The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 06/24/2008 Item #12C Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 1 of 49 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Request that the Board of County Commissioners provide direction to Staff aud to the County Attorney, whether to commence a civil lawsuit, or in the alternative, a code enforcement proceeding, against Milano Recreation Association, Inc., for violating PUD Ordinance No. 03-54 (The Royal Palm Academy PUD), relating to failure and refnsal to allow residents of Imperial Golf Estates to construct a road ("Marquis Boulevard") over portions of the Milano subdivision to access Livingston Road, contrary to commitments made during the PUD rezouing process. OBJECTIVE: For the Board of County Commissioners to provide direction to Staff and to the County Attorney, as to whether to commence a civil lawsuit, or in the alternative, a code enforcement action, against Milano Recreation Association, Inc. ("Milano"), for violating PUD Ordinance No. 03-54, The Royal Palm Academy PUD ("PUD"), relating to failure and refusal to allow residents of Imperial Golf Estates to build a road known as "Marquis Boulevard" over portions of the Milano subdivision to access Livingston Road, contrary to commitments made as part of the PUD rezoning process. CONSIDERATIONS: Milano is a platted subdivision within the Royal Palm Academy PUD. The PUD requires an interconnecting road ("Marquis Boulevard") between Imperial Golf Estates and Livingston Road, bisecting the Milano subdivision's preserve areas. Milano Recreation Association, Inc. ("Milano"), which controls the area in question, has refused to allow the construction of the interconnecting road. During the rezoning process, the developer (Milano's predecessor in interest) agreed, as a condition of PUD approval, that it would allow construction of Marquis Boulevard by a third party. This was confirmed by a Conceptual Master Plan showing this road as part of the PUD (see PUD Conceptual Master Plan, attached as Exhibit A). The PUD Ordinance is attached as Exhibit B. The following history of the rezoning process that led to approval of the PUD evidences that the applicant agreed, as a condition of their PUD approval, to allow construction of "Marquis Boulevard": NIM (Aul!ust 15. 2002) At a neighborhood information meeting for the PUD, the attorney for the applicant, Richard Y ovanovich, Esq., stated to the interested public: "There will be also be another access point, which has been referred to as Marquis Boulevard. . . . We envision that people from Imperial, at some point when Marquis Boulevard is built, will want to use that as an access point to Livingston Road, instead of having all traffic go out to U.S. 41. .".,-"~ Our site plan provides for and anticipates the construction of. . . 60 feet worth of ROW, for the construction Marquis Boulevard. . .. It should be a minimum of 60 feet for the construction of Marquis Boulevard. . . . Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 2 of 49 I don't know if we have any recorded easements here, but we anticipate that, even if we don't, we will be providing it as part of the zoning process. So there should be a minimum of 60 feet for the construction of the roadway for Marquis Boulevard. If the community is gated, it will be gated off of the main road. . .. [T]here will be no hindrance to the use of Marquis Boulevard by Imperial. . .. Imperial has always . . . wanted a back door from the project to Livingston Road. . . ." Rezoninl! Hearinl!s before the EAC. CCPC. and BCC: Staff Reports: Based on the developer's commitment to allow construction of Marquis Boulevard as a condition of approval, the staff reports for the EAC and CCPC, and the BCC Executive Summary relating to the rezone request contain the following statement: 'The PUD also provides a right-of-way easement. . . which would provide access to . . . Livingston Road for the residents of Imperial Go If Estates." EAC (July 2, 2003): The EAC minutes reflect that the applicant's engineer "used the master plan to point out. . . access points to Livingston Road." The EAC unanimously recommended approval. CCPC (September 18,2003): The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting relating to the PUD clearly show that the applicant agreed to provide access to Imperial residents as a condition of approval ("Access for the residents of Imperial is being provided.") (See excerpts of CCPC minutes, attached as Exhibit C). The CCPC unanimously recommended approval. BCC (September 23, 2003): The minutes of the Board of County Commissioners relating to this PUD contain the following (the BCC unanimously approved the PUD): "MR. YOY ANOVICH: . . . Imperial. . . .They're going to connect to Marquis Boulevard, which is going to be on our site, and go to the east to get to Livingston Road. So that's going to be a secondary access for Imperial for them to get out of their project. They're going to have to go through a preserve, so they know they're going to have some mitigation issues. . . .. We have agreed to accommodate the drainage from the roadway through our water management system. . . . We will give them whatever [mitigation] credits we have left, and hopefully they will be able to use those in permitting the roadway." "COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great. I'm glad you're good neighbors." (See excerpts ofBCC minutes, attached as Exhibit D.) The clear and repeated commitment made by the developer, on the record, to allow construction of Marquis Boulevard, along with the depiction of the road on the Conceptual Master Plan, gave the EAC, CCPC, and BCC no reason to call into question whether or not this commitment would be part of the PUD. In addition, members of the public had no reason to second guess this clear commitment. Agenda Item No. 12C June 24. 