Agenda 07/22/2008 Item # 8EAgenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 1 of 71
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to consider Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing the Naples Reserve
Community Development District (CDD) pursuant to Section 190.005, Florida Statutes
OBJECTIVE:
The objective of this public hearing is for the Collier County Board of County Commissioners
(the Board) to review and consider a petition for the establishment of the Naples Reserve
Community Development District (CDD) by adoption of an ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
Naples Reserve Golf Club Planned Unit Development (PUD) was approved by the Board at their
meeting of June 9, 1999, by Ordinance No. 1999 -42. The previously approved PUD was for 552
dwelling units at a density of 1.50 per acre, with Village Commercial development on 3.50±
acres of the 688.10± acre parcel.
Ordinance No. 99 -42 was repealed by the Board at a meeting held on November 13, 2007, and
was replaced by Ordinance No. 2007 -71, amending Ordinance No. 2004 -41 the Land
Development Code, as amended, by amending the appropriate atlas map or maps by changing
the zoning classification from Planned Unit Development (PUD) to Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD), for the project known as Naples Reserve Golf Club, adding an additional
602 dwelling units for a total of 1,154 DU /A at a density of 1.67 per acre, and by removing 3.5±
acres of Village Commercial.
CONSIDERATIONS:
On March 20, 2008 Naples Reserve, LLC, the managing member Anthony Salce, through its
undersigned attorney, jointly filed a petition for the establishment of the Naples Reserve
Community Development District. A mandatory $15,000 application fee was submitted with the
petition, including the required legal advertisement fees for advertisement placed with Naples
Daily News for four (4) successive Sundays prior to hearing as required per Florida Statutes
Chapter 190.
The proposed District is located entirely within Collier County, Florida and covers 688.10+ acres
of land. The subject property, consisting of 310.94± acres located within the Residential Fringe
Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed -Use District, with the remaining portion of 377.16± acres located
within the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District's Receiving Lands. The entire site is located in
Section 1, Township 51 South, Range 26 East. The proposed District is bounded on the South by
Walnut Lakes PUD, on the East by agricultural and disturbed lands, on the West by Winding
Cypress PUD, and on the North by Picayune State Forest. A map showing the location of the
land area to be serviced by the District, as well as a metes and bounds description of the
proposed CDD, appears as Exhibits 1 & 2 to the petition. The landowner's consent to the
establishment of the proposed CDD appears as Exhibit 3 of the petition.
1
Agenda Item No. SE
July 22, 2008
Page 2 of 71
Although Ordinance No. 2007 -71, Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD allows up to 1,154 dwelling
units, the proposed 688.10f acre Naples Reserve Community Development District (CDD) will
consist of 500 single - family detached homes, 240 4 -plex (coach home) units, 270 6 -plex units
and 90 4 -story multi - family units for a total of 1,100 residential dwelling units, including
recreational facilities.
Please note that the density requested is 129 dwelling units less than what would be permitted on
the subject property, as calculated below:
Urban Mixed -Use District
Residential Fringe Subdistrict
Base Density: 1.5 du's per acre or 466 do's
Bonus: TDR Transfer or 1 per acre 311 do's
Total Units: 777 du's
Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District
Receiving Lands
Base Density: 1 du per five acres or 75 du's
Bonus: TDR Transfer or 1 per acre:377 du's
Total Units: 452 do's
Grand Total: 1.229 allowable dwelling units
By adopting the ordinance and granting the Petition, the Board would authorize the District,
through its Board of Supervisors, to manage and finance certain basic infrastructure for the
benefit of the landowners and residents of the Naples Reserve CDD Development. This
infrastructure, under Section 190.012(1), Florida Statutes, includes basic urban systems, facilities
and services, including water supply, sewers and wastewater management, surface water control
and management (drainage), roads, bridges and street lights. If adopted, this ordinance would
not constitute consent by the County to the exercise of certain additional special powers
authorized by Section 190.012(2), Florida Statutes.
In essence, adoption of the CDD ordinance does not exempt the petitioner from compliance with
any applicable local, regional, state or federal permitting or regulatory processes. In this sense,
the Community Development District is merely a mechanism to assure the County and the
landowners of the district that the provision of infrastructure and services for the RPUD is
managed and financed in an efficient and economical way.
Section 190.005, Florida Statutes provides that the exclusive and uniform method for
establishment of a CDD of less than 1,000 acres shall be by County Ordinance. Section 190.005,
Florida Statutes outlines the specific content required in the petition and further outlines six (6)
factors for the Board of County Commissioners to consider in determining whether to grant or
deny a petition for the establishment of a CDD as follows:
1. Whether all statements contained within the petition have been found to be true
and correct;
2. Whether the creation of the District is inconsistent with any applicable element or
portion of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government
comprehensive plan;
3. Whether the area of land within the proposed district is of sufficient size, is
sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one
functional interrelated community;
2
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 3 of 71
4. Whether the District is the best alternative available for delivering community
development services and facilities to the area that will be served by the District;
5. Whether the community development services and facilities of the District will be
incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities, and;
6. Whether the area that will be served by the District is amenable to separate
special- district government.
Environmental Services, Transportation Planning, Public Utilities and County Attorney staff
have reviewed the petition and exhibits submitted by the petitioners (attached) pertaining to the
petitions six factors (as noted above), noting their concerns, as follows:
Environmental Services Review:
The submittal includes a list of estimated costs for infrastructure and other services. It does not
appear to include any estimated costs for the management of the on -site 63 acre preserve, which
includes 10 acres of restoration or the off-site 300 acre preserve, which also includes areas of
restoration. It would be appropriate to add those costs so the CDD, if approved, is prepared for
the initial required work and perpetual management of these preserve areas.
Transportation Planning Review:
Having reviewed the attached CDD application and based on the existing US -41 Consortium
approved DCA, proposed amendment and existing commitments within the Naples Reserve
RPUD, have no objections to the CDD application.
Public Utilities Review:
The property is located within the Collier County Water and Sewer district boundaries. Water
services will be owned and maintained by Collier County. Per County GIS, there is an existing
16 -inch diameter force main and a 12 -inch diameter water main along Tamiami Trail East.
Four well site easements 100' x 100' each, has been committed under the current Ordinance
2007 -71 for this development, for expansion and reliability of the Wellfield Program as part of
the Land Use Decision Processes per the 2005 Water Master Plan Update Section 6.3.1.3.2. The
four well site easements and utilities /access easements should be provided to the Collier County
Water and Sewer District at the time of the Plans and Plat review process (PPL). Pre - application
meetings were held on 11/29/07 for the Site Development Plan and PPL for this development
project.
Comprehensive Planning Review:
Staff analysis relative to the above referenced Six Factors can be found in Attachment 2 to this
document.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Exhibit 5 of the petition, Naples Reserve Community Development District Proposed Timetable
and Estimated Costs of Construction, delineates the fiscal impacts and timing of impacts to be
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 4 of 71
managed by the District. It is noteworthy that the estimated internal infrastructure and services
to be financed by the CDD is $112,750,000 consisting of roadway and utilities construction,
water management, landscaping, lighting, signage, environmental mitigation and contingency
costs. Utilities will eventually be turned over to Collier County, upon meeting acceptable county
standards for acceptance.
*Fishkind & Associates, financial consultants for the petitioner, provided a review of the estimated CDD
lot assessments. These are only estimates based on the information available at this time. The final
assessment amounts will be market driven, and will be based on market acceptance, the amount of
bonds ultimately issued, and the amount of the bonds paid down by the developer at closings. No exact
amounts are determinable at this time, and will not be until the bonds are issued, as much as a year or
more after the District is established. Based on current available information and projections, the current
estimates of the assessments for debt service on the bonds are to be as follows:
Reserve Product
Estimated Annual Assessment
Estimated Quarterly Assessment*
-Naples
90' Single Family Home and Lot
$1100
$525
75' Single Family Home and Lot
$1,800
$450
60' Single Family Home and Lot
$1,500
$375
Coach Home
$1,100
$275
6-Plex Home
$900
$225
2 -Plex Town House
$450
$112.50
Assessments will be on the County tax bill prepared by the Tax Collector's office and are paid annually,
so there is no quarterly billing.
* Home buyers will be provided with annual CDD assessment paperwork for their review prior to closing.
DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES:
According to the petition, the Naples Reserve Community Development District, if the ordinance
is adopted, will assume responsibility for General development of the approved uses within the
District; roadways; street lights, landscaping and signage; stormwater management; water and
sewer utilities; environmental mitigation and /or other matters related to the above tasks.
In keeping with past instructions by the Board, staff has included the following special
commitments to the Ordinance:
"SECTION SEVEN: PETITIONER'S COMMITMENTS
The adoption of this Ordinance is predicated upon the material inducements contained in the
foregoing Recital setting forth Petitioner's Commitments, re- stated as follows: that the
Petitioner, its successors and assigns, shall (1) elect one resident of the District to the five
member Board of Supervisors at such time as residents begin occupying homes in the District,
and (2) record a Notice of Assessments containing the specific terms and conditions of any
special assessments imposed to secure bonds issued by the District, which notice shall be
recorded immediately after any such bond issuance. The Board shall retain any and all rights
and remedies available at law and in equity to enforce Petitioner are Commitments against
Petitioner, its successors and assigns."
2
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 5 of 71
I 1 .III I ti /:V/:Le70Iu'i�1►Y1�luI:1�11�
The Future Land Use classification for the 688.10+ acres of the Naples Reserve CDD are set
forth in the Considerations section on page 1, paragraph 2 of this executive summary. Although
the establishment of this district does not constitute any development approval, the plan of
development previously approved for the subject property has been determined to be consistent
with the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). Accordingly, any future petitions for
rezone or development permits will be subsequently reviewed at the time of submittal, and will
be subject to the requirements and limitations specified in the Collier County Land Development
Code (LDC), and will be required to be consistent with the GMP in effect at that time.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
"If adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, the subject Ordinance would establish a
Community Development District (CDD) and a District Board of Supervisors. The purpose of
establishing a CDD, as per Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, is to establish an independent special
district as an alternative method to manage and finance basic services for community
development." The primary purpose of a CDD is to provide a long -term financing mechanism
for the subject development through:
1. Assessments
2. Ad Valorem Taxation
3. Issuance of Bonds
Creation of a CDD provides assurance that the capital infrastructure improvements necessary in
the District are funded by bond investors and subsequent purchasers of the parcels in the District.
The proposed CDD will be receiving sanitary sewer, potable water, and solid waste removal
services from the Collier County Utilities Division and will have to enter into one or more
interlocal agreements with Collier County, for such purposes. M� MSS1
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners consider adopting and enacting the
proposed ordinance establishing the Naples Reserve Community Development District (CDD),
with the stipulation that the developer commit to the TDR Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District's
Receiving Lands requirements set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 2004 -41) in
effect at the time of development.
PREPARED BY: Marcia R. Kendall, Senior Planner, Comprehensive Planning Department
5
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 6 of 71
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Item Number: BE
Item Summary: This item to be heard at 1:00 p.m. Recommendation to consider Adoption of an Ordinance
Establishing the Naples Reserve Community Development District (CDD) pursuant to Section
190.005, Florida Statutes.
Meeting Date: 7/22/2008 9:00:00 AM
Prepared By
Marcia Kendall
Planner
Date
Community Development &
Comprehensive Planning
6/18/2008 8:08:07 AM
Environmental Services
Approved By
Judy Puig
Operations Analyst
Date
Community Development &
Community Development &
6/18/2008 12:11 PM
Environmental Services
Environmental Services Admin.
Approved By
Nick Casalanguida
MPO Director
Date
Transportation Services
Transportation Planning
6/26/2008 2:16 PM
Approved By
Laura A. Roys
Environmental Specialist
Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services
71112006 3:25 PM
Environmental Services
Approved By
Comprehensive Planning Department
Randall J. Cohen
Director
Date
Community Development &
Comprehensive Planning
71712008 1:37 PM
Environmental Services
Approved By
Zamira Deltoro
Project Manager
Date
Public Utilities
Public Utilities Engineering
7/7/2008 2:20 PM
Approved By
Marjorie M. Student- Stirling
Assistant County Attorney
Date
County Attorney
County Attorney Office
71812008 2:42 PM
Approved By
Community Development &
W Joseph K. Schmitt
Environmental Services Adminstrator
Date
Community Development &
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Environmental Services Admin.
718/2006 5:20 PM
file: / /C: \AaendaTest \Exnort\ 111 -July %2022 %202008 \08 %20ADVERTI SED %20PUBL1 C... 7/15/2008
Page 2 of 2
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 7 of 71
Approved By
OMB Coordinator
County Manager's Office
OMB Coordinator Date
Office of Management & Budget 7/912008 9:28 AM
Approved By
Mark lsackson Budget Analyst Date
County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 71912008 9:47 AM
Approved By
James V. Mudd County Manager Date
Board of County
Commissioners County Manager's Office 7114/2008 3:06 PM
file• / /C' \AAenc1nTOCt \F.xnnrt\ 111 -IT dVOMM?0/ O'7`0OR \090 /7(IArIVFRTTQFnO /)OPIIRIIC 7 /1S /')Of1R
Agenda Item No. BE
July 22, 2008
Page 8 of 71
ORDINANCE NO. 08--
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
ESTABLISHING AND NAMING THE NAPLES RESERVE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT; DESCRIBING THE
EXTERNAL BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT; NAMING THE
INITIAL MEMBERS OF THE DISTRICT'S BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS; PROVIDING STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND
COMMITMENTS GOVERNING THE DISTRICT; PROVIDING
FOR CONSENT TO SPECIAL POWERS; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Naples Reserve, LLC, has petitioned the Board of County Commissioners
of Collier County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, to establish the
NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (District); and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, after proper published notice has
conducted a public hearing on the petition and determined the following with respect to the
factors to be considered in Section 190.005(1)(e) Florida Statutes, as required by Section
190.005(2)(c), Florida Statutes:
1. The petition is complete in that it meets the requirements of Sections 190.005,
Florida Statutes; and all statements contained within the petition are true and
correct.
1 Establishment of the proposed District is not inconsistent with any applicable
element or portion of the local comprehensive plan of Collier County, known as
the Collier County Growth Management Plan, or the State Comprehensive Plan.
3. The area of land within the proposed District is of sufficient size, is sufficiently
compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one functional
interrelated community.
4. The District is the best alternative available for delivering community
development services and facilities to the area that will be serviced by the District.
5. The community development services and facilities of the District will not be
incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities.
