMENT REMOV At. OF EXISTING CONCRETE
CY EXCAVATION(ROADWA.Y)
cv EMBANXMENT
5Y nn B STABILIZATION (l.BR~) (12-)
5Y MSE.QPI1ONAL{ll.A$GR0UP9}
sy MIUING EXlSITh'G ASPRA.U'PAVEM'ENT{I~l/"- ......
IN iUPERPAVEASPHAL1'1CCDNCREI'ErtRA..l:lF1C \. :t l),,:,..~
TN 'lUCT1ONCOUlb"(l'C"l.S}(1NCL~~ 'CT'; .r.<'-.
TN unJU'AVEASPHALnc ~OVERBUD...D} -.......:. t,"\.
TN J&SC ~ CONe. FA ~. J. ,"", \.
CY Q..ASSICONCRET'E-Rlrr~GWAttLjGRA~ALL) \. \
L5 lNLlIT ADjUSlMENT CRE.O<tAn >If. 50 .. \
LF PIPE OPTIONAL (181 JNO..pp:ES<;DNc \
l.1' CONC::'REreaJRBANDG~ /" C?'
5'Y PAVERS, , I \l \! l \
I.J: GUARDRAU..~AD\YAI- I ~
EA END ANQIOKAGE \ A / ~ l-
S'( SCDOOlG{BAHIA)(hdud "-' " CY:
\ I. " '<, 1 I....,
CA.TEGORYI-ROADWAYTGfJil!, \ ~~ I I..-..~ I
~ TI.. /,..'-'/
.' CA.TmCIR'I'~ AMDYA\Serrtu.RtCN;S V /
0.12.1 MI IslGNINGM1)P.....VEMENT ' ,-' ,/ ('\.. /
1 I ,~r/'/'I ,.,,: -,...;:\ r/
CATEGORY. SGNlNG&PAV'EMENl' qou:r~T"R \......1../
I
I
1.DOO
'"
I
01'
'"
73ll
".,
""
'.9Oll
J70
5"
"-'
25
30
,
U
UOO
""
73ll
,
3.300
v
CiQEGIORY". wUiH'J'IiriIG
1 f LS 1u....rm1NG
I
CATEGORY.. UGIm~ TOTAL
. . .".,........-~. -
55 TN F1Tl"W::iSDI (F &: I) (RESTR.A.O.JEOJOlNT) (INa.UDESSOUD5L.EEV'fS W/GL4.N!:&)
100 LF l'Il'E Dl iF" n (1<ESTlWNED)OlNI) 136" CL25O)
100 Lf rff't: FVC (F It: 1) (RE5TVIlNEV JOD\li) (12" PRZOO)
JOO LF r.D'E PVC (F &: I) (RESD.A.INED)olNTI (16" PlUOO)
2 ~ VAtvt:ASSrMBLY/AlXRa..EASI(WA'fER}
2 EA VALVE ASSEMBLY I AIR REt..USE {Rew}
2 llA VAlVE ASSLMBLY/IUR REIEASE (SEW'ER)
CATEGORY JV. unL.R1ES TOTAl
.....-=0; CliallU.II&'f.
.
. 4O.Lm.OO . "'.000.00
. 5.000.00 . '.DOll.oo
. 15,00(1.00 . 15.000.00
S 4Q,()(l(I.OO . 40..000.00
S 0.80 S 800.00
. .... S "..00
. 10..000.00 S 11),000.00
S 20.00 S 12.321:1.00
. 10,00 . 800.00
. "UXI . '........
. '.00 . '-972.00
. 21.00 , 18.481).00
. ,.sa . 13.<so.oo
S 100.00 . 17,lXXl.ro
. 80.00 , <5.920.00
, 120.00 . 25.llOO.oo
. 138.00 . "''''.00
. 450.00 S 13.soo.oo
. 3.500.00 S 7,lXlO.110
. 130.00 . 1S60.oo
,.... . 13.600,00
80.00 . 2.1,600.00
20.00 . 14,600.00
t.500.oo S 1..500.00
. 250 . '=00
. 369.562.00
, 40,000.00 I . <.800.00
I
I. ',800.00
, '.000.00 I, '.llOO.oo
I
I. 8,000,00
. .'
. '.000.00 . n.soo.oo
. <OOJIO . ...oooJlO
. 130.00 . I:J,.ooo.oo
. 140.00 . '<.000.00
. 5.000,00 . 10.00>..00
. S.ooo.oo . 1O,DOO.OO
. 5.000.00 . 10.101.oo
5 146..soo,00
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION EXHIBIT B
TOTAL DESIGN EXHIBIT B
TOTAL CEI EXHIBIT B
TOTAL PROJECT COST EXHIBIT B
TOTAL PROJECT COST EXHIBIT A &0 B
$ S28,862.00
5 ".000.00
$ 60.000.00
$ 638,862.00
$ 3.210,ll96.oo
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28. 2009
Page 176 of 247
Josepfi 'l'. 1(fl.rpinsfij. Jr., (]),cDS.
3183 C/iiB. Jl. venue
fRpcfiester; 'NY 14624
M!lIch 26, 2008
PlUme: (585) 889-2273
PI1:\; (585)889-9370
G!lIlick, Stetler aod Peeples LLP
Mr. Perry Peeples
5551 Ridgewood Drive, Suite 101
Naples, Florida 34108
Dear Mr. Peeples:
As a follow up to our conversation, attacl1ed is the Affidavit you requested signed by my
husband, Joseph F. Karpinski, Jr.
Since our five acre parcel was included in the Mirasol PUD by your client's error, we are
authorizing IM Collier Joint Venture to correct the error by retuming the zoniog to
agricultural without any expense or cost or fees to the owners of this parcel. We were
unaware that it ever left Ag Classification.
Thank you for your assistance witl, this matter. If you should need anything further,
please contact me at 585-538-4156. Good Luck with your process.
Sincerely,
~dLi:J/0-1f:U~)U- .
Leslie.T. Karpinski
cc: John Bielejeski, Jr.
Attomey at Law
" ,.
..
. r"
.' t':', .~: .,..
';:'~;. .
:':!;.,:,',!,:
.1
.1,"
,~~,,,:'~~~...:;r.-G ;-:-""~;.; ,- ~.."','.-j_ <1 ',..';.;. ""',;:-.:;: ;r:, );.'
" . .- ~'::.~', .:: !:.'':';~.::'.~:' :; l' '.;~
~ .: f.l: ,~::: .
..t. .,'
.. .
Agenda Item No. 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 177 of 247
AFFIDAVIT
I, Joseph F. Karpinski Jr., being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am 111e owner of
the property described herein regarding the Rezone application for parcel no.
00179240005. The Rezone application will be permitted through Collier County
Development and Zoning to rezone 111e five acres, more particul8J.]Y described in Exhibit
"A" attached hereto, frem the Mirasol PUD designation to Agriculture (A g) zoning
d'~~ ~.
o Property Owner
"-
Still f.f fiL-ItILP tAJSkJ
ent w~"a91j\l1ow1edged before me tbis ~~y of March, 2008,
1 y, .J!Who is personally known to me or has produced
as identification.
SOMNUK N. SAN3ASY
No.01SAB061657
NoLsf)' ?Ub"C, State 01 New Yon~
auol\fred In Mtmroe county 1 t
My CommIssIon Expires 07/1612.0!...L
State of New York
(Print, Type or Stamp Commissioned
Name of Notary Public)
Country of Momoe
Agenda Item No. 88
. . "R::~~~~:::,,~tii~~.'.~,~i~i";' pa~~r;17~8 2009
East Yz of the northwest Yo of !:he southeast Yo of the..sB3ffii!~5~~@f.Section
. , ' ;.' ,,"~"P~':\"\11li1 '.' ~t,\, l~'~.l;;;';'::;'
10, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier COI.li1ty!!tiptj~i9iilf}taining 5
acres more-or less. :_:.:;.~.:~:,..p:.r''.~P~';''!<i13.i~?~;'~
f;~;US"
fli~!
", '. -'-.' ,,-:::;,....,~;.\'~, :,.'
. _." :p~~l,:~~::: -\=:-. ::.:.
", :.~" ....:..H ./-
"'. ~.;;,,;,..,.,
'-'. ,"h,'; ,:.,.....
:....
Jan 23 OS 03.37p
Jan 21 O~ 08;02p
PHS Ino
PNS Inc
'1359082
435S062
Agenda It.frr1 fJo. 8B
p. ~pril 28, 2009
Page 179 of 247
~T(;J':i :r.OS11 1'1 rU~J!.91r.TroN~
(Sotti.n 10.03.00. <':OI.i.lFJ<. COUNTY I_^ NI) ))~VElOI'M8NT corm (We)
A ZOnillt, -:i.r:.o(.lo) 1t1u<;t In; po~ted by U~O p-ctlliohCr or the r>ell\juncr':,; ..lt~e'r!t on ~11l~ jlar,cl (or:a xmOlmum of rinCc.ll OS) l;:1I~llltll'
Ol1}'/' ill !)!lVlI.t1~<: oC Ihc. Cll',>l fI\Jblil;. h:::;uillt. :\tuJ :..nlu i;ir,t\(s) a'H1M be m~it\1.:ljI\C(\ by \he !-.etilinut;r or lhl.l peli\ioncr'li >1:'(.:01
tllmt.tGll the lto:ltd ot Count)' c.oO\lul:;:;ioneM 1~c.ln['\r.. Uelow 11ft l:t:ncr.11 r,uiddi)lC:'" rlJf ~i1,..'Tlr.. ho\VcYCI thfl'.\l cuiJe.Uht:.. :houlu
not l.l~ U'lll\{(u,O 10 :;urt;r....cde ~IW rc.qVtrC1l\Ct" cd Ihe I~T>C. 1'01 5lltl.'.:lrJC .:.i~ n:4uifc,nl'.I'I.'i, l'lci\!:e rckr 10 ~'lioll 10.0;1.00 flf
lhe l.lx:.
f. The SI~(,l:} l'Iiu~1 be CI't:.tJCD. if) IlJll view or lhe. public., hOll\\('>)"o 1bhl11ivt (5) (cCt fl'l)ll1 tlle n~;ll-t".<;\ :ilI'cCt nr,hl.o~-w:IY or
(:;~~(t\eJ1.t,
2 'lhe :>itn(~) mu";t be- !;ccu:'i:ly illlly.cd by I~:!'ils, ~'pt'::(.l 0\' 4'>tllG( 'r\~tM, ''':i wood ((,11T'Ie Or 10 iI .....ood J,}::u'l.d :IIIJ Olct\ f:ullem;d
~r:c:urdy lo., pO~I, 01" other ::trUOIUr'l;. nle :;ir,lI111;l')' not be l).fii~e-o III I, 'r~ Of OLh(,:f [alla-ce.
3, 'llle Ilttil10ncr 1;>). (hi.' pdilione.t'~ itr,c~ t'1\\Itl IJI:litlli\L.n th~ ~ett(s) ill pljcc. Md re,')ll:\h!c t.ollcli'i(\(\ !.loul the reqll~~..u4
Ac~i0111.;1S be-ell henftJ nod;'\ filk.31 tkd::tOllICI\dt.lIe(1. H the :::.ll;I1(;;> j.., de;,!,T['Iycd,lcY..{.llT f(tr\dcr~d IJt\,~d.)ble, UK pt"lilietncr
or thE: cl:;l'()flCr'=. ~ C:hlln~1 t~ll:1tC th.~ ~irn~ _
NOTE: Al.-r)>;)oI TliIlSIG1'll'IAS lllm:<I'Wl'JW.
"O-nS AFl"IJ)A VIT OF rOSTING NOTrC)!: "'IOtfU)
Ill' Ill!TUMeO NO I.A T~l{ THAN TEN (Ill)
WORKING "A"\'S Dl:r.OIU; 11m FIRST f{~AI(rNG
"An; 1'()"'"~ ,\,SSlQNr.1l rJ..^NN\:l~
.f'f'1''''^ VfT Ot..t(J~T'N(' N<">TJr:I',
STAtE Of rLOIill>A
COUNTY or- COll.! Pit
OEl'Ol\E l1JE UNDERSIGNED A\)nH)RITY. PEl1.S0NA1..I.V A)'PI;ARBDRi durd i/p\lCtruJv1'ch
\>/HO ON 01\'111 SA 'is TtlAT 11F.JSIlBHAS POSTnl) 1'/tOP!;\( N011m AS REQUIRr-.t? IlY:;r. TION 100).00 OPTHF-
~~I~MEN1' CO))), ON TIlE; MRCBL CovEJum IN I'J:rmo\-: NUMJ)ER
-1~/C'') ~---E='-"
__ .. ,_CL..__~
?:.d&~1}~G~ '.
NAME (TYPED OK RlNTED)
!dOD~..iL!l.Jt-:3bJ
STllI"l~'J' em r .0. JJOX
J0~~~rti ~lpQq\o:)
STATE OF FLORIDA
cO[,"JoITy OR C()1..LlI'Il {Ji.
D : T11. (O;;P?"j ""\('"0''''' "'^' "WO);" t:lj~1 s\lb.""ibo<! belore me (hi, tl a d"> oJ~.lOO Cf.... l>y
r:;d ChUfi.O ~>..v.a{)!J:~fy Im.wn '0 .... Ot who p".d"",", '"
jdolui!lcDt!OO l.\Jld 'wh dldJdld Ilot l:\kc ilL) Oillk
7'~'H.."n""""""""""".....r.....c
: JENNIFI.:.R C. (.,:/\$TI\..LO ~
i .l~";;;'." CoJMlrt DOO4"131G ~
: ""f'~'fo~ eJ4llr(J~ "I2')/201Q ::
: \~jj 9ondocf Ihr\J (aoo)432-4~~
:: "..?;;f:.~;o.'" r.lc,;::ln hl01Bl"Y 1us&1\ k\c: :
So.... ........~..... ..t.... u... .......;; >,n.t
My CornrTli"~lrm E^-J'U"eJ.i.
{Sti\mp Wi':l ~tr;," numbC:I')
OJ",r--.
coo,,"
ON
ON_
Z - 0
EE8 ~
Q)~.,..
=::0....(1)
m<l:: en
-0 C1l
c 0..
Q)
OJ
<l::
o
z
"""
E-i
~
~
Z
o
"""-
E-i~
~~
~~
OVl
~~
"""Z
~O
otij
o
~
o
S
o
"""
~
Z
a-
!S
-
I
-.
ilJ
.....
eo:
('()~
r--
~
~.
~
--C
~
-:y
o
m
~
cr.
ilJ
8
eo:
Z
Ct)
"E';'
;....
~
'"
'"
ilJ
lo;
"0
"0
~
-
....
eo:
S
I
~
(Dmr--
co07
ON
aN_
.",.,..- ,0
~
CO
..::.."...... .
=:: Q..w
('tic:{ en'
D '"
c: CL
'"
OJ
<l:
Co?
z
....
E-<
r.l
r.l
~
Z
o
....
E-<~ ~
~
~
Oif:J
~z
z~
....z
A Co?
otij
o
~
o
~
~
....
Co?
i-I
~
Z
<l)
~
A
5
~
c
<l)
t)
c:1
-
~
eJJ
=
...
.....
<l)
<l)
~
<Il
<Il
<l)
l.o
-
...
c:1
S
I
~
~ <.:
~ ~
"t:l Q l
~;)o<
..... :r '"
~ l ~
l.o '"
~ '- -<
Q.)
S
c:1
Z
.....
t)
<l)
.....,
o
l.o
P-i
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 182 of 247
Mirasol Fact Sheet
Acreage:
1543+/- acres total
1202,92+/- acres \vithin RFMU designated Neutral
340,7 acres+/- within the Urban designation
General Location:
(Exhibit 'C); west of the Broken Back Road Future C,R, 951extension;
north of lmmokalee Road
Zoning History:
POO Ordinance 01-20 was originally approved on April 24, 2002; (Exhibit 'A)
799 Residential Units (mix of single- family and multi-family)
2 -18 Hole Golf Courses
Various amenities to support the residential uses
Flow-way obligation
SFWMD Permit:
Permit #11-02031-P, as amended, original approval February 14, 2002
amended
ACOE Permit:
Pennit # SAJ-2000-1926(hwb) approved October 5, 2007
Collier DCA:
Approved May 3, 2007; pre-payment of transportation impact fees on the 799
residential units for improvements to lmmokalee Road and Collier Boulevard,
Proposed Zoning:
799 Residential Units (mix of single- family and multi-family) (Exhibit 'e2)
up to 2 -18 Hole Golf Courses
Various amenities to support the residential uses
Excavation activities shall comply with Section 22-106 of the Code of Laws and
Ordinances of Collier County Florida, The entire water management pass-
thru system will be constructed at one time as per South Florida Water
Management permit #1 I -02031-P, as amended, prior to the residential
development under a "development" excavation permit as long as no more
than 20,000 c,y, of material is removed off-site,
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 183 of 247
From: Kevin O'Brien [kevino@mwutah,com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 7:07 PM
To: DeselemKay
Subject: Mirasol PUD
Ms, Deselem:
Responding to the Public Notice in the NDN, I regret that I cannot attend the public meeting re
this project
Still I wish to register my strong opposition to any steps to ease the advance of this project
I am a resident of Quail Creek (offImmokalee Rd, near 175) and regularly travel Immokalee Rd,
eastbound past 951,
I have many reasons for my objections to this project Here are a few,
. There are numerous developments in the area already underway which are far from being
filled out TwinEagles is an example, So is Quail West There is no need for more new
housing in this part of Collier County,
. A number of my neighbors in Quail Creek (considered an affiuent community) have recently
been foreclosed upon due to the real estate problems widespread in Collier County and
nearby counties,
. Even after improvements to Immokalee Rd" traffic remains a serious problem, Additional
development can only make things worse,
. We have very limited "natural" land left in Collier county for wildlife and for water
management Mirasol will take away a large portion of what we have left in this area,
Consider the few wood storks and panthers we have left,
. Yes, I know there are lots of invasive, exotic plants on those lands, The cost to us tax
payers ultimately will be a lot less if the county hires some unemployed workers to remove
them than it will be if we approve this development I'm willing to add $10 to my tax bill,
. Note as well the ads in the NDN by many golf clubs looking for members because they are
losing members and are not able to replace them. We don't need more golf courses. I am a
golfer and know this too well. Talk to Bonita Bay who is really suffering due to losing
members at all their clubs.
. It is too bad the developer is in financial trouble; so am I and almost everyone I know.
People look at South Florida and see lots of vacant land and think they can build forever.
Actually, almost all of that vacant land can never be built on. We have very little buildable land
left. Use it very wisely please.
Don't waste it on a new housing development which no one except the developer needs.
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 184 of 247
Kevin C. O'Brien, Ph.D.
4355 Silver Fox Drive
Naples, Florida 341 ] 9
Tel: (239) 513-6906
Fax: (239) 513-6907
Cell: (239) 249-4224 eFax: (435) 604-7819
=~
~~
-~
--
-
-~
--
-
<->-
_0
... ~
~
-
-- ..:
c:::> :c
.......... =
c-..I B _
...
... ..
.. __....:II
C!;JI ~~
~ ~ ~ -
-=-
u'"'
o
~ ...
,'"
.
.
~ = -
. - "" '"
~~....
<-> '"
-'"
.. Il:llI:: _
e:::: ....:II~
c:> S =:!
.~ --
~. -~
<r-'I ... . .
c:>~
c-- -
&..C"") .2: _
.......... ~...
c:::> = ~
~--~
=~
--
:ol~
=-
<->~
-~
...
Agenda Item ~Jo, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 185 of 247
DEVELOPER AGREEMENT
MlRASOL
THIS DEVELOPER AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement") is made
and entered into this ~ of May, 2007, by and between 1M Collier Joint Venture, a Florida
Venture, with an address at 6704 Lone Oak Blvd., Naples, FL 34109 (hereinafter referred to as
"Developer"), and COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, a political subdivision of the State of
Florida (hereinafter referred to as "County"). All capitalized terms not defined herein shall have
the same meaning as set forth in the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance,
Ordinance No. 2001-13, as amended.
R Eel TAL S:
WHEREAS, Developer is the owner of approximately 1,558 acres of land located on the
north side of Immokalee Road immediately west of Collier Blvd. in Callier County, Florida,
known as the Mirasol POO, more particularly described in Ordinance No. 2001-20; (hereinafter
referred to as the "Development"); and
~~-
. WHEREAS,.as set forth in theP~HltIs ex}ll''<Y:a';1?~t the Development will at build-out
contalll 799 reSidential umts; and ~~;::..---~~
WHEREAS, Caunty wj~eJr~mpmYe.!!!jI\ts be iuaMto its transpartation system as
set forth in Exhibit A, and ,as ')TI oPll0ft~\sertain imProvem~ts 'set forth in Exhibit B, with
engineer's costs estimates f01 eatD'lt' -;il\i~~fl. \
_(r, J.J~1f ~ 1.,--.1 . .