2008 Page 3 of 49 Mr. Y ovanovich has recently confirmed, in wntmg, that as representative for the developer, he agreed to allow the construction of Marquis Boulevard as a condition of PUD approval (see Exhibit E, attached). This confirmation leaves no room for doubt as to whether or not this commitment was made as a condition of the rezoning approval. The PUD: The following PUD provisions demand responsibility on Milano's part to allow Imperial residents to build Marquis Boulevard: Conceptual Master Plan: The approved PUD's master plan depicts an "existing 60' ROW easement" over the area known as "Marquis Boulevard" which would provide access from Imperial Golf Estates to Livingston Road, consistent with the developer's commitment. Section 6.2: This section provides, in part, that "The Developer, his successor or assign, shall follow the PUD Master Plan and. . . any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property." Section 6.8.0: This section provides, in part, that "The Developer is not obligated to permit or construct Marquis Boulevard. However, in the event that Marquis Boulevard is constructed by a third party, any excess mitigation credits. . . shall be made available to the third party for use in permitting and constructing Marquis Boulevard. . . ." PRESENT STATUS: The Milano Recreation Association, Inc., as Royal Palm Academy's successor in interest, is the party this is bound by this PUD commitment, under Section 6.2 of the PUD. Milano has taken the position that they are not obligated to allow the construction of Marquis Boulevard. This is inconsistent with the repeated assurances by Milano's predecessor that access to Livingston Road for Imperial residents was being provided as part of the PUD approval. It should be noted that Milano is involved in a lawsuit with Imperial Golf Estates and several other parties concerning (among other things) Imperial's right to access Livingston Road by traveling through the Milano subdivision. One of the central issues in that suit is whether there is an enforceable easement of record as set forth in the Conceptual Master Plan. The issue we are bringing to the Board differs from this civil suit because the County's concern is that irrespective of whether or not there is an enforceable easement, the PUD requires the interconnect. FISCAL IMPACT: If the Board wishes to pursue a civil lawsuit to enforce this PUD commitment, filing fees will be required, as well as potential ongoing expenses of litigation. If the Board wishes to pursue an administrative (Code Enforcement Board) proceeding, there are no known fiscal impacts beyond standard administrative costs. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: That the Board of County Commissioners provide direction as to whether to file a lawsuit, or initiate a code enforcement proceeding, against Milano Recreation Association, Inc., for violations ofPUD Ordinance No. 03-54 (The Royal Palm Academy PUD), relating to Milano's failure and refusal to honor their PUD commitment to allow the construction of "Marquis Boulevard." PREPARED BY: JeffE. Wright, Assistant County Attorney Page 1 of2 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24. 2008 Page 4 of 49 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Item Number: Item Summary: 12C This item to be heard at 3:15 p.rn Request that the Board of County Commissioners provide direction to Staff and to the County Attorney, whether to commence a civil lawsuit, or in the alternative, a code enforcement proceeding. against Milano Recreation Association, Inc., for violating pu~ Ordinance No. 03-54 (The Royal Palm Academy PUD), relating to failure and refusal to allow residents of Imperial Golf Estates to construct a road (Marquis Boulevard) over portions of the Milano subdivision to access Livingston Road, contrary to commitments made during the PUD rezoning process. Meeting Date: 6/24/200890000 AM Prepared By Jeff Wright Assistant County Attorney Date County Attorney County Attorney Office 6/12/200810:57:50 AM Approved By Heidi F. Ashton Assistant County Attorney Date County Attorney County Attorney Office 6/12/200811:25 AM Approved By Joseph K. Schmitt Community Development & Environmental Services Adminstrator Date Community Development & Environmental Services Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. 6/12/2008 12:07 PM Approved By Jeff Wright Assistant County Attorney Date County Attorney County Attorney Office 6/1212008 1 :44 PM Approved By Jeff Klatzkow Assistant County Attorney Date County Attorney County Attorney Office 6/12/20082:35 PM Approved By OMB Coordinator OMS Coordinator Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 6/12/2008 3: 52 PM Approved By John A. Y onkosky Director of the Office of Management Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 6/12/20087:24 PM Approved By James V. Mudd County Manager Date Board of County County Manager's Office 6/13/2008 3:06 PM file;//C;\AgendaTest\Export\ 11 0-June%2024,%202008\ 12.%20COUNTY%20A TTORNEY... 6/18/2008 Page 20f2 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 5 of 49 Commissioners file://C:\AgendaTest\Export\ II 0-June%2024,%202008\ 12.%20COUNTY%20A TTORNEY... 6/18/2008 ~ :~~~ a" ~~ .~o-::t '='- . 