6. The area that will be served by the District is amenable to separate special- district
government; and
WHEREAS, it is the policy of this State, as provided for in Section 190.002(2)(c),
Florida Statutes, that the exercise by any independent district of its powers as set forth by
uniform general law comply with all applicable governmental laws, rules, regulations, and
policies governing planning and permitting of the development to be serviced by the district, to
ensure that neither the establishment nor operation of such district is a development order under
Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and that the district so established does not have any zoning or
permitting powers governing development; and
WHEREAS, Section 190.004(3), Florida Statutes, provides that all governmental
planning, environmental, and land development laws, regulations, and ordinances apply to all
development of the land within a community development district. Community development
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 9 of 71
districts do not have the power of a local government to adopt a comprehensive plan, building
code, or land development code, as those terms are defined in the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. A district shall take no action
which is inconsistent with applicable comprehensive plans, ordinances, or regulations of the
applicable local general- purpose government.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that-
SECTION ONE: AUTHORITY FOR ORDINANCE
This Ordinance is adopted pursuant to Section 190.005(2), Florida Statutes, and other
applicable provisions of law governing county ordinances.
SECTION TWO: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The Naples Reserve Community Development District is hereby established within the
boundaries of the real property described in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated by
reference herein.
SECTION THREE: DISTRICT NAME
The community development district herein established shall henceforth be known as the
"Naples Reserve Community Development District."
SECTION FOUR: DESIGNATION OF INITIAL BOARD MEMBERS
The following five persons are herewith designated to be the initial members of the Board
of Supervisors:
1. Anthony Salce
4. Jay Malamphy
3292 Green Dolphin Lane
11521 Longshore Way W.
Naples, FL 34102
Naples, FL 34110
2. Mark Lazar
5. Tom Andrea
489 Raven Way
119026'" Avenue N.
Naples, FL 34110
Naples, FL 34103
3. Don Mazzarella
649 Bowline Drive
Naples, FL 34102
SECTION FIVE: STATUTORY PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE DISTRICT
The Naples Reserve Community Development District shall be govemed by the
provisions of Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, and all other applicable general and local law.
SECTION SIX: CONSENT TO SPECIAL POWERS
Upon the effective date of this Ordinance, the Naples Reserve Community Development
District will be duly and legally authorized to exist and exercise all of its general powers as
2
1
Agenda Item Nol 8E
July 22, 2 08
Page 10 o 71
limited by law; and has the right to seek consent from the Collier County Board of County
Commissioners for the grant of authority to exercise special powers in accordance with Section
190.012(2), Florida Statutes.
SECTION SEVEN: PETITIONER'S COMMITMENTS
The adoption of this Ordinance is predicated upon the following: that the Petitioner, its
successors and assigns, shall (1) elect one resident of the District to the five member Board of
Supervisors at such time as residents begin occupying homes in the District, and (2) record a
Notice of Assessments containing the specific terms and conditions of any special assessments
imposed to secure bonds issued by the District, which notice shall be recorded immediately after
any such bond issuance. The Board shall retain any and all rights and remedies available at law
and in equity to enforce Petitioner's Commitments against Petitioner, its successors and assigns.
SECTION EIGHT: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other ordinance of Collier County or other
applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion.
SECTION NINE: INCLUSION IN CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Laws
and Ordinances of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinances may be renumbered
or relettered to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section,"
"article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION TEN: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Florida Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this day of , 2008.
ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
Deputy Clerk
Approved as to form
and legal sufficiency:
Marjorie Student- Stirling
Assistant County Attorney
3
By:
TOM HENNING, CHAIRMAN
Exhibit "A"
Agenda Item No 8E
July 22, 2 08
Page 11 o 71
LEGAL DESCRIP71ON
(NAP:3 RESERVE)
ALL OF SECTION I, TOYMSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTIgV 1, TOMNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA',
THENCE N.00'40'n5'E. FOR 2.749. 79 FEET TO THE WEST QUARTER (1 /4) CORNER OF SAID SECPM 1{
THENCE N, 00.40.07 -E. FOR 2.B01.80 FEET, TO THE NORTHWEST CDRNER OF SAID SECTION 1:
THENCE 5.89'36'17'E. FOR 2,690.B0 FEET. TO THE NORTH QUARTER (1 /4) CORNEA OF SAID SEC71M I:
THENCE NAB 57'27'L FOR 2,70&42 FEET, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1.
HENCE 5.0019'59 "W. FOR 2.76412 FEET. TO THE EAST GARTER (1 /4) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1:
THENCE SOOTS 23'W. FOR 2,>63.64 FEET, TO THE NDJMEAST CORNER M SAD SECTION 1:
THENCE SAS55'32 "W FOR 2,716.41 FEET. TO THE SOUTH QUARTER (1/4) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1;
THENCE S.B9'5508'W FOR 2.716.33 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN,
CONTAINING 29,971,643 SQUARE FEET M 6801 ACRES MORE OR LESS
SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD.
BEARINGS ARE BASED M THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWST QUARTER (1/4) OF SECTION I AS BEING 58955'38'W. FLORIDA STATE
PLANE COORDINATE
SYSTEM. EAST ZONE, 1983 NORTH AMERICAN DATUM, (1999) AbXSTMENT.
SBP]61TF vw ) Y MMY=T_W. 2744.47 Y
N We1eI -c z A. seelrxrW x7Re.a v
A E �
I
S a
�R
%G
a� I
I as
9.^
gg I
I eW
NARLES
RESERVE
SECTION 1 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 FAST
666.1 ACRES+/ —
II
null
„III
I;;g
esli
I .�
POOR OF
BEGINNING 1\
7T6 v Y 54955'v'W 271641 Y
31
=SBPeS'v'W
152YW x)ID.0 P QNa W I,.,. F
1e1)—ry ], 206F 1006 AM 0 \L0011 J1OI)5 50.06 Nopl Hesa COD \UOG2 C00 Labbst --f \40125%01. ox9
T`C INC.
FEB zoos
CLIENT
NAPLES RESERVE,
LLC.
�A pl.g
XX A
vMURv am
1' -1000
CONSULTING S
m
TITLE:
Z <1 "' uF eI & MPP
R V
fit^
METES & BOUNDS LEGAL
DESCRIPTION
IILAIoN:
nom
PnW(M)N7A6n
FAA -'261 NNMn
y "s 1'
PRU"I
040125.06
SHECT
1 1
TILE
40125X01
N:,MPIR
NOMBLR. OF
N1.11R'.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 12 of 71
BOARD OF COUNTY CO tMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE PURSUANT
TO SECTION 190.005(2), FLORIDA
STATUTES TO ESTABLISH THE
NAPLES RESERVE COIMIUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
PETITION FOR EST_aBLISHMEN'T BY COUNTY
ORDIN?ANCE OF A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Petitioner, Maples Reserve, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company (the
"Petitioner "), by and through its undersigned attorney, petitions the Board Of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida (the "Commission "), to enact an
ordinance establishing on the property proposed in this Petition the Naples Reserve
Community Development District (the "District ") as a community development
district under and pursuant to the Uniform Community Development District Act of
1980, codified as Chapter 190 Florida Statutes, as amended and supplemented (the
"Act "). In support of this Petition, Petitioner states as follows:
1. Petitioner's principal place of business is at 515 Terracina «'ay,
Naples, Florida 3.1119.
3. The land area to be, serviced by the proposed District is located wholly
within the unincorporated area of Collier County. The land area of the proposed
District is bounded by PicaFtine State Forest to the north, agricultural lands and
the Walnut Lakes PUD to the south, agricultural and disturbed lands to the east,
and an undeveloped portion of Winding Cypress PUD to the west. A map showing-
the location of the land area proposed to be serviced by the District is attached as
Exhibit,
1 of 5
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 13 of 71
3. A metes and bounds legal description of the proposed external
boundaries of the District is attached as Exhibit "2 '. There is no real property
within the proposed boundaries of the District which is to be excluded from the
jurisdiction of the District.
4. Written consent to the establishment of the District by the owners of
one hundred percent (100' /0) of the real property to be included in the land area
proposed to be serviced by the District is attached as Exhibit "3
5. The live (5) persons designated to serve as the initial members of the
Board of Supervisors of the District, all of whom are citizens of the United States
and residents of the State of Florida and who shall serve in that office until replaced
by elected member:; as provided in the Act. are:
(l) Anthony Salce
3292 Green Dolphin Lane
Naples, FL 34102
(2) Mark Lazar
489 Raven «lay
Naples, FL 34110
(3) Don Alazzarella
649 Bowline Drive
Naples, FL 34102
(4) Jay Malamphy
11, 21 Longshore Way W.
'Maples, FL '34119
(5) Tl on Andrea
1190 261 , avenue N.
Naples, FL 3110:3
6. The proposed name of the District is "Naples Reserve Community
Development District."
2of5
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 14 of 71
_ 7. A map of the land area of the proposed District is attached as Exhibit
"4 ". There are no major trunk water mains, sewer interceptors, utilities or
stormwat.er outfalls on the property within the proposed District.
S. A good faith estimate of the proposed timetable for construction of the
District systems, facilities and services and the estimated costs of constructing; the
same, leased upon available data which are subject to change, is attached as Exhibit
9. Collier County (the "County ") has adopted its Local Government
Comprehensive Plan (the "County Plan ") in accordance with the requirements of
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The Plan designates the land area proposed to be
included in the District as Urban — Afixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe
Subdistrict (310.94 acres) and Agricultural /Rural — Rural Fringe Mixed Use District
(RF>t1UD) (377.16 acres) . A copy of the relevant FLUE map showing this
classification, and also showing the future general distribution, location and extent
of public and private uses of land contemplated by the Plan for the land area
proposed to be serviced by the District is attached as Exhibit "6 ".
10. A Statement of Estimated Regulatory Coats (SERC ") of the
Commission's granting this Petition, in accordance and in compliance with sections
190.005 (1)(a)(8) and 130.541, FS., is attached as Exhibit" 7 ".
11. The District, if established on the proposed property, would not be
inconsistent (and in fact, is consistent) with the policies of any applicable element of
The County Plan and also the State Comprehensive Plan.
12. The land area proposed to he included within the District is of
sufficient size, compactness and contiguity to be developed as one functional,
interrelated community and the District is planned to be developed as such.
13. The creation of the District represents the best alternative available
for delivering the community development services and facilities to the property to
be served by the proposed District.
3 of 5
Agenda item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 15 of 71
14. The community development systems, facilities and services t,o be
provided by the District on the proposed property will supplement, and will not in
any way be incompatible with, existing roads and other local and regional
community development systems, facilities and services on the proposed property..
15. The area proposed to he served by the District is amenable to separate
special district government.
16. As required by the Act. Petitioner will provide full disclosure of
information relating to the public financing of District facilities and the
maintenance of District improvements.
17. In support of the factual assertions and conclusions set forth in this
Petition, Petitioner has attached the written pre -filed testimony and affidavits of
those professionals whose testimony is attached as Exhibit 6.
WHEREFORE. Petitioner respectfully requests the Commission t.a:
A. Determine this Petition is complete and in accordance with the
requirements of the Act and direct its staff to notice, as soon as practicable, a local,
public, non - emergency public: hearing pursuant to the requirements of Section
190.005(2)(1)) and (c) of the Act, on the subject of whether to grant this Petition for
the establishment of the proposed District and whether to enact: an ordinance
establishing the proposed District;
Petition: and
B. Hold a public hearing in accordance with the .Act to consider the
C. Grant this Petition and enact an ordinance to establish the
Naples Reserve Community Development District.
4of5
Agenda Item No. 811
July 22, 2008
Page 16 of 71
Respectfully submitted this AqAay of 281 f! � , 2008.
Bv:
Donald A. Pel:worth
Donald A. Pickworth, P.A.
5150 Tamiami Trail North
Suite 502
Naples, FL 34103
PH: 239-263-8060
Email:
Attorney for Petitioner
5 of 5
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 17 of 71
MIAW1. >007 EN NAPLES RESERVE, LLC
Fr1" A / % \ Pluming
Visualization N T S
coJSUCIwc ciraL-ngnxng i-l:
AL r 1 T 1 NAPLES RESERVE RPUD
.L Surveying & Mapping N _
ss,awaaw ran. wve. s,n,�.2o0 -_ VICINITY MAP
NaPi. 23T5a34ID5
PM1One_(23!5P- -0575
FAx����,�� >.�A � �, � _ 04- 0125.00 1 ,, 1 ; .,,;, 4012500X06
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
IbOTIi
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
J`:ACLES e'SERVF)
A_C IF SEC'ICN 1, TOWNSHIP 5' SOUTH. P.ANGE 26 E59T. COLLIEP COJNTV, PCRIDA. GCINC MORE PAFTICJLARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNINO AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNLTi OF SECTION 1. 10WN °HIP 51 SOUTH, 4ARGE 201 LASI. COLLIEP =DUNTY. FLDROA.
THENCE N.00'40'55'E. FOR 2. ?49. 74 .FEET TO THE WEST QUARTER (1 /4) C?DRNER OF SAID SE ^TiON 1..
THEIJCE N_ODYC'C7 "E. FOR 2.801.80 F[[T. TO THE NOR7HW[S7 CORN[RR OF SAID SECTION
THENCE 199'38'17'E, FOR 2.690.50 FEET, TO THE NOET} QUARTER (1 1'4) CORNER OF 5AIJ SECTION 1,
THENCE N.89'57'27E. FOR 2,'08.42 ?EE'.. TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1,
7HENC[ S.00'19'59 "W, FOR 2,761.12 TEL,. TO THE EAST QUARTER (' /4) COR14ER OF SAID SECTION 1:
1HfNri SAO'19'23 "ut_ FOR 2.7E3.54 FEET, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SEC'I'0N 1;
THENCE 5. E9'553''W- FOR 2,716.41 FEE. TO T$E SOUTH OLIARTER (1!4) COPNEF OF SAID SECTION %
THEN, S sg,55'35 "W' FOR 2,716.33 Tu-T, TO THE POINT OF 3EG.IJNINF. OT THE PARCEL DESCRIBED HEREIN.
Z:NTAINING 29971.643 SO'u AFT :EET DR 688.1 ADRES, MORE OR LESS
.
SJBJFCT TO FASLMENTS AND REST31CTIDNS 01 RECOPO.
BLARINCS ARE EASED ON ! If S00H LINE 01 THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (1114) OF SECTION 1 AS BEING, SB9 "'x5'38 "v!, FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE
SYSTEM. FAST i'DNE, 1983 N0RT1'. AMERICAN DA IM. (1999) A0VE7MEAT
569']9 }7'[ 2690.64 N 5B9'5727'W 270842 M
N 5 -9'127 149045 I, 569'y'23`W 2)08.43 P
E
s
OO
88
so
POl OF
BEGINNINIG
NAPLES
RESERVE
SECTION 1 TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH,
RANGE 26 EAST
688.1 ACRES + /—
i
1
1
SBP5� 3[fW 2716.38 a S99115'3: w 211" M
c99 ^}.522'w "'E 13 v 509559:w p'I9.30 c
I CLIENT:
DT 'p�INC.