WHEREAS, Develo ,er, oec_ 'e"O ;\CIS onsttuctlOn.,,<!lp'eements and relatIOnships,
believes that it can design, pefi!iii, and construct thesto y' roj,bcl1::at a lower costs than that set
farth in Exhibit C; and \~I'j~ ~''f~'~'~'"'' 1
, " ,'-." -"-
Vr ",l.'
WHEREAS, as detai.led iiel€,"');'i!l~\~3P .of its project for transp.ortatian
concurrency purposes, and III eJ>chang!'1 ,tqt{lm~<1t'\tee.credlts III the lesser .of the sum of the
engineer's cost estimates or actual pro~~ests;-a5'-Set forth below, Develaper is willing to
design, permit, construct and provide a CEI acceptable to Collier County for the improvement
project described in Exhibit A, and, if Caunty exercises its option, for the project set forth in B as
well; and
...
o
o
~
-
WHEREAS, County is willing to grant Developer concurrency rights far this
Development in order to accelerate the needed improvements to this intersection; and
'"
""...
:1ii - WHEREAS, the Transportation Administrator has recommended to the Board of County
...
_ Commissioners for approval of this Agreement, which will help finance needed improvements
""-
...:::: and additions to the County's transportation network; and
<:> -~
...--
O~
--100oii__
~ 5: e :. WHEREAS, after reasoned consideration by the Board of Commissioners, the B.oard
_C-)__
finds and reaffirms that this Agreement will help finance needed improvements and additions to
the County's transportation system; that this Agreement, when viewed in conjunction with ather
existing or proposed plans, including thase from other developers, will nat adversely impact the
......
c::>
~
C"'o.J
CJ
""'-
'-0
C"'o.J
C"'o.J
--
-=>::
C>
Agenda item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 186 of 247
cash flow or liquidity of the County's road impact fee trust accounts in such a way as to frustrate
or interfere with other planned or ongoing growth-necessitated capital improvements and
additions to the County's transportation system; and that this Agreement is consistent \vith both
the public interest and with the comprehensive plan, including the most recently adopted five-
year capital improvement program for the County's transportation system, the Long Range
Transportation Plan and complies with the requirements of the Collier County Consolidated
Impact Fee Ordinance.
WIT N E SSE T H:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and
valuable consideration exchanged amongst the parties, and in consideration of the covenants
contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
1. All of the above RECITALS are true and correct and are hereby expressly
incorporated herein by reference as if set forth fully below.
2. Within 30 days from the date-this-Ag.eement is approved by the Board of County
Commissioners, Developer will commert~ ~ <i~ -;;p.ennit, construct and provide a CEI
acceptable to County for certai~~Pr6'Ve~E~t1n Exhibit A. Developer shall be
responsible for all costs associate~ththis project. All ~cGs~ right-of-way will be provided
by County. The project must 6'omrnencenoiateLth~ebru~ 1>,2008, and must be completed
no later than March 31, 2009/ex~t t'fianro~dates ma~ be reasonably extended by Developer if
such delay is caused by COn?itio. 'V~}l~8' \ ~tr\pj lDCllf~~\r but! not limited to Acts of God,
Government restrictions, wilTs, imsurrel:tion andl~~ cite . cause beyond the reasonable
control of the Developer. \!2-~\W ~\\ I /,~
3. By written no~e;3ia,ted no later than <AUsu~t 1'02007, County may exercise its
option for Developer to design~~Reimit, construct and \ prdvjde ,/ CEI acceptable to County for
certain imp:ovements i~entified iit'Ifx?!~~is~ct0Pev~Ioper shall be responsible for a.1I
costs assocIated WIth thIS project. AUn~~\ls,sEY~~.Io~aY WIll be provIded by County. ThIs
project must also commence no later than FebitIaf'i-y,1608, and must be completed no later than
March 31, 2009, except that both dates may be reasonably extended by Developer if such delay
is caused by conditions beyond its control including, but not limited to Acts of God, Government
restrictions, wars, insurrections and/or any other cause beyond the reasonable control of the
Developer.
4. For a period of nine months, commencing with the date first above written,
Developer may permanently reserve roadway capacity for up to 799 residential units, at any mix
of single family units and multi-family units chosen by Developer. To exercise this right,
Developer shall prepay to County one-half (112) of the County's estimated Road Impact Fees for
the Development less the estimated costs for the improvements. If the estimated costs of the
project(s) exceed the actual costs of the project(s), Developer shall pay County the difference
between the two within 30 days of providing County with a reconciled statement as set forth
below. Upon payment of these fees, Developer shall receive a Certificate of Adequate Public
Facilities ("Certificate") vesting the Developer's Project to construct up to 799 residential units
solely for the purposes of meeting the County's Transportation Concurrency requirements, and
Page 2 of6
'-C>
c:::>
~
.......
C)
0...
'-C>
.......
.......
--
c:::
C>
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28. 2009
Page 187 of 247
unless specifically required by law, the County shall not thereafter withhold the issuance of any
Certificate of Occupancy based on the County Transportation Concurrency requirements. Final
calculation of the remaining road and other impact fees due will be based on the impact fee
schedule in effect at the time of the issuance of building permits for such units. Payment of these
fees vests the Development entitlements for which the Certificate applies on a continuous basis
for three (3) years unless otherwise relinquished. This initial 50 percent impact fee payment is
non-refundable after payment and receipt of the Certificate.
5. Not later than 90 days prior to the expiration of the three-year period for the
Certificate, the County shall notify Developer via registered mail of the remaining balance
due for the estimated transportation impact fees up to 50 percent (50%), based on level of
building permits already issued. The balance of the impact fees due will be calculated at the
rate schedule then currently applicable. The Developer may elect to pay the balance of the
estimated transportation impact fees for the entitlements for which the Certificate applies or
modify the Certificate to a lesser entitlement and calculate the balance of the transportation
impact fees on the revised entitlements. The Certificate shall be modified to include only the
entitlements for which the estimated transportation impact fees are paid. Once the balance of
the estimated transportation impact fee~'IFpaid~those estimated fees are non-refundable.
The Certificate TUns continuouslr\''Yi~B,(HeC1~;~ perpetuity after all estimated
transportatIOn Impact fees hav7~{~!Yi'ali:f. As liulldmglpermlts are drawn down on the
entitle~ents, the estimated tr<r5Popation imp~ct fees alt~ay'p,a~d shall be debited. at t?e rate
of the Impact fees In effect at the'tnneOfutilizal!O~ If the estlmated transportation Impact
I /.uL-. . '-v \ \
fee account becomes depleted, tlie Devcl~p;hal1 pa the currently applicable transportation
impact fee for each buildin~ pehnjnl1!JUl~n'O~l~JiSjiSS~~~. Ih the event that upon build-
out of the Development es~ma!:'ed1\ ttral\spbrtatibL iiffiPaA f~s kre ktill unspent, the remaining
b I f h . d ,= ~ ,,-,' \. I I.-LL. '1 I 'he I '-I d . . h' h
a ance 0 suc esl1mate ',lee U1aY:'[Je...IflI11SualllU todlIlJl,t ,:li.-approve project Wit In t e
same,. or adjacent transpoW~ n impact fee diSt~ct~ ipr9~~d any veste~ entitlements
assoclated wlth the unspent anll 'transferred transpOWa110n1mpJlct fees are rehnqulshed and
",,\, '\--//-'-;
the Certificate is modified to delete-those entitlements. /. l" .
~ 0 ';;- ~2:\.~
,f' ~.........-:::'()
6. It is understood and agrl'~!fiaCo~of e foundations of this Agreement is
Developer's belief that it can complete these projects at a cost less than the estimates set forth in
Exhibit C. Developer is therefore willing to bear all risks that its costs will exceed that set forth
in the estimates, and will receive no adjustment whatsoever from the County should the costs be
higher. At the completion of the project(s), Developer shall provide County with a reconciled
statement of the actual costs Developer incurred in designing, permitting, constructing and
providing a CEI for the project(s), and shall be entitled to impact fee credits for these actual
costs, not to exceed the engineer's estimates set forth in Exhibit C.
7. This Agreement shall not be construed or characterized as a development
agreement under the Florida Local Government Development Agreement Act.
8. The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this
Agreement shall inure to, all successors in interest to the parties to this Agreement. Upon giving
written notice to the County, Developer may assign all or part of the Road Impact Fee Credits,
utilizing the County's then current form of assignment, to successor owners of all of part of the
Page 3 of6
r-
c::>
........
C'-..J
~
r::>..
~
C'-..J
C'-..J
""""
~
C)
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28. 2009
Page 188 of 247
Development, or as otherwise provided for in the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee
Ordinance.
9. Developer acknowledges that the failure of this Agreement to address any permit,
condition, term or restriction shall not relieve either the applicant or owner, or its successors or
assigns, of the necessity of complying with any law, ordinance, rule or regulation governing said
permitting requirements, conditions, terms or restrictions.
10. In the event state or federal laws are enacted after the execution of this
Agreement, which are applicable to and preclude in whole or in part the parties' compliance with
the terms of this Agreement, then in such event this Agreement shall be modified or revoked as
is necessary to comply with such laws, in a manner which best reflects the intent of this
Agreement.
11. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement shall only be amended by
mutual written consent of the parties hereto or by their successors in interest. All notices and
other communications required or permitted hereunder (including County's option) shall be in
writing and shall be sent by Certified Mai!.-T~ecej-p.t requested, or by a nationally recognized
overnight delivery service, and addres~,1i1l16J;;? 0 U0
// 0\/ ~' ~r./' ~
To County: / () To D~oper~
~~-J-\ \,
Harmon Turner BUilding! , ~ /\ W'C<;,llier Joint enture
Napl.es, Florida 34112 I (~@U ~ ~i6,N1f\e;?'.!k B\"ulevard
Ann. Norman E. Feder, A.I.y.P\ /lNapl~s~:Fffindk,34109
Transportation Division K~\iniStcito 4~ U)C I
Phone: (239) 774-8872 \ \,..,.. \ Phone: (239) 5~d-9067
Facsimile: (239) 774-937(k<.~ Fac~tin ile': (23.. '"Cjl598-2245
" , '^ ' '-J /'- ,
V!,;/, L /
Notice shall be deemed tohay;;)?e~ 'ven on tbt::n'~t)u!cessive business day to the date of
the courier waybill if sent by nationalty'r~~~tdelivery service.
12. Developer shall execute this Agreement prior to it being submitted for approval
by the Board of County Commissioners. This Agreement shall be recorded by the County in the
Official Records of Collier County, Florida, within fourteen (14) days after the County enters
into this Agreement. Developer shall pay all costs of recording this Agreement. The County
shall provide a copy of the recorded document to the Developer upon request.
13. In the event of a dispute under this Agreement, the parties shall first use the
County's then-current Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure. Following the conclusion of
this procedure, either party may file an action for injunctive relief in the Circuit Court of Collier
County to enforce the terms of this Agreement, said remedy being cumulative with any and all
other remedies available to the parties for the enforcement of this Agreement.
14. An annual review and audit of performance under this Agreement shall be
performed by the County to determine whether or not there has been demonstrated good faith
compliance with the terms of this Agreement and to report the credit applied toward payment of
Page 4 of6
cx:>
c:::>
.........
C"-..J
c.!)
c...
'-C>
C"-..J
C"-..J
--
a:x:::
C>
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 189 of 247
road impact fees and the balance of available unused credit. If the Collier County Board of
Commissioners finds, on the basis of substantial competent evidence, that there has been a
failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement, the Agreement may be revoked or
unilaterally modified by the County.
REMAINDER OF P AGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW
;1,'~~At.
~ r;.,
\a.-'
I I "")../\~ \
li~'CID ]jJ'iD ~!7. \
I I . \ ij i
I ,,\ Jl \) r .
I n I '-..::::7 cL.'" ,t-<
\('" '., /t:::::;
\ ~\ ,~ I .:;)
\~ ~~ 1 0
\1- ~ .0
~'" ,,"'.
J""~,,
rllE ('lRe/Y
~
Page 5 of6
0-.
C>
...-I
(".J
~
p...
'-D
(".J
(".J
--
!:l::
C>
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 190 of 247
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
by their appropriate officials, as of the date first above written.
.....
"
Attest: , ,
DWIGHT.~. MOC~ Clerk
B:~V~
A~ .""foG (ftt l"""~uty Clerk
s fllAlture On'rli""" ~~
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
AS TO DEVELOPER:
Signed, sealed and 1M Collier Joint Venture
delivered in the presen~e n a Florida Venture
:I:? ?/4. Y 2,:/ By: Mirasol Development, L.L.C.;
Signature ~~Iorida limited liability company
~~~/6~~~~mMm
C By: CCMS Deveroplnent L.L.C.;
gna / I \ '-.aE orida limited liability company
7"'" ,- ~_ >VI \'
..:ro~ A.J v, SlP'?eLl.vb _ L/-I agin N{ m er
Printed Name, {' Vir\] /fS", " '" '\ ',/1. ',' , '
! i( (\ ay:'.' R;! '
\ n \ ~..J ! Clahsknl Managing Member
\ s:- \ \'&, I i?J
'\f~ ~~~
~p~,\,
" " 'f{FC1\'Z.L.,// .
The foregomg mstrurnent w'aNc\dil}wledged before me thiS ..3'0 day
. ,2007, by Robert Claussen, as Managing Member of 1M Collier Joint Venture,
"' O~ 0 m ,..., prod=< #-..~;l1:;:;"tioo. .
Print Name: ;) I.. .-..I . 5 [l:)'t u A..J9
My Commission Expires: 2.0/ <.>
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
of
!iI'
~ ""..-.I
Notary 'ublk State of Florida
John J Sterling
My Commission 00518651
E,pi... 04105120 1 0
kow
tant County Attorney
Page 6 of6
(Dm
COO
,0
o.r'J ~
",.=
- ~
- 0. -
ct<!; ..
D ..
c: ....
'"
OJ Sl oll
<!; m SllVIIIl
" _w
Cl.
~ a:
:;:
0::
;t 0
I-m ...J
~ mw ~
Co:: ,
U w::l ,
...J U- rnI-
~ 0 Ou
Z Cl.::l
0 00::
Cl ~ 0::1-
Z Cl.m
Z U
~ 0
...J
W w
0:: 0::
~
Z
0
f=
z
w~
~Cl.~
w t.~
~ ~-I-
-i1j
~~o::
Cl ::lC<
Z uO::C
f= x<O
m o::lm
X ooCl
w
CD
z-
~~
U.
::l'"
0::0
1-0::
(/lCl.
Zw
Ow
~~
wO
c;:!
Z:;:
::l_
S.tIV<lIl
.--...........
....,' r........,
~'4._, ~ -"
. ",I ~,'
" -
"YY' ~
\ rj~,\ a.. LL
~~~'t. ~
mu u. w
O,'ii'~~\ ~~, ~
B=r: .:~wo::
,-I- ,}, I-...w
!l,U.;),:;:/ I C "f t:
~!JWoll
..... UZCD mo::::l
"'0'- - Q'O Cl
.-.tJ;;" Cl. I- oll
w~,,:;: oi
0:: x~.o:: 00
~/t.I.l,jf;;/ Cl. a.: gs
-',", '\ '-ill W u
qJ ~ '.~ (/l
,
C
~ ~
~Cl. 3:
u>- :J:
6: 00 !;c
~O:: a.:
3: ~ b
U C ....
0::_
~~
N.
.."..,
/'
.
(~S6) 'o^,a ~31110~
o
Ir,
w
UJ
...J
~.
o
:E
:E
~
w
ii:'- ~
~!!:. 0
~w >-
ClCl. e
~~ w
lfio:: a
cw Cl.
~5 ~
filCl ~
moll ~
000 u
Cl. 0:: 0
O::l ...J
lIu w
0::
<J:
--1
o . f-
~<J:......
o::Ucn
0......
......
:::E I
X
W
ii:'
t.
W
u
LE
0::
::l
m
w
0::
oll
ci
...J
5
00
0::
W
>
o
C>
::<:I
.:::a
.......,
.......,
0"\
'"
C':l
.......,
.........
.........
c::>
(DO>
oo8c
ON
Zco'
EN
w="E
""a.
"'<1:
D
c:
'"
OJ
<1:
~
~
C)
-
..
..
"-
-
a..
~
...J
~
o
0::
:5
(!)
.
~, -',.1'"
III ' .'
~-:'r-
~ I I
W
0:: s:
"" 0
D:"_ciD::.
~!!:.:::! (!) I
~W ::> Z
CO -
Za.. 0:: l-
t C.l:!~ W ~
~~ ~~ffi ~ Wx~"
c;;;; ~ "" ~;j V\y '.
~~ 1-0::05 ::;: /..i'/ , :'
ZI- LI.. I'-/i'<....
Wo:: j;!;;:""..., ! JJ,', ,
Qw rno::co I ,,' -,~, l
s:~ if!5 IC:IM1 ":
0::> wt),~. 1,_
w '" C/J I ~~ , _ .
C/JV -":1 \ ;.
o oil i'I~'~(,'
~~ \ \! \ .
a::: ~ \'" ~.
a..C.l \'
'\ \. " .'
''\
\d~
.... r ~_.
v I .
. "-..............
~
CD
---l
o . I-
(/)<J:_
<rum
0::0_
- I
::E X
W
'"
z~
00
~i
C.l.
::>...,
0::0
1-0::
C/Ja..
Zw
Ow
~~
Wo
0::;:
~~
C>
:::a
.-
~
~
C7'>
'"'<:I
G"l
~
t->
t->
t->
3:JNW..LN3 co
~
A \f8 39'1'.lRJ3H ~~ ..... 0
co ::;:0
I 0::- ~ w coi
wg! ...J w0::3
, u.:r ~ rnLl..
, wx 0 OrnO::
I o::w ...J a..1-a..
a:: a.._ Oww
W U.rn O::...Jw
wffi a..Z...J
W I-i~
~ !;;::r
g5 C/Jo::o
~O::;:
0 ...J>- ~ti~
Wco
:2: o::~
:2:
ENGINEERS ESTIMATE p IMMOKALEE RD ~ COLLIER BLVD INTERSECTION (PHASE 1 " EAST LEG)
EXHIBIT C" TASK A
(Dml'--
rog~
Q.~O
(")
OJ
-:::....-
:::: a.Q)
m<( en
-0 ell
c: CL
'"
OJ
<1:
"'"
C"'-lI
.......
.......
C"'-lI
, ..
, ..
, ..
, ..
, ..
, ..
.. CY
.. MH
... ED
24 ED
,.. "
....tKKi -Lf
.. EA
, ..
16.ODO CY
.-_i~ CY
... CY
.D75 SY
,.." SY
3,470 SY
1~.200 S'I'
1,bIiJ SY
'" TN
L641 TN
'" TN
" '"
~ -ci-
UOO LB
, EA
, EA
", "
". "
, EA
__ ;.:w Lf
'" "
"" SY
___~~~_ TN
no "
. EA
14,000 SY
~
"'""
'-C
C"'-lI
C"'>.J
""'"
e>>::
C>
<US
--
______ 1
n
"'"
"'"
"'"
.
.