0 <iOQ -NO,) E",Ol ",e'" =:::}o.... ",' "0 e '" :t , , , , , , , ~ , ~ , , ," < , ~~ , '- ~ , ~~ , N~ , ~ , ~ i , , , , , , , ~ , , , b , , , , ~ I , ~ ~~~ " ..s 5~~ N~~ " a ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ . b --T~i --~-~i,n t:'C ll: ~II :.~ I _::::.:r- " ------- ------ ---- ------- " " {~ I' ~ ,I .:..~ i I p ~ . --T :r.., . . .... { '. t \. . . . . . " 1:: ~ ~. -L_':.__ --------- 5 I ~i ubi p lio N~ i3 561 ., li. N~ ~ . . ~ I p ~ ~ - ~ <~ ~~ c(~ .- b I ~ t . ~ ~ H~ · ~ 5 i I \ \1 \.~~- ~ I ;. ~ -""'..!'",-r-,:~-""-"'...I aiIMO~ lW.JfIfl 01/ ~ .....J-"t . . . ...., "," .... ! \~~""""""",""""'" J', \0 . .... . . . .... . . . II I.. ......... _'/' /0......................... ~ \ <"',J.....:............:....... I, \~ . . . .' . . . . .' . . . "'\. \....... .......... ........ I ~ 'j /. . . .. . . . . .' . . . . ,~ J ' .. .... ..., \5 I I~""""""'."""."".' ,I ) , . . .' . . .. ...... ~ I~ ,.... . . .... . .','.' .... . ~ '.... ~/.'.'.'.'.' ............ .. W I. . . . . .' . . . . ." . . . ........... . . . . . .' . . ...... . . ....... ~ , . . . . .....'......:.:......... ~ " i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7~ ~s ~<i ~i ~ , ~ S ~!i ~~ <C~~ "b1:l1 I=>; N~g . "5 a~ " ~ b a~~~ ;1 ~ ~ i' ! ~ ~ffi z. .. ,. ~} z~ ~~ .' ~ ~o ~~<l~ ~Q!Z1S~ ?i~~~~ ~zj~g:~\i !.lll:Il..... s ; ." I~ I _Ii = i ~ I i~~ . I .~ " ~'. l: iI iI~ e! ~ ~ 15 ~ ~ .~. i ;; l~ U ~:! _ .< ~l '. A~ .. ~ t ~ g ~ ::~: ~I !~ I ( '. z I ~ < ...J D- o:: I ~ . l:! .. :<Vl :oJ ....< _::0; ~& Ql...J ~ :I: < ..., ~~ f >!: D- o W '" U z 8 N ~~ '" o~ ...., c.;~ &3 ~. ~. . ill glQ ~ ils ~I:I ;1' ~3~';" 11'1~!ii >- li III ~ .: =e I ." @ =- , ,; < . ~ , , . " " d ~ ~ . . ~ ~ I . @ " . H 8 ~ . . w ~.. . < l S. . j ; ; ~h! .~. . ;; . -! Ih~~8 1~'~1 ~i~m ll~:~ . . ~ ~ . :&\-12.1C8 '4' ~ 8> ~ T .... 'I [-m:r 2IIJ3'J ~ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 9H02 l!i\ REmVED :: THE COLLIER COUNI'Y LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH ,- 'llo ;; INCLUDES THE COMPREHENSNE ZONING REGULATIONS 10, Ji' FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, " :'?.... q,4'. FLORIDA BY AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING AUAS MAP:. '''~OZ8~8\.j} NUMBERED 8S13N BY CHANGING THE ZONING :.,: CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL ~(.; .:~ PROPERTY FROM -A" RURAL AGRICULTIlRAL AND "A-ST' 2'2,: RURAL AGRICULTIJRAUSPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAY TO;;;:;: u, "PUD' PLANNED UNIT DEVEWPMENT KNOWN AS "ROYAL PALM INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY PUO" LOCATED ON LNINGSTON ROAD (CR# 881) IN SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 2S EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 162.7% ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ORDINANCE NO. 03-1!..- Agenda Item No. 12C June 24. 2008 Page 7 of 49 """i. WHEREAS, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor & Associates., repre5cnting Royal Palm International Academy, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY the Board of County Commissioners 01 Collier County. Florida. that: SECTION ONE: The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from "A" Runtl Agricultural and "A~ST" Rural Agricultural with Special Treatment Overlay to "PUD" Planned Unit Development in accordance with the Royal Palm International Academy PUD Document" attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein. The Official Zoning Atlas Map numbered 8S13N, as described in Ordinance Number 91-102. the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY AOOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier Comly, Florida, this ~ day of ~p~blr ,2003. ~. . t:UI'O' ". .i~~ l~~ ,g'\I.Iin . ...d Legal Sfdticicncy' BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLlER~'Fb BY: ,:)'f'Jt.--- TOM HENNING, ~~ .... ........., . 6Jdinance flied with the ~11~ of s~ Otf~r =Sdoy of ' one! _Iod~."!,~ ': flll~'t'" of ~~~ By: l)IpolfYe_ . -rf"vt~~~; Yr\,?~'-In~~J- Marjorie . Student Assistant County Attorney PV[),Z..2002.AR-2944IFRIsp Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 8 of 49 ROYAL PALM ACADEMY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 162:1: Acres Located in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East Collier County, Florida PREPARED FOR: Naples Education, Incorporated 6000 Livingston Road Naples, FL 34110 And Royal Palm Academy, Incorporated PREPARED BY: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 And D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates 3800 Via del Rey Bonita Springs, Fl 34134 DATE FILED DATE APPROVED BY cpee DATE APPROVED BY Bee ORDINANCE NUMBER 9/23/03 03-54 EXHmlT "A" Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 9 of 49 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE STATEMENT OF COMPUANCE SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION. PROPERTY I-I OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT II-I SECTION III CAMPUS AREA III-I SECTION IV RESIDENTIAL AREA IV-I SECTION V PRESERVE AREA V-I SECTION VI DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS VI-l EXHIBIT A PUD MASTER PLAN EXHIBIT B SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 9/19103 ii Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 10 of 49 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE Royal Palm Academy. Inc.. referred to as Royal Palm Academy or the Developer..intends to create a Planned Unit Development on approximately 162.7 acres of land located in Section 13. Township 48 South. Range 25 East. Collier County. Florida. The name of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) shall