` / 1 >lannu,g
Visuatizadnn1
FFB. 2D08
"= 1000'
CONSULTING Civil Engineering
.AL '11L T UL 1 Surveying & Mapping
RY
T
C. N
6610 014W Pain Ome, Sidle 200
N.*s. Flonoo UIM
P11oBe 12391597 G775
FAIL (991597-0578
08
FF
ni
NAPLES RESERVE, LLC.
TITLE: EXHIBIT ".2 "
METES & BOUNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION
040125.061 '; 1 1 , ,1,:.. -, 40125X01
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 19 of 71
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND CONSENT TO CREATION OF CDD
STATE OF FLORIDA )
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this i';kday of March, 2008, personally
appeared Anthony Salce, and having been sworn and under oath, deposes and states:
1 . Affiant is over the age of twenty -one (21) years, is otherwise sui juds, and has
personal knowledge of the facts asserted herein.
2. Affiant is the managing member of Naples Reserve LLC, a Florida limited liability
company (the "LLC ").
3. The LLC is the owner of 100% of that real property located in Collier County,
Florida and described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property"),
The Property constitutes all of the property to be included in the proposed Naples Reserve
Community Development District and there are no other lands sought to be included in the
District.
4. The Affiant has the authority to execute this Affidavit and the Petition for the
establishment of the Naples Reserve Community Development District (the "District ") and to
consent to the inclusion of the Property in the District, and does by this Affidavit so consent.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
DATED this -'" clay of March, 2008,
Anthony Salce
-fi,
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this '7 clay of March, 20086 by Anthony
Salce, [who is personally known to me)lv44n � as
identification).
, 1 P cbl' Staglorida
v!
My Cbm74sion Expires:
Murh 1 L2Z3T
batni vr �Ji7 10 1 55
I •�' �..'°iao� rjJ
Yb a I� ♦ \ r/ t \ e
1 tl ♦ \ i � 1
a gp ti
V
♦ t`�
Asac y
#�f— 3 S SY ✓ � fl r� � � � a C
^.. i fl ail ""M' �.✓.t`# ➢ is 5
inj
9 I C
w
v,
I h
i n c
�+3
'..i
JI�^��5 tl�
q'�xa�'sxx9 q IIrr y�y$g — '� R� �m� „m ,N
1'�dyli�ePk7 I kA' g�
qef: Sp O• S �� a� oa',g a —n �ezn >S
� 3� �eE'79¢ ➢ � 90 m u,ui� ,�
ggF'xli
,5 mix. III {L
A as Id Iii V a
R a$§ §i ) eY °e m A n 'm
NOR ��
� 10
9 .e•� Lon i
Exhibit "4"
MAPLES RESERVE. LLC
y �W Naples Reserve
xPUD AIASTER FLAN RPUD
- T 6
DAVA,�
CONSUC.TINp Civil �Q°'?
1 1 � I1 1 q�wvenny Jt Map{nng
9 1 d I
IJEI
m
N �
N
O'
O O
Rm
A
\
N,,.
i
MAPLES RESERVE. LLC
y �W Naples Reserve
xPUD AIASTER FLAN RPUD
- T 6
DAVA,�
CONSUC.TINp Civil �Q°'?
1 1 � I1 1 q�wvenny Jt Map{nng
9 1 d I
IJEI
m
N �
N
O'
O O
Rm
W W
�S�
pN O
Z N
N N
m�a
c
0
m
a
Ln
x
it
W
m�
og
o�
is
5E
3�
°e fl
8
$E
aFFg
y�
mD
"m C
it
Fyn
9 �
�8
gRY
= �8
'En
a e gmm
58§
80
I
r
S°
8
0
o
O
8
°
o
8
p
g
O
8O
O
y�j
l
S
S
p
p
8A
p
S
Cl
69
!9
19
M
°o
S
`o'
yH�
$
N
q
IR
�
f9
fA
M
fA
+-
E
N
8
S
8
S
8
✓
y
N
C
tn0,
0
m
N
M
a
to
�
I�
A
4
t`9
�
a
i
>
p
0 CL
O
N
V
tn0
C
O
N
Sm
O
P
t°p
IC
M p
Y
fA
e9
69
M
-"
Yi
b9
ry
>
N (
a
y (D
a
°
R >1
Z
p
O
O
O
IV
$
O
°
N
N
E
V
O
E E
§
a
g
00
S
o
S
m
S
°-
o
o
o
S
°
8
°
�o
mo0
S
C
N
C
j
yN
U
O
C
d
C
N
2
O
U
y
d
in
O
o
9
10-
y
N
CJ
V
YJ
lD
1�
RJ
Of
m�
og
o�
is
5E
3�
°e fl
8
$E
aFFg
y�
mD
"m C
it
Fyn
9 �
�8
gRY
= �8
'En
a e gmm
58§
80
I
r
W O
0 0
N N
N N
N T �
C
N
Q
v
A
N
i E
u E
v o°
v
a
a
m
E
E
U
`o
x
0
m
c
L
n
a
n
z
W
a
I
I I
c
11
31
TI
w
,.;a
I
e a o
i
S 3
i
S
1
I S
I
6
h
a
I
-
n
I
-
m
p
e
m
i
I I I .. a
5 i 13 a3
So
44WW 1
N d� Y�
�q'"S T oz
q f d� Any`
r / GE��e�yRX i ^i
Ml,
i
i +Y
UR
/
ORF' /
;.
�
t
/
_
.��.,- ......,.�..o.�.a...,,..., ,,.
.,,.M......�. RFR
\
GS
\
\
"Ulu
\�
1
N
R Na.W
RN
_Rf Se.MU A
URF
p )
Y J
\�
Z X i�
Naples Reserve CDD
�-
�� AC
Exhibit 5, Page 1
ONSll "' "`r
i,ii �.
�0uminp •vim.•lbm�
F=uture Land Use tUap
"
t5i
P.xnzozr o ragez
NAPLES RESERVE. LLC
Naples Resen e MAIA
CONSULTING
RPUD MASTER PLAN RPUD AL IL T Vk JL So=mmllm.
NN
AN
IoM
00 M
Agenda Item No. BE
July 22. 2008
Page 25 of 71
STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS
Naples Reserve Community Development District
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose
This statement of estimated regulatory costs ( "SERC ") supports the
petition to establish the Naples Reserve Community Development District
( "District" or "CDD ").
The proposed District comprises approximately 688 acres all of which are
in the County of Collier. The proposed District will provide community
infrastructure and services to the Naples Reserve residential community
( "Development ") as described below.
The new District will provide community Infrastructure that will serve all, or
a substantial portion of, the land in the proposed District. The District
plans to provide localized infrastructure improvements and services
( "District Infrastructure ") to serve the land in the District and any offsite
mitigation required by the Project's Development Order, The District may
finance community Infrastructure by issuing bonds from time to time
("Bonds ") secured by, among other things, proceeds of non -ad valorem
special assessments (the 'Assessments ") levied on land within the
District.
1.2 Scope of the Analysis
The limitations on the scope of this SERC are explicitly set out in Section
190.002(2) (d), F.S. (governing District formation or alteration) as follows:
"That the process of establishing such a district pursuant to uniform
general law shall be fair and based only on factors material to managing
and financing the service delivery function of the district, so that any
matter concerning permitting or planning of the development is not
material or relevant (emphasis added)."
1.3 Overview of the Development Plan for the Naples Reserve District
As noted above, the Naples Reserve District will provide community
infrastructure and district infrastructure, services, and facilities along with
their operations and maintenance, to the Naples Reserve Development.
The land contained in the District is currently planned for the land uses
shown in Table 1. These are preliminary plans and are subject to change.
EX ffl iN sr 7
Agenda Item No. 3E
July 22, 2008
Page 26 of 71
Naples Reserve is a master planned residential community in
unincorporated Collier County being developed by Naples Reserve,
L.L.C.. ( "Developer "). The Naples Reserve Community Development
District, if approved, will encompass a total of approximately 688 acres.
Current plans envision approximately 500 single family detached homes,
240 4 -plex (coach home) units, 270 6 -plex units and 90 4 -story multi-
family units for a total of 1,100 residential units along with recreational
facilities.
Table 1. Naples Reserve CDD Currently Planned Land Uses
Category Amount
Total Gross Acres: 688.0
Single Family Homes: 500
Coach Homes: 240
Six Plex Homes: 270
Multi - Family Units: 90
Naples Reserve, L.L.C. ( "Developer ")
1.3 Requirements for Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs
Section 120.541(2), F.S. (2002), defines the elements a statement of
estimated regulatory costs must contain:
"(a) A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely to
be required to comply with the rule, together with a general description of
the types of individuals likely to be affected by the rule.
(b) A good faith estimate of the cost to the agency, and to any other state
and local government entities, of implementing and enforcing the
proposed rule, and any anticipated effect on state and local revenues.
(c) A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred by
individuals and entities, including local governmental entities, required to
comply with the requirements of the rule. As used in this paragraph,
"transactional costs" are direct costs that are readily ascertainable based
upon standard business practices, and include filing fees, the cost of
obtaining a license, the cost of equipment required to be installed or used
or procedures required to be employed in complying with the rule,
additional operating costs incurred, and the cost of monitoring and
reporting.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 27 of 71
(d) An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by Section
288.703, F.S., and an analysis of the impact on small counties and small
cities as defined by Section 120.52, F.S. Collier County is not defined as
a small County for purposes of this requirement.
(e) Any additional information that the agency determines may be useful.
(f) In the statement or revised statement, whichever applies, a description
of any good faith written proposal submitted under paragraph (1) (a) and
either a statement adopting the alternative or a statement of the reasons
for rejecting the alternative in favor of the proposed rule."
2.0 A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely
to be required to comply with the ordinance, together with a general
description of the types of individuals likely to be affected by the
ordinance
If this petition to establish the District is approved, the District will
encompass approximately 688 acres. All of the ultimate property owners
in the District will be required to comply with District rules and their
properties will be encumbered with District obligations to pay for
infrastructure and operations and maintenance expenses incurred by the
District. Of course prior to the sell out of the real estate, all of the
undeveloped land owned by the Developer and any other landowner will
also be under the jurisdiction of the District.
3.0 Good faith estimate of the cost to state and local government
entities, of implementing and enforcing the proposed ordinance, and
any anticipated effect on state and local revenues
3.1 Costs to Governmental Agencies of Implementing and Enforcing
Ordinance
State Governmental Entities
The cost to State entities to review or enforce the proposed ordinance will
be very modest. The District comprises less than 1,000 acres. Therefore,
the County will review and act upon the petition to establish the District.
P
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22. 2008
Page 28 of 71
There are minimal additional ongoing costs to various State entities to
implement and enforce the proposed ordinance. The District is a special
purpose unit of local govemment, and it is required to file various reports
to the State of Florida, the Department of Community Affairs and other
agencies of the State. The filing requirements are outlined in Appendix A.
However, the additional costs to the State and its various departments to
process the additional filings from the District are very low, since the State
routinely processes filings from over 100 similar districts. Finally, the filing
fees paid by the District are designed to offset any additional costs to the
State.
Collier County
This petition to establish the District will require the County to review the
petition and its supporting exhibits. In addition, the County will hold public
hearings to discuss the petition and to take public input. These activities
will absorb staff time and time of the County Commission.
However, these costs are very modest at most for the following reasons.
First, the review of this petition to form the District does not include an
analysis of the Development itself. In fact, such a review of the Project is
prohibited by statute. Second, the petition contains all of the information
necessary for its review. Third, the County already has all of the staff
necessary to review the petition. Fourth, no capital costs are involved in
the review. Fifth, the County routinely processes similar petitions for land
use and zoning changes that are far more complicated than this petition to
form the District. Finally, the $15,000 filing fee is designed to offset these
costs.
The County will incur only a small additional annual cost if this petition is
approved. The proposed District is an independent unit of local
government, so the District is responsible for its own budget, reporting,
and the full conduct of its powers within its boundaries. The District will
provide the County with its budget each year, but no County action is
required.
3.2 Impact on State and Local Revenues
Adoption of the proposed ordinance will have no negative impact on State
or local revenues. The District is an independent unit of local govemment.
It is designed to provide community facilities and services to serve the
development. It has its own sources of revenue. No State or local
subsidies are required or expected.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 29 of 71
In this regard it is important to note that any debt obligations incurred by
the District to construct its infrastructure, or for any other reason, are not
debts of the State of Florida or any unit of local government. By State law
debts of the District are strictly its own responsibility.
In this regard it is important to note that any debt obligations incurred by
the District to construct its infrastructure, or for any other reason, are not
debts of the State of Florida or any unit of local government. By State law
debts of the District are strictly its own responsibility.
4.0 A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred
by individuals and entities required to comply with the requirements
of the ordinance
The District plans to provide various community facilities and services to
the property in the District, as outlined in Table 2. The District plans to
fund, construct, own and manage the water management system and the
land acquisition. In conjunction with the Developer, the District will fund
and construct the roadways and lighting, utilities, drainage system,
earthwork, perimeter landscape features and offsite improvements
required by the project's development order. The utilities will be owned
and operated by the County while the roadways & lighting, drainage
system, earthwork and perimeter landscape features will be owned and
maintained by the project's property owners association ("PDA"). The
offsite improvements required by the Project's development order will be
owned and maintained by the Florida Department of Transportation
( "FDOT "). The District's costs may include acquisition of land on which the
infrastructure will be constructed.
Table 2. Proposed Facilities and Services
FACILITY
Roads & Lighting
Developer /CDD
PDA
POA
Utilities
Developer /CDD
County
County
Water Management
Developer /CDD
CDD
CDD
Drainage
Developer /CDD
PDA
PDA
Earthwork
Developer /CDD
PDA
PDA
Perimeter Landscape Features
Developer /CDD
PDA
PDA
Land Acquisition
Developer /CDD
CDD
CDD
Offsite Improvements
Developer /CDD
FDOT
FDOT
The costs for providing the capital facilities outlined in Table 2 consist of
District Infrastructure. Table 3 on the next page presents the District's
share of costs associated with the Community Infrastructure and offsite
mitigation along with a time table for its installation.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 30 of 71
Table 3. Summary of Estimated Capital Costs for
Community Infrastructure for the District
10% Contingency $10,250,000 2009/2014
Total $112,750,000
Source: RWA, Inc., Engineers
Prospective future landowners in the District may be required to pay non -
ad valorem assessments levied by the District to secure the debt incurred
through bond issuance. In addition to the levy of non -ad valorem
assessments for debt service, the District may also impose a non -ad
valorem assessment to fund the operations and maintenance of the
District and its facilities and services.