,
MlR.ASOL. COLLIER. COUNTY
4J25I2"'"
Vail
ltu'l DncriDliOD
CA~I----.v
--
MOBILlZ.AT1ON __ _______ ~___ $ 225~OO
PROVIDE-/MAINiAiN'::~BUlLT~N~_ _ . ____ ____ ____ s___~~:oo
PROV\OEC~~SU~~'I'ING_~~OLA~__._ _ _ ___ _~_ ~~l.oo
PRESE:RVATION OFSURYEY MONUMENTS ___ __"_~___ __ ___ _ ~ _~.oo
PRoVlOE"tt.wNTAINPRoiECfsCHEOW __ _____ __ $ _ .~~
MAINTENANCEOFriAFf1C - ----- ____ _______ L 12.S~~
~~~~~t~6RJ~~~:_~~~~~-~r{~- ______---- ___: ---~:
_ VARlABlfMEssACE!;,ICN (2Jk>r~~~~ch ___~____ ___ _______ $ ___ _._ 20-00
BALEOH"VORSTRAW $ 10.00
~AnNG-ruRBlDin'iAAAlER - -- ----=-~=--_ ~--.--=-=-_ _p_ ----- _ 5 - 6.50
STAnDSit.TFfNc:f{tYPE~~ ____ _ S ___~~
ROO. BA-GS ---- $ 4_00
a...EARlNCANDCRUBslNC-- ----- - --_.- S 45,llOO.oo
- OIAN-NfCExCAV:"''ribN aNCiUOOiROCi~DEw""TER.lNC)- -- ---.- - $ -- 20.00
EXCAV....TiC>N7ROAOWAY I t:lEUNTI6i,iAfu~---' - $ 10.00
EXCAV-ATION--=--~-~~-=-~-=-- -~~__ ---:-_~.. - $ __ 12-.00
TYPE BsTA8IUZAT1ONlL8R4O){I2j S 4.00
ii'~EROCiCLBR 1(0)(6-)-PATHWA'I'(l500-i..f)--=--~-=-=-=-__ - - --~ ...~-- ___ - $-=:~ 15.00
BASE,Of"IloNAl(8ASEC-RoUP"9)-- $ 21.00
~~~~~7~~--:l~;---~ !---,~~
SlJPERPAVfASPHA~riCSQ~D)(OVER!Uiw)-~- J--- $ 120.00
M1SC I\SPH~~PAVE~~~_vL_ __ __ __ ___ _ t.--- ~~'~
~~~~~~:~L '\ ~ ~ - r\--~;
REIN-KiRaNG STEEl cBoX CUloVERTlUi.~ _--V \ _ - -CC=__.!]~
11'!.~(P-6}(<lO!.....L--= / ----=-- -=-\..-2~ __ _-_~ \ S__ \. 5~~
~~=~7fl~r(~ft~~YW1f~\~ ~,--1' .5,500~.:~
MITEREOENoSl:CT1ON,RClUNO(:z4") - j j' _ -~--l ",- -i~~~
(~ONciEr(~~A~~~rrYi'EX --- Z e:LJ; r-I_ i4ro
T1lA~~!~!?R(~~tv)(4~ _-----<. _ '" J~/__:l5~
.~~.;:'dj~~6,I,;.".GfuriXTILiF~,..q-_ n=-~' _L!c.~! .::
~~i~~6:';E~~h~~'-==--~~'~'1-~~_I-- -~~ ~'_ -_"]~:
5:Df'DlNG~~_H~~u_~~_~u:!r~~~___ __ ---, , A.~ ~'.'., $ 2.50
,1"""- .,'",,/
CATEGORY I. ~AY TOTAb.. -<,' .t." '-',- __/ of. \."'-
CMI*II't.-';;"_';';-";;;"'~:-~"/
Ml 1SlCNlNGA~DPA~"!Tt.1AIOONGS ___ -- -.----
CA~GORY 11_ SM;H"G & PAVEMENT IllARKlNGS TOTAl..
t'
~,tJXl:oot-1s
,
~..UCIIftNI
15 ~HTI!'IC ____ ____
CATEGORY..UGHTING TOTAl.
j.'-
""'''-OOf f'--
,
"....00
~.,"'......
rn
"
--
"
"
EA
EA
EA
FlTTlNCS DI (F kl) (RESTRAINED JOINT) (lNCl.UDESSOUDSLEEYES W ICLANr:6)
MPEOIfFAoI)cRf.5TiiAINE-OIOlNT)()(,"CLlSO)---------- ----
pfPEPvc-fin~NEDiOiNT)il:fPR200i-------- ---
P1PEPVC(F"I)~NED}OINTj{i6;-PR200)- -- -- ---
VA_~Vi-~~y;~~R~~_~~~R)w___ ~~_~__~_-_=---_
VALVIAssEMBL'I'/AIR Rfl.EAS[ CRCW)
VALVE ...s5EMst. Y I "IR RiLE.AsfI'SEWfR) - - -
-----
~-..?~oo
~.. ___400.00
S__~30.oo_
$I~
$ 5~~
$ s~oo
$ 5~,~
CATEGORY N. UTIUTIES TOTAL
TOTAL CONSTRUcnON EXHIBIT A
TOTAL DESIGN EXHIBIT A
TOTAL CEI EXHIBIT A
TOTAL PROJECI' COST EXHIBIT A
-.......
$ _____~_~.oo
5 15.l1Xl.oo
s- -- 3Sroo~
~ __ _ 2.IDJ_l!'
$_____..__~OO
~,_ 125.l1XlOO
5 ___._ _}~OO
$ 2~~
$ __'"" ._9poo.oo
$ 240.00
-.
$ 1.S6000
$ -_-____:!~.(i:i
S 160.00
T~~ -_~ :!~;:~
~__ lO.ooo~
$ 6..000.00
$___ 16..)00.00
$ ___ p~OO
~_ _n~-!\l?
~ _____~lOO~
$ -- !~~~
.$__ 66~
S 131.~:.00
$ !!7.:!2000
$ 3.:m..oo
$"-- ~ _9~~
s:--- 33ilOOOO
$ ____ _3.h80~
$_ ___ _"..000.00
$ ----~!>~~
5 _~oo
~.__'~17~!Xl
$ --- ~~~
$---~
~_ ~~92S~
~._--=-- ~~;~
$ 299.610.00
$_ _=-14~~
$ ,~
_$_ _____J5~.00
1798.234.00
10.000.00
10..00000
--
"00000
+---
,
, .
,
,
.
.
_99.l1Xl~
1lO~C?J
~,ooo~
_~}XlO~
~~~
""'00
20,000--,-00
5 293,llOO00
S 2,.121.2M-OO
$ 190,000.00
$ 260,000.00
$ 2.57l.234OO
..
..
..
m
~
~
C"'-I
~
Q.o
~
C"'-I
C"'-I
-=t'"
r::>:::
C>
..
..
..
Agenda iten
jI,pril
Page 19
ENGINEERS ESTIMATE. IMMOKALEE RD "" COLLIER BLVD INTERSECTION (PHASE 1. EAST LEG)
EXHTBIT C - TASK B
MIRASOL - COLLIER COUNTY
412S1'1JXJ7
QTY Unit lbem Description
~I."""Y UIIl' PM:I! _1aL_.
I IS MOBIUZAnON $ 0I01lOO.00 $ 40.000.00
I IS PROVIDE/MAINT AIN "AS Bun.r PLANS $ 5.000.00 $ 5.000.00
1 IS PROVIDE CONSTRUCI1ON SURVEYING AND LA YOur $ 15.000.00 $ 15..000.00
1 IS MAThlTEN'ANCE OF TRAfFIC $ 40.000.00 $ 40.000.00
1,1100 U' STAKED Sn.T FENCE (TYPE III) $ 0.80 $ 800.00
40 EA ROC!< BAGS $ <00 $ 100.00
1 IS Cl..EARIJro.IG ANDGRUBBING $ 10.000.00 $ 10JlClO.oo
61. 5Y PA VEMENr REMOV At. OF EXISTING CONCRITE $ 20,00 S 12..320.00
80 CY EXCAVAnONCROADWAY) S 10.00 $ 800.00
73ll CY EMIlANXMENT $ 20.00 $ 14..600.00
12" 5Y 'IYPE BSTABlUZA1l0N (l8R40) 02") $ <00 $ 4..912.00
880 5Y BASE..OmONAL (BASE GROUP 9) S 21.00 S 18..480.00
3.900 5Y MIU.ING EXlS11NG A5PHALT PAVEMENT (]-l/l:..A~____ S 3.5<1 S 13A50.oo
111> TN SUPERPA VB ASPHALnc CONCRETE ('I1t,VFIC 1t)(J5'K. \... r 11"-. ~, S 100.00 $ 17,000.00
574 TN FRlCT10N COURSE (FC-l2.S) (INCl R~) (\5"t:.:..-___ "-it' "~',, s 80.00 S 4.5.920.00
215 TN I5UPEltPAVE ASPHALTIC co~ OJ (OVF.RBUll.O) ....."'., t'\. S 120.00 S 25.8Oll.oo
25 TN MlSC. ASPH. CQNC fA VEMENT- l.. j / "- '\ S 138.00 S 3A5D.00
30 CY CLASS I CONCREn-RET AINING W ALL .(GK/o....YIIX~ AU) '\ \ s 450.00 $ 13..500.00
2 IS INlET ADJUSTMENT (REl.CIC'ATE 5;-1. S-)}.... '------,f'l \, s 3.500.00 $ 7.000.00
12 U' PIPE oPTIONAL (18") lNClUDES OONCRE"IE Cdt'bARsJ2}-.... \ I, '$ 130.00 S 1..560.00
UOO U' ('()OCRETECURB ANOGI!ITER ~ ~ ~",tt-? -.,?\ $ 14.00 S 13.600.00
21Il 5Y PAVERS, AROfiTEC'T'lJ1UJL if i \l{ ! \ , \!! I ~ \/1 I . 80,00 $ 21,600.00
,
731) U' GUARDRArt (ROADW A Yl II I I I i , ,',..-' ':\ { I . 20.00 S 14.600.00
,
1 EA EJ\.'D ANCHORAGE ASSENrBl.~ \ \ \ /\ I, / / '11 1 I 1i'--' $ 1..500.00 S 1..500.00
3.3DO SY SOODl:NG (BAHlA)(lndudtsWjter.~, MoWing) , - , i~:S 2.SO S 8.250.00
\~ .", \ ,.,', I I '~
CATEGORYI-ROAI:1WAYTQTAL... \ ~::;;.~ ; /........ ' $ 369.56200
\"J~,.\ r "- i / ..\",.... /
CA'1'EGal\"....~AIID.I\..- fT....-.m :/. '..~/J
0.121 MI J5IGNINGANDPAVEMENr~) _........... /,", / S 40.000.00 S 4,.800.00
I I ',- . /,' ,,, ----_.-----~,., '\ '/
CATEGORY. - SIGNING & PAVEMENT ~TQ)rAL(-' \ 'U \......- ./ s <.8Oll.oo
~' _/
CAImClRY. -LIGIInG
I I IS IUGHTING $ 8.000.00 S 8.000.00
I I
CATEGORY.. UGHTlNG, TOTAl.. S 8..000.00
_.,.1IIUl&
'.5 TN fTTI'INGS DI (F &. I) (RESTR.AINED]OINI) (II't.1CLUDES SOLID Su:EVES W IGLAN05) S 9.000.00 $ 49..soo.oo
100 l.f PIPE Of (F &:: l) CRE5TRAINED JOINT) (36- U250) $ "".00 $ 40.000.00
100 l.f PIPE PVC (F" l) (RESTR.AINED JOINT) (12" PRlOO) $ 130.00 $ 13..000.00
100 l.f PIPE pve (F &. n (RF.STR.AINEO 1OIN'T) (16" PR2OO) S 140.00 S IUJllO.oo
2 EA VALVE ASSEMBLY I AIR RElEAsE (WATER) $ 5..000.00 $ 10.000.00
2 EA VALVE A.SSEMBL Y I AIR REl..EA5E CRew) $ 5,llOO.oo S 10.000.00
2 EA VALVE ASSEMBLY I AIR REl..EA5E (SEWER) $ 5.000.00 $ 10.000.00
CATEGORY IV. UTIL.mES TOTAL S 146.500.00
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION EXlDBIT B $ 528,862.00
TOTAL DESIGN EXlDBIT B $ 50.000.00
TOTAL CEI EXlDBIT B $ 60.000.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST EXHTBIT B $ 638,862.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST EXHTBIT A "" B $ 3,210.D96.00
No, 88
8.2009
of 247
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 195 of 247
SPECIAL NOTICE
Due to the volume of material contained in the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), members of the public wishing to review the
materials or obtain a copy of the CD can contact Kay Deselem,
Principal Planner, Kay Deselem, AICP; Zoning & Land Development
Review Department; Community Development & Environmental
Services Division; 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive; Naples, FL 34104;
Phone: 239.252.2931; Fax: 239.252.6357.
MIR}.SOL
A
PLA.NNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
REGLTL'\. TIm-IS /.ND SUPPORTING }'L^.STER PL^.N
GOYERNI~IG MIP~^.SOL ,^. PL^.NNED
'--'NIT DEVELOPMENT PURSU.^J'IT TO PROVISIONS Of
THE COLLIER COUNTY L^.ND DEVELOPMENT CODE
PREP,'\.RED fOR:
Mirase! Develejlment, LL.C.
80~ 5 Car1teR Lakes Beule',aTEl
Naples, FL 311 10
PREP/.RED BY:
PMS, IRe. ef1'Iaj3les
2335 Tamiami Tr-ail Nerth
Suite 1QS
Najlles, FL. 31103
D.^. If: REVlE'NED BY CCPC
D/.TE ,'\.PPROVED BY BCC
ORDIN/.NCE tJUMBER
.'\.MENDMENTS /.!"!D REPK^.L
DOCL'MHIT D,^.TE
1/23/01
INDEX
l','.CE
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 196 of 247
Liot sf Bdlil3its aHa TaBles
Statel'lloHt of COlRjlliaHGe
SECTlOJ>J I
SECTION II
SECTION III
SECTION IV
SECTION V
SECTION VI
Property O'xHerohip, Legal
GeHeral DeseriptisH aHa Sflert Title
Prej eGt DevelejJlReHt
ResiElen-tia:l De~.'0Iopment .^.n~as
G01f Coarse/OfH3Fl Space
Preserve Distriet
GeFlerai Deve10}3ment COlrunitlneFlts
t
LIST OF EXIIIBITS l\ND L\RLES
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 197 of 247
II
III
I I
2 I
3 I
4 1
5 1
6 1
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 198 of 247
EXHHlIT ".^."
Plar.neElUnit De':el8j3meHt Master Plan
EXHIBIT "13"
Legal DesGrifltieEiSJ
T!.BLE I
Land Use ~llJHmary
T."'BLE II
De':eI8]3ment ~taHElardG
it
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 199 of 247
STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
THe develoJ3meat sansists ef I 55& 1/ aeres of ]'lfll]'lerty in Callier CaHnty as a Plar.Red T.1nit
Devela]'lmeat ta se l:newn as the ~1iras81 PT.1D ',':hie+1. will se in salllfllianee '.'.'ith the geals, olJ-jeeti'.'es,
afle J30lieies efC8llier Celffity as set fer-th in t,he Cellier CeHni')' Grewili Managmmmt PlaH. The Miraool
PL'D is a single aHe mHlti family resieential senlliHlnity v:ith aS50eiatee reereaHanal uses and will se
e8nsistent \':ith the EIfl]'lliealJle elements 8Hhe Cellier Grw::t.fl Management Pl!lR fer the fello\':ing
reasons:
1. The tetal aereage of the MiraBel PL'D is 1 55& ~/ aeres. The n~allimllffi numBer of dwelling
Hnits te se Built en the tetal aereage is 799. The numBer ef ev:elling Iiflits per gress aere is
EIflJ3roKimately 0.51 Hnits. The density on indi."isHal ]'lareels enand tliroHgHem the Prejeet ma)'
vary aee8rding 1,0 the tYfle efHeHsing J3laeed en eaeh ]'lareel of laRd. The prejeeted denoity of
0.51 dwelling Hnits ]'ler aere is in eem]'lEanee wit+1. t,he fllt,lIfe Land L'se Element efthe Gre'.'.'t+1.
MaRagernent Plan ..'.'Bieh allews 1.9 Iiflits ]'ler aere as a base density on the prejeet lands leeated
'.vit,hin tHe UrsaR, TJrBan Milled L'se Distriet, L'rbaR ResiEleHtiai Soodistriet, Seetion ~2,
TowHshi]'l 1&S, Range 28E eGnsisting af310.7 aeres thlls yielEling 1382.& uHits. The lands within
Seetien 15, Township 1SS, Raage ~8E and Seetien 10, TewlIshifl ~&S, Range 28E are eutsiEle the
urBan BGlIHeary, eesignatea as /.t;rieHlture/R\lfal, ;\grielllmre/RHral Milled Use Distriet on the
fumre Land Use MaJ3 witR eensity assigned as lloll1it ]'ler 5 aeres. TRese 1217 aere ',':ollle yield
2 ~ 3.5 units. The Master Plan Ras seen arrangee te milize dustering ef ee':eI8pment !raets to
previae for signifieant lane eeRser\'atisn as well as the eonstmetion sf a regienal flB\':way. (See
also Seetion 3.3 ofiliis Oreinaaee)
2. The sOOjeet pfll]'lerty is loeatee oHtsiae ane within tRe UrBaR MiKed T.1se Distrist, Ur.san
Residential SHBdistriet, LaRe L'se Desigaatien as ideatifiea 8H tRe fHture LaRd Use Map.
3. TRe sOOjeet preflerty's losafiea in relatioa te ellistiRg or flroposee eB11llilUflity fasilities aad
serviees peR'Rits tae de.:eloJ3ment's resieentialeelloitj' as deserised iR Objeek,'e 2 of the future
Laae Use ElemelTt.
1. TRe Prejeet eeveloflmeat is eOHlflatiBle \':itR ane eOHlj3lemeatary to eJlistiRg aad fumre
surroHHeing laRd ases as reEjuired iR Polie:, 5.~ sfthe famre Llmd TJse Elemeat.
5. IHlflTOvemeHts are ]'llaflBed to Be in eamplianse with a]'l]'llieable sestiolls aftRe Callier C8\lHty
Land De.,'eloJ3ffient CaGe (LDC) as set forth iR Ol3jeeti'.'e 3 o[(Re fatare LaRd Use EIsment.
8. The ]'lrejeet ee\'eloj3FFlent will result ia an effieient and eeenomieal alloeation of sOffiffilHlity
faeilities and ser:iees as reEjuired in Poliey 3.1.G aftl1e futare LaRd Use Elemeat.
7. TRe ]'looJie/j3ri','ffie ]'lartnersRiJ3 for tRe J3r0j305ee flowway ereation will Be sonoistee v:itR Paliey
I. ~.2 of the DraiRage SliS Elemeat of the PuBEs faeilities Elemeat BY cOReeting e1listing
defieieneies BY atiliziag innovative fuRdiag SOHrees. The Prejeet aevele]'lment is ]'llanned to
protest the funetioning of nahH'al draiaage feamres aRd aatural grauadwater aqHifor reeharge
areas tRrollgfl ereatioH Bfa RegiaRal floww&j' as desoneed in Objeeti'/e 1.5 afthe Drainage SOO
Elemeat of tRe PUBlio faeilities Element.
&. lJI final laeal ee',elOJ3FFlent oreers for tRis Prejeet are suBjeat to Di':lsion3.15, ;\eeqaate Paslie
FaeiJities, e[(l.e Callier CeUflty LDC.
ffi
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 200 of 247
SECTION I
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP & CENERf.L DESCRIPTION
1.1 PURPOSE
The pUfl3oc;e of this SeetiElFl is to set forta tlie IBeatief1 aHa 0T,T::nershiI3 of the 1'[0138rt1', aad t8
deseribe tHe e]~istiFlg G0nditieflS eftke preperty 13feposed to Be deT:e10l3eaooaer fa€! fJr0jeet Flarne
of tHe Mirasel PlJD.
U LEe'.L DESCRIPTION
See EJlHil1it B
U PROPERTY OWNERSHIP
THe sH1J.jeet prepert:,' is e'.\'Rea l1y Mirasol DevelopmeRt, L.L.c.
1.1 CENER!.L DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY f.RK'.
l.. The Prejeet site is leeatea te tHe RertH ~iae efImmekalee Read; l10raerea OR FHe east l1y
Brel:en Bae]: Reaa, future 051; the Collier I Lee COURt)' liRe is the HOrth pr0flsrty liRe; a
portieR ef tHe 'leestern ]3roperty l1eraers aloRg agrieHltHi'al zORing I (]3reposea Ter-afiRa
PUD) aRa tHe Parklands DRI; On tHe seHtH siae ofImmekalee Reaa is Pebl1lebree1:e
Lakes aRa LaHrel Lakes.
B. The zaRing elassifieatioFl oftR8 Prejeet prier tEl apfJT0\'al 0[t1:11$ PVD dOGmneFlt ?,'as
H~^..grieulrnral".
1.S PHYSIC'.L DESCRIPTION
i\.. THe Prejeet lies wiFHiR SoutH Flerida 'Nater ManagemeRt Distriet Ne. 7.
B. '.Vater managelneflt [aeilities f~r the Prejeet v:ill13e designee aFla 00Flstrnetea to seITe
155&, I aeres efresideRtially zeRea laRds diseHarging ':ia tHe Immekalee Reaa CaRal.
C. Elevations witHiR tHe site ':ieiRity are f.lat. THe ele'eation eftHe sHl1jeet site is
apprOJlimately tHirteeR aRd 1 n feet (13.5') abe':e mean sea le':el. The entirety eftlle site
lies witHin Floea ZeRe "X" aeeerding Fe Fir-m Map !!120Q€i7 Q21:3 D, map reyisea June 3,
+-9&&.-
D. SBrficial seElimeflts Elf}, aBa is tAe ~:ieif1ity of the Pr0jeet are primarily fiFH.~ qHartz sands,
and er';af1ie learns ever sha1I0Y; limestsn0 13eareelc. S13seifie sail types louRa 011 tHe
Prejeet iFlell::1ae:
~4:ala13ar fiRe sand, BasiFlger fine SaflEl ana Roea fiRe safHJ, Helef)aT.\, fiB!? sana, OlEl~Jlna{"
fine saRa, Piaeaa finEt SaRa, liITlE!st8RE! Sl:l0StratWTl, geGa, RiT:iera, Lim0steFl0 SU8stratHm,
ana Copelana fiRa sGfla, ae]3resBional.