be Royal Palm Academy PUD. The development of the Royal Palm Academy PUD will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as established in the Growth Management Plan. The development will be consistent with the policies of the land development regulations adopted under the Growth Management Plan and applicable regulations for the following reasons: J. The subject property is located within the Urban Mixed Use District. Urban Residential Subdistrict as identified on the Future Land Use Map. 2. The density provided for in the Royal Palm Academy PUD complies with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan. since the density of 3.4 dwelling units per acre does not exceed the base density of 4 dwelling units per acre and the site is not eligible for bonuses or subject to reductions. In addition. the Urban designation allows for a variety of community facilities. such as schools. 3. The project development is compatible and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.4 of the FLUE. 4. Improvements are planned to be in compliance with the applicable land development regulations as required in Objective 3 of the FLUE. except as may be modified in this PUD document 5. All final local development orders for this project are subject to the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance as required in Objective 2 of the FLUE. 6. The design of Royal Palm Academy PUD protects the function of the existing drainage features and natural groundwater aquifer recharge areas as required in Objective 1.5 of the Drainage Sub-Element of the Public Facilities Element. 7. This project shall be subject to applicable Sections of the Land Development Code (LDC) and Growth Management Plan at the time of development order approval. except as otherwise provided herein. 9/19/03 iii Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 11 of 49 SECTION I LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION ..... 1.1 PURPOSE Section I sets forth the location and ownership of the property. and describes the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the project name Royal Palm Academy PUD, 1.2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION The subject property being 162.7 acres more or less. is described as: PARCEL I-A A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTIlI/2 OF SECl10N 13, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECl10N 13; TIlENCE RUN S 88051'53" W. ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECl10N 13. FOR A DISTANCE OF 1325.25 FEET: THENCE RUN N 00006'21" W FOR. A DISTANCE OF 1342.12 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGlNNlNG; THENCE RUN S 88051'35" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1988.19 FEET; THENCE N 00011'06" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 673.98 FEET; THENCE RUN S 88'54'24" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 663.00 FEET; THENCE RUN S 00' 12'24" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 674.52 FEET; THENCE S 8805 I '35"W. FOR A DISTANCE OF 1325.51 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE N 00015'00" W, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 13, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1251.18 FEET; THENCE RUN N 88'57'12" E, FOR A DISTANCE OF 2900.77 FEET; THENCE RUN S 54000'51" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 262.56 FEET; THENCE RUN S 58022'58" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 335.05 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH; THENCE RUN EASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 184.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 86'33'16". SUBTENDED BY A CHORD OF 252.27 FEET AT A BEARING OF N 78020'24" E. FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 277.96 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE AND A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF UVINGSTON ROAD; THENCE RUN S 60'51'19" E, FOR A DISTANCE OF 383,11 FEET; THENCE RUN S 00006'21" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 759.51 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONT AINlNG 96,705 ACRES. MORE OR LESS. AND PARCEL I.B A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTII 1/2 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: 9/19/03 I-I Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 12 of 49 COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE RUN N 00'04'15" W. ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECl10N 13. FOR A DISTANCE OF 450.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE SAME BEING A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT.OF. WAY LINE OF LIVINGSTON ROAD AND THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTIlWEST; THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT. HAVING A RADIUS OF 2047.36 FEET. THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 36024'45", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD OF 1279.34 FEET AT A BEARING OF N 180]7'26" W. FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 1301.12 FEET; THENCE RUN N 00"04'15" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 658.59 FEET; THENCE RUN N 33036'24" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 378.62 FEET; THENCE RUN N 00002'40" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 42.