It is important to note that the various costs outlined in Table 3 are typical
for developments of the type contemplated here. In other words, there is
nothing peculiar about the District's financing that requires additional
infrastructure over and above what would normally be needed. Therefore,
these costs are not in addition to normal development costs. Instead, the
facilities and services provided by the District are substituting in part for
developer- provided infrastructure and facilities. Along these same lines,
District - imposed assessments for operations and maintenance costs are
similar to what would be charged in any event by a property owners'
association common to most master planned developments.
Estimated
Commencement/Completion
Category
Estimated Cost
Date
Roadways & Lighting
$9,600,000
2009/2014
Utilities
$11,160,000
2009/2014
Water Management & Drainage
$7,900,000
2009/2014
Earthwork
$22,440,000
200912012
Perimeter Landscape Features
$3,100,000
2009/2014
Land Acquisition
$16,000,000
2009/2011
Offsite Improvements
$24,700,000
2009/2014
Professional Service Fees
$7,600,000
2009/2014
10% Contingency $10,250,000 2009/2014
Total $112,750,000
Source: RWA, Inc., Engineers
Prospective future landowners in the District may be required to pay non -
ad valorem assessments levied by the District to secure the debt incurred
through bond issuance. In addition to the levy of non -ad valorem
assessments for debt service, the District may also impose a non -ad
valorem assessment to fund the operations and maintenance of the
District and its facilities and services.
It is important to note that the various costs outlined in Table 3 are typical
for developments of the type contemplated here. In other words, there is
nothing peculiar about the District's financing that requires additional
infrastructure over and above what would normally be needed. Therefore,
these costs are not in addition to normal development costs. Instead, the
facilities and services provided by the District are substituting in part for
developer- provided infrastructure and facilities. Along these same lines,
District - imposed assessments for operations and maintenance costs are
similar to what would be charged in any event by a property owners'
association common to most master planned developments.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 31 of 71
Real estate markets are quite efficient, because buyers and renters
evaluate all of the costs and benefits associated with various alternative
locations. Therefore, market forces preclude developers from marking up
the prices of their products beyond what the competition allows. To
remain competitive the operations and maintenance charges must also be
in line with the competition,
Furthermore, locating in the District by new residents is completely
voluntary. So, ultimately, all owners and users of the affected property
choose to accept the District's costs in tradeoff for the benefits that the
District provides.
The District is an alternative means to finance necessary community
services. District financing is no more expensive, and often less
expensive, than the alternatives of a municipal service taxing unit (MSTU),
a neighborhood association, County provision (directly or via a dependent
special district), or through developer -bank loans.
5.0 An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by
Section 288.703, F.S., and an analysis of the impact
on small counties and small cities as defined by Section 120.52, F.S.
There will be no impact on small businesses because of the formation of
the proposed District. If anything, the impact may be positive. This is
because the District must competitively bid certain of its contracts. This
affords small businesses the opportunity to bid on District work.
The development is located in the County of Collier. As of the latest
Census date, the 2000 Census, the County has a population of 251,377.
Therefore, the proposed District is not located in a County defined as a
"small" (75,000) according to Section 120.52, F.S.
6.0 Any additional useful information.
The analysis provided above is based on a straightforward application of
economic theory, especially as it relates to tracking the incidence of
regulatory costs and benefits. Inputs were received from the Developer's
Engineer and other professionals associated with the Developer.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 32 of 71
Finally, it is useful to reflect upon the question of whether the proposed
formation of the District is the best alternative to provide community
facilities and services to the Development. As an alternative to the
District, the County could approve a dependent special district for the
area, such as an MSBU or a special taxing district under Chapter 170,
F.S. Either of these alternatives could finance the improvements
contemplated in Table 2 in a fashion similar to the proposed District.
However, each of these alternatives is inferior to the District. Unlike the
District, the alternatives would require the County to continue to administer
the project and its facilities and services. As a result, the costs for these
services and facilities would not be sequestered to the land directly
benefiting from them, as the case would be with the District.
A District also is preferable from a government accountability perspective.
With a District as proposed, residents and renters in the District would
have a focused unit of government under their direct control. The District
can then be more responsive to resident needs without disrupting other
County responsibilities.
Another alternative to the District would be for the developer to provide the
infrastructure and to use a property owners association (POA) for
operations and maintenance of community facilities and services. A
District is superior to a POA for a variety of reasons. First, unlike a POA a
District can impose and collect its assessments along with other property
taxes. Therefore, the District is far more assured of obtaining its needed
funds than is a POA. Second, the proposed District is a unit of local
government. Therefore, unlike the POA the District must abide by all
governmental rules and regulations.
(Rest of Page Left Intentionally Blank)
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 33 of 71
Fishkind & Associates certifies that this SERC meets the requirements for
a SERC as set out in Chapter 120.541, F.S.
We have developed over 40 SERCs. Below is a listing of some of these
SERCs.
• Urban Orlando Community Development District
• Marshall Creek Community Development District
• Cedar Hammock Community Development District
• Mediterra Community Development District
• Brooks Community Development District
• Pelican Marsh Community Development District
• Pelican Landing Community Development District
• Fiddler's Creek Community Development District 1
• Monterra Community Development District
• Quarry Community Development District
• Capital Region Community Development District
• Deerfield Preserve Community Development District
• Cypress Shadows Community Development District
9
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 34 of 71
APPENDIX A
LIST OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
FLORIDA
STATUTE
REPORT
CITE
DATE
Annual Financial Audit
11.45
12 months after end of
fiscal year
Annual Financial Report (AFR)
218.32
by March 31
TRIM Compliance Report
200.068
130 days after
Form 1 - Limited Financial Disclosure
112.3144
by July 1
Public Depositor
215
by November 15
Proposed Budget
218.34
by September 1
Public Facilities Report
189.415
March 1
Public Meetings Schedule
189.417
beginning of fiscal year
Bond Report
218.38
When issued
Registered Agent
189.417
30 Days after
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 35 of 71
EXHIBIT 8
WRITTEN, PRE -FILED TESTIMONY OF:
G. RUSSELL WEYER
ROBERT .NIULHERE, AICP
CHRISTOPHER "'RIGHT, P.E.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 36 of 71
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
IN RE: PETITION TO ESTABLISH NAPLES RESERVE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AFFIDAVIT ADOPTING WRITTEN. PRE -FILED TESTIMONY
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
1, G. Russell Weyer, of Fishkind & Associates, Inc., being first duly sworn, do hereby
state for my affidavit as follows:
I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this affidavit.
- ?. My name is G. Russell Weyer, and I ant employed by Fishkind & Associates. Inc.
3. The prepared. written, pre -filed testimony, submitted under my name to Collier
County relating to the establishment of Naples Reserve Community Development District_ and
attached hereto, is true and correct.
-t. HA were asked the questions contained in the pre -filed testimony orally at any
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners relating to the Petition to establish Naples
Reserve Community Development District, my oral answers would lie the same as the written
;utswers presented in my pre -tiled testimony.
My pre -filed testimony generally addresses the truth and accuracy ofthe Petition
to establish the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District, the six factors that
must be considered in a determination to establish a community development district, and the
estimated regulatory costs associated with the establishment of a community development
district.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 37 of 71
Under penalties of perjure. I declare that I have read the foregoing and the facts alleged
are true and correct to the best of m} kno A ledge and belief.
Executed this ilay of /� T R,^ , 2008.
G. Russell Wever
SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by the Affiant, on this % day of
A'„ , i 2008.
.
...................
C.LAURENT
..........................
.�.P YPµ
Comm#D00689386
3`
EXPIMS 6!292011
ry A., lx
F..... No� Sm
Personally
Type of identification produced
Printed Name of Notary
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 38 of 71
TESTIMONY OF G. RUSSELL WEYER FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
1. Please state vour name and business address.
My name is Russell Weyer and my business address is 141 5 Panther Lane, Suites
346/3147, Naples. Florida 34109.
2. By whom are you employed and in what capacity?
I am a Senior Associate with Fishkind & Associates, Inc.
3. Please briefly summarize your duties and responsibilities.
As a Senior .Associate for Fishkind & .Associates, I am responsible for the day -to-
day operations of the Naples branch of the company. My client services include
fiscal and economic analysis for real estate development, local, regional, and state
governments and seuvinu as the financial analyst for nine community development
districts in the State of Florida.
4. Do you work with both public and private sector clients?
Yes
5. Please describe your educational background.
I hold a Bachelor of Arts in Communication from Michigan State University, East
Lansing. Michigan. and a Masters in Business .Administration from the University
of Miami, Coral Gables. Florida.
6. Please describe your wort: with community development districts in Florida.
As the Financial Advisor to a community development district, I advise the district
on a variety of Financial issues, including the development of the district's
assessment methodology, assistance in the bond validation process including
determination of the validation amount and expert witness testimony, calculation
of the preliminary and final assessment rolls, performing true -up tests at their
appropriate times and administering the assessment methodology during platting,
Fen book and release of liens at closing.
7. Are any of the community development districts ( "CDDs ") of about the same
size as the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District?
Yes
8. What has been your role with respect to this Petition to establish the Naples
Reserve Community Development District?
Ivly firm assisted the Petitioner in evaluating the feasibility of establishing a
district for this land from a financial and economic perspective. Concluding a
community development district was appropriate for this project, our firm
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 39 of 71
prepared the Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs, attached to the Petition as
Exhibit 7.
9. We will begin by addressing portions of the Petition to establish the proposed
District that relate to certain economic analysis matters and your related
expert opinions. You stated that your firm prepared Petition Exhibit 7?
That is correct. Exhibit 7 is the Statement of Estimated Regulatory Costs
("SERC ") required by Chapters 120 and 190. Florida Statutes.
10. Are there any changes or revisions to the SERC at this time?
No
11. In general terms, please summarize the economic analyses you have
presented in the SERC.
The SERC reviewed and evaluated four major categories of potential impacts as
outlined in Section 120.541(2) (f), Florida Statutes.
(a) A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely to be
required to comply with the ordinance, together with a Reneral description of the
types of individuals likely to be affected by the ordinance;
(b) A good faith estimate of the cost to the agency, and to any other state or local
government entities, of' implementing and enforcing the proposed ordinance and
any anticipated cffcct on state and local revenues;
(c) A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred by
individuals and entities. including local government entities, required to comply
with the requirement of the ordinance;
(d) An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by Section 285.703,
Florida Statutes, and an analysis of the impact on small counties and small cities
as defined by Section 120.52, Florida Statutes.
(e) Any additional information that the a2cncy determines may be useful.
After reviewing these categories, we are of the opinion, as stated in the SERC, that
there is no adverse impact on any affected person that would result from
establishment of the proposed District.
12. Please describe briefly the data and methodology you used in preparing the
SERC and related analyses.
The data used in preparing the SERC was compiled from the Petitioner and our
expertise with other community development districts. The data was analyzed
according to standard methodologies in our industry and consistent with the
siututory elements of estimated regulatory costs defined in Section 120.541(2).
Florida Statutes.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 40 of 71
13. Based on your training and experience in the financial aspect of community
development districts, do you have an opinion regarding the financial
viability and feasibility of the proposed District?
Yes
14. What is that opinion?
My professional opinion is that the proposed Naples Reserve Community
Development District Nvill be financially viable and feasible.
15. Do you have an opinion from an economic analysis perspective as to whether
the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District is of sufficient
size, compactness and contiguity to be developable as a functionally
interrelated community?
Yes. I believe that the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District
encompasses enough area and is compact and contiguous such that it may be
developed as a functional interrelated community.
16. When you gave that opinion, what were you including within the term
"functionally interrelated community"?
It means that each functional need of a community must be planned to interrelate
to facilitate the development and maintenance of the larger community. Roads,
drainage, water, sewer, recreation, lighting and other community infrastructure
needs and services must be incorporated into a long -range plan to effectively
accommodate the needs of a community's development. Being functionally
interrelated means that each of these infrastructure needs and services are planned
in comprehensive and supporting relationship to one another.
17. In your opinion, you said the proposed District is of sufficient size to be
developable as one functionally interrelated community. Please explain this
portion of your opinion.
I'll-, District will cover 6g$ acres as proposed. This is certainly large enough to be
developed as a functionally interrelated community. Certainly, there are many
smaller community development Districts that have been developed as a
functionally interrelated community. The District is also compact and contiguous
enough to allow for the effective delivery of infrastructure services and facilities to
the area within the District. The configuration of the proposed District will
maximize the economies of scale benefits available from the services and facilities
to be provided.
18. You also opined that the proposed District is of sufficient compactness. Please
explain this portion of your opinion.
Compactness relates to the proposed District's ability to efficiently and effectively
a, provide the anticipated community infrastructure improvements and services.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 41 of 71
Compactness is a measure of the spatial relationship between the lands and land
uses within a community. Sufficient compactness is present here, in my
professional opinion.
19. You also opined that it was sufficiently contiguous. Would you please explain
this portion of your opinion.
Contiguity relates to the subject property to he included within the District being
of such a shape to allow efficient design and use of infrastructure. Contiguity of
the lands is present for efficient infrastructure design and use.
20. From an economic analysis perspective, do you have an opinion as to whether
the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District is the best
alternative available for providing the proposed community development
services and facilities to the area to be served?
Yes. I believe the proposed District is the best alternative available to provide the
proposed community development services and facilities to the lands anticipated
to be included within the proposed District.
21. Why is that?
These improvements could be provided by the purpose local government utilizing
special assessments or general funds. Or, the developer and/or a property owners
association could provide these facilities through private financing.
There are several important criteria to consider in evaluating these alternatives.
including which alterrtativ ^e provides the best focus, whether the alternative can
effectively and efficiently manuge and maintain the facilities on a long term basis,
whether the alternative has the ability to secure future funding of operation and
maintenance expenses, and v\hether the alternative can secure low cost, long -term
Public financing.
A general purpose local government provides the long term perspective and is a
stable and relatively low cost source of financing and provider of services at
sustained levels, however, regardless of the specific mechanism, the eencral
purpose local government will incur costs associated with the financing and
management of the construction. The source of the necessary construction funds
would be the general purpose local government's general revenue fund or issuance
of additional debt through a dependent taxing or assessing mechanism. if general
revenue is use, these costs. along with annual maintenance costs, would be born by
Lill residents of the ecncral purpose local government, not just property owners
within the proposed District. Financing improvements through a CDD would
impact the = eneral purpose local government's total bonding capacity and would
have a number of management implications discussed later in my testimony.