-h+
1.(, PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 201 of 247
The Mirasel PT.JD is a resideRtial siRgle family aRa multi familj' golf oeHrse oommuRity with a
maJlimum ef 799 dwelliRg ooits. ReematioRal faoilities m~' be pT8':ided ia eeajooetioR with the
dwelliRf; ]'!Rits. ResiaeRtial laml uses, reereatienal ],!ses, ana signage Bi'e desigHea te be
harmeRieas with ene aRother iR a Ratmal settiRg by HsiRg eemmOR arohiteoture, appropriate
sereeRiRglfmfferiRg, aRa Rative ':egetatieR, wheRever feasible.
URlike most ether resiaeRtial eommuRities the MiraGol Pro-jeet has entered iR a pablio / private
partRership eOHlmitted to beiRg part ofthe solatien for FlooeiRg issHes plagaiRg parts of SeHth
Lee ane Northeast Cellier COUlRies, a araiaage baaiR 0[300 sqUBi'e miles. The regieRal beRefit to
this Fleaa ecmtrel will iRe1llde impT8vemeRts to ':egetatieR aHd wildlife habitat beth OR site aRd
U]3strearR.
1.7 gUORT TITLE
This OrdiRaaee shall be kneWR afld oited as the "MIP~^.SOL PL^J'INED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT ORDIN/J'ICE".
.f-,2.
SECTION II
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 202 of 247
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
2.1 Pl'RPOSE
The flHrpose oft:His SectioFl is to geFlerally eeseriee tHe prejeet plafl of ae\'e10~meFlt,
relatioFlsliips to &flfJlieoole COl:illty onliFlaFlces, the reSfleetiT:e land Hses sf the tfaets inelHdeEl in
the Pre-jest, as v:ell as otHer flrojeet felatioFlships.
2.2 CENER\L
.^.. De':eloflmeflt ef the l\fimsel PUD SHall se ifl aeeenlaRse ',vitH the seRteflt5 eftHe
PlaRfled Uflit DeveleflmeRt desumeRt aRd aflfllisable seetiefls efthe Cellier COHflty LDC
and Gro'1/th Maflagemeflt Plan iR effest at tHe time sf issHaRse sf any aevelOflmeflt oraer,
sHen as but Flot lilTlitea to final subdh'isieFl }31at, fiFlaI site de\'eI0:f)1Tl8Flt fllan, enca':ati0Fl
permit, aHa Prelimin8i)' ,-"Vork .A~Hth0rizati0n, 10 '.vaieh SHe}, regl-dati0F1S relate. VfRere
tHese reglllations fail to 13fo':ide de':eloplTl(~fltal staFldaFEIs, tHen tHe 13Fo":isieFls B[lBe fflest
similar aistrist in the Couflty LDC SHall aflflly,
B. Uliless ether.,','ise floted, the defiliitielis of all tenns shall be the same as the defiRitielis set
furth ili the Collier CeHntj' LDC iR eff.eet at tHe time ofBHilEliflg flennit ajJfllieatien.
C. .'.11 eSRaitieRs imflosea alia all gra]3Hie material flre5efltea aejJietiRg restristions fur tHe
de':elo]3meRt eftHe Mirasel PUD shall beseme]3art efthe regHlatiefls Thisl; govern !lie
mallilBr ifl whiSH the PUD site may se Ele':elefled.
D. Uflles5 meditied, '",aiveEl or ellSejJted by tHis P'--!D, tl;e p'rovisiolis of the LDC, \':here
ajJplieable, remain iF! full furse afld effect witH resfleet te the aevelopmelil ef tHe lana
whieh ceffi]3rises this PUD.
E. Develeflmelit permittea by tHe a]3jJro':al of this ]3etitiefl '.vill be sHbjeet te SenSlilTeRsy
revie'.I' HRGer tHe jJre':isions sf Di':isiofl 3. ] 5, .^.aeEjHate PHslie Faeilities, sf the LDC at
the earliest Sf next to OSCUT ef eitHer fiFlal SDP a]3preval, Bflal fllat a]3]3reval, sr bHilaiflg
]3srmit issuaRes applieable to this De':eloflmen!.
F. Signifieaflt moElifieatiofl te tHe aesis'Tl, size or leeatieR oftHe Flew way alia/or signifieaat
ehaFlges to the Flo'l: ,,':ay .^.greemsFlt (Ellhisit B sf the OraiRaflee) a5 a resHlt of, SHt Ret
limited te, pennitting or aetisli takeR by the flarties to the as'feelneflt, sl;all 6sFlstitute a
sHbstantial chaRge ts the P~ D and shall require a re Hearing sonsistent '",itH !lie
pro':isions ofSeetioR '.7.3.5.1, ofths LaRa De':elo]3ment Code relatiye ts suestafltilll
ehaflges.
g
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 203 01247
2.d DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PU.N .\ND PROPOSED LAND USES
f.. The prejeot Master Plan, inelHaing layoHt of streets aHa use ofland fer t:Be VanOllS tracts,
is iIl11strated by EllhitJit ".^.n, the PUD Master Plaa. THe Ratme and eJlteRt of laRa llses
wilhia tHe Prejeet are iRdicatea on TaBle 1. The speeiBe loeatieR ana size ef iRdi\'iallal
traets aHa the assigRment ef dwelliRg lHlits thereto shall 'se determiRea at the time of
aetailea site develejlmeat planniRg er jllattiRg.
B. The fiRal size ef the reersatieR ana epeR space lands '::iIl aepeRd eR the actual
fequirel11BFlts for '.vater maFlagement, foad7:ay flattem, iHld c:h~/el1iflb uRit size and
CORBgHration.
1\11R.~.SOL
Lf.ND VSE SUMMARY
Tr'.RLE I
MfjCIMVM LAND USE INTENSITY SVMl\'L'.RY
USE
Mf.X. D.U.'s
ACRES
Total Prejeet
799
155S +-/
Mia. OpeR Space @ €iO~<' N/.^. 935 +/
(Lakes, Preserves, Laadseape Buff-ers, Golf Courses, Oj3eR .^.reas & Recreational .^,reas)
2.i RELf.TED PROJECT PLf.N f.PPRO'.'f.L REQUIREMENTS
.^.. Prier te the reeeraiHg of a recerd plat, and/er coHaomiHiufn plat for all or part of the
PUD, BRal !llans ef all requirea impro\'emeRts Ghall reeeive aJ3pre\'al of the a]3j3rojlriate
Cellier Coooty governmeatal ageHey te inGllfe compliaHce with the pun Master Plan, the
Collier County SuBai':ision Cede, aRd the platting Ia-ws of tHe State ef Florida.
B. EKHibit ".^.n, t:Be pun Master Plan, cORstitutes tHe requirea pun De\'eloprnent Plaa.
SuBseEjUeHt to or eORearIeRt with PUD aJ3pro':al, a prelimiRary suBdi\'ision jllat, if
aJ3plieaBle, shall 'se sllbmitted for the eRtire area eeverea 'sy the PTJD Master PlaH. .^,ny
division ofjlroperty ana the ac\'elOjlfHent efthe land shaH be iR eOHl!lliaRce with Division
3.2 of the Collier COllnty LDC, aHd the platting la''''5 of the State efFlorida.
~
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 204 of 247
C. The ]lT8visiens efDi"ision 3.3 eftHe Cellier C81mty LDC, wheH aj'lj3lieaele, shall a]lj3ly
to the ae~;e10J3fFlef1t ef all platies traets ef pan~01s of laFH:l as f)fs\'iElea ifl saie DiT:ision
prior 18 tHe iS~ndaF1ee of a Ell:lildiFlg f1enTlit or otRer ch~Ye18flm0Flt orser.
D. The aeve10per of BEY tract or flareel flFlflToT.'ea For resiaeFJtiaI aeyelof'meFlt G0fltelT1fllatiFlg
Fee simple o?:nershifJ Elf land fur eaoB av:elliFlg HAit sHall be reEJ.l:lirea t8 sBsmit 8Fld
reeeiT:e a13fJf8T:al of a }3relimiFlary SH8diYisiefl plat iFl eOFlfoTITl8Ree '?.'ith rSE}uirements of
DivisieH 3.2 of tHe Collier Ceuflty LOC ]3rier te the sUBlRittal ef eOHstruetiElH ]llaaG aHa a
fiflal ]llat for aflY ]leTtien of the tmet or ]laree!.
E. Uti lit)', read, flblblie aRa priT,'ate easemeFlts sHall 88 estaBlisHed as reEJ.uirea auriFlg tRe
SOP afld fer ]3lat aj'l]lroval j3reeeGs.
f. ~\Pflr8priate iFlstrumeFlts T.~:il1 13e flT8\'iaed at tRe tiIFH~ ef inFrastmetHre impr8\'8mGnts
regardiBg aeaieatioBS aBa tHe metl:wa for f'nr:idiBg 138lfletual maiBteflanee of eOFl1i-nOB
facilities.
2.5 MODEL HOMES.' SJ'.LES OFFICES
~1Gaell=t8mes, sales eenter!; aFHI otHer Hses and struetures related t8 tRe preluoti8fl ana sale ef
real estate ~n:ieh as, 61:1t Ret lil1~itea te, f'a..'-iliens, \'ie\T:iRg platforms, gazeeos, 13arl:ing areas, tents,
afld sigRs, sl1.all Be ]leflRittee ]lriHci]3al ],Ises throHgheHt tl1.e MiraGol PUD subjeet to tl1.e
reEl],lH-el'fleflts ofSectieH 2.8.33.1 efthe Collier CClHflty LDC.
2.a AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR pun Mf...STER PL\N
.^.menelReflts IRa}' Be maEle te the PUO as ]3rovieed in tl1.e Cellier Ceunty LOC, SectisH 2.7.3.5.
2.7 J'.SSOCU.TlON OF PROPERTY OWNERS FOR COMM.ON ARK"... MAINTEN.'.NCE
CommOH area maillteHaRee will be ]3roviEled 8)' the master pro]3eliy OWRers' aSGsciatioa. The
assoeiatioH is a legitimate alternative for tHe tilRel}' aRe SUGtaiHea preyisiEln ef E1uality COFllfnOR
area iRfFastmctme aRe maiRteHanee uHeer tHe tenllS and 80RaitieHs of CeuR!j' de':elo]3lRent
a:1313reyal. for those areas Bet n1aintainea 8)' tRe luaster asseeiation, t.ae De..'sloper '",:ill create a
pT8]lert}' eV:Rers' aSGeeiatisR(s), or eOReerniHiuffi asssciatioR(s), v:l1.ose fURctioRs shall iHeJude
pro.,'isiGFl fur the 13erpetllal mainteFlanoe 8f eOfnfflen facilities aFld e130n sf)aoes. TAe l"Flaster or tHe
prepert)' e?:Hers' aSGeciatiofl, as a]3plieable, c;hall Be res]loRsible for tHe oj'1eratioll, maiHtsllaHce,
and maHagemeHt of the surfnce v:ater and stofIRv:aler H'laaagement s)'steHls, afld reser,es ser:ing
the MiraGol PUO, togetHer witl1. aR)'
aj'lj31icable ]leflRits frelR tHe Flerida De]lartlTleflt sfEHyirellmeRtal ProteetiElH, U.S. !.fIR)' Cerps
of EHgifleers, and South Flerida \Ii ater MaRagerneRt District.
~
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 205 of 247
2.8 DESICN CUlDELlNES i.ND STf.NDf.RDS
The Collier Csooty fllanHes unit develsflment sistriets are inteHded te elleoar-age ingenuity,
illBs,:atioH aRd imagillation iH the fllallniHg, desigH and development sr redeveleflmeBt of
relatively large traets sf land uHser Uflit'ies oWRersllip Sf eentrol, as set f{)rth iH the Collier
COUHty LDC, Seetie!l2.2.20.1.
The aj3plieaHt has !let set "stages" for the de':elspmeHt ohhe flfeperty. Sinee the flroperty is to
be se':elsped s':er aH estimated teH (10) year time fleriod, aRY projeetieH of flrejeet develsflHleHt
ean 8e HO Hlere t-llat a!l estimate basss 8!l eUITeHt marl:eti!lg IGlswledge. The estimate FHay
elIaRge deflef1diHg UflSH future eeonsmie faetsfs.
2.9 CENER\L PERMITTED USES
Certain uses shall 8e eensidered geHeml flermitted uses tbnmgllout tHe Mirasol PUD e1leeflt in
tHe Preserve Distriet. GeHeFilI permitted uses are thsse uses 'l:Hieh geHsral.ly serve the Devel8per
and residef1ts efthe MiraGol PUD aRd are lJ'flieally part of the eomrHeH iHfras~ruet\lfe or are
eORsidered e81nmunity faeilities.
.\. GeHeral Permitted Uses:
1. Essefllial ser:iees as set forth <lRder the Collier County LDC, See~isH 2.15.9.1.
2. Water H1ilHagement faeilitie, and related s~rueBxes.
3. Lal.:eG ineluding lal.:es ':;ith Imll:heads er other arelliteetural er strnetHral. bank
treatments.
1. Guardhouses, gateheHses, aRd aeees, eontrel slruetures.
5. Comm1ffiity aRd neigfitlsrhood flarks, reereational faeilities, eeffiffiooity eenters.
15. TSffij'lerary e8nstruetieR, salss, and affiRif1istrati':e offiees fer tHe Developer,
builders, and their authsrized eSB.traetors and GORsllltants, if16lHding nseessary
aeeess ways, flarbng areas ana related lIses in aeserdaflGs with the Csllier
County LDC in effeet at the time pen-nits are requested unless o~h8rwise s]3eeified
hGreiFl.
7. LaHdseaj3e foatares iHeludiHg, but not limited to, laHdseape 811ffers, 8enns, fenees
and walls shall be in aeserdanee 'l:ith tHe Collier Csunty LDC iB. effoet at the tims
pennits are requested uflless otherwise sfleeified Herein.
S. /\~' ether use 'l:hieh is eornparal3le in Hamre with the foregoing HSeG aRd whieh
the Planning Ser:iees Direeter aetermiRes to be eeffij'latible.
M
Agenda item No 88
April 28, 2009
Page 206 of 247
B. DevelElpment Staaaards:
UFlless ether.T.'ise set furth iFl this de8llffiE!flt, the F8Ilo',':ing deT.'elej31R8flt staFlaanls shall
apply to 8truetHres:
1. Setbaek frem Bade efeurb er edge of )'lave meat Elfan)'rElad fifteea feet (15').
Guanlh01:1SeS, gateBo\;lses, aFld aGcess GeFltrel strnctblres sHall ha'.'e fle reeraired
setbaelc, HElWeVer SUCH stwetHres SHall be loeated sHeH tHat they de net eaHse
veHieular staekiFlg ontelAe Immokalee Roaa rigHt Elf way.
2. Set.eaek from exterior ]3ro)'lerty lines one Half (I /2) tHe Height ef lAe strnemre.
3. ~fiBimbuB aistaFlee belY/seR strucMes ?,'hieH are part of aFl arehiteetl::lfally l:l11ified
grmlj3ing five feet (5').
4. MiFlinmm aistaaee set'1:eenlll1relatea stTlle1:llres Ten foet (10').
5. I\fiFlimHHl fleor area :t-'J0FlE! ref:}uin~a.
6. P.fifliITll::ll11. 18t or pareel area }Jenl2 reql:lired.
7. Siae'.valks, bikSj'JatAs, ana eartl"aths may oeeur witHin COURt)' TeEjuired suffers;
howe':er the \\'iath ef tHe reqHirea ]olHffur SHall be iFlcreasea f1re)'lortieRately te the
wiath of the )'la',ea ,~urfaee of the siaev:alk, bil:e)'lath, or eaIiflath.
S. StaRaaras for f1arking, landseafling, signs and EIther lana uses ',>,'here sHeh
stanaards are nElt Bj3ecif.ied Aerein, are te be in aeeoraanee with the Collier Celfnty
LDC in etfeet at the time of site aeyelopment )'llan apprElvaJ.
2.11l OPEN SP:\CES REQUIREMENTS
The PUD Master Plan iaentifies ap)'lT8xinlately 935+/ aeres inelHdea in tae Reereation,
Lanaseal"e,'Open S]3aee, Golf Course, Lakes and Preserve District aesignations. These areas
flollly satisfy tAe o)'len sj3aee requirements ElfSeetion2.6.3' of the CElllier CElunty LDC.
2.11 NATIVE VECEL\TION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS
Twenty fi':e Perceat (25~(') of the viable narurally fHnctioning aati':e vegetatien oa site 8Rall be
J:1reser.'eEi.
M
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 207 of 247
SECTION III EXHIBIT A
RESIDENTI:\L DEVELOPMENT ARK\S FOR MlRASOL RPUD
3.1 PVRPOSE
THe jlUlJlese of tHis SectieR is te estaBliSH laRa use reglllations aRa de-:elojlmeRt standards fer tHe
ResideRtial de':elejlment tnwts designated OR g)l.\lieit "N', tlle Pl'D Master Plan as "RG
ResideRtial/Ge1f". THe Gelf Ceurse develElflmeRt standards -",ill be regulatea as fler SectisR lV,
Gelf CeUfse / OpeR Sjlaee.
3.2 Mf.xIMUM DWELLINC UNITS PERMITTED USES:
The maximum RlR'RBer of 799 residential dweniF!g units and a maximum of 36 golf course holes
mav be developed within the RPUD. jlen-nitted witHiF! tlle P'JD is 799. The prejlerty ceRlaiF!s a
g;-ess acreage of 1552+/ acres lffia density ef 0.51 awelliRg URits per gross acre.
3.3 mSTRIRUTION OF DWELLINC UNITS
DwelliRg uRits peFlliittea iF! the f.t;riculture/Rural, .\I,TIctllture/Rural Mi1led Use District area
may net e)(ceea tHeir ooaerlyiAg aeRsity as set fortH ia t.\le StatemeHt of Cempliaace aEtil sUCH
time as the fliture Laad '3Ge Elemeat efthe Cellier Ceooty GrowtH Management Plan is
aHleF!dea iF! StiCH a \':ay tHat dwenint; HlTitS may ee sHiftea Hem UrBlffi Residential te
.^ogrieultme/Rural, .\I,TIctllture/Rural Mi1ledl'se District area.
3.1 CENERf.L DESCRIPTION
.^oreas aesigRated as "R" eR tHe PUD Master Pllffi are desigAea tEl accemmoaate a full range of
residefltial a'::enint; tlnit t)'jles, a fun raHge Elf recreatisflal facilities, essefltial ser.qces, ana
cHstOfRar)' accessory uses.
THe apjlrs1limate acreage oft.\le "R" District is inaicated ea the PUD Master Plan. This acreat;e
is based Eln cSRcejltHal aesigfls aRd is aJ3flr01limate. j\etual acreages of an de':eleflmeat kaets
v:illlJe J3revided at tRe time of site developmeF!t plaR or J3relimiRary sHbdivisioF! plat approvals in
aecerdaace ...:itH Di-:ision 3.3 and DivisiEln 3.2, resjlecti':el)', of IRe Collier COURt)' LDC.
Residential tracts are desib'lled te aCeOrRB10aate iRtemal roadways, OJ3efl sflaces, parks and
afReflity areas, lakes aRa water maaagemeHt facilities, and ether siniilar uses [oooa iR resideatial
~
~ USES PERMITTED:
1. ResidentiallGolfTracts (RG):
A. Principal Uses
I. Single- family detached dwelling units.
2. Single fuJRily lffia zero lot liBe dwelliRgs. Zero lot line dwellings.
3. Single-family attached and townhouse dwellings.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 208 of 247
H
4. Two-family and duplex dwellings.
5. Multiple-family dwellings.
6. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses
and which the Planning Services Director detennines to be compatible in the
"RG" District
B. Accessory Uses/Structures:
1. Uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses permitted.
2. Guest houses, pursHant to Se0ti8R 2.B.] 1 of the Collier Coooty LDC.
3. Common area recreational aHa utilitarian facilities.
4. Clubhouse or recreation centers for residential uses.
5. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to, boardwalks, nature
trails. bikewavs, gazebos, boat and canoe docks. fishing piers, picnic areas, fitnes~
trails and shelters.
6. Model homes, welcome centers and sales trailers.
7. Golf Course. practice areas and ranges. golf cart barns. rest rooms, shelters snack
bars and golf course maintenance yards.
8. Golf Club Complex as located on the Master Plan:
1. Retail establishments accessory to the permitted uses in the District such
as, but not limited to, golf. tennis and recreation related sales.
11. Restaurants, cocktail lounges. and similar uses intended to serve club
members and club guests
111. Pro-shops, golf club, tennis clubs, health spas and equestrian clubs.
9. Shuffleboard courts. tennis courts, swimming pools, and other types of accessory
facilities intended for outdoor recreation.
10. Golf course, golf club. tennis clubs, health spas and equestrian clubs.
] 2. Guardhouses. gatehouses, and access control structures.