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE RUN N 88057'12" E. ALONG SAID NORTH LINE. FOR A DISTANCE OF 189,98 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE S 000{)4'15" E, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 13. FOR A DISTANCE OF 2234.80 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 11.937 ACRES. MORE OR LESS, AND PARCEL 2.A A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA. BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE RUN S 88051 '53" W, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECl10N 13. FOR A DISTANCE OF 275.05 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUE S 88051'53" W, ALONG SAID SECl10N LINE. FOR A DISTANCE OF 1050.20 FEET; THENCE RUN N 00006'21" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 1342.12 FEET; THENCE CONTINUE N 00006'21" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 759.51 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF LIVINGSTON ROAD; THENCE RUN S 60051'19" E. ALONG SAID WESTERLY RIGHT.OF-WAY LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF 165.02 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTIlWEST; THENCE RUN SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1772.36 FEET. THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 6O'47'{)4". SUBTENDED BY A CHORD OF 1793.]3 FEET AT A BEARING OF S 30'27'47" E. FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 1880.28 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; THENCE RUN S 00004'15" E. FOR A DISTANCE OF 454.68 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 39.318 ACRES. MORE OR LESS. AND PARCEL 2-B A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECl10N 13; THENCE RUN N 00004'15" W, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 13. FOR A DISTANCE OF 2684.85 FEET TO THE EAST 1/4 CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE RUN S 88057'12" W. ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTII 1/2 OF SAID SECTION 13. FOR A DISTANCE OF 189,98 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE RUN S 00002'40" W. FOR A DISTANCE OF 42,69 FEET; THENCE RUN S 33036'24" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 378.62 FEET; THENCE RUN S 00"04'15" E, FOR A DISTANCE OF 658.59 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF LIVINGSTON ROAD. THE SAME BEING A POINT ON A CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHWEST WHOSE RADIUS POINT BEARS S 53"30'13" W, A DISTANCE OF 2047.36 FEET THEREFROM; THENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE 9/19/03 1-2 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 13 of 49 LEFT. HAVING A RADIUS OF 2047.36 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24021'31", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD OF 863,81 FEET AT A BEARING OF N 48040'33" W, FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 810.41 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE; TIlENCE RUN N 60"51']9" W, FOR A DISTANCE OF 174.19 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENTIAL CIRCULAR CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHEAST; TIlENCE RUN NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1772.36 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2032'47", SUBTENDED BY A CHORD OF 18.76 FEET AT A BEARING OF N 59034'55" W, FOR AN ARC LENGTH OF 78.71 FEET TO THE END OF SAID CURVE. THE SAME BEING A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE S0UTH 112 OF SAID SECl10N 13; TIlENCE RUN N 88051']2" E, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, FOR A DISTANCE OF ]601.90 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 14.172 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. 1.3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The property is currently owned by Naples Education. Inc.. and Royal Palm Academy. Inc. 1.4 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY A. The project is located in Section 13, Township 48 South. Range 25 East and is generally bordered on the north by AgriculturaJJy zoned land that is undeveloped. on the east by Livingston Road; on the south by Madeira PUD and Imperial Golf Estates zoned RSF-3 and undeveloped land zoned RSF-3 and Agriculrure. and on the west by Imperial Golf Estates zoned RSF-3. A 235 to 260 foot wide FPL easement overlaps the property along its eastern boundary. Livingston Road. which has a 275-foot wide right-of-way. runs parallel along the eastem property line then curves to the northwest bisecting the PUD, B. The zoning classification of the subject property at the time of PUD application is Agriculture (A) with portions having a Special Treatment (ST) overlay. A conditional use approval for the exisling Royal Palm Academy has also been authorized. C. Site elevations range from 10.6 to 13.8 FT. NGVD. According to FEMAlFIRM Map Panel Number 1200670195 D. dated June 3. 1986. the property is located within Zone X. 0, Soils on the site generally include Hallandale fine sand and Boca, Rivera, Limestone Substratum and Copeland fine sand depressional. E. Existing vegetation on the site consists of melaleuca. Brazilian Pepper. palmetto prairie, pine flatwoood. cypress, Cabbage Palm and disrurbed lands. Wetland areas have been heavily impacted by melaleuca F. According to the Collier County Drainage Atlas. the site is located in the Cocohatchee River Basin. The northern portion of the site is located in the Imperial Drainage Outlet Sub-Basin; the southern ponion of the site is located in 1.3 9/19103 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 14 of 49 the Palm River Canal Sub-Basin. The conceptual water management plan is depicted in the Surface Water Management Report which accompanied the rezone application submittal. 1.5 SHORT TITLE This Ordinance is known and cited as the "Royal Palm Academy Planned Unit Development Ordinance". 