Dependent district financing would be on the balance sheet of the general purpose
local government. Furthermore, this would require the general purpose local
L-overnmcnt to continually administer, operate and maintain the development
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 42 of 71
infrastructure. Thus, the general purpose local government would be increasing its
responsibility and hence potential liability for the variety of actions that will take
place in the development. For these reasons, general purpose local government
responsibility for the development would divert economic resources that could be
directed elsewhere.
The other alternative is the use of private means — either through a property
owner's association ( "POA ") or through the developer, or both in combination.
This combination can provide focused service and facilities and managed delivery.
However, only a public entity can assure a long-term perspective, act as a stable
provider of services and facilities, qualify as a lower cost source of financing and
pay for services at sustained levels. The developer could try to obtain private
financing, but it is difficult and, when available, is customarily more expensive.
This may result in housinv that is less affordable or a decrease in the level of
services provided. Likewise, a POA also lacks the ability to effective finance
improvements. A POA will not likely have access to lower cost bank or third party
financing in today's market and would not be able to cn -age in the financing
program necessary to provide the needed infrastructure because a POA is
generally not considered, in its infancy, a "bankable entity." In addition, annual
maintenance would likely be delevated to a POA, which does not have the same
legal backing as does a CDD to enforce assessments for operations and
maintenance. Neither the developer nor a POA would be able to provide an as
effective long -term financing of services and facilities as would a CDD.
A CDD is a special- purpose unit of local government designed to focus its
attention and financial resources on providing the best long -term service to its
specific benefited properties and residents_ It has limited power and a limited area
of jurisdiction, but the proposed District has the ability to obtain adequate funds
for sustained levels of maintenance. In addition, the proposed District will incur
the cost of issuina bonds or other indebtedness necessary to finance the
construction of the necessary infrastructure and will oversee and manage all
phases of construction. Further, the sources of funding and manner of collection of
funds will assure that the CDD facilities will be managed at the sustained levedris
of quality desired by residents well into the future. All costs associated with these
activities will be born only by property owns within the proposed District that
benefit horn the improvements. No general purpose local government funds will
be used and no costs will be insured by any residents who do not own property
within the District.
In sum, a CDD allows for the independent financing, administration, operations
and maintenance of the land within the District. For these reasons, a CDD is the
best alternative to provide these facilities and services to the Naples Reserve
development.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 43 of 71
22. Do you have an opinion from an economic analysis perspective as to whether
the services and facilities to be provided by the proposed Naples Reserve
Community Development District will be incompatible with the uses and
existing local and regional facilities and services?
Yes. My professional opinion is that the services and facilities anticipated to be
provided by the District are compatible with the uses and existing local and
regional facilities and services.
23. Why is that?
Any services required of the proposed District are necessary to support new
rowth in the area. Further, a CDD, unlike a property owners' association, must
adhere to higher c *overnmental rules, procedures and standards because it operates
like a government to ensure public oversight to avoid duplication or
incompatibility. There are no incompatible use issues for the lands to be included
within the proposed District.
In addition, Petitioner presently expects the proposed District to finance and
construct and /or maintain roadways, entrance features, recreation improvements,
storm water management system and other infrastructure. Ultimately, the District
may own and maintain certain of those improvements and the applicable general
purpose local government may own and maintain others. However. there will be
no overlap or incompatibility because the facilities and improvements expected to
be provided by the proposed District either do not exist or exist in a manner
consistent with the development plan anticipated for the proposed District.
24, Does this conclude your testimony?
Yes. it does.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 44 of 71
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
IN RE: PETITION TO ESTABLISH NAPLES RESERN'E
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AFFIDAVIT AI)OPTI_NG M'RITTEN. PRE -FILED TESTIMONY
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
I, Christopher O. Wright, P.E., of RR'A, Inc., being first duly sworn, do hereby state for
my affidavit as follows:
f have personal knoxN leduuc of the matters set forth in this affidavit.
?. My name is Christopher O. Wright, P.E., and I am employed by RWA. Inc,
3. The prepared, v +ritten. pre -filed testimony, submitted under my name to Collier
County gelatin. -to the establishinent of Naples Reserve Community Development District, and
attached hereto, is true and correct.
4. li" 1 were asked the questions contained in the pre -filed testimony orally at any
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners relating to the Petition to establish Naples
Reserve Cornnunity De' eloprnent District, my oral ins« ers would be the same as the written
answers presented in my pre -filed testintnnc.
My pre -filed testimony r,.enerallc addresses the truth and accuracy of the Petition
to establish the proposed Naples Reservc Community Development District, the six factors that
must he considered in a determination to establish a cornniunity derelopment district.
t \Drs-�aplas103- 04\2004 \0401 (10 06 Naples Reserve CDD\0002 CDD Establishman1'2009-03 -IS Al for Wright CDD Estnb?ishmmll doc
I of 2
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 45 of 71
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foicuoing and the facts alleged are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Executed this day of 2008.
Christopher O. Wright, P.E.
SWORN 1-0 and SUBSCRIBED before me by the Affiant, on this 1 day of
t2 C V- I 12008.
77RIISHWA
MYMMM15SION 5
E XPIRES :Aflua
Printed Name of-Notary
Personally Known
Type of identification PI-OLILICULI
1Dfs-,,p1,,103-04 0004,04012 00 06 Naple, Reserve C r)D\()()02 CnD F&tablishment',7008-03 -1 8 Affidavit for Wr!6t UDD Kstabit0mentdoc
2 of 2
Agenda Item No. 8E
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPIIER O. V, RIGHT. P.E. FOR THE EST.ARIAIISME e
qF 1008
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEN'LEOPMENT DISTRICT
1. Please state your name and business address.
hly name is Christopher 0. Wright. Nly Business address is 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite
200, Naples. Florida 34109,
2. By whom are you employed and in what capacity?
1 am currently employed as a professional engineer With RW.A. Inc. and I am the Chief
Executive Officer of RWA, Inc.
3. And what is the nature of your firm's business?
RW,,V Inc. provides civil engineering. land sunny and mapping and land planning
consulting and desimn services to private and public clients.
4. Please describe your experience and credentials, including your current employment.
1 am a Registered Professional Enelneer in the State of Florida tsitli over 19 years of Civil
engineering and project management expel
Please describe your educational background, with degrees earned, major areas of
study. year of decree, and institutions attended.
I graduated tironi the University of Florida wnii a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
Decree WSC'E),
6. Do you hold am professional designations or certifications?
I am a Professional Fnumeer in the State of Florida, P.E. "47o59.
7. Are you a member of any professional associations'.
I am a member Of the Florida Dwineermg Society. Amencan Socicry of Civil Engineer;. the
National ,Society of Professional Lngin-ers, and the Florida Institute of C'attsultinD
F.n gmeers.
8. Prior to your current employment. by whom were you employed and in what position?
1 was employed as a Professional Engineer Rir WilsonNfiller, line. as a Senior Prn_ject
Nl am a ger.
9. Do you consider yourself an expert in civil ew< iueerinw'
1'c s.
�DC.s pl 1 2 5 S000tiN,V Resew C DD'(II]Z CDO C 11111h1 1 21,119 Oi_Rl.pi —dTO, —,fog W fl (DDF. b mm, l)OC
1 of
Agenda Item No. 8E
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER O. IN'RIGHT, P.E. FOR THE ESTABLIIISM e 2008
of 71
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMI IUNITY DEVLEOPMENT DISTRICT
10. Please describe )our experience with civil engineering relating to community
des elopmenl districts (' CODs ") and special districts.
1 have provided civil eneineenne scn ices to several CODs throughout my career. t currently
serve or have served as CDD Enginccr ior. I.cl Resort, pelican Mash. Vasari, and Villa „e
Walk at Bonita Springs CDD's
H. Do you consider yourself an expert in civil englineerin”, capable of rendering expert
opinions on CDDs, and specificalic on infrastructure for CDD services?
1 'es.
12. What has been your role .with respect to the Petition to Establish ( "Petition") Naples
Reserve Community Development District ("Naples Reserve C'DD)'.
Nly firm has provided civil cmginecnng and consultation services to the proposed CDD.
13. Are you familiar with the Petition filed to establish Naples Reserve CDD"
1 have rcvievN ed the Petition and its attachments. and I am familiar with the materials.
14. Have cou reviewed the contents of the Petition and the exhibits attached to the
Petition?
1'cs
15, Are there anv chan,,es or corrections to the Petition ur exhibits at this time?
No.
16. To the best o1'your knowledge, based on cour familiarity srilh the Naples Reserve CDD
and (IM's generally, is the Petition and its contents true and complete?
)'es.
17. \re you generalh familiar with the !- enrraphical areas, tN pe.. and scope of development
and the available scrN ices and facilities within Naples Reserve CDl)?
) -es. I :urn familiar with the area within Naples Iteserv-e CI M and I am also familiar with the
some -, and facilities available NN -ithin Naples Reserve CI M.
18. Please proNide u% with a brief description nt Naples IteserNe CDD houndaries and
location?
"I-lie proposed Naples Reserve CIO is O?; 4 acres, us descnhcd in the leual description
comaimcd in Eehibn 2 and shover on the locaunn r.iap v, hick is E> hihit 1. both prepared by
our train.
oD8 v.i- .4 _t04 14 1"111 k,,,IDD11l( "C'DlPmbisM1m -i40, 11 1 our v(. whi CDD EaxG::Fmmi NX
2 of 4
Agenda Item No. 8E
1 TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER O. WRIGHT, P.E. FOR THE ESTABLIHSMF e 'of 71
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVLEOPMENT DISTRICT
19. Please describe Exhibit 4?
Lxhtbtt 4 is [lie PIID Master Plan for the ("IM property, and shows generally how the
pmpert_v will he developed as a residential convnutiM. There are no existing stormwatcr
sewer micreeptors or outfalls. water mains ur sc�xer force mains on the CDD property. Such
acilitucs will be installed during the devek±pment ofthe property.
20. Based on your experience, do you have an opinion as to whether the proposed Naples
Reserve CDD is of sufficient size. sufficient compactness, and sufficient contiguiy to be
developed as a functional). interrelated comtnunitc?
Yes.
21. "'hat is your opinion?
Bused on my previous experience and reviexv of the Petition and exhibits thereto, the
proposed Naples Reserve CDD is of sufficient size. compactness and contiguity to be
developed as a functional interrelated community and it has been master planned as such.
22. NN hat is the basis for Your opinion?
Fhe project is compact with land use t }'pica) of a planned community. The development of'
the land has been planned to he a functional mter elated commuml,v.
23. Based on Nour experience, do Non have an opinion as to whether Naples Reserve CDD is
the best alternative available to provide con nninitN developnteni services and facilities
to the area that will be served?
Yes.
24. What is your opinion and the basis for it'
Given the locational and functional constraints of provtdm,_, such ;ervicec in the area of the
CDD. Naples Rescixe CDD is the hest altcrttatice to provide community dexeloptnent
faciiitics to the area to be served.
25. Based tin your experience, do you have an opinion as to syhcther the services and
facilities to be provided hN Naples Reserve CDD will he compatible with the uses and
existing local and re_ional facilities and services?
Yes.
26. What is Nour opinion and the basis for it?
Naples Reserve CDD's facilities and sLtxices xvithm its houndaries will not duplicate ariv
-- available regional services or facilities xxithin Naples f, °:cn'c CDD.
.',nts mp =e t0
04 2r,01 040 _ O ) M Nnfnes Rev fpDA ,.0' 01 x3,1,, d fes rm . v,W hi CDD E".b. hm a 1 KsC
3 of
Agenda Item No. 8E
TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER O. WRIGHT, P.E. FOR THE ESTAAL[IISM 2� 2008
e�5 of 71
THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVI.F,OPMENT DISTRICT
27. Rased on vour experience, do you have an opinion as to whether the area to be included
within Naples Reserve CDD is amenable to being served by a separate special district
,rovernment"
Yes_ I do. It is my opinion that the area designated to be included in Naples Reserve CDD is
amenable to continued existence as a stp;aratc special district government.
28. What is the basis for your opinions?
It is clear that the lands in Naples Rescne CDD will conimue to have the need for basic
inb astructure.
The land area for Naples Reserve CDD has been evaluated for sufficiency of size,
compactness, and contiguity and meets those tests. t'heref'ore, from a professional
engineering perspecuve. the area to be served by Naples Reservc CDD is clearly amenahie to
separate special- distinct governance.
The Naples Reserve CDD will have the ability to provide facilities and sen�tces to the benefit
of its owners and residents. and the size and compactness of the area vt ill not he inconsistent
auh Naples keserve (T)D's abiinv to provide those services.
29. Does this conclude voar testimnm'Y
1'es.
oDr n a,cv.osuoo., ,a : os no nori p"v I CDD e'1102 a, 1I 'j, ,h:M Ylm 01 41.1, a T.,,�„ r w ,En, am 1...h, , : ooe
4 of 4
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22. 2008
Page 50 of 71
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA
STATE OF FLOWDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
IN RE: PETITION TO ESTABLISH NAPLES RESERVE
CONTMUNFFY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AFFIDAVIT ADOPTING WRITTEN. PRE -FILED TESTIMONY
STATE OF FLORIDA
COITNTY OF COLLIER
1. Robert Ntulhere, of RW A. Inc., being first duly sworn, do hereby state for my affidavit
as follows:
1 have personal knowledge of the matters set Mh V this affidavit.
2. My name is Rohcrt Mullicre, and I am employed by RNVA, Inc.
The prepared, wrincn, pre -filed testimony, suhnmitted under my name to Collier
County relating to the establishment of Naples Ilesew Community I)evelopnmcnt Distria and
attached hereto. is true and correct.
1. If 1 were asked the questions contained in the pre -tiled testimony orally at any
hearing before the Board of County Connnissioncas relmin to the Petition to establish Naples
Reserve Community Dc%elopment District, my oral anwas would he the sane as the written
ans%yers presented in nry pre -filed testimony.
5. A1v pre -tiled testimony, ecnerully addresses the truth and accuracy of the Petition
to establish the proposed Naples Rescri c Community Deg clopnment District, the six factors that
must he considered in a determination to establish a district and the
consistency of the proposed community (In olopment district with the state and local
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 51 of 71
comprehensive plans.
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have -cad the foregoing and the facts alleged
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Executed this 19 day of M,A (zC 9 .2008.
Robert Mulhere
SWORN TO and SUBSCRIBED before me by the Affiant, on this _aday of
NAAJZC',\ .2008.