13. Essential services. pursuant to the LOC.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 209 of 247
H
14. Water management facilities and related structures.
15. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank
treatments.
16. Communi tv and neighborhood parks. recreational facilities. communi tv centers.
17. Temporarv construction, sales, and administrative offices for the developer,
builders. and their authorized contractors and consultants, including necessary
access ways, parking areas and related uses.
18. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape buffers berms, fences
and walls.
l2." Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses
and which the Board of Zoning Appeals detennines to be compatible in the "RO"
district.
II. Conservation/Preserve Tract:
A. Principal Uses:
I. Passive recreation uses limited to the following so long as clearing for such uses
does not result in the reduction of Preserve acreage below the minimum
requirement:
1. Boardwalks
11. Environmental uses (wetlands and conservation areas)
lll. Pedestrian bridges
IV. Equestrian trails
v. Pervious nature trails except where American Disabilities Act
requires otherwise.
VI. Native Wildlife sanctuary
Vl1. Inclement weather shelters, in preserve upland areas only unless
constructed as a part of a permitted boardwalk svstem. The shelters
shall be a maximum of 150 square feet each.
2. Environmental research
3. Drainage and water management facilities subiect to all required permits.
4. Anv other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list or permitted
principal uses. as detennined bv the Board of Zoning Appeals through the process
outlined in the LDC.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 210 of 247
EXHIBIT B
FOR
MIRA SOL RPUD
~ DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Table R I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the~
Resiaefltial Dislriet. RPUD.
B. Site aevelopmeflt staflaards for Categeries I 5 set fortH ifl Table II apply te plattea pareel
BouHaaries.
C. Stanaaras for parkiHg, laHdseapiHg, sit;ns aHd ether lafla uses WHere suell S,standards-are-
not speeified specificallv set forth herein shall are-ffi be those specified in applicable
sections of the aeeenlaflee witll Collier CeuHty LDC in effect ffi as of the date time of
approval of the site development plan (SDP) or subdivision plat. appT8\'al. Unloss
ether.vise ifldieatea, requirea yards, lleigHts, and fleor area stanaaras apply te priHeipal
strnctHres.
D. Develepment standaras for owes flet speeif.ieally set furtll ifl Table II sRall be eslabliohed
aliriflg the site dovelopmeHt plaH approval phase as set fortH iH Divisien 3.3 ofilie LDC
iH accerdaHce '?:ith tllose staHaards of tHe zBfliflg district '1:hicR is !Rost similar te the
proj3esea use.
E. Off street parbnt; required for tHe multi family uses shall be aesessea bJ' parl:iHt; aisles
or dri':cways '?:hicR are separate Kom aHY roaas wRich serie more tRaE oHe de,"elopmeEt.
.^~ brreen s:fJaee area of Rot less tRan teR feet (1 Q') if} ';:idth. as l.:t1eaSUrea frcnTl payemeRt
eage to pa':emeEt eage shall sepamte any parkiHg aisle er dri':eway Kern aEY abllttiflg
ma4-
F. Sint;le furEily patie afla zeT8 lot line awelliHgs are iaentified separately Kem siHgle
family aetachea dwellings witH eeH\'entioflal siae J'ara requirements to aistiEguisR these
types of reSiaeHGeS for the pHTJlese ef applyiflg the aevelepmeflt stanaards uflEler Table II.
G. Housing structure types iflsllldiHg let 8rieHtati8fl fer siflgle f[lffiily aetaellealleHsing SOl ell
as zero 18t line versus Bon zero lot liBe orientations maJ' FlOt Be ITliJwd ~^,ithiF1 the safFle
develepment traet.
H
Agenda Item No< 88
April 28, 2009
Page 211 of 247
TABLE II I
~UR~_SOl. CO~~fUl";ITY
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
"RG" RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Single Zero Lot Two Family Single Multi- Clubhouse/
PERMITTED USES Family Line and Duplex Family Family Recreation
AND STANDARDS Detached Attached Dwellings Buildings
and *6
Townhouse
Category Princioal Structures I 2 3 4 5 6
Minimum Lot Area 5,000 SF 4,000 SF 3,500 SF I2IT 3,500 SF 9,000 SF n/a
lot or unit 4
*3
Minimum Lot Width ~ *4*7 50'*7 40'*7 35' per lot or 35'*7 90' n/a
unit *7
~fimHH:lFB L0t De]3tR +00"- +00"- +00"- +00"- +00"-
Front Yard Setback *2 20' *2*7 ~ 20' *2*7 ~ 20'*2*7 ~ 20' *2*7 ~ 20'*2 ~ 25'
Side Yard Setback 7.5 *7 00rI0'*7 7.5' *7*8 7.5' *7*8 15' *5 5'
Rear Yard Setback *1 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' *7 15' 0'
Rear Yard *1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Rear Yani .'\eeessery w.: w.: w.: w.: w.:
Setback From Golf Course 10' *7 10' *7 10' 10' 10' 20'
Setback From Preserves 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25'
Maximum BaildiBg Zoned 35 ~ feet 35' feet 35~ feet 35 ~ feet 50' feet Q.. 50' (2 stories
Height ,q stories not to over oarking
ex ceed not to exceed
50')*9 50')
Actual Height 45' 45' 45' 45' 65' 75'
Distance Between Principal & 10' 10' 10' 10' 20' "4 *5 15' or 5BH
Accessory Structures whichever is
l,1feater *6
Floor Area Min. (S.F.) 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 750 SF n/a
Single Family Zero Lot Two Family Single Family Multifamily Clubhouse/
Accessorv Structures Detached Line and Duplex Attached and Dwelling Recreation
Townhouse Buitdings *6
Front Yard Setback *2 SPS *7 SPS *7 SPS SPS SPS SPS
Side Yard Setback 5' *7 o or 10' *7 5' 5' 10' 5'
Rear Yard Accessorv Setback *1 10' *7 10' *7 10' 10' 10' 10'
Setback From Preserves 10' 10' 10' to' 10' 10'
Distance Between Accessorv 0' or to' 0' or 10' 0' or to' 0' or to' 0' or 10' 0' or to'
Strucrures on the same lot
Distance Between Accessory and 0' or 10' O' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or to'
Princioal Structures on same lot
Maximum Zoned Height SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS
Actual Height SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS
All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted.
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 212 of 247
Front yards shall be measured as follows:
A. If the parcel is served by a public right-of--way, setback is measured from the adjacent right-or-way line.
B, If the parcel is served by a private road, setback is measured from the back ofcurh (if curbed) or edge of pavement (iCon! curbed).
':. Iftlil parBal J;n: fnlAlaga SR t 8 5iG~Ei, iJB~BaBl' jn 1'R!J8!Hlma fnH'f1 tlie "iEll!' itR tfle EiR8RI!Cil fr8Rtael! itA IRO f'ERf!f ff8Rtage BOGigR8.teJ aD a sial!
,.......
*1 - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tmets which abut lakes and open spaces. Setbacks from lakes for all principal and
accessory uses may be 0' providing architectural bank treatment is incorporntcd into design and subject to written approval from Collier County Engineering
Review Sectinn.
"'2 Ql:IilaiRe Rl:'igRt SRlill be thl? l.'fti:al EliotaRBl.' I"ROE!.[ilirl.'B fFC1R tAl.' HfGt Rat1itarlo IiFliGRed f.1for I:'I~ atif:lR to tAo Ifpr ~R'Rtl5t t:iaiGAU9 lll:'iliag ",Is atiBFI sftHi!
--
*J.J. - Single-family and multj~fami]y dwellings v,"hich provide for two p<lrking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than in
private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to ~ 10 feel for the garage. Mulli.ta.milv dwel1imi!s which provide for two nark in!! snaces ",'ithin
an enclosed arn e and rovide for uest arkin may reduce the front vard to 15 feet. This reduction shallnol result in an a roval to im ede or block the
sidewalk. Front loaded l!ara!!cs shall be a minimum of 23 feet from the cd!!e of sidewalk.
*41 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area al]ocation of 3,500 ~ SQuare feet for a total minimum lot area of 7 ,000 ~ SQuare feet.
*~ - Minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% for cui-dc-sac lots pnl\'ided the minimum lot area requirement is maintained.
*e.i - Building distance may be reduced at garage to half the sum of the hei!!ht of the !!ara!!cs.
*6 Althoul!h neither setbacks nor separation between stmc(ures are anp]icab]e to the clubhouse and other recreation structures located on a clubhouse tract
neither the clubhouse nor any other recreational stmcture shall be located closer than 25 feet from any residential or oreservalion boundary.
*7 - The use of flag lots is allowed to "wvide maximum flexihility in subdivision desi!:!:n and may varv from the minimum lot widths. However. neither lhe
minimum lot area. nor the minimum distance between structures mav be reduced.
*8 - Zero fool (0') setback lor internal units.
*9 - Inclusive Munder buildin!! PUl.kin!!
BH = Bui]ding Hei!!ht
SPS = Same as Princinal Structure
~
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28. 2009
Page 213 of 247
~ECTlON IV
COLF COURSE
U PURPOSE
The J3a1']3ese oft~is Soetien is te sot feRh the uses J3e_itted aHa de'.'oleJ31'Hem standanls for the
Golf Coarse Traets, designate a as "G" and "RG". TRe primary ftmetien aHd plifflese oftRese
TraGts \':ill be te proviae aestRetieally pleasing eJ3en areas, golf eoarse aRa reereational faeilities.
E)~eopt in areas authorized for aevele]'lffient, all goea 'luality native trees aHd sa-oos shall be
]'lrsteetea aHd J3resor\'ea wRerever ]'lmetieallle.
i.2 PERMITTED USES ".ND STRUCTURES
No bllilaing or strlletHre, or ]'lart thereef, sRall be ereeted, altered or HBoa, or land or water Hsod,
in ';:Role or in ]'lan, for etRer than tRe fellov:iag:
!.. PeFffiitted Priaeipal Uses aRa Stnletares
I. Golf eeurses aRd golf elHb faeilities, iaelllding t01'Hflorary golf elubRsusOB.
2. Tennis elubs, RoaltR spas, e'lHeotriaa dubs, and ether reereatisnal elu13s.
3. Prejeet iafsTInatiea and sales eeaters.
4. COHlillooity and gelf Gomoe l'11aifltoaaHee areaB, maiateaaHee builffiflgs, essemial
sorviees, ilTigatierr water aRd effluent storage tanks aHd J30naB, ';:ater aaa
wastewater treatHJent plants, utility prnEfling faeiltios aad J3\HHfl builaings, utility
ana maiateflanGe staff offiees.
5. Publie admiaistratiye faGilities.
e. TeleGoFrllIJuniGtHiofls faeilities.
"7. CsmmlHReations tewcr.
S. O]'len space HseB aHa structures sucR as, BlIt f10t limited to, Boardwalks, nature
tmils, bike?:ays, laFldscaJ3e nurseries, bazee8s, boat aHa canoe aeeks, fislJ.iflg
piers, ]'licFlie areas, FitFless trails and SHelters.
<,'. I.FlY other J3rinsipalllGe whisR is cOFFl)3arable ifl aatHre wi#! tRe f-eregeiFlg uses
and '::Rich tRe PlaFlfliag Serviees Director dete_iaes to be eOHl)3atible.
4
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 214 of247
B. PenRitted .^~Gcessory Uses aRa Strblstures
1. .^..eeessery HoSes and stmeGlres Gl::lstem.arily asseciatea '.~:itR tae flriFleiflal Hses
peDRittea ill this District
2. Pre sfleps, practice areas aHa raAges, belf eatt 88.fliS, rest Teems, shelters, sRBek
bars aRa gaIf GGUfSe rFlaintsfl8Flee yards.
3. Retail esta.elishmeFlts aeeess8ry to tHe flenTlittea l:lses iF! tHe District SbWR as, 8ut
flot limited t8, gelf, teRRis, aFHi reereatieFlal relates sales.
1. Restal:lrants, coel:tail IOHl1ges, afld similar HEISS iflteFl8ea to gar:€! shill FEe~em
and eJlIb guests.
5. Sauff.1eboani courts, teflllis GaHris, SV,'ilTlmiflg }30018, aRa all otaer t)'fl8S of
8esessery faeilities inteflasa for outaoor reereati0fl.
6. ~^~flY ether 8eeessery Hse ',T/:BieR is eomflaral3Ie in nature Tl:ith tRe fer-egeing Bses
and T.T/hicB. the Plar~iFlg Ser\'iees Direeter aetelllliFles t8 be 60lTlflatible.
o DEVELOPMENT RECULl.TIONS
.'\. Prinei13al struetures sAallse set ba61~ a miHiRHiiTl of t\T,'8Bty feet (20') fh:nn golf e01:1rse
bellllaaries ana ]3ri'?ate reaas, aRa tweRtj' fi'?e [.eet (25') fmm all PUD beullaaries alla
residential traets. Rear yaras fer priaeipal aHa aeeessory structHFes 0n leES and tracts
Tl,'B.ich abut a lal~e, flOfl jurisaietiGnal opefl sflace Of flatiT.'B T.'e';0tatioFl presefvatioB areas
may ae 2em feet (0') e)[se]3t that all arshitectllral aarne treatmeRt shall be inseFflerated
iRte tHe desigR.
B. ~\e0essOlJ' strnctHres shalls!? set baeIc a miFliml:1Hl GfteB feet (1 Q') :limn golf course
bouRdaries alld pri'?ate reads, alla twefltj' feet (20') fre1R all PUD seuBaaries aBd
resiaelltial tracts.
C. LigHtiBt; fasilities SHall ae aFFatlgea iB a maflfler WHiSH will pretest roaaways atId
resiEleFttial preflerties frem direct glare ef l:1ILeasofla131e iflterfereFlce.
D. ~4:aj'~imb11Tl height ef struetHres
I. Priflsi]3al StfllstllTeS 2 steries er tHirty foet (30').
" .^~eeessory Struetures 1 story or fifteen feet (15').
E. 1fin}mUFfl aistanee beh,'eea flrineiflal struemres Ten feet (10').
F. MillimUIR fleer ai'ea NOBe reEjuirea.
G. ~fiRiFRHfB.10t er pareel area rJene reql::lired.
4d.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 215 of 247
H. ParkiHg fer the eOHllRlIRity eeHteF/chH3flOUSe SHall 8e t!n-ee Gpaees !ler every eHe thousaFla
(1,OOQ) sEjuare feet ef gress fleer area, whieh shall 8e cOHsiGerea iHdusive ef tlle requirea
golf ceurse parkiHg.
1. StaFlaanls for parbHg, laHaSCllfle, sigas aFla otfler l!lFu:l uses where s,wh staFlElardG are Flet
speeifieEl hereiFl, are te 8e iH aeeonlaFlce with the Cellier COIiHt)' LDC iH eff.ect at the
time of site E1evelopfIleAt lllaFl allpro\'al. UHless etflerl.'ise indicatea, reEjuireEl yards,
heih4Hs, aflEl floor area standarEls a!lj'lly te llrineilltll struet\ifes.
~
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 216 of 247
SECTION V
PRESERVE DISTRICT
Sol PURPOSE
The pl::lIflose of this Seetiefl is t8 iaeatif}' pefFRittea l::lses aRa aeveloI3meFlt staRdanls for areas
v.'itkiFl tRe ~.1irasoI PLTD eOITH-RUBi!)' desig-Bated Gn tRe },faster Plaa as the Preser,'e Distriot.
So2 CENER.'\L DESCRIPTION
~\reas desi6flateG as Preser,'e Elfl t1:1e ~1aster Plan are desi.gT:H~d to aeG01TlI-Reaate a full [aBbe sf
GOFlservatiof1 8:I1EllimiteEl water rnaaagemeflt Hses aHa f.HFlGtioFlS. THe }3rimary flUfJ38se of tHe
Preser.'0 Distriet is to retaifl viable FlatHrally fUReti8fling V/etlaFl8 aHa 1:l131anG systems, 10 allB?:
fur restOFatiOH aHa eHlwneemeHt of imllactea or degradea wetlaRa systerRs, aHate pf('l"(iae aa
opeR space ameHity for tHe eHjoymeHt of the MiraGoI PUD resiaeats.
SoJ USES PERMITTED
1'Jo bHildiFlg or strHehIre or 13art tHereof, SHall be ereetea alterea Br used, Of laFlablsea, in ~.T:1iole or
in part, for etHer tHaR ilie f{)llewiRt;, subjeet to Regional, State aad Feaer-al 118Fffiits wHeH
reqliired;
A. Priacillal U 5es
1. ParJ:s, flassiT.'0 reereatioFlal areas, boan.h\'alks.
2. BibRg, Hiking, ana Hamre tFails.
3. V,Tildlife sanotHary.
4. Paili'Na)'s aHa/or Bridges, sul3jeet te allflT8flriate apj3revals BY peFlRiltiHg agefleies.
5. Recreational shelters ana festrooms, iB Presen'0 HfllanB areas.
6. DFaiFlage and 7:ater maFlagemeat [aeilities S1:113:100t to all needed penFlits.
7. ~^~flY ether aeeessery Hse v.'hieh is GOl1=lflaFable ifl nature V:itR tHe foregeing uses
ana v.'RicA iRe PlanniNg Seryiees Direetof aetenYiiFleS to De Gom13atible in tRe
Preserve Distriet.
g
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 217 of 247
S.1 DE'/ELOPMENT STAND!~RDS
"^.. Seil3ack re(juiremeRts fBr all s~metares shall Be in aeeonlaaee with Section 3.2.g.~.7.3, of
the Callier Count'o' LOC.
B. Lighting facilities shall be arranged to prevent Eiistur.eflllees to the ]Jreserves.
C. Ma;[iffilHH height of strnehires TweRty fi'ie feet (25').
D. MiniflTHffi distflllee Between princi]'lal strnetures Tefl feet (10').
E. Minimlllil. distanee bep.veen aeeessary struetures Piye feet (5').
P. ~4:iRiHll.ifFl floaf a-rea }Jene reflUireEl.
G. Minimum lot or ]'lareel area None required.
S.S PRESERVE DISTRICT CONSERV"'\TION E!~SEMENT
!. non ellelusi','e e8HseT\'ation easement or tract is re(juireEl by the Collier CoUflty LDC, Seet.jon
3.~.g.~.7.3 for lanEls ineludeEl in the Preserve Distriet. In aElElition to Collier Calmty, a non
mCclusiye eOAseryation easement may also be re(jHired B)' otHer reh'l1latory ageneies wi~h
jHrisdiction oyer Preserve District lands. In additisn to cSHl]Jlyiag viith the ]JTOYisisas ofthe
Collier COW'lty LOC, said easernef!t shall Be ]JTO\'ided in aeeordance with the terms set fGTth if!
any aj'l]JlicalJle permit grflllted BY other ageaeies. The De'iels]'ler. its suecessor(s) or assigas,
iFlslHding the Huster pT8jlerty swners' assosiation shall be reG]JoasiBle for eoatrol aad
maintefHmce oflaads wit-hiH the Preserye Oistriet.
The eonser,.atiofl eas_eat utilizes on this Projeet will provide fer allo'lianee offut-are
permittiag and mitigation afaa)' im]'laeted 'lietlands 8xie to ~he final alignmeRt efthe future C.R.
951 eerridor.
~
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 218 of 247
EXHIBIT E
FOR
MIRASOL RPUD
DEVIATIONS
I. Deviation #1 seeks relief from Appendix B of the LDC, entitled "Tvoical Street Sections and
Right-of-wav Design Standards", which requires cul-de-sacs and local streets less than one
thousand feet (1.000') in length to have a minimum sixtv foot (60') right-of-wav width and
two ten foot (] 0') wide travel lanes, to allow a minimum right-of-wav width of fortv feet
(40') for private streets and fiftv feet (50') for spine, collector and interconnecting roads.
2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.0l.J. Street Svstem
Requirements. to allow that Cul-de-sacs in excess of one
thousand feet (1,000') in length. For anv cul-de-sac exceeding 1.200 feet in length. the
roadwav must include at approximatelv ] .200 feet intervals design features which provide for
the abilitv of emergencv vehicles to turn around. Traffic roundabouts. evebrows.
hammerheads or similar design features shall be allowed.
3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.0. Street Svstem Requirements. which
requires that street name markers shall be approved by the County Manager or designee for
private streets or in conformance with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be
waived. However, breakawav posts shall be used.
4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.0I.R. Street Requirements
which requires that street pavement painting, striping and reflective edging
of public roadwav markings shall be orovided by the developer as required
bv the U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. This requirement shall be waived for private
roadwavs with 40' widths. Traffic circulation signage shall be in conformance
with U.S.D.O.T.F.H.W.A. Manual on Unifonn Traffic Control Device
standards.
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 219 of 247
SECTION VI EXHIBIT F FOR MlRASOL RPUD
CENER.\L LIST OF DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS
6.1 P'-!RPOSE
The pllTflsse sf tHis Sectisa is te set [eItH the ae\'elspmeat eSFBl-llitmeats f-er the aevelsjlHl8nt of
tHe Pr8j ect.