9/19/03 1-4 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24,2008 Page 15 of 49 SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 2.1 PURPOSE Section II delineates and generally describes the plan of development and identifies relationships to applicable County ordinances. policies. and procedures. 2.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT . A. Royal Palm Academy PUD is a mixed-use project and will consist of four development parcels and multiple preservation areas. Categories of land uses include those for educational campus. residential and preserve areas. The main ponion of the school campus will be located in the center of the property wesl of Livingston Road. The Residential areas are designed to accommodate a variety of housing types. The overall project density is approximately 3.4 dwelling units per acre and the maximum units permitted in the PUD shall be 550 units. B. Exhibit A depicts the PUD Master Plan. The PUD Master Plan includes a table that summarizes land use acreage. The location. size and configuration of individual tracts shall be determined at the time of preliminary and final subdivision plat approval. 2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCES 9/19/03 A. Regulations for development of Royal Palm Academy PUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Document. Planned Unit Development District and other applicable sections and parts of the Collier County LDC and Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of issuance of any development order to which said regulations relate which authorize the construction of improvements. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards then the provisions of the most similar district in the LDC shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the time of building permit application. c. Unless modified. waived or eltcepted from this PUD Document or associated exhibits. the provisions of other sections of the LDC. where applicable. remain in full force and effect with respect to the development of the land which comprises this PUD. 11-] Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 16 of 49 D. Development permitted by the approval of this petlUon will be subject to a concurrency review under the provisions of Division 3.15 Adequate Public Facilities of the LDC. 2.4 LAND USES A. Land uses are generally depicted on the PUD Master Plan. Exhibit A. The specific location and size of individual tracts and the assignment of square footage or units shall be determined by the developer at the lime of site development plan approval. preliminary subdivision plat approval. or final subdivision plat approval subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County LDC. B. Infrastructure. not including roads, located internal to the PUD may be either public. private or a combination of public and private, depending on location. design and purpose. Roads intemalto the education campus shall be private_ The Developer or its assignees shall be responsible for maintaining the roads. streets. drainage. common areas, water and sewer improvements where such systems are not dedicated to the County. Standards for roads shall be in compliance with the applicable provisions of the LDC regulati'ng subdivisions. unless otherwise approved during subdivision approval. The Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to Code design standards in accordance with Section 3.2.7.2 of the LDC. 2.5 LAKE SITING A. Lakes have been preliminary sited on the PUD Master Plan and are subject to change based upon final surface water management permitting by the South Florida Water Management District, and site plan design criteria. Fill material from lakes is planned to be utilized within the PUD; however, excess fill material may be utilized off-site. The volume of material to be removed shall be limited to ten percent of the calculated excavation volume to a maximum of 20.000 cubic yards. If the Developer wishes to remove additional fill from the site, a commercial excavation permit shall be required. B, Setbacks: Excavations shall be located so that the control elevation shall adhere to the following minimum setback requirements. subject to approval of County Staff at time of final construction plan approval: I. Lakes (control elevation) shall be setback a minimum of thirty (30) feet from the right-of-way of Livingston Road and perimeter property lines. except that the lake located within the 38:1: acre preserve area may be located twenty (20) feet from the northern perimeter property line. 9/19103 II-2 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 17 of49 2.6 USE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY The Developer may utilize land within the rights-of-way within the PUD for landscaping. decorative entranceways. and unified signage. This utilization is subject to review and administrative approval during the development review process by the Community Development and Environmental Services Administrator for engineering and safety considerations. 