LIMMCPHERSON SION k 00632990 January 23, 2011 mnruuru�nM,n,,,,
Personally Known �/
Type of identification produced
r'
->, ZSOtJ
Printed Name o1 Notary
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 52 of 71
TESTIMONY OF ROBERT. NIULHERE, AICP, PLANNER, FOR TFIE
ESTABLISHMENT Ol: THE NAPLES RESERVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT
1. Please state your name, business, business address, and position and duties within
your business.
My name is Robert J, Mulhere, AICP. By profession I am an urban planner. i am a Senior Vice
President and Director of Plannin.- with RWA. Inc., whose address is 6610 W illow Park Drive,
Naples Florida.
2. Please describe your education, experience and credentials as a planner.
I have 2.5 years of experience in planning and permitting related to land development activities,
including: Developments of Rcgionai Impacts, comprehensive plan amendments, properly
rezonines, land development code amendments, site development plans, feasibility studies, and
assessing alternative ways to provide infrastntcutrc to permitted and planned community
developments. I have a BA Degrec in Political Science from St. Michael's College and a
Masters Degree in Public Administration from Florida Gulf Coast University. I am a Certified
Planner w -ilh the designation ofA1CP from the American Institute of Certified Planners and
member of the Urban Land Institute.
3. Have you qualified and been accepted as an expert in planning matters.
I have been qualified as an expert in urban planning_ and in local, regional, and state growth
management planning in numerous hearings in front of cLtrirnis Zoning Boards, Local Planning
.Agencies. and County Commissions.
4. NVliat aspects of the Petition for the Establishment of the Naples Reserve
Community Development District will you address in your testimony'
Based on my experience and training. I will address planning aspects and consequences
of the Naples Reserve Commtmit) Development District on the proposed property of the
community development project. I have assessed from a planning perspective the mana"cmcnt
of the delivery or provision of basic infrastructure to community development districts and
related financin,,. I have assisted in the preparation of the Petition_ its requird exhibits and
additional infomtation pertinent to the planning consequences of establishing the District.
5. Could you describe the proposed Naples Reserve CDD
Naples Reserve is located at 10097 Grecnvvay Road in Section 1. Township ;1 South.
Ranee 26 East. Naples Reserve is an amenitizcd residential project encompassing approximately
66.1 acres, and is to include 1 1 ;4 dw211ing units in a mix of product type including -;met,,
family detached, siriLle family attached and multifamik dwclhnLs amenitizcd b%, ztn 18 hole �,nlf
course and lake systern. Naples Reserve will provide a unified community framework, which
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 53 of 71
uccommitdates a variety of housing, opportunities. Desi-nt Ruidelines and an integrated plan for
landscaping, si mage, utility service. storinwater manaeement, and community serviccs will tie
the neiuhborhood toe•ether, crcatine a viahle community strucun-e.
6. Are you familiar with the statutory procedure for the establishment of a community
development district and the six factors that must he considered in the establishment of a
district and why these factors must he considered?
The Iaw requires that certain factors be addressed in the determination of the
establishment of a CDD. In addition. a consideration of the statutory factors and procedures for
the establishment of a District tends to identify problem areas v,hich can be addressed by the
District Board of Supervisors after establishment of the District, or by the staff and members of
the Board of County Commissioners and the District rcvictc team during the petition process.
7. Do you have an opinion with regard to Factor One. that the petition is true and
correct ".
In my professional opinion from a planning perspective, the Petition and its attached
exhibits satisfy the requirements of the statute and contain information that is both true and
correct. therefore, factor one in my opinion is satisfied from a planning perspective.
8. Do con have an opinion with regard to Factor 7 wo, that the establishment of the
district is consistent rcith the State and Local Comprehensive Plan?
Reeardim factor number two. I han e done a considerable amount of analvsis of both the
State- Comprehensive Plan and the Collier County Comprehensive Plan because this factor seeks
consideration of information on whether creation by lam+ and establishment by county ordinance
of the District is inconsistent n ith any applicable clement or ponion of 'the State Comprehensive
Plan or time Collier Count}, Comprehensive Plan.
The State Comprehensive Plan is set forth in Chapter 1 S7. Florida Statutes. I ha%e
anah¢cd this State Plan upon the assumption that the District will exercise all of its systems.
facilities and services and related specialized Powers set lOrlh in time uniform charter of the
Disinct. Sections 190.006 throu•,h 190.041- Florida Statutes.
As to mcthodolo - y, I looked at all 26 subjects, 26 _amts and several related policies under
each goal in the State Plan font this perspectirc. First. I eliminated all subjects, goals and
policies of the State Plan that related neither to the development itsclE nor to the creation and
establishment of the District to serve the development. Further. I rejected any goals, subjects and
policies that related on I.% to the development and land a >c project. :1s a result, I teas mile to
identify certain remaining suhicets. i-,oals and Policies. and to evaluate and consider
them. as they related, in m_v opinion_ to the creation and establishment of a Community
Development District.
l'sin! this ntcthodology, I have determined that four Lmais and related policies actually
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 54 of 71
apply' to the sulliect of this petition. the establishment of the Naples Reserve Community
Development District. Because the Florida Legislature, consistent with section 187.20121)(b)2.
FS., created the District by general law and provided that it should he established oat the
proposed property, I will focus on the establishment aspect in this testimony. I hav-eanaly'zed
each subject and goal and then identified carious specific policies under each of them which
related to the District, once again, applying all of these factors to the assumption that the Distract
would cxcrcise on the particular property in Collicr County all of its specialized powers; in
subsections (I ) and (2) of Section I90.ol2. Florida Statutes_
Subject and Goal 16
( 16) LAND USE.-
(a) Goal: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and
enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which
have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities,
and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner.
First, Subject Number 16 and its related goal apply because the subject of development
being directed to areas having. or programmed to have funded land and water resources, and
service capacity to serve growth in an envirommentally responsible manner relates directly to the
District purpose of fiscal responsibility and adequate SMICe supply through District provided
infrastnicture improvem;nts. I determined that establishment on the proposed property of the
District tmould not be inconsistent with this goal and subject because the Legislature Chapter 190,
F.S., has found already that services provided by a District can be °...a timely, effective,
responsive and economic..." means of accommodating development demands "._tt °ithout
ON erhurdcning other governments and their taxpayers."
Policy 16(b)1. Promote state programs, investments, and development and redevelopment
activities, wwhich encourage efficient development and occur in areas which will have the
capacity to service nets population and commerce.
Regarding policy 16(b)I, establishment of the District is not inconsistent because Chapter
190, F.S., requires efficiency and responsibility in the utilization of District powers in providing
services to supply development demand and the requirements of- county land use and
development decisions.
Police 16(b)2. Develop a system of incentives and disincentives, which encourage
separation of urban and rural land uses awhile protecting water supplies, resource
development, and fish and wildlife habitats.
Regarding policy 16(b)? a District. lobe❑ established. is required by lave to provide
service capacity in areas designated for urban services, and to provide such services in an
environmentally sensitive manner. The District is not inconsistent with policy 16(6)2 of Chapter
1S7. F.S.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2005
Page 55 of 71
Policy N. 16(b)5. Encourage and assist local governments in establishing comprehensive
impact - review procedures to evaluate the effects of significant development activities in
their jurisdictions.
Based on the fact that the District, when established, must report annually for such
facilities using comprehensive review procedures set forth in Section 189.4t�. F.S., it is not
inconsistent with Policy 16(b)5 of Chapter 187. F.S.
Subject and Goal 18
(18) PUBLIC FACILITIES. -
(a) Goal: Florida shall protect the substantial investments in public facilities that already
exist and shall plan and provide for and finance new facilities to serve residents in a timely,
orderly, and efficient manner.
Next, I determined that Subject 18 and its related Goal would he directly implemented
throLtuh the establishment of the District through the responsible provision of services and
facilities when needed. Based on that determination, the District would not he inconsistent with
this subject and goal.
Policy 18(b)3. Allocate the costs of new public facilities on the basis of the benefits received
by the existing and future residents.
Through all understanding of the principle behind the establishment of a District, where
facilities and serrices provided by the District are paid for by those %� hose property benefits from
those facilities and scrv)ces through ad %-alorem taxes. non -add valorem special assessments or
user fees. I find that the District will implement polic } I8(h), and therefore, in my opinion, is
consistent with the policy.
Foliey 18(h)4. Create a partnership among state government, local governments, and the
private sector, which would identify and build needed public facilities and allocate the costs
of such facilities among the partners in proportion to the benefits accruing to each of them.
In ret-Inrd to Policy I 8(b)4, the District is a partncrship between and a coinciding of State
socernment, other local government, and the Private sector, given that a District's charge is to
utilize its statutory powers for the provision of Infrssuucuire only in conformance with local and
state regulations as applied to the development and developer. 'Thus, establishment of tile
District is not inconsistent with this policy.
Policy 18(b)5. Encourage local government financial self- sufficiency in providing public
facilities.
In regard to Policy 18(bI5. the District. ifcstablished. would he a single and special
purpose local government, and � ould he self -sufiicicm in the provision of inti-astructure systems.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 56 of 71
services and fetcilitics given that it would not draw upon other County resources. The
establishment of the District on the proposed property would not be inconsistent with this policy.
Policy 18(b)6. Identify and implement innovative but fiscally sound and cost- effective
techniques for financing public facilities.
The establishment of the District is the demonstration of Policyy 1 SNUB intent, whereby
the District is an innovative means of providing fiscally sound and cost cffeetive service and
facility improvements. Establishing the District is not inconsistent with this policy. Further, the
District. when established, being a special purpose local government, would have limited powers
to design, fund and construct sen'ices and facilities necessary to accommodate the project's
facility and service demand. The long -term mana. ement of infrastructure, at sustained levels of
quality, is both fiscally sound and cost effective as an infrastructure management tool, which then
eliminates the need for excessive finsutcine of the facilities. The District is not inconsistent with
this policy.
Policy 18(b)7. Encourage the development, use, and coordination of capital improvement
plans by all levels of government.
(liven that the District, when established, is subject to the reporting provisions of Sec -tion
139.415, Florida Statutes, which in paragraph (6) states, "For purposes of the preparation or
revision of local goverment comprehensive plans required pursuant to s. 163.3161, a district
public facilities report maybe used and relied upon by the local general purpose goverment or
"Overments within which the special district is located. The District, if established, will
implement this policy statement. and is therefore consistent.
Subject and Goal 21
(21) GOVERNMENTAL EFFICIENCY. -
(a) Goal.- Florida governments sbatl economically and efficiently provide the amount and
quality of services required by the public.
Sub ect 21 deals with Govcrntent Efficiency and it, along Leith its goal. applies because
of the statutory finding that a District is a means to deliver services and facilities in a timely.
efficient and cost effective manner. The District is not inconsistent with Coal 21.
Policy 21(b')1. Encourage greater cooperation between, among, and within all levels
of Florida government through the use of appropriate inter -local agreements and mutual
participation for mutual benefit.
The Maples Reser-ae Community Development District_ when established. beconmes a
separate special purpose local - ovemment with the authority to provide public services and
facilities within a limited land arca. As a local goverment, dtc District has the ability to enter
into inter -local agreements with mutual panicipation for the benefits to the land and residents
within the District, and the rest of the County. Given that any action on the part of the District
Agenda Item No. BE
July 22, 2008
Page 57 of 71
cannot he inconsistent with any potion of Collier County's Comprchensivc flan, including the
Intergovernmental Coordination Element, hoth go%erttntents will he operatingwithin the
parameters of the Comprehensive Plan. This leads to close communication and coordination
between the levels of government, which provide a mutual benefit for both the County and
District. The District, in my opinion. implements this policy and is therefore consistent.
Policy 21(b)2. Allow the creation of independent special taxing districts, which have
uniform general law standards and procedures and do not overburden other governments
and their taxpayers while preventing the proliferation of independent special taxing
districts, which do not meet these standards.
Policy 21(b)2, captures the intent of why Community Development Districts are an
important and integral component in the mana- -emcnt and financing of community development
facilities and services. The District uovenmient, created by uniRmn «engird law and established
pursuant to that uniform general law on the proposed property. has the single and special purpose
of providing infrastructure to the community development through the exercise ofits
management powers with related powers to fund that management function. Therefore. the
District meets t,,enerat law standards expressly. It may attain its funding in part to pay for its
mana�-,ement Functions through the sale of bonds. If so, bonds arc repaid by the landowners who
receive the special benefits of the systems. facilities and services provided by the District to
Property: therefore, the District does not burden the general taxpayer with obligations to pay for
sv_ stems, facilities and services within the District boundaries.
Giren that all Chapter 190, P.S., Districts are created by law and established by ordinance
or rule pursuant to the specific general factors considered by the county and petitioner as
specified by the law. The establishntcnt of this type of District is consistent with the policy not to
allow the needless fragmcntalinn, duplication or proliferation of local -,oNc liment systems,
facilities and services by independent taxing districts, which do not have those specific laws
factors and standards. The District would scree to implement this polic} and in my opinion, can
be considered consistent.
Policy 21(1)5. Eliminate needless duplication of', and promote cooperation in, governmental
activities between, among. and within state, reg_ ional, count). city, and other governmental
units.
As stated previously, a District is statutorily required to report as to operation and demand
on its facilities pursuant to Section 159.41 5. F.S., which Collier Count' may utilize in its Annual
Update and Inventory Rcpnrt pursuant to its Comprehensi\ e Plan. This. along with a District's
charge to operate in conformance with local, regional and state Lrow -tll mana <,ement
regairuntents, including the State mandated Intergovcrnmental Coordination Element's Intel,-
local a,reements, pro%es, in inv opinion. that the District would not he inconsistent with Policy
Policy 21(h)9. Encourage greater efficienc}' and economy at all levels of government
through adoption and implementation of effective records management. information
management, and evaluation procedures.
I
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 58 of 71
Information and records analysis and management are an operational requirement of
Chapter 190, F.S., through record keeping, disclosure, and overnment -in- the- ;unshinz. This. in
my opinion, effectively implements the call for efficiency in government vet forth in Policy
21(b)9, thereby malting a District consistent with that policy.
Subject and Goal 26
(26) PLAN IMPLEMENTATION. -
(a) Goal: Systematic planning capabilities shall be integrated into all levels of government
in Florida with particular emphasis on improving intergovernmental coordination and
maximizing citizen involvement.
Subject No.26 addresses plan implementation. Its related goal sets forth that systematic
planning capabilities shall be ineegrated into all levels of government in Florida, with particular
emphasis on improving inters ove:ronlental coordination and maximizing citizen involvement. As
stated previously, a District has a statutory mandate to report information concerning District
operations. Further. a District being a special purpose government must advertise its regularly
scheduled meetings, ensuring the opportunity for public comment. The District, if established, in
my opinion, is consistent with this goal and would implement it.