6.2 GEJ>JER..'.L
/\11 facilities shall be csastructea ia strict accordaace \':it-li fiflal site de\'elspmeflt plafls, fiflal
swai\'isisa plats, afld all apjllicable State aaalocallaws, csaes, afla repdatisa ap]3liea13le
to tHis PUD. E)~cept wRere speciFically asted or statea stherwise, the staaaards afla
specificatisFls of tHe LDC, Di'/isiofl3.2 shall apply ts t-liis Pr8ject e':eFl if the laRd witmfl
tHe PUD is flOt ts be platted. THe Developer, His SHeeessor ana assipls, SHall Be
respsflsible for tHe con:mitmeBts outliRed in tHis aocument.
The Deyeloper, his Sl1eeessor er assigflee, sftall agree to fe 11oy,' the }.1aster Plafl aHa t.a0
regulatiofls of the PUD as adoptea, ana aHY ot-lier cORaitiofls or l1lodifieatioRs as may be
afoTeed te ifl tHe rezemFlg of tHe property. Ia additisl1, as:.' sueeesser or assignee ia title, is
bmmd BY tHe sSffimitmSl1ts '::itHia tms dOCBmel1t.
Regulations for development ofthe Mirasol RPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of
this RPUD Ordinance and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP)
in effect at the time of issuance of anv development order in which said regulations relate. Where
this RPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the
specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall applv.
~A. RPUD MASTER PLAN
A1." Exhibit ~ "C2", the PUD Master Plan, illustrates the proposed development and is
conceptual in nature. Proposed tract, lot or land use boundaries or special land use
boundaries, shall not be construed to be specific final and may be adjustea aHriBg tHe
plattiFlg or site developmeat plaR approval process varied at anv subsequent approval
phase such as platting or site development plan application. Subject to the provisions of
Section 2.7.3.510.02.13 of the LDC, RPUD amendments may be made from time to
time.
B. ,\lll1eeessary easemeats, deaieations, sr other iRstrul'ael1ts sRall Be graatea te iHsare the
contiauea opemtion aad maiateaance sf all servise ffiilities Effia all COBlHlOB areas ifl the
Project.
C. THe fellewil1g SHaH Be eSl1siaerea miBsr CHaRges afla reFifl8ffieHts, sHBject to t-lie
limitatiofls sf SectieR 5.3,'. sf this PUD.
1. Due to tae comple)~ity of ereatiag afla permittiBg a regioaal flo\',~::ay thrsBgH t-lie
Project, reconfiguratieR ofpresen'e areas, jarisdictioflal wetlafla limits, Effia
mitigatioR features as a result of regulatory abBflCY revie'l: will be coasiaerea
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 220 of 247
miR8T if tRere is He blFlaee6f)table net 18ss of T:iaele fuBctierHflg TNetlaflas er F1ati~:0
T,'Ggetatisf1 flreser:es as a TesHlt of tHe ameFldFF10flt.
&.+
2. P...ec0F1fi;uratioF1 oflal~es, flol1as, canals, 0T ether y.'ater maflagemeflt facilities
",",'Rere SH6R cha:n;es are eonsisteHt ",":ita the eriteria afiBe SalliB Flange \Vater
~1aflagefl1eFlt District and Collier Ceuflty, aRG "NEey€! there is Be further
eneroaefUReRt i11te preser,e areas.
3. Resonfig-uratiofl of aesigFl fBatBres.
4. Internal reaHf,1llmeflt ef rights of ',T:ay etHer thaFl a relecation of aeeess PGints to
tAe PUD.
5. ResenfiguratioR of resideHtial pareels ,/,'R0Fl there is HG eneroaehmeflt IntEl
preser,'e areas.
B.1 SCHEDULE Of DEVELOPMENT,1MOl>IITORIl'JG R.WORT .~.ND SUNSET PROVISION
~^... InitiatiGR ef C0flstrnstiofl Elf} the ~fifasol PUD Prejeet is eeEteFBfllatea ia the ealeHaM
year '001 v:ith Gem131etioE efthe flrejeet iFlfrastrnetHre aFltieipated to eeol::H' in
stages,
E. 1foaitoriRg Ref10rt: /\R aRRHa! men1toring reflert shall be sl:lEnnitted 13Ufsuaat to Seetion
2.7.3.~ eftAe Collier COHsty LOC.
C. TAe Projeet is sHBjeet to tAe sllRGetti11g jlroyisioss ef Seetie11 2.7.3.1 eftlle LDC.
6.5 POLLING PL^.CES
PHrSHaRt to Seelien2.B.30 oftAe LDC. jlro',isien sRalllle made fer lAe future Hse ofspaee within
a eGFfl1110n b1:l.ilai11'; for the pHIflose of aeeElnunoaatiF1g the fHnotiEln sf aN e!eetGFa! flolliFlg fl1aoe.
f.s agreemest sRalllle rGeerdeEl i11 tAe Oftieial ReeerEls of tAe Clerk ef tAe Cireuit Court of
Collier COURt)', v:ll.ieA sll.alllle llinElisg Hj30R as)' asEl all SHseessom is istereGt to tAe Deyeloper
that aeEluire O'l.'FlersEiI3 Elf SHOE eommeFl Meas iFlGlHdiFlg, But Flot lilnited to, Gonaemiail:lHl
asseeiations, hm:neG'NNerS' asseciatioFlS, or c01:nnlHFlity recreation l pl:lblic b1.:lildiNgs I fH:lblic
rooms or similar eommOR faeilities Ie he H,~eEl for a jlelliRg plaee if Elele_iRed 10 be neeessary
by the Sllpel":isor ef EleetioRs.
a.a SURDlVISION REQUIREMENTS f.ND STf.NDf.RD DESICN SURSTITVTIONS
A. SiEle'::alks / Ilike patlls BAall e011[o_ wit A SHbseoties 3.2.8.3.17 oftAe LDC.
B. Pri':ale streelG shall eORfonn with the rigllt ef v:ay 'Nidlll reEjHH-eme11ts of SuaseetieR
3.2,8.1.16.5 oflhe LOC eJleej3t as follews:
Agenda Item No. 88
.-'lpril 28, 2009
Page 221 of 247
1. CloIl de saes and leeal streets less than ene tHeusaml feet (1,000') in length are
requi>ed te haye a mini_ feTty feet (~O') right ef ','lay ',\'idth and t','IO ten foot
(10') \':ise travel lanes as reEjuired sy Slffiseetien 3. ~.8.1. 1 ~.5 ef the LDC.
2. l.lI other eal de saes are reE]Hired to ha':e a minimurn forty feet (10') Fight of way
\Vieth aHe t'::o ten feet (10') wide travel lanes as reEj'uired by Subseetien
3.~.8.1.1~.5 efthe LDC.
~
3. l.lI et-ller loeal streets are requires to have a miRimuffi ferty f.oet (10') right of
way and two ten f.oet (10') wide t-ra-vellanes as reEj'aired So' Slffiseetion
3.~.8.1.18.5 efthe LOC.
1. Cal ae saes ll'lay eJ~eeed the ene thoasaml foot (1,000') leH;'!h lRaJdlIU_ of
Subssetien 3.2.8. 'l.l ~.~ of the LOC.
5. Tangents set',YSSR reverse eur\'es shall Bot se requiree as per Subseetion
3.2.8.1.1~.10 oft-lle LOC.
~. Street graaes may exeeed the f.oar pereeBt (1~/o) ffiaKilRuffi efSubseetion
3.~.8.1.18J 1 of the LDC pro'lided that applieable fleriea OejJa1tment ef
Transj3ertatien, Manual efVnifenn MinilRBffi Staneards (fDOT MUMS) ans
L^.SHTO eritena are met.
7. LOC, Subseetion 3.2.8.3.19: TRe stanaard that street RalRe marlwrs shall be
appr8vea So' the CeuRty Engineer and eentonnanee '::ith
L'.S.O.O.T.f.H.'.V./\.M.1J.T.C.D. is waiyes. Street pa'o'emeflt paiRtiRg, striping
and refleetiye edgiflg ef maiR read s)'stelR 'Nill 8e wai':ed. Traffie eireulatien
signa be sRall be iR eonformanee wit-ll 1,!.S.D.O.T.f.H.W..\. M.U.T.C.D.
staRdards.
8. LDC, Subseetion 3.2.8.1.]0: The stlilldara tRat PRMs 8e iRstallee in a typieal
water valye eo'o'er shall be waived gab-jest to 111eBumentation seiRg installes in
aeseraanee v:it-ll CRapter 177, Florida Statutes.
9. LDC, Subsection 3.2.8.1, 1~.8: The minimum baek of curs radii for internal reads
shall se 30 feet. with tRe e)~cej3tioR that botR entrance read iRtersectiens sRall ha':e
cm-B radii 0 f 10 feet.
10. LDC, Subseetion 3 .2.8.1.1 ~.9: The minilRum 75 fGet tangent stanears at
interseetions may se redHeed saBjeet te a eertified traffie study sasea upon desigR
speed, site distaRee aRd adeEj-liate reeo':e\)' zone. This requirement sRall not se
waived at both preject aeeess paints.
11. LDC, Susseetien :J .2.8.1.21: The gtaRdard f-er blank utility easings shall se
wai':ea.
&ri-B. TRANSPORTATION
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 222 of 247
Tae aeveleflmeRt oftais PUD Master Plan saall Be sHBjeet te aRa gevemea So' tae folle'::iRg
GOflaitisRs:
~'\. ThE! applieant shall install arterialle\'sl street ligating at tae 13f&jeet 8atr8flee 13rier to the
graatiRg of any eertifieates ef oeeu13aney for the PrBjGct.
R Tae liflfllisaRt gHall Be reGfleRgiBle for tae sest ef a trame sigFlal system at tae flwjeet
entraRoe, if a siplal system is fuHfld te be 'NarraRted and apflre\'ed BY tHe CeHRty.
&.-J-
C 'Ned: '.\'itHiR aRY Collier COI~Rty ribHls of ".a)' sHall meet tHe reqHiremeRts ef tae Cellier
CelUBty RigHt elf 'Nay OrdiBaRee Ne. ,,] 61.
D. THe flrojeet aesess sHall be leleated aRd aesigRea in senfeffiHlBee \':ith the Cel1ier Ceunty
<,"eeeBs MaRagemeBt Pelliej' aflfllieable to this Project.
E. f,ecess to BrokeR Bad: Read, (tHe futHre elltensieR ef CR. "51), if aBY, shall be
GOFlsisteat 'I,'itb tRe Recess ITlanagelnsFlt fllan iN place at the time Elf de':eIs131Uent.
F. THe Pre-jest ribht ef way resen'atieR felr CR. 951 shall Be geRerally lOO feet aleng the
eastern s0Gtien liRe Elf SeetieFlS 10, 15 ana ')~. The Pn:Jjeot '1:ill also ;l2Flerally 13f0'.'iEie
same] 09 feat aloBg the eastern seetioB line elf SeetieRs 15 aRd 2~, 290 feet as it flroeeedr
northwest aeress the Rorthem Aalf af Sectien 15 aRd tAe seHthern Aalf e f SeetieR 10, ami
100 feet at the weotem seetieR liRe of SeetioR 10 as aR altemate alibHIHeRt. THe sfleeifie
right of v:aj' alif,'RmeRt ohall be aeteFFRiRea by a aetailed eerriaor e':alHatieH. The right
of way aedieatieR sAallBe made "!lOR reEjHest eftAe Ceunty. THe read impaet fee eredits
shall Be iR aecerdanee witH the eonsoliaatea Imj3aot Fee OraiBaRce iB effoet at the time of
dedieation.
G. THe ceRseT\'atieH easement sAall pre':ide for tHe fHture j3eFFRittiflg aaa mitigatioR ef any
iffij3aeted 'NetlaRds aHe te tHe fiHal aligflffieRt aRd eenstroetion eftAe future CR. 951
corriclor.
H. The Prejeet SHall j31'O':ide a j3eaestnan flatH'::ay to Be leeatea aloRg tAe Immol:alee Road
right ef way SR the Herth siae eftHe eaRal.
1. The Prajse! '?'ill13ro','iEie int0reonnecti8fl to the asjaeeflt pr813erty, FHture ~A..etiyity Center
located 'l.'itAin Hie southeast j30rtien ofSeetion ~~.
1. THe Ceunty may Ill8dify, iflehlElin.; closl:1re, aA)' IqqeEliaFl 0J:leniFlg: OR Immol:ale0 Reaa, if
in tAe OfliRioR oftae C8URty, aRY eperatioRal or safety e8RGideratiBR makes sueA
llloaifieatiofl necessary or desiraBle.
K. Prier tel tAe first PSI' ef SDP aflprsval, the applieaRt shall previae a detailed
traRsportatieH aRalysis ef tAe system 8fImmol:alee Read from Old Cypress Boule':ard
(Future LegaH Bsule':ara E)[ten~;isR) to CR. 951. SAould tAe aRalysis idelitifY
deficieHeies er o]3eratienal 'safoty flroblel'RS, the applieant shall eitAer be limite a tel tAe
amount sf de\'eleflment that may oeeur or ]3TO':ide the Reeessary mitigatioR at tAe
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 223 of 247
afJplieant's CElst tEl meet level of service requiremems. Sait! aetefFRinatioll shall be
reqHired J'lrior ta tRe first PSP ar SDP apjlraval.
L. The value eflaFld jlHfcRased freB1 the prej3erty e\','ner \3y tRe CSlInty fer any of the future
C.R. 951 (Callier Boule'ianl) right of way, shall be a value Flat ts exceea mITeRt land
values at the time ef rezoRiFlg, aRa sRall \3e based sRllle valae ass8ciatea with. tRe
proflerty's former Rmal f.gricultaral zsni>>g aesigRatioR.
1. Upon the Countv's adoption of a CR-95 I extension corridor alignment. and within 180
davs of the Countv's request. the Developer. its successors or assigns, shall dedicate to
County fee simple right-of-wav for the roadway and drainage svstem at the
predetermined amount of $45,000 per acre, for those areas located outside the limits of
the residential/Golf Course areas depicted as "RIG" on the PUD master plan.
Upon recordation of the deed or other convevance instrument in the public records of
Collier County for the dedication of the right-of-way. the Developer shall become
eligible for Transportation Impact fee credits in accordance with the consolidated
impact fee Ordinance in effect at the time of recordation of the dedication. If the
proiect is built out or has prepaid transportation Impact Fees to be assessed for the
proiect, then the Developer or its successors or assigns shall be eligible to request cash
reimbursement.
The Developer shall not be responsible to obtain or modify anv permits on behalf of the
Countv related to the extension ofCR-951.
2. The Developer shall construct a 10' multi-use pathwav to be located along the
Immokalee Road right-of-wav on the North side of the Cocohatchee Canal as a part of
the entrance construction. Completion of construction of the pathway shall be
completed concuITentlv with the vehicular connection to the existing bridge over the
Cocohatchee Canal.
3. The Developer entered into a Dcvelopcr Contribution Agreement with Collier Countv
on Mav 3,d. 2007. Pursuant to the tenns of that agreement. the proiect is vested for 799
dwelling units for the purposes of transportation concurrency.
4. The Developer. it's successors. or assigns agree that at the time of any subsequent
Development Order approval within this PUD. the Developer. or its successors or
assigns, shall be responsible for their respective fair share of the North leg of the CR-
951/Broken Back Road intersection with Immokalee Road, which includes modification.
replacement or relocation of the at-grade bridge crossing the Cocohatchee Canal.
M
Ii.S VTILITIES
DlIe to tRe c8>>struetion afiRe regional flow'l:ay tbnlHgh !he Mirasol Project, it is aRtieipatcd t:Rat
a COfRlffil>>ity Developme>>t District may \3e neoessary t8 fund this J'lHblic facility as well as other
essential pwjeot ser/ioes.
Agenda Itern No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 224 of 247
The ae\'elepm8Flt erEhil') PTJD P.faster Plan saall13e S1::lbjeet 10 afla g:e','emeEi BY the f<BUsY/iag
8ORaitieRs:
This Prejeet lies 'NitRin taree seetioFls, tRe part aflRs Prejeet ifl SeetisR 22 lies within the
GUrreR! DreaR ;\rea. EJcisting Htilities Fleeessary 10 ser:e the Prejeet are leeate8 along the
sOHtAem Beraer efSeetieFl 2'\ ....,'ithifl tAe Immol:alee Read right or way. Te }3f0T:ide
SetTles to Seeti8fl 22, 1::ltilities 'loTII 8e 8J:teFleed iFltereally.
S@etiefl 15 is IGeatea 8Htsiae tHe GHITeRt UrBan Ser:iees .'\rea. The prs130sea asveIOflffieflt
if! Seetiefl 15 6SRSists Elf a gelf 60blrse, resia0stial aFld aeeessory Hses, SHaH as the
GltiSR01::lSe afH:I maiFltenaHee facility. Septie sj'stems aFld ',",'ells will be bltilized in the
eT,'SRi tHat Sestina E of this aoeUllleFlt ean fIot Be irn13Iem0fltea.
Seetien ] Q is also loeated autsiae tlle current UrBan Ser:ices .^,rea. Tlle flTOj3esed
de~:eI0pment in Section 1 9 eOfIsists of only a golf GOl:lrse afIG aGcessory Hses SHGh as a
dublleuse aRa mainteRaRse faeility. /\ sefltic ~j'stefH aRa well will be utilized for eaell
struetHre. Due te tile Ratural bamer ereated by tile creatien ef tlle flo',':'.vay, ellteRsioR of
v:ater aBa se7,'0r facilities is B8t feasiele.
In tile flertioR eftlle Prejeet '?,itlliR the Hr.aan ai'ea tile fo]]ey:iRg ~tipHlatiens ~jJ]Y:
~'\. '.Vater EiistriBution, sewage co lIeetioFl ana traFlsnlissioFl JiBes t8 ser:e the Prejeet are to 80
Elesi.6Tfled, eOfIstrueted, GElflyeyea, aHa lor oY,'Hed ana InaiBtaiFl0d in aeeorElanee with
Collier CaHnty OnliRance l'Io. 97 17, as ameRdea, aRa etller ajJj3lieaele Ce\inty rules and
regHlatiens.
B. /JI 0BstolT1ers eont=teetiRg t8 the ~l.'ater distribBticn=t and se~.T:age eolIeetioFl [aGilities to 190
eClf!struetea will be custemers ef tile Ceunty aRd ','iill be billea by tile Counl:,' iR
aecerdaRse witll the Cellnty's estaBlislled rates. SlleHld tlle CeuRty Ret be if! a jJesitieR to
j3roYiae seVier seryice te tlle Prejeet, tile sewer eHstemers ~hall Be cllstemers of the utility
established to serie the Pmjeet until the Ceunty's effsite sewer laeilities are ayailable te
serve tlle Pr&jeet or septic taRks meeting tile reqHirements of floriaa Statlltes rnay be usea
on aR iRterim Basis.
C. The eR site water aistrielltien system c;erYiRg the Prejeet must be eOllReetea to the
Distriet's
~.T,'ater main aHd Ff1l:1St be eonsisteFlt witH the maia sizing re'll:lirsmeFlts speeifieEi in the
COBnty's Water Master Plan aRd eJltenaed th;-ouf;heHt the Pr&jeet. During the aesigR
pllase ef these facilities, the fCl IIewiRg features shall be ineerporatea into the aistrieutioR
system:
~
] . Deaa eRa maiRs SHall iRelHde aeaa eRa flllshif!g hyarants.
~. StHbs for future s:,'stem if!tereenf!eetion witll adjaeeRt preperties SHall be j3reYidea
tCl tAe propert:,' !iRes oftAe Pr&jeet at 10eatieRs to Be nmtllally agreea to by ilie Ceunty
af!a tAe De\'eleper allriRg the aesigR phase eftHe Projeet.
D. Tile lItilit)' eenstrllction aeclllneRts for the Projeet's sewerage system DHall be prej3al.'ea to
eontaiR the de,~ign aRd eenstruetien of aR eRsite foree maiR, vihieh may ultirRately
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 225 of 247
eo Meet t-he Prejeet to the fumre eeHtml se',':erage faeilities of Collier Co,lIlty. The foree
mala must 'ee iHtereOflaeetea te the pUHljl statiofl with afljlrojlriately loeatea val'/es to
pen-Rit f.ef simple feaireetiElf1 efthe Pr&jeet's se~.T.'erage, sBBuld eenFleetion to t11.e
COlHlty's e~ntral sey,'er [aeilities e'/er 8eeome availaBle.
E. LElfIao\\'Her may aflj'lly for ?/ater ElfId sewer s~r/iee from a j'luelis er pri'/ate Htility
provid~r.