2.7 MODEL HOMES SALES OFFICE AND CONSTRUCTION OFFICE A. Model Homes Sales offices. construction offices. temporary school offices. and other uses and struclures related to the promotion and sale of real estate or the school such as. but not limited to. pavilions. parking areas. and signs. shall be permitted principal uses throughout the Royal Palm Academy PUD. These uses shall be subject to the requirements of Sections 2.6.33.and Division 3.3 of the We. B. Model Homes may be pennitted in multi-family and townhome buildings. Up to one 8-unit building per phase may be utilized for wet or dry models. subject to the time frames specified in Section 2.6.33 of the We. 2.8 CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS TO PUD DOCUMENT OR PUD MASTER PLAN Changes and amendments may be made to this PUD Ordinance or PUD Master Plan as provided in Section 2.7.3.5, of the LDC. Minor changes and refinements as described herein may be made by the Developer in connection with any type of development or permit application pursuant to Subsection 2.7.3.5.6 of the LDC. 2.9 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT PHASING Submission. review. and approval of Preliminary Subdivision Plats for the development parcels may be accomplished in phases to correspond with the planned development of the property, 2.10 OPEN SPACE AND NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS A minimum of 30% of the project shall be devoted to usable open space. A minimum of 25% of the on-site native vegetation shall be retained. consistent with Section 3.9.5.5.3 of the LDC as conceptually shown as preserve areas on the Exhibit "AU. Conceplual PUD Master Plan. In conjunction with the residential phase(s) of construction. a minimum of four (4) :!: acres of preserve area shall be shown on the applicable SDP or plat for that residential component lying weSI of Livingston Road. 9/19/03 11-3 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 18 of 49 2.11 COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE One or more property owner's associations (POA) will provide most common area maintenance. The POA. as applicable. shall be responsible for the operation. mainlenance. and management of the surface water and stormwater management systems and preserves serving Royal Palm Academy PUD, in accordance with any applicable permits from the South Florida Water Management District. 2.12 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS A. The Collier County Planned Unit Development District is intended to encourage ingenuity. innovation and imagination in the planning. design and development or redevelopment of relatively large tracts of land under unified ownership as set forth in the LDC, Section 2.2.20. 1. Individual Projects a) Site Planning: Each dislinct project within the PUD will provide an aesthetically appealing, identifiable path of entry for pedestrians and vehicles. The orientation of buildings and structures will be sensitive to adjacent land uses and the surrounding community. b) Landscaping: Where applicable. plantings along public rights-of way will be complimentary to streetscape landscaping. 2.13 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, BERMS. FENCES AND WALLS A. Landscape buffers. berms. fences and walls are generally permitted as a principal use throughout the PUD. B. The maximum fence. wall or berm height internal to the PUD shall be eight (8) feet. not including those portions of walls incorporated into project identification signs. The maximum fence height shall be measured relative to the greater of the crown of the adjacent roadway or the adjacent minimum finished floor, as applicable. C. Perimeter Buffers shall mainlain a minimum 50% of the required buffer width as a vegetative planting shelf (maximum. 10: I slope) and retum to grade ,shall be permitted at a 3:1 slope. or a maximum 2:1 slope when planted with native grasses (at 3 feet on center). 2.14 SIGNAGE A. GENERAL Signage shall be consistent with the LDC except as provided below: 9/19/03 11-4 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 19 of 49 I, Each platted parcel shall be considered a separate parcel of land. 2. Signs and decorative landscaped entrance features within a County dedicated right-of-way shall require a right-of-way permit subject to the review and approval of the County. 3. All signs shilll be located so as not to cause sight line obstructions, 4. The Royal Palm Academy shall be permitted one off-site ground sign which may be located within the Collier County Public Schools access roadway and shall be no greater than 60 square feet in area. B: PROJECT ENTRY SIGNS I. Two ground or wall-mount entrance signs maybe located at each project entrance on Livingston Road including both sides of the entrance right-of- way and in the entry median, Such signs may contain only the name of the subdivision. and the insignia or motto of the development. 2. No sign face area may exceed 80 square feet and the total sign face area of Entrance Signs may not exceed 160 square feet. The sign face area shall not exceed the height or length of the wall or monument upon which it is located. 3, The setback for the signs from Livingston Road rights-of-way and any perimeter property line shall be 5 feet; a deviation from 10 feet as required by Section 2.5.5.1.1.2. of the LOC. 4. Entrance signs may not exceed a height of 8 feet above the finished ground level of the sign site. For the purpose of this provision. finished grade shall be considered to be no greater than 18 inches above the highest crown elevation of the nearest road. unless the wall or monument is constructed on a perimeter landscape berm. C. ON-PREMISES SIGNS I. A maximum of two residential and community facilities entrance signs may be located at each subdivision entrance including both sides of the entrance street and within the entry median. Setbacks from intemal road right-of-way shall be zero feet (0 feet) a deviation from 10 feet as required by Section 2.5.5.1.1.2. of the LDC, Such signs may be used to identify the location of neighborhoods. clubhouse. recreational areas and other fearures within the residential property. Individual signs shall be a maximum of 80 square feet per sign face area. Such signs shall have a maximum height of 8 feet. 9119103 II-S Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 20 of 49 2. The education campus area shall be permitted on-premises directional signage without restriction to number of signs to facilitate on-site pedestrian and vehicular movement. unless the sign age is visible from any public right-of-way in which case said signage shall be in compliance with Division 2.5 of the LOC. D. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic signs such as street name signs, stop signs. speed limit signs. etc. shall be designed to reflect a common architectural theme. in accordance with Subsection 3.2.8.3.19. of the LOC. 2.15 SUBSTITUTIONS TO SUBDIVISION DESIGN STANDARDS A. The Developer reserves the right to request substitutions to subdivision improvement and utility design standards in accordance with Section 3.2.7.2 of the LOC. B. The Developer shall construct a IDlmmum five (5) foot wide sidewalk from Livingston Road to lhe project entry. along the south side of the Collier Counly Public Schools access road. C. The following substitutions are requested: I. Subsection 3.2.8.3.17 of the LDC. Sidewalks. bike lanes and bike paths a Sidewalks shall be provided throughout the campus area to provide pedestrian links between campus uses. The location of sidewalks within the campus area shall be shown on the final site development plan. b. A 5-foot wide sidewalk shall he provided on one side of each residential street. 2. Subsection 3.2.8.4.16. of the LDC. Streets and access improvements a. Subsection 3.2.8.4.16.5 of the LOC. Street Right-of-Way Width Street right-of-way width: The minimum right-of-way width to be utilized for local streets and cul-de-sacs shall be forty (40) feet. a deviation from the 60 foot width required. by Appendix B of the LDC. Typical Street Sections. Drive aisles serving multi-family tracts shall not be required to meet this standard. Streets and drive aisles shall meet applicable NFP A criteria. 9/19103 II~ Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 21 of 49 b. Subsection 32.8.4.16.6 of the LDC. Dead-end Streets Cul-de-sacs may exceed a length of one thousand (1,000) feet c. Subsection 3.2.8.4.16.8. Intersection Radii Intersection radii: Street intersections shall be provided with a minimum of a twenty-five (25) foot radius (face of curb) for all internal project streets and a thirty-five (35) foot radius for intersections at project entrances. 3. Subsection 3.2.8.3.6 (b) 3 of the LDC. Vegetation Removal and Site Filling Permits Vegetation Removal and site clearing: the developer may clear and fill lhe entirety of each phase of an approved final site plan or plat. in conjunction with infrastructure improvement. not to exceed a maximum of 25 acres per phase. 2.16 GENERAL PERMITTED USES A. Certain uses shall be considered general permitted uses throughout the Royal Palm Academy PUD except in the Preserve Areas. General permitted uses are those uses that generall y serve the entire PUD or distinct projects there within. B. General Permitted Uses: 9/19/03 I. 2. 3. Essential services as set forth under LDC. Section 2.6.9.1. Water management facilities and related structures. Lakes including lakes with bulkheads or other architectural or structural bank treatments. Guardhouses. gatehouses. and access control structures. Temporary construction. sales, and administrative offices for the Developer and Developer's authorized contractors and consultanls. including necessary access ways. parking areas and related uses, subject to a Temporary Use Permit. Landscape features including. but not limited to. landscape buffers, berms. fences and walls subject to the standards set forth in Section 2.13 of this document. Signage. 4. 5. 6. 7. 11-7 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 22 of 49 SECTION III CAMPUS "C" DEVELOPMENT AREA 3.1 PURPOSE Section III establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within the Royal Palm Academy PUD that are designated Campus "C" on the PUD Master Plan. 3.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as "C' on the PUD Master Plan occupy 50:!: acres and are designed to accommodate a full range of educational, social. religious and recreational opportunities for students from pre-kindergarten through high school. Student population is estimated at 1.250 students. 3.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. Principal Uses and Structures I. Schools. Private (Pre-K through grade 12) 2. Administrative Offices 3. Chapel - incidental to private school function 4. Rectory 5. Cafeteria and food services 6. Residential dwellings. consistent with Section IV of this PUD 7, Recreational Uses. including but not limited to gymnasiums, tennis courts. basketball courts, natatorium. playgrounds and athletic fields. B. Accessory Uses and Structures 1. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in this PUD including hut not limited to miscellaneous recreational uses. architectural features, and on-site housing for teachers and staff. 3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A, Minimum Lot Area: None required. B. Minimum Lot Width: None required. 9/19/03 m.1 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 23 of 49 C. Minimum Yard Requirements: L 2. 3. 4, 5. Front Yard. internal roadways or drives: From Livingston Road ROW: From Collier County