_- The Legislahue provided for the establishment of a district by ordinance or mile on
proposed property to coincide the best aspects of three different interests while eliminating the
less desirable ,,ro,, with management aspects of those three alternatives so far as provision of
infrastructure to community developments is concerned. First, the best interest or capabilities of
the county involve planning and implementing public policy based on health, safcty and welfare
requirements and state and local comprehensive planning and related cm ironmentcd and land use
perinitting and development orders. This set of county strengths is coincided with the expertise
of a landowner- developer to rnarkcl the development and to tie marketing to phasing and
absorption rates and other matters involving the art, science and technology' of high quality
community development enhanced by county policies, regulations and requirements; these
strengilbs are then coincided with the strenLgh of the District to construct and maintain at
sustained levels of high quality the basic infrastructurc in a manner that is not inconsistent tv�ith
the joint wort: product of the county and the landowner- developer. The permitting and planning
process jointly exercised by the county and the lanclowner- developer adds Value to the raw land
and this intrinsic value is enhanced further as found by the Florida Legislature. through the use of
the independent community development district. The reason is because the community
development district has one singe special purpose that it exercises through pinpointed and
focused mana remcnt accountable to the people and landov� ners closest to the District. The
Florida Legislature created the District charter. and authorised its establishment by rule or
ordinance, in order to provide this highly specialized single- purpose, efficient and accatmtable
alternative to manage the delivery of infrastructure. The coinciding ofthcse three interests theft
allows for collaboration throttJl such mechanisms as intetiocal ttM crnnent agreements under
section 103.01. FS.. and the provision of capital improvements with related financing tied to
land -use phasing through sections 189.41 i(2) and (6). FS. This coinciding would not allow for
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 59 of 71
appropriate collaboration if it were not for the fact that the Icss desirable aspects of the county
and the landovtroer- developer alternative Were not eliminated through this approach. Such less
desirable aspects for the county alternative are the fact that it has a plethora of legitimately
countervailin; economic, financial and political duties_ responsibilities and goals and has
substantial overhead, which raised serious questions in the Legislature about the efficacy of using
the general purpose county go%crnmcnt for the provision of certain specific and special purpose
infrastructure phased out to a particular community development. The Legislature was also quite
Concerned that the county horizons for the exercise ofits economic, political and legal
imperatives were relatively short -term in thinking and approach (re- election cycles). The
negatives for the landowner - developer alternative were its relative lack of accountability and the
Legislature was in particular concerned about the even shorter time frames for political,
economic and business imperatives because developers would be looking mostly to quarterly and
amnia] profit statements as benchmarks, therefore putting into question seriously the long -terns
consistency and longevity of constructive developer involvement as away to respond to the
interests of the landowners and residents. Even private homeowner associations as determined
by the Legislature are essentially private entities without the power of governmental enforcement
and without professional managennent with expressed and focused attention, not just on common
areas, but on the planning, construction, implementation and maintenance of basic infrastructure,
short -terns and long -term. Therefore, the coinciding as envisioned by chapter 190, FS.,
climinatcs the negative and enhances the positives of the three Basic alternatives to provision of
infastructurc, which can be collaborated NN ith more efliciencv. accountability and fairness.
Police 26(6)2. Ensure that every level of government has the appropriate operational
authority to implement the police directives established in the plan.
By vinue of the fact that the District- as created by and established on this proposed
property pursuant to Chapter 140. Florida Statutes, roust not he inconsistent with any applicable
portion of the State Comlirchcnsk c Plan, a District is granted the operational authority to
implcmvnu policies of the Plan. The District is not inconsistent �% ith Policy 26(6)2.
Polic} 26(b)3. Eslablish effective monitoring, incentive. and enforcement capabilities to see
that the requirements established he re�ulaton� pro -rants are met.
Policy 20(b) I calls for measures to assure that rct,_ulatory programs are adhered to. A
District is not exempted from any applicable local. regional or state growth management
regulatory programs, thus the Naples Reserve Community Devclopntcnt District is not
inconsistent with this policy.
Policy 26(b)S. Encouratie the continual cooperation among eornmunities which hate a
unique natural area, irrespecti%a of political boundaries, to bring the private and public
sectors together for establishing all orderly, eu%ironmentally, and economically sound plan
for future needs and growth.
The District is required to operate in the sunshine, encourcUin <" public participation, and
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 60 of 71
as stated previously, reporting of the District's facilities and services status to the County
goventnnent provides a mechanism for cooperation between the general purpose and special
purpose ,governments. .A District, in my opinion, not only is consistent with Policy 26(b)S. it
implements it.
1 have also reviewed all the subjects, goals and policies which I have determined do not
apply to the District, and it is illy professional opinion that establishment of the District is
therefore. not inconsistent with any of those subjects, goals and related policies.
From a planning perspective, (as to management and financing of all the basic
infrastructure systems, facilities and services which the District by law is chartered to provide),
my opinion is that the creation by law and establishment by ordinance of the District is not
inconsistent with any subject, goal and policy of the State Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
The Collier County Local Government Comprehensive Plan is set forth in Collier County
Ordinance No. 89 -05, as amended. This Plan is currently in force and effective in Collier
County Subject to general law. No county plan or ordinance, under charter home rule or non -
charter home rule, may be inconsistent with the plan or any other general law. Therefore, the
county plan may not be inconsistent with Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, the express general law
by which the community developtncnt district was created and pursuant to which it is to be
established by cowtty ordinance on the proposed properly.
Under the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development
Regulation Act, Chapter 163, part II, Florida Statutes, as amcnded, the Plan consists of various
components, elements and other designations. By way of methodology.] applied each special
power available to the Community Development District under all of Section 190.012, Florida
Statutes, to every element, component, section and other aspect of the Collier County
Comprehensive Plan. 1 have applied this Plan as a planner in order to determine whether there is
any particular inconsistency with the Plan from creation and establishment of the District.
The detailed methodology I used to make this determination is similar to that I outlined
with regard to the State Plan, First, I eliminated certain goals, objectives, policies, elements,
components, sections and portions, which do not address creating, and establishing, the District on
the proposed property; I also rejected those which relate strictly to community developments.
These subjects are irrelevant to the creation and establishment of the District. After climinatine
these matters, I identified and evaluated the remaining parts of tile Plan as to whether creation
and establishment of the District.. exercising am and all OF its special powers, would be
inconsistent.
As to these pals. policies, components, elements, sections and other aspects of the Plan
which relate to creation and establishment of the. District' I nottd live for the purposes of this
planning analysis.
The establishment of the Community Development District, whose purpose is to provide
its - overnmental services attendant to Naples Reserve's basic infrastructure, complies fully with
m
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 61 of 71
the goals, objectives and policies of the Collier County Gro�%th Managemcnt Plan.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS EL.EAIEVT
Objective 12: Financial Feasibility. Future development will beat- a proportionate cost of
facility improvements necessitated by growth. Future Developments payments may take
the form of impact fees, dedication of land, provision of public facilities, and future
payments of user fees, special assessments and taxes.
Naples Reserve CDD will pay fees to the County, properly taxes and non -ad valorem
special assessments and fees and charges to the District.
PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT — POTABLE A4'ATER SUBEUMENT
Policy 1.2.6: Where Community Development Districts, or other similar special districts
are established to provide a tool for developers to finance infrastructure or other purposes,
wholly or partially within the Collier County Water-Sewer District, water service shall be
connected to the regional system, and internal facilities shall be conveyed when acceptable
to the Collier County Water- Sewer District for operation and ownership...
Naples Resen e CUD %ill provide and maintain potable water infrastructure to support
the proposed development, and �N ill connect the system to Collier County consistent with the
Collier County Utilities Ordinance. The District is consistent with this Policy.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
Objective 1.4: Continue formal mechanism to improve and coordinate efforts among levels
of government and the private sector in order to provide recreational opportunities.
Naples Resen e CDD will provide extcnsivc passim Lind active recreation and open space
t'acilities throughout the project site. The project will include natural preserves, lakes- parks, and
active recreation facilities such as tennis, swinnning. and health club. Naples Reserve CDD,
throw-di its mana«ement and related financing of %attic enhancing improvements, is consistent
With the Collier Count' PDlicv 1.4 in its commitment to provide on -site recreational facilities.
INTERGOA-ERNiMEM AI. COORDINATION E ITAIEN7
Goal 1 and Objective I.I.: Provide for the continual exchange of information and the use
of any intergovernmental coordination mechanisms to achieve compatible and coordinated
plans.
Naples keszrva has cxlcnsi%ely coordinated smith carious public and pr %ate sector
agencies in the deli%cry of scram ices. such as Collier Counn and Florida Pov.cr and Light to insure
that scrviees are coordinated and non - duplicative_
M
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 62 of 71
Once established, the Naples Reserve CDD may enter into interlocal agreements such as, but not
limited to, the Collier County Water -Sewer District, Collier County, or other Community
Development Districts.
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
Objective S and Policy al: In order to promote sound planning, ensure compatibility of
land uses and further the implementation of the Future Land Use Element. All rezonings
must be consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan.
Naples Reserve is a mixed use master planned community, which has utilized the Planned
Unit Development zoning district alternative to establish the development pro�n-ant, and the
establishment of the Community Development District to provide specialized local governmental
infrastructure systems, facilities and services. The project site is located in the area designated
Urban, Urban Residential Fri nac Subdistrict of the Mixed Use District, and Receiving lands
within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, of the Agricultural /Rural Designation, as depicted on
the Countv Future Land Use Map. The prc ?jcct is consistent with the permitted land uses,
densities and policies of the Future Land Use Element of the Collier County Growth
Management Plan, and the Community Development District is consistent with these policies
because the District plans, implements, constructs and maintains, both short -terns and Ion. -term.
basic systems, facilities and services implementing to the county capital improvement element
which is tied to the county future land use clement.
Having thoroughly review cd tire Plan of Collier County as it may be rclatcd to the
creation and establishment of a District pursuant to Chapter 190. Florida Statutes, I found that the
District on the proposed property is not inconsistent with goals, objectives, policies, sections or
portions which were found not to he applicable to the establishment of a District.
Based upon the aforementioned findings, the creation and establishment of the District on
the proposed property would not he inconsistent with any goals, policies, sections or portions of
the Plan, even if it were to exercise any and all of its statutory powers. In fact. the District
would further the Plan in general, and mmry of its specific components.
Further, the creation and establishment of the District would not he inconsistent with
those parts of the Plan which do not relate to the creation and establishment of a District.
9. Do you have an opinion as to Factor Three relating to size, compactness and
contiguity?
Factor three deals with whether the area of land proposed by the petitioner to be within
the District is of sufficient size, is sufficient) -y Compact, and is sufficientiy coati «uous to he
developable as one functional interrelated community.
Key teens and words need to he defined or put in proper context from a planning
perspcetive as related to the factor and infrastructure delivery. A -'cot ill till ity" is a unified body
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 63 of 71
of individuals tie ing in a nmrticuIar area linked by common_ social_ political Or economic interest.
Conununity governments provide people with those facilities and services they desire to live in
the community. These include water, sewer. police, fire protection, roads,. parks libraries and
some social services such as childcare. affordable housing assistance and health care.
From the planning perspective the term "functional interrelated community" means that the
functions of a community must be inte,,ratcd into a long -range plan to analyze the future needs of
the contnnmity. Each function requires a funding source and an und.erstandinw of the size ofthe
community's needs so as to handle the growth and development ofthe community. Additionally,
the land area of a community must be of sufficient size to accommodate the pemthtted land uses
and the required, interrelated infrastructure facilities and services. Functional interrelation means
that each community function has mutual relationship to the other. Each function must he
designed to contribute to the development or maintenance of the larger whole, or as used here,
the community.
Under this factor, using the understanding I outlined of a functional interrelated
community above, 1 can detemrine whether the actual physical area within Collier County on
which the District would function to provide infrastructure to the proposed community
development raises any particular problems as to size. compactness or contiguity.
The size of the land area for the Community Development District is approximately 688.1
acres. In my opinion. the size is sufficient to operate as a community because it has been master
planned to be efficient in land utilization, to provide for all land uses necessary to be physically.
and socially scti'sustaining.
Compactness relates to closeness in distance between the lands within the development.
It is a spatial term used to describe properly that is close together. I faving reviewed the Naples
Reserve Community Development District's land area. I Find that its houndaries are sufficiently
compact, have no major Obstacles separating the land uses, and are not irregular in shape. It is
not substantially divided and the land area is such that there can be both physical and social
functions. In my opinion, therefore, the land area within tlic proposed comntunih� development,
which would be sen�iced by the District_ is sufficiently compact to be a functional interrelated
community.
C'ontigttity is another spatial ierin. which can describe lands. which are adjacent, v, here all
parts of a project are either in actual contact or are separated by no more than a road or street or a
small separation. The properties must be close enough to allow the cost effcctir °e and efficient
use of infrastructure, services and desi«n. The actual touching of property lines is not required
forproperty to be sufficiently continuous forplanninu- purposes. In revicwin- the land area
which will he , n,iccd by the Naples Reserve Community Development Disuict. I believe that
the land is sul''fieicmly contiguous to be a functional intertelated COrtin inity because it is
spatially close together, complctch contiguous, and it is Iargc cnou,h in land area to allow ibr
the efficient provision of infrastructure systems, facilities and services.
10. Skipping to Factor Six, relating to the amcnahilit} of the development to special
district governance, what is your professional opinion with regard to compliance with this
12
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 64 of 71
factor?
This factor, dealing with land area, is more appropriately analyzed out of numerical order
so as to he associated with the preceding factors, which also deal with land area issues. Factor six
deals with whether the area that will be serviced by the District is amenable to separate special -
district government. 1 have reviewed information about this proposed land area from the District
governance perspective. In order to do so, I have detemtined that the terminology "separate
special district - governance" means governance, created by law and established by laws through
petition and vote pursuant to the Board of County Commissioners, with limited special functions
and powers to levy taxes or special assessments and non- lienable charges and fees within a
legally defined geographical area. The District, if established, would be a special district
governmem with such capabilities.
The term "zunenable" can he defined to be an appropriateness for accountability, or
responsive.
]-laving determined that the land area is sufficient size. and is sufficiently compact and
sufficiently conti"unus to be functional as an inter - related community, I now, as a planner, must
determine whether that land area is also amenable to being 'governed by the Community
Development District as set forth in its unifornt charter created by law as set forth expressly in
Section 190.006 through 1 90J141. Florida Statutes. 1 have reviewed this subject from the
potential exercise b., the District of any and all of its special powers in that charter.