9.9C ENVIRONMENTAL
The ae'/elopmeHt oftRis PUD Master PlaR shall be su~eet to ana gO'.'emed by tHe foYowiag
eOflaitioHs:
",'c. ElwiroameRtal j'lenRittiflg shall Be ifl aeeordElflee with the State of Florida Eflviroflmelltal
Resource Pe_it Rules afla 8e soojeet to re':iew ElfIa apjlro\'al by C\lffeHt PlanmRg Staff.
Removal of ellotic ':egetatioH shall Rot be the 50le lBitigatioR methoa for iUlj3asts to
Collier COlffity jurisaistioRaI '::etlands.
B. ~^Jl G8FlServatiefl areas shall be aesibIflateEl as GGHser:atioa/preserva-ti8Fl traets Elf
easemeHts Oil all cORstrustiOH plaRs afla sHall 8e resorded 011 the plat with proteetive
eoveaanls j'lcr or similar to Sestioa 7g~.Oe of the Florida StatHtes.
C. Buffers around preser:ea jurisdistioRal wetlallas shall 8e in aeeoraaRee with the State of
Florida EH':irollineHtal Resource Pennit Rules. PreseT\'ed jmisdietioHaI wetlaHas aHd
surrmmaillg buffers shall 'ee illeofJ3orated iHto sORser:ation areas '",hieh SHall be plattea
or recerdea as 6enser,'ation easenH3Flts.
D. j\.H e:lotie ':egetatioll remo':al, mOHitOliRg, aHd maillteHaRSe (eJlotis free) plan for the
site, '::ith emphasis OR the e8Ilser:atisfI/preSeT\,atioHS areas, shall 8e sHlolmitted te ClIrreflt
PlaflHillg Staff for review 811d aflpT8val prior to fiflal site plan/ssRstruetioH plaR aflj3roval.
El. As a part of the environmental resource pennitting process of the South Florida Water
Management District (SFWMD) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers
(USACOE) permitting, recOlmnendations from the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FFWCC) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) regarding impacts to protected wildlife species will be incorporated into the
pennits issued for this Project. The PetitioRer developer shall comply with the guidelines
set forth within those pennits. Habitat management plans shall be provided for tfle--
Flerida paRthor, Florida slaek sear, Big Cj'preS5 f01l sEjuirrel, wood stork, rea coekaded
woodjleeker, aRd all ether protected listed species WHish inhaBit or utilize this prejeet.
2. The property will be required to preserve 511.9 acres of native habitat. This will be
done through a mix of on-site and off-site preservation.
3. Mirasol will provide water qualitv testing as defined in the Mirasol Water Oualitv
Monitoring Plan which is Exhibit #6 of the Mirasol Environmental Resource Permit #
I 1-0203l-P. Anv deviation from these testing and monitoring procedures will require
prior approval from the District Environmental Compliance Staff. Such request must
be made in writing and shall include (1) reason for the change and (2) an outline of the
proposed change.
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 226 of 247
The results of the Water Oualitv Monitoring referenced above shall be submitted to
Collier County's Director of Engineering and Environmental Services. If the
Petitioner is not in comoliance with standards in condition #3 (condition #33 of the
SFWMD, ERr referenced above), remediation shall occur at the Petitioners' expense.
4. The proiect is oroposing imoacts to 586 acres of wetlands. The oroiect has identified
515.2 acres of 586.2 acres (88 oercent) of the required wetland mitigation acreage. The
remaining 7] acres of off-site mitigation shall be identified orior to SDP aooroval.
5. The minimum oreserve acreage shall be maintained. Additional preserve acreage shall
be added onsite or offsite to compensate for anv clearing needed for orivate access to
out parcels within the oreserve.
~
b.lll ENCINEERINC
/.. This Pre-ject shall be reEjuired tEl ffieet all CeuRty ElrdiRaRces in eff-ect at the time fiRal
construction GOGHmcFlts are saemittal fer de~:010pH-leFlt apJ3ro':al.
B. Desib'tfl aHa Gonstruetiefl sf all iITlflT0\'E!fR0F1tS SHall 130 subject to GOIR13liaFlce '}.'ith
ap13r0flnate 13f0\'isioFlS orthe Collier Celln!)' LDC, Di':isiGfl 3.',
C. PriElr te flRa] site ElevelepmeRt plan aj3preval, a right Elf 'Nay pen-nit will be required.
b,ll W:\TER M.\N.\CEMENT
1. The Mirasel "reject, as a part Elf a pUBlic j3riyate j3artnersllip, will j3rElviae Elesisn,
penFlitting ana GOFlstruetion of a regional t10'.','?:ay iF} 6clflj1illGtiofl 'l/itfl the 01jstiag OlEic
C)1Jress "l!D aRd the j3roj3ElseEl TerafiRa PUD. Tile creation of a C8!RInuRit),
Development District may 8e Recessary te help finaRce this ]Jualie facilit), as well as
other essential proj eet sar:i ees.
~. /~ cOf'j' 0[tne SGl:lth Florida 'Vater ~1aFlabeH.:teflt District (SF'.1,T)'1D) SHi"faee \Va-ter
Permit shall be sUEnnittea pri0r to fiflal site aevelo}3m0at plan a1313re~.'aI.
3. ,\n 0J:cw:atieH f'0fFflit ',viII BE! feEIaired fElr tHe f'refl0seEllal::e(s) in acceraaaee v:ith
Di':i~isn 3.5 afthe Callier Csunty LDC and Spm',fD Rules.
b.U PL\NNINC
/\. PHr~Hant to SeetisH '.','5.8,1 of tRe LDC, if dURns the eOHfGe sf site clearing"
eJ:Ga~.'ati8Fl ef other constnIstioFl aeti'.'ity a Bistofie Sf arehaeolEl;iGal artifact is fOURd, all
Agenda Item No, 8B
April 28, 2009
Page 227 of 247
de\'eleflmsRt ~l:itRin tHe IniRimlfffl area Fleeessary 10 fJ[ote6t the Elisco~.'ery shall be
imlReaiately sto]3]3ea aRa tlie Collier CO~Hty Code ERforeeIHeHt De]3artFReRt eontaetea.
9.B f.CCESSORY STRUCTURES
~\eeess8ry structures shall be eeflstruGted simultaf100usly T,T,'il):} 0f fo110Tl.'ing the 00FlstruetieFl of
tae priReipal struet~re eJloept taat teH1j3orary sales builaiTlbs, ~rai1eFG, mari:etiRg faeilities,
oOBa-aeters' aRa euilasrs' storage aBa omes [aeilities aRa the like, ffiay ee emetea aBa rnilizea
dHriRg tile ]leriod of ]lrejeet ao\'olopmsIIt aRa marketiBg eORsisteIlt with aflplioable reE]uirsffients
oftae LDC. SueR teIR]loFar)' bHildiRgs sRallee reffio\'ea UpOH cOIR]3letioH of tlie marketiIlg or
eonstruetion aeti\'ity Tshich taey are aeeessery to.
€r.+
9.11 SICNS
/\11 sigHs sllall e0H1j31y '<'lith Di'.'-isioIl 2.5 of the Collier County LDC iH offeot at ~ae tiIRe of
buildiIlg ]3enBit a]3]3lioatioll.
9.1S LANDSC.\PINC
^
~ ..,
LaFlaScafJing for tHe flori-meter berm., if require a, shall Be in 60nf-ennaaee ',':itk Seetien
2.1.1.8 oft~e LDC.
1. Trees aHa sRmes sllallee plaRted aloIlg ~ae ease oftlie berm so as to ':is\lally
softeR t~e a]3]learaBce of tae side sf the sefffi.
2. Trees sRall be a miHHfmm of75~<' Rati\'e s]3eoies.
3. Shrn\3s sRall ee a lRiRiffiHffi of 35% Hativs species.
}.ll laflasea]3iHg for off sa-eet ]larkiIlg areas sllallee ill aecoraalloe '::i~h tae Di','isioR 1.1 of the
Collier Coullty LDC iR effoet at t~e time ofbuilEliTlg flennit applieatioH.
6-d-&.Q. PRO'/ISION FOR OFF SITE REMO'.'f.L OF EARTHEN M.\TERIAL EXCAVATION
Tile e1~oa\'atioH of eart~ea material aHa its stookpiling iIl preparatioIl of water lTIanagemeat
faoilities or allier water eodies is Hereby pen-l'Iitted. If it is delRoIlstmtea t~at fill aetivities OIl
taese buildaBle pOltioIls oftae Pr(}jeot site are SHea !hat !here is a sUf]3lus of eartlleB material,
then its off site aisposal is also hereby pen-flitted subjeet to t~e foll8\\'illg eomiitiolls:
A- Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a commercial or "dcvelopment
excavation:: pursuant to Di','isioIl 3.5 of the Collier CouIIty LDC Section 22-106 of the
Code of Laws and Ordinances of Collier Countv Florida. whereby off site remo\'al
BRall ee limitod to tea pereeHt (to a madmuFR of 20,000 eubie yaras) ef the total
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 228 of 247
YOll::lITl6 e]~ea':ated 1:-m]ess a c0Ff1fflereiaI eJCea"atiGB fefFHit is reeeiT,'o8.. The entire water
management pass-thru system will be constructed at one time as per South Flori
Water Management pennit #] 1-02031-P, as amended, prior to the residentia.
development under an administratively issued "development" excavation pennit as
long as no more than 20,000 e.y. of material is removed off-site. As per Section 22-106
of the Code of Laws and Ordinances, a commercial excavation permit will be required
for removing more than the approved 20,000 c.y. of material off-site.
B. ~~J18tRer}3ro':isiOl~S efsaiEl Di','isieFl3.5 efiBe Collier COHflty LDC Me aj3fllieable.
~
9.l-+E. PROVISION FOR ACCESS TO OUTPARCEL IN SECTION 10
A temporary easement shall be granted to the owner of parcel number 00178760007 o'.','Rsa by
.^dfonsoR Terlizzi, Ris SHGeeSSOrs or assi!,'fls, at a location specified by Mirasol it's successors and
assigns. At such time that the northern portion of the Mirasol RPUD has access to a public road,
the Developer shall provide reasonable access from the .'\lfoRsoR Terlizzi parcel number
00178760007 across the Mirasol RPUD to the public road. Both the temporary and permanent
easements shall be granted to Mr. Terlizzi the owner of this parcel, His SHeeessor or assit;ns, at no
cost. Ho'?,'e\'er, SHe to the eR',ireRl1'leRtal G8RstraiFlts of SeetioFl 1 G, Mr. Terlizzi may be requires
to rE!':ise tHe SeRf};} Flerida V.'ater },1aHagemeflt EA':irofllTl0ntal Res8uree Permit fer ~.firasol and
prcr,ise mitigation fur any impasts created 8Y tHe coFlstruetioFl of this aesess.
~
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 229 of 247
ORDINANCE NO. 09-_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED,
THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
WHICH INCLUDES TIIE 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 PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DlSTRJCT (PUD) TO A
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD)
ZONING DISTRlCT FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS THE
MIRASOL RPUD, A PROJECT WITH A TOTAL OF 799
DWELLING UNITS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE
NORTH SIDE OF IMMOKALEE ROAD (CR 846) BORDERED
ON THE EAST BY BROKEN BACK ROAD AND FUTURE
COLLIER BOULEVARD (CR 951), IN SECTIONS 10, IS AND
22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 1,543+/- ACRES;
PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER
2001-20, THE MIRASOL PUD, AND REVERSION OF FNE
ACRE TRACT TO AGRICULTURAL; AND BY PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, IMCOLLIER JOINT VENTURE, represented by Richard Yovanovich,
Esq., of Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A., petitioned the Board of
County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property.
NOW, TIIEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE: ZONING CLASSIFICATION
The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Sections 10, IS
and 22, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from a Planned
MirasoI, PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046
Revised 03/18/09 HF AC
Page 1 00
Agenda Item ~Jo. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 230 of 247
Unit Development Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning
District for a 1,543+/- acre project to be known as the Mirasol RPUD, in accordance with
Exhibits A-F, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas
map or maps, as described in Ordinance Number 04-41, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO: REPEAL OF ORDINANCE AND REVERSION OF FIVE-ACRE TRACT
Ordinance Number 01-20, known as the Mirasol PUD, adopted on April 24, 2001 by the
Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, is hereby repealed in its entirety.
The five acre parcel of property identified as Folio No. 00179240005 was inadvertently added to
the legal description in Ordinance 01-20 and shall revert to its base zoning of Agricultural.
SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective Upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this
day of
,2009.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
, Deputy Clerk
By:
DONNA FIALA, CHAIRMAN
Mirasol, PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046
Revised 03/18/09 HFAC
Page 2 00
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 231 of 247
Approved as to fonn
and legal sufficiency:
y..('f.\g-
"," <"\
~\ 31\0
>\\
Heidi Ashton-Cicko
Assistant County Attorney
Attachments:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit B2
Exhibit C
Exhibit C2
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
Permitted Uses
Development Standards
Flag Lot Scenario
Location Map
Master Plan
Legal Description
Deviations
Developer Commitments
08-CPS-0086014 7
Miraso!, PUDZ-A-2007-AR-12046
Revised 03118/09 HF AC
Page3 00
Agenda Item No 88
April 28, 2009
Page 232 of 247
EXHIBIT A
FOR
MlRASOL RPUD
PERMITTED USES:
A maximum of 799 residential units and a maximum of36 golf course holes may
be developed within the RPUD.
I. ResidentiallGolfTracts (RG):
A. Principal Uses:
I. Single-family detached dwelling units.
2. Zero lot line dwellings.
3. Single-family attached and townhouse dwellings.
4. Two-family and duplex dwellings.
5. Multiple-family dwellings.
6. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals
dctermines to be compatible in the "RG" district.
B. Accessory Uses/Structures:
1. Uses and structures customarily associated with principal uses
permitted
2. Guest houses.
3. Common area recreation facilities.
4. Clubhouse or recreation centers for residential uses.
5. Open space uses and structures such as, but not limited to,
boardwalks, nature trails, bikeways, gazebos, boat and canoe
docks, fishing piers, picnic areas, fitness trails and shelters.
6. Model homes, welcome centers and sales trailers.
7. Golf course, practice areas and ranges, golf cart barns, rest
rooms, shelters snack bars and golf course maintenance yards.
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
1
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 233 of 247
8. Golf Club Complex as located on the Master Plan:
i) Retail establishments accessory to the permitted uses in the
District such as, but not limited to, golf, tennis and
recreation related sales.
ii) Restaurants, cocktail lounges, and similar uses intended to
serve club members and club guests
iii) Pro-shops, golf club, tennis clubs, health spas and
equestrian clubs.
9. Shuffleboard courts, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other
types of accessory facilities intended for outdoor recreation.
10. Guardhouses, gatehouses, and access control structures.
11. Essential services, pursuant to the LDC.
12. Water management facilities and related structures.
13. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or
structural bank treatments.
14. Community and neighborhood parks, recreational facilities,
community centers.
15. Temporary construction, sales, and administrative offices for
the developer, builders, and their authorized contractors and
consultants, including necessary access ways, parking areas and
related uses.
16. Landscape features including, but not limited to, landscape
buffers berms, fences and walls.
17. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the
foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals
determines to be compatible in the "RG" district.
II. ConservationlPreserve Tract:
A. Principal Uses:
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
2
RevISion date (2) 4-02-09
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 234 of 247
1. Passive recreation uses limited to the following so long as
clearing for such uses does not result in the reduction of
Preserve acreage below the minimum requirement:
i. Boardwalks
11. Environmental uses (wetlands and conservation areas)
111. Pedestrian bridges
lV. Equestrian trails
v. Pervious nature trails except where American
Disabilities Act requires otherwise.
VI. Native Wildlife sanctuary
VII. Inclement weather shelters, in preserve upland areas
only unless constructed as a part of a permitted
boardwalk system, The shelters shall be a maximum of
150 square feet each,
2. Environmental research
3. Drainage and water management facilities subject to all
required permits.
4. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing
list or permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of
Zoning Appeals through the process outlined in the LDC.
3
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 235 of 247
EXHIBIT B
FOR
MIRASOL RPUD
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
Table I below sets forth the development standards for land uses within the RPUD.
Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections
ofthe LDC in effect as of the date of approval ofthe site development plan (SDP) or
subdivision plat.
TABLE I
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
"RG" RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Single Zero Two Single Multi- Clubhouse/
PERMITTED Family Lot Family and Family Family Recreation
USES Detached Line Duplex Attached and Dwelling Buildings
AND Townhouse *6
STANDARDS
1 2 3 4 5 6
Principal
Structnres
Minimum Lot 5,000 SF 4,000 3,500 SF per 3,500 SF 9000 SF nla
Area SF lot or unit
*3
Minimum Lot 50' *7 40' *7 35' per lot 35' *7 90' nla
Width *4 *7 or unit *7
Front Yard 20' *2 *7 20' "2 20' '2 *7 20' "2 *7 20'*2 25'
Setback * 2 "7
Side Yard 7,5' *7 o or 10' 7.5'*7*8 7.5' *7 *8 tS' *5 5'
Setback *7
Rear Yard 15' *7 15' *7 15'*7 15' *7 tS' 0'
Setback * 1
Setback From 10' *7 10' *7 10' 10' 10' 20'
Golf Course
Setback From 25' 25' 25' 25' 25' 25'
Preserves
Maximum 35' 35' 35' 35' 50' (5 stories 50' (2 stories over
Zoned Height not to exceed parking not to
50') *9 exceed 50')
Actual Hei.ht 45' 45' 45' 45' 65' 75'
Floor Area 1000 SF 1000 SF tOOO SF 1000 SF 750 SF nla
Min, (SF,)
Distance 10' 10' 10' 10' 20' *5 15' or .5BH
Between whichever is
Principal greater *(j
Structures
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
4
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 236 of 247
Single Zero Lot Two Family Single Family Multifamily ClubhouselRecreat
Accessory Family Line and Duplex Attached and Dwelling ion Buildings '6
Structures Detached Townhouse
Front Yard SPS *7 SPS *7 SPS SPS SPS SPS
Setback *2
Side Yard 5' *7 o or 10' 5' 5' 10' 5'
Setback *7
Rear Yard 10' *7 la' *7 10' 10' 10' 10'
Accessory
Setback * I
Setback From 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' 10'
Preserves
Distance 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' Q' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or to'
Between
Accessory
Structures on
the same lot
Distance 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' 0' or 10' O' or 10'
Between
Accessory and
Principal
Structures on
same lot
Maximum SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS
Zoned Height
Actual Height SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS
Fronl yards for al] uses shall be measured a~ fo1]ows:
A. If the parcel is served by a public road right-of-way, setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line.
a. If the parcel is served by a private road, sethack is measured from the back of curb (if curbed) or edge ofpavemenl (if no!
curbed)
"'I - Rear yards for principal and accessory structures on lots and tracts which abut lakes and open spaces. Setbacks from lakes for all
principal and accessory uses may be 0 feet provided architectural bank treatmenl is incorporated into design and subject to written
approval from the Collier County Engineering Review Section.
"'2 - Single-family dwellings which provide for two parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking other than
in private driveways may reduce the front yard requirement to [0 feet for a side entry garage. Multi-family dwellings which provide
for tv.'O parking spaces within an enclosed garage and provide for guest parking may reduce the front yard to 15 feet This reduction
shall not result In an approval to impede or block the sidewall< Front loaded garages shall be a minimum of23 feel from the edge: of
sidewalL
"'3 - Each half of a duplex unit requires a lot area allocation of 3,500 square feet for a total minimum lot area of 7,000 square feet.
*4 - Minimum Jot width may be reduced by 20% for cul-oe-sac lots provided the minimum 101 area requirement is maintained.
"'5 - Building distance may be reduced at garages to_half the sum of the height of the garages.
"'6 Although neither setbacks nor separation between structures are applicable to the clubhouse and other recreation structures located
on a clubhouse tract, neither the clubhou."e nor any other recreational Structure shall be located closer than 25 feet from any residential
or preservation boundary.
"'7 - The use of flag lots is allowed to provide maximum flexibility in subdivision design and may vary from the minimum lot widths_
However. neithcr the minimum lot area, nor the minimum distance between structures may be reduced_
"'8 - Zero foot (0') sctback for internal units
"'9 Inclusive of under building parking
BH = Building Height
SP$ ~ Same as Principal Structure
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
5
I
I
I
J
--
FlAG LOT
FlAG LOT
DENOTES LOT UNE
NOTE:
TNIS EXHIBIT IS FOR ILlUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
TO SNOW HOW CERTAIN GEOMETRY OF A GIVEN
TRACT WOULD FACILITATe TIlE IMPLEMENTATION
OF A 'FLAG LOT" DESIGN LAYOUT.
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Paoe 237 of 247
BUILDING FOOTPRINT
o
50 100
SCALE IN FEET
PREPARED FOR:
I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
c.ni5c.o..IA..u...rn.rionN",_UJU4..-dUU54
....II!~
::::hGNOLl
..__li[8
...... ARBER &
.....r.
...:=.\'0
:::..:.uRUNDAGE, INC.