In my opinion the land area for the District is amenable to special district governance
because the land area proposed to be established as a District has the need for the services and
would benefit from the facilities that the special district would provide. and through my previous
findings, the land area is of sufficient size, suffcienth- compact and contiguous to be a functional
interrelated comatunily.
11. Do you have a professional opinion as to Factor hive which relates to compatibility
viith existing sen ices and facilities'.'
Factor Five deals with whether the community development services and facilities of the
District will be incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities.
By legislative mandate. all actions and implementation of any or all of the District powers
tut governed by and nntst not he inconsistent wiilt the Collier County Growth Management Plan,
fhis insures compliance with County land development regulations and coneurrency
requirements.
I have reviewed the proposed properly ou which the state - created District will be
estahlshed to determine if there arc any regional systems, services or facilities, which through
their existence may be problematic as to incompatibility. related to District functions, and found
no such facilities. Therefore, no problems would be treated.
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 65 of 71
12. Finally, what is your opinion nyith regard to Factor Four relating to alternatives to
providing services?
Factor four must logically he taken out of numerical order. It deals with alternatives,
essentially requiring the Board 01 County Commissioners to use relevant, material and pertinent
inforniation as to the various alternative ways to provide basic systems, facilities and services to
the community development.
From a planning perspective there are three alternative ways to provide basic systems.
facilities and services to the community development on this property in Collier County. The
first is private, through developer managed improvements, separate private infrastructure
contractors, a private utility company, a homeowners association, or any combination of these
private means of providing community development sen ices and facilities alone tv,ith related
financing potmere. The second ahernative world be local general purpose public, either through
the County itself or by County management and financing through dependent districts, or county
managgentent but with tinancin.- throueh the use of County Municipal Service Taxing Units
(MSTU), or County Municipal Service Benefit knits (NISBU). Finally, the third alternative
would also be public but through the specialized, limited and sin.-le purpose Community
Development District provided for by Chapter 190. Florida Statutes, which coincides both public
and private interests and capabilities.
As previously stated in response to Goal -b, the Le,- islature pro% ided for the
establislunent of a district by ordinance or rule on proposed property to coincide the hest aspects
of three different interests while elintinatin-, the less desirable ,row th management aspects of
those three entities so Jar as provision of infrastrucune to community developments is concerned.
First. the best interest or capabilities of the comity involve planning an innplcmentine public
policy based on health, safety and %N afire requirements and state and local comprehensive
planning and related environmental and land use pennitim., and development orders. This set of
county strengths is coincided with the expertise of a landovi ner- developer to market the
development and to tie marketing to phasing and absorption rates in other matters involving tine
art, science and lechnology of hieh quality community devclopmcnt enhanced by county policies,
regulations and requirements: tinese siren_ lls are then coincided with the strength of the District
to construct and maintain at sustained levels of high quality the basic infrastructure in a manner
that is not inconsistent with the Ioini work product of!he county and the landowner- developer.
'I lie penuitting and planning process jointly exercised by the county and the landowner -
developer adds value to the raw land and this intrinsic value is enhanced further by the intent of
the Florida Lcgislature throueh the use of the independent community development district The
reason is because the cotmnunity development district has one single special purpose that it
exercises throuo,h pinpoiined and ii owed mane ement accountable to the people and l:mdowncrs
closest to the District. Ilie Florida Legislature created the District charter, and authorized its
establislunent by rule or ordinancc. in order to provide this hi_hly specialized sin�,Ie purpose
efficient and accountable alternative way to nnanage the delix °ery of infrastrtlCtnre. The
coinciding of these three interests then allows for collaboration through such mechanisms as
14
Agenda Item No. BE
July 22, 2008
Page 66 of 71
interlocal goverment agreements under section 103.01_ FS., and the provision of capital
improvements with related financing tied to land -use phasing through sections 180.415(2) and
(6), FS. This coinciding would not allow for appropriate collaboration if it were not for the fact
that the less desirable aspects of the county and the landowner- developer were not eliminated
through this approach. Such less desirable suspects for the county are the fact that it has a
plethora of legitimately countervailing economic Financial and political duties, responsibilities
and goals and has substantial overhead, which raised serious questions in the Legislature about
the efficacy of using the county for the provision of certain specific infrastructure phased out to a
particular community development. The Legislature was also quite concerned that the county
horizons for the exercise of political and legal imperatives were relatively short -term in thinking
and approach (re- election cycles). The negatives for the landowner- developer were lack of
accountability and the Legislature was in particular concerned about the even shorter time frames
for political economic and policy imperatives because developers would be looking mostly to
quarterly and annual profit statements as benchmarks, therefore questioning seriously the long-
term consistency and longevity of developer involvement as a way to respond to the interests of
the landowners and residents. Even private homeowner associations as detennined by the
I- egislatttre are essentially private entities without the power of Uovermnental enforcement and
without professional management with expressed and focused attention not just on common
areas but on the planning. construction, implementation and maintenance of basic infrastructure,
short -term and loner term. Therefore, the coincidin!� as envisioned by chapter 19D, FS.,
eliminates the negative and enhances the positives, which can be collaborated with more
efficiency, accountability and fairness.
Plsmnine considerations needed to determine the best alternative to deliver basic
intrastrucntre to community der °elopers are whether the alternative was able to provide the
highest quality sery ices and facilities, whether the aIt ernative was capable to deliver the facilities
and services in a timely manner when the community dcN clopment service and facility demand
occurs; whether the alternative had a means of niana«emcnt to be responsive to the community
developmcnt over the long term; and whether the alternative could obtain and maintain short -
term and Ions term financing, to facilitate the mana2CM,_-nt hene[its.
Regarding the supply of infrastructure in advance of the impacts of the actual
development, concurency is an important considerution. In this regard, it is vital to have an
understanding of the community development infrastructure commitments during time master
planning process to properly and cfiicient1V phase the construction of the community
development facilities. This alloGts a full utilization ofconstncted facilities before new branches
of those facilities are constructed. The statutory District reporting mandates described previously
can be utilized by Collier County as a concurrency managemment mechanism to implement
applicable provisions (i.e._ Future Land use Element, Capital Improvement Element, etc), of its
Grcwth Managcment Plan. The Community D�c%clopment District alterative means of
nrovidine comnwnity development spstems, facilities and set %ices for a cooperative
concur rencv management program between the County ucneral purpose government and the
District special purpose local govenmment,
_ Long term and sustained adequacy and efficiency of infrastructure are important. and I
I;
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 67 of 71
note that anion_ the three alternatives, the District would more closely and efficiently inanage
services and facilities given the District's sole responsibility is the community development's
infrastructure needs, both immediate and in the long terns. Further; a District can lie more
responsive to the residents of the community development and other affected parties, than can be
Provided by the alternatives, which either have a broader public accountability, or n.ul-owed
interests.
Regarding the important planning principle of lone teen implementation and
maintenance. I find that among the three alternatives the District's unique operational and
management role would provide the community development residents greater assurance of the
maintenance of the community development services and facilities which would not be otherwise
be provided for by the ahematives at such a hi-11 level of quality, particularly in the long term.
Collier County could supply the community development infrastructure, but it does not have the
unfettered opportunity for phasing flexibility. nor does it Dave the luxury of' sole focused
attention for monitoring and maintenance as would a District. This is again due to Collier
County's general purpose, where it must he responsive to multiple community developments and
other special interests. whereas a District created by and established pursuant to Chapter 190.
Florida Statutes, has a singular and special purpose of providing to the community development
that it serves specific systems, facilities and services. The private installation ofcomnnmity
development infrastructure, while it may provide, at ]cast for the short -term. quality systems,
services and facilities may not have the nhanagcmenl and maintenance lonpet ity, particularly
hshen the community development is "built -out' and tradihoual]y fumed o-ver to homeo%%uers
andior condominium C6SOCianons h+'hich traditionalh are only interested in their individual
association matters.
The establishment of the Naples Reserve Community Development District on the
proposed properly is the most approprinte means of providing community development systems,
services and facilities because it is functionally involved in the overall physical ttrtsterplanning
of' the development, equitably distributes the costs and responsibilities to the users of the
systems. services and Gucilities. provides for long tc^rnt maintenance, and provides a greater
assurance that the Naples Reserve Community Development District is the most appropriate
means of providing community development systems. services and facilities beeanSe it is
functionally im -olved in the overall physical master planning of the development, equitably
distributes the costs and responsibilities to the users of the systems, services and facilities.
provides for long term maintenance, and provides a greater assurance that the residents served by
the lyaples Reserve Community Development %a ill have a sustained quality of life.
13. Does this conclude your testimony:'
Yes, it does
16
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 68 of 71
ATTACHMENT 2
STAFF ANALYSIS RELATIVE
TO THE SIX (6) FACTORS
FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FORMATION
FOR NAPLES RESERVE CDD
Backeround:
Section 190.005, Florida Statutes outlines the specific content required in a Community
Development District (CDD) petition and further outlines six (6) factors for the Board of County
Commissioners to consider in determining whether to grant or deny a petition for the
establishment of a CDD, as follows:
1. Whether all statements contained within the petition have been found to be true
and correct.
2. Whether the creation of the district is inconsistent with any applicable element or
portion of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government
comprehensive plan.
3. Whether the area of land within the proposed district is of sufficient size, is
sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one
functional interrelated community.
4. Whether the district is the best alternative available for delivering community
development services and facilities to the area that will be served by the district.
5. Whether the community development services and facilities of the district will be
incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities.
6. Whether the area that will be served by the district is amenable to separate
special- district government.
Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the six factors referenced above and makes the
following findings with regard to the proposed Naples Reserve Community Development
District:
1. Whether all statements contained within the petition have been found to be true and
correct.
Comprehensive Planning Department staff, along with the staffs of the County Attorney's Office,
the Public Utilities Engineering Department, Environmental Services and the Transportation
Planning Department, has reviewed the referenced Community Development District petition.
Based upon the review of the petition and sufficiency information, staff believes that the
information found within these documents is substantially true and correct.
I
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 69 of 71
2. Whether the creation of the district is inconsistent with any applicable element or
portion of the state comprehensive plan or of the effective local government
comprehensive plan.
The entire Naples Reserve Golf Club RPUD designated within both the Residential Fringe
Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed -Use District and the Rural Fringe Mixed -Use District's
Receiving Lands, on the Collier County Future Land Use Map and as part of the approval
process, the development was found to be consistent with the Growth Management Plan in effect
at that time. The proposed CDD would be a unit of local government established specifically for
the purpose of carrying out the approved Master Development Plan and commitments of the
Naples Reserve CDD Development. The CDD does not authorize any form or amount of
development not previously approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Therefore, staff
finds that the establishment of the CDD is consistent with the Collier County Growth
Management Plan.
As to consistency with the State Comprehensive Plan, the County staff notes that the CDD
process is established within Section 190 of the Florida Statutes. The petitioner has not deviated
from the standard process, as established by the Statute. Section 187.201, Florida Statutes,
contains the text of the State's Comprehensive Plan. Subsection (2)(a) is the State Plan Goal for
Goverrunental Efficiency, which reads as follows:
" Goal. -- Florida governments shall economically and efficiently provide the amount and
quality of services required by the public."
Policy 2 within this goal area reads as follows
"2. Allow the creation of independent special taxing districts which have uniform general
law standards and procedures and do not overburden other governments and their taxpayers
while preventing the proliferation of independent special taxing districts which do not meet these
standards."
As an "independent special taxing district ", the proposed CDD is consistent with the State
Comprehensive Plan.
3. Whether the area of land within the proposed district is of sufficient size, is
sufficiently compact, and is sufficiently contiguous to be developable as one
functional interrelated community.
The proposed Naples Reserve Community Development District (CDD), if approved, would be
within the size range of several other CDDs within Collier County. For instance, the Parklands
Collier CDD comprises approximately 622± acres, the Verona Walk CDD is approximately 785±
acres in size, and the Naples Heritage CDD is approximately 557-± acres. Based upon previous
experience and the subsequent success of other Collier County CDDs, Comprehensive Planning
Department staff believes that the Naples Reserve Community Development District is
consistent with the above criteria.
2
Agenda Item No. 8E
July 22, 2008
Page 70 of 71
4. Whether the district is the best alternative available for delivering community
development services and facilities to the area that will be served by the district.
As noted within Exhibit 7 of the CDD petition, there are numerous alternatives available for the
provision of infrastructure and services by and for an approved development. These include, but
are not limited to the following: private funding procured by the developer; establishment of a
homeowners association; establishment of a Municipal Services Taxing Unit (MSTU);
establishment of a Municipal Services Benefit Unit (MSBU); establishment of a Community
Improvement District (limited to drainage and irrigation related improvements); establishment of
a County- managed special purpose district; or, direct County management. All of these
alternative options have various legal, financial or other limitations on their operations or do not
provide a focused, compact approach to the provision of infrastructure and services. Therefore,
staff finds that establishment of the proposed CDD is viable, if not the best alternative available
for delivering community development services and facilities to the area that will be served by
the proposed district.
5. Whether the community development services and facilities of the district will be
incompatible with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities.
The proposed CDD cannot develop any facilities and services that are incompatible with the
surrounding area. This is because the CDD's sole purpose is to implement conditions and
developer commitments that were part of the original RPUD and/or DRI approvals, which
demonstrated compatibility with the capacity and uses of existing local and regional community
development services and facilities. Moreover, the proposed CDD is requesting less density than
initially approved by the RPUD, Ordinance 2007 -71. The District Board of Supervisors will not
have the legal authority to implement any facilities, services or development that would be
inconsistent with its existing development approvals.
6. Whether the area that will be served by the district is amenable to separate special -
district government.
Based upon staff findings concerning the previous five criteria, Comprehensive Planning
Department, in consultation with other County Divisions and Departments, staff finds that the
subject area for the proposed CDD is amenable to special district government. Furthermore, staff
recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopt the Ordinance, as contained in
Attachment 1, establishing the Naples Reserve Community Development District.
3
Agenda Item No. SE
July 22. 2008
Page 71 of 71
"DIXTAINC "MAY, 2007 �L'E "' NAPLES RESERVE, LLC
/ / \ Visualiation :•.'1J.T.S.
CONSULTING CivilEngn3eering .,F,,1 e. TITLE NAPLES RESERVE RPUD
J. ` i Fl a sw eying&Mapping C.L.N.
88i0 WIIbx Feh Drrve. 3�9e 200 D.. VICINITY MAP
Nepka, FIOnE834108 D.H.N.
pm": 123915970575 r
FM (239( 597-0578 ,;c <95 ^EE aaWMaER. 04- 0125•0 DINivBIR- 1 " 1 NGI.:erg 40125DOX06