Professional Engineers, Planners &. Land Surveyors
CaoIIioo'c.-'l' HOIlTa.......T.dN..1'I.~I'l..J4111 Ph.~ un'l S'l7.11l1. ra,.,P-IPl~llIIJ
PRO..(CT NAME
DRAWING N.u.l(;
FLAG LOT
,
200
MIRASOL PUDA
I
I
I
...
~
Sl
!!l
'"
g
..
S
..
~
~
~
~
~
l5
;;;
s
OJ
II:
~
FLAG LOT SCENARIO EXHIBIT .B2'
DR AWN e'1;
R[VI['o\I[[) BY;
D4TE:
SCALE:
ROP
ROP
OJ 08
N A
ABB PRO,xCl No.:
ACAD rlU: N~tr.I[:
ORA-WINe rilE No.:
SHUT;
7BBJ
9B14[XB-B2
N A
I or
.
Agenda Item No 88
April 28, 2009
Paae 238 of 247
., 1. _';.'f.E.C:Cj~~~... _ I
,._-'~. '" '-, COL/7ER COUNTY' ~'////
~,.,: .:,....~L ,'::~[~":,t"'l~)~(d!::',;:, (8;":
-,-,'.~ ,;-,' . ...-.;:_..,il....,.. .;..). ':.r~. v/
~:. - '.: -, ,<' ','" .,,'., '.",' ")"" ' ' . 1:'-:..0'" ::' " v,
"--\. 'i" f", '.',.- '. ._', "~)<;:;: . .'
TUliCAHY J' ,'.., J. .\ ('_ "',"'.,. "
IIlBERYI: i "~.~ .. "~ ~'>'.: ',_, J -'. ".' - ,
" " I.
.....;.j'""..-. - - - -- '/ 0 - - - - +----
~,,; .~~.~ ;".-~, 'wI:::>' 'f~; ~ ~ +: ",.,
~~ 'l'~\"\ 'r~{~" ",(~j 1 ~,~}
:1,:1,}~.q~d"'",).~!. c_ :1' :;_.+~ 'i "t~.~SITE '~
,1;"< . "'IE""'" I ,"', i.~Xf~,;,,~,'F:)a.; ~"'j(~,' LOCATION'",
~":~' 75 ..~, ~ ,;;-~ /;. ''..,;7 !! I . " f , l J
". '\.1 ~), ~'. ,',; : ,II,'''' I' il. (:l,~! ~'"",,,,","'T jl';',
\., ~,~ (( i ~ ,I: j:j.S~'-#.-;;' ,{,17,' I J J I~" ~"~I' !.:,
ji;;~.~: i:~: '~'~.':;:";~'i" 2;..;". '~i.i I i J.....~WDitti
,:,~'~-"r:j~"~~~'t~MOKA~.!,4' ....r: .- '846~: ~~
' '.\ . "'" '.' ,I' :' I' vIr....: ....\COUNrr! . - -
t . v' -.-/...- --"':' 11rt.. I:i I, ,I ~'~. "__~: ,",:,- ::_,j ,
, .r . " . I "'~" 't ~i~"G "'~. "
;J:!j':~~., ,!~~~.~,~_~.)~~~ ~, ~:~,:~I:.;'i;;I~L J Y i ~
r::-,.. I ',~)-- ':c1,11,\ 1'::1:,1.. ""... ,; ~1;f':' ...!U: """"'. .:..... ,
:\J'11_~: !,Irl" I, I':LI 1: . ,-. -,'rlrE.J.~~~J N1CO\U,M;loIIEW
-=~u~(i_L '~: -::.u'~~...-", ,~r;'::'~:, :~'-"-k'~ "~;~-'~9'- -:-.-.:;
i u,'J'~ -:;r; I,', "1,-:" 1~\J'H!.l!~~ .' . : ~'~"~\~"i' ~
IJ',;J;, :: i ~i'II:;]JJiI.'1 '-'ii~."".';".,r"-~::::':'::_, . .' " _ . ..\, " j';,'"
~:. W,I "I'" r,:'~J.\J....I."".I' ';;~.--,'5- "':~~.-- ....."'- ClllUBl . ~
!, , ',' ".' '~','",' . 2::. i!,: "",T':1.JJ '~.'w"., ::,:7.";':' '>,e, 't:! ';.l, 951 _, 'J"-:A. "\ 'Z-.. . ,,~_..
I ,:~~,,!; r ~~i>E.. '~d'l~k~}!J~~~~ ~coo~_..:;~~~, 11!' :' ~
Ii~;::::.,,',";,,~' (. ' . wLt1'r1Y"'~ -,', II ~;.d.. ' ::!",...:.. i. '. : ''I, j 'f-:.f'-'f'
~-.._..~-~ .::. \-~ - _~'1,; - ,'!;;'!'I._' ll'~ I; :1 ,'. i' I, ii"
I~L,f~~f~' ~ ~"2-.j~t:.:tA ill':iii!,~:,.. " :' , . ';, I r .';1 .
1\~:1':~'~_.I"~ i_,~', ?\'r .,,",-"'-:'~t;.:r;;:;,'\:H~,'1.\; ': , ;','" ._
~
.. - - ...., - -...:- -.
, . ,
-..-:'-~~-
,
-,..1
I
!
~
r,..", ,
:. .; I
o 2000 4000
SCALE IN rEET
& REVISION DATE 11-6+08 5th PUDA SUBMITTAL
ClI[NT:
'-M_ COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
PRD..[cr NAME
MIRA SOL PUD AMENDMENT
....,~ c:.:nific:.I&"""IIrt.riuI;'.NDII.U1)661.c1D~
====hGNOLI
.....1i8
......A DDER &
.....r. n..n..o
......~D
======URUNDAGE, 1Ne.
Profcssion:aJ Engineers, Planners & Lmd Surveyors
00Il0u c-.,.,. 74DO T_...., 7.. N.. "'.......Fl...t<IICII p\.: I1HtU1.)UI .f..., Qnls5fi,llOJ
DRAWING NAME'
LoeA TION MAP
EXHIBIT 'C'
DRAWN BY;
R[VI{IIlt'D 9Y:
DA1[:
SCAl..L
ROP A.8B PRO..(Cl No.;
ROP ACAD FlL( NAME:
05/D~ DRAWING F"lL[ No.:
'.-"000' $HITT:
7BBJ
94'BC
9418-5
1 or I
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 239 of 247
4-
I
Non: fOR PLAN LEllEND AND SPECIAL NOTES SEE SHEET 3 Of 3
MATCH LINE - seE SHEET 2 OF ~
L
~
$fWMD
,RUf:Irf'!
....
~
li
!
...
"
~
~
'"
~
~
~
I!!
~
~
~
..
II:
TERAfI""
tPUD)
"""
'''L.u.
RIll
l
".
u"
~
@
ENfRY
51lfiME
1M.)
U'n'PlW'LI.E.
DO',lOPOSlt 9f1 tIlT.
lto.W.DiDlCAlIOM
lS'mt MJUIIlLE
'r UU. fU1URE
11In:RCONNECT
~ CONCEptUAL TREE FARM POSSIBU
ClUI HOUSE ,PUD) FUTURE
COM'Wl ntnRCOMIIECT
LOCATION
rg HERITAIE BAY'
,....,
~ ~ .l~m ~
1I11'fn PRDPERTY' (
D . 'rLU. .ou.._ :1
OlDft'l',RUS ~ >> RIll
(PUDI ~ :; ~
. -,
. ~ ~
>> ~
-;;11~
. ,
1 0 500
>> " " """ SCALE
""LII.t.
. " "
>> ~ RIll
CUENl;
PROJECT NAME
I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
MIRA SOL PUD AMENDMENT
GNOU
ARBER &
::::..,BRUNDAGE, INC.
Professional Engineers. Planners & Land Su:rveyocs
!';olh..c-", ..Dlll"....nw...i r.oiIN.. Napt..FL- ).IU. pt,., In'! 5'1".'111 _Fn. (~'''' '106-1103
l"ooc-..,,-. ""'OC__,1l4~~ 111......~S,....,n.l<I1U n..,(l]9JS~1_]lll_'...,(Ll",.~.1T.H.
c...aIic.o".'AIl,hMi..";.,...NIM-Ull",,.-dDlJ66'l
DRAWING KAME:
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT 'C2'
DRA'Mi BY:
REVIEWED BY:
0,,1[:
SC....LE:
RaP
RaP
05 DB
1-_1000'
"BB PRo.ECT No.;
AC"D FlLE NAME:
DRAWING FIlE No.:
SHEET:
788
9418C2
941B 1
1 Of
3
.._~._-^---'
- - - -
~" .. -- -... '-.. ...-. .
tt5 -" -. - -_: -. _..- '.__ 0- ..."_ -. __
" - -'. - - - ..' . -
+ - 0 _." _ "_._
. 0 . .. . _
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 240 of 247
I
i
I::
--- - - -
- - -. - - - . . . - .
-. ..0.. _.... _ ....
'~ap--,-.._--,...-...-..,._
" ... - - -. - 0 + _. .
- - . -.. . - -. - --
" -. + - . - .
- . . - - . 0 _ __
- . . - - . -.. .
-. .
- -. . - - -. --
. . . -f
__. - 0 _. . .
I')
VACANT . _ . _ . _
OW:'~;:::~':.:D<:":':.<,:::: -::.1..-:: .':
lip:-:-:-
:':O~~~;::~:::::.:..::: :~'
. : : .. - - - I
I
r
- <'W
MlRAIDl
PROI'Uf'(
BOUNDARY'
....
~
i
!l
..
~
..
~
~
N
i:
~
Ci
~
~
il!
PAlhnAIID$
,PUDI
<I8
fAl
V,\CAlIIf
TfIUFIIIA
I",DJ
~,.'
\Y2f
~
,
o 500 1000
SCALE IN FEET
N~
l
RIG
MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 1 OF 3
Rill
HERlfAOE IA"
fPUD)
ClJEHT:
I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
F'Ro..ECT NAWE
....,~
=:::hGNOU
.....~D
====='UARBER &
......~D
====='DRUNDAGE, INC.
Professional Engineers, Planners & l..3nd Surveyors
c..~io,C_'J: ~.lIllT_;_;T'...!N. . N.,., fL. '.101 1'II.:QJ'l In..'lll _ b" nnlJ<l6-ZltQ
t.oC-nor. ~1'Uc.........IW~'';''J(lJ.I''''''.~FL.J..1U! ""'.:U]'))'7'JIII ~'''O)9j~fl'21:M
MIRA SOL PUD AMENDMENT
Ufti/i.,.'..I.....dtmu.rio..No..l..BJ66tuulCJIJ'/i4
DRAWING NANE;
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT .CZ'
DRAlAN BY:
RE\IIEWED BT:
DATE:
$CALL:
"Of'
ROf'
05 D8
,"..,00(t
ABa PROJECT ND.:
ACAD FIl[ HAME:
DRAwtNC FILE "'0.:
SHEET:
7BBJ
9418C2
9418-2
2 0.- J
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 241 of 247
LEGEND
...
~
~
co
~
~
~
.,
~
N
a
l!!
~
~
~
III
L CONCEPTUAL LAKE LOCATIONS
<8
RIGHT -OF-WA'I
-----------
* LAND USE AREAS ARE CONCEPTUAL AND SUBJECT TO
RELOCATION/CHANGE PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION PERMITTING
SPECIAL NOTES:
1) WHERE APPLICABLE ALONG PROJECT BOUNDARY AND UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED PRESERVE AREAS SHALL SERVE AS BUFFERS. IF AFTER EXOTIC REMOVAL
THE PRESERVE VEGETATION FAILS TO MEET MINIMUM CODE BUFFER STANDARDS
ADDITIONAL PLANT MATERIAL MAY BE REQUIRED.
NATIVE HABITAT SUMMARY:
EXISTING NATIVE HABITAT = 85:302 Ac.:!:
REQUIRED NATIVE HABITAT (60%) = 511,9 All.:!:
PROVIDED NATIVE HABITAT (ON SITE) = 461.6 All.:!:
NATIVE HABITAT PROVIDED (OFF-SITE) = SO.~ All.:!:
WENT;
PROJECT HAllIE
I.M. COLLIER JOINT VENTURE
MIRASOL PUD AMENDMENT
ii5iFA..GNOU c.omIi<at.. Aodw>riurio" Na..Ul '661.... E.Il JW.
.....~D
=:===JJ~ARBER &
......~D
======'nRUNDAGE, INC.
Professional Engineers, Planpcrs &: Land Surveyors
ColIC, c..-~: 14Q() r........;T'..IN._N.,.Iu,JL.J<lIOl I'l>..-(H'n J~'._ll1J - fn; (tl'lf'-S-l1aJ
t..-c...-J' _C'OC"-'lI.lI_,*"'0J.....,.~Fl.,..lH "'.,(H"Jl~'.JUl fn'IU7lm-l7J'
DRAWING NAllI(:
CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
EXHIBIT 'CZ' LEGEND & SPECIAL NOTES
DR;.wt.I BY:
RE\IIEWED BY;
D....tE:
SCAtE:
.OF'
.OF'
05
1".2000'
ABS PRo.ECT No.: 7BBJ
ACAD ALf. NAME; g.f18C2
DRAWlNC f1LE No.: 9418 J
SHEE:T' J OF .J
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28. 2009
Page 242 of 247
EXHIBIT D
FOR MlRASOL RPUD
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SECTION 10
ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING FOUR (4)
PARCELS:
I) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
2) THE SOUTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4,
3) THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4,
4) THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHEAST 1/4
SECTION 15
ALL THA T PART OF SECTION] 5, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
LESS & EXCEPT
THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHWEST 1/4, AND THE SOUTH l/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4,
SECTION 22
ALL THAT PART OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTlCULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS;
THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, AND THE EAST 1/2 OF THE
NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4,
ReVlSlOn date (2) 4-02-09
II
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 243 of 247
THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4; AND THE WEST 1/2 OF THE
NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,
THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4,
THE EAST 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST
1/4, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE EAST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE WEST 1/2 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE
SOUTHEAST 1/4,
THE SOUTHWEST 114 OF THE NORTHWEST 114 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4,
THE WEST 112 OF SOUTHWEST 114 OF THE SOUTHEAST 114, LESS & EXCEPT
THE SOUTH 100 FEET,
THE WEST 3/4 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST
1/4, LESS & EXCEPT THE SOUTH 100 FEET
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
12
Agenda Item No 88
April 28, 2009
Page 244 of 247
EXHIBIT E
FOR
MlRASOL RPUD
DEVIA nONS
I. Deviation #1 seeks relief from Appendix B of the LDC, entitled "Typical Street
Sections and Right-of-way Design Standards", which requires cul-de-sacs and
local streets less than one thousand feet (1,000') in length to have a minimum
sixty foot (60') right-of-way width and two ten foot (10') wide travel lanes, to
allow a minimum right-of-way width of forty feet (40') for private streets and
fifty feet (50') for spine, collector and interconnecting roads.
2. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 6,06.01 J, Street System
Requirements, to allow that Cul-de-sacs in excess of one thousand feet
(1,000') in length. For any cul-de-sac exceeding 1,200 feet in length, the
roadway must include at approximately 1,200 feet intervals design features
which provide for the ability of emergency vehicles to turn around. Traffic
roundabouts, eyebrows, hammerheads or similar design features shall be
allowed.
3. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01 ,Q. Street System
Requiremcnts, which requires that street name markers shall be approved by
the County Manager or designee for private streets or in conformance with
U.S,D.O.T.F.H.WA. This requirement shall be waived. However, breakaway
posts shall be used.
4. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.0I.R. Street Requirements
which rcquires that street pavement painting, striping and reflective edging
of public roadway markings shall be provided by the developer as required
by the U.S,D,O.TFH.W.A. This requirement shall be waived for private
roadways with 40' widths. Traffic circulation signage shall be in conformance
with US.D.O,TFH.W.A. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device
standards.
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
13
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 245 of 247
EXHIBIT F
FOR
MlRASOL RPUD
LIST OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS
Regulations for development of the Mirasol RPUD shall be in accordance with the
contents ofthis RPOO Ordinance and applicable sections ofthe LDC and Growth
Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of issuance of any development order in
which said regulations relate. Where this RPOO Ordinance does not provide development
standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise
applicable shaH apply.
A. RPUD MASTER PLAN
1. Exhibit "C2", the RPUD Master Plan, illustrates the proposed
development and is conceptual in nature. Proposed tract, lot or land use
boundaries or special land use boundaries, shall not be construed to be
final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as
platting or site development plan application. Subject to the provisions
of Section 10.02.13 of the LDC, RPUD amendments may be made from
time to time.
B. TRANSPORTATION
1. Upon the County's adoption of a CR-951 extension corridor alignment,
and within 180 days of the County's request, the Developer, its
successors or assigns, shaH dedicate to County fee simple right-of-way
for the roadway and drainage system at the predetermined amount of
$45,000 per acre, for those areas located outside the limits of the
residentiaVGolfCourse areas depicted as "RIG" on the POO master
plan.
Upon recordation of the deed or other conveyance instrument in the
public records of CoHier County for the dedication of the right-of-way,
the Developer shaH become eligible for Transportation Impact fee
credits in accordance with the consolidated impact fee Ordinance in
effect at the time of recordation of the dedication. If the project is built
out or has prepaid transportation Impact Fees to be assessed for the
project, then the Developer or its successors or assigns shaH be eligible
to request cash reimbursement.
The Developer shaH not be responsible to obtain or modify any permits
on behalf of the County related to the extension of CR-95 I.
2. The Developer shaH construct a 10' multi-use pathway to be located
along the Immokalee Road right-of-way on the North side of the
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
14
Agenda Item No. 88
April 28, 2009
Page 246 of 247
Cocohatchee Canal as a part of the entrance construction. Completion
of construction ofthe pathway shall be completed concurrently with the
vehicular connection to the existing bridge over the Cocohatchee Canal.
3. The Developer entered into a Developer Contribution Agreement with
Collier County on May 3cd, 2007, Pursuant to the terms of that
agreement, the project is vested for 799 dwelling units for the purposes
of transportation concurrency.
4. The Developer, its successors, or assigns, agree that at the time of any
subsequent Development Order approval within this POO, the
Developer, or its successors or assigns, shall be responsible for their
respective fair share of the North leg of the CR-951/Broken Back Road
intersection with Immokalee Road, which includes modification,
replacement, or relocation of the at-grade bridge crossing the
Cocohatchee Canal.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL
1. As a part of the environmental resource permitting process of the South
Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the United States
Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) permitting, recommendations
from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC)
and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding .
impacts to protected wildlife species will be incorporated into the
permits issued for this project. The developer shall comply with the
guidelines set forth within those permits. Habitat management plans
shall be provided for protected listed species.
2. The property will be required to preserve 511.9 acres of native habitat.
This will be done through a mix of on-site and off-site preservation.
3. Mirasol will provide water quality testing as defined in the Mirasol
Water Quality Monitoring Plan which is Exhibit #6 of the Mirasol
Environmental Resource Permit # 11-0203 I -Po Any deviation from these
testing and monitoring procedures will require prior approval from the
District Environmental Compliance Staff. Such request must be made in
writing and shall include (1) reason for the change and (2) an outline of
the proposed change.
The results of the Water Quality Monitoring referenced above shall be
submitted to Collier County's Director of Engineering and
Environmental Services. If the Petitioner is not in compliance with
standards in condition #3 (condition #33 of the SFWMD, ERP
referenced above), remediation shall occur at the Petitioners' expense.
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
15
Agenda Item No, 88
April 28, 2009
Page 247 of 247
4. The project is proposing impacts to 586 acres of wetlands, The project
has identified 515.2 acres of 586.2 acres (88 percent) of the required
wetland mitigation acreage. The remaining 71 acres of off-site
mitigation shall be identified prior to SDP approval
5. The minimum preserve acreage shall be maintained. Additional
preserve acreage shall be added onsite or offsite to compensate for any
clearing needed for private access to out parcels within the preserve.
D. EXCAVATION
Excavation activities shall comply with the definition of a commercial or
development excavation pursuant to Section 22-106 of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Collier County Florida. The entire water management
pass-thru system will be constructed at one time as per South Florida
Water Management permit # 11-02031- P, as amended, prior to the
residential development under an administratively issued
"development" excavation permit as long as no more than 20,000 c.y. of
material is removed off-site. As per Section 22-106 of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances, a commercial excavation permit will be required for
removing more than the approved 20,000 c.y, of material off-site.
E. OUTPARCEL IN SECTION JO
A temporary access easement shall be granted to the owner of parcel
number 00178760007, at a location specified by 1M Collier Joint Venture
it's successors and assigns. At such time that the northern portion of the
Mirasol RPOO has access to a public road, the developer shall provide
reasonable access from the parcel number 00178760007 across the
Mirasol RPOO to the public road. Both the temporary and permanent
easements shall be granted to the owner of this parcel, at no cost to the
County or the owner of this parcel.
Revision date (2) 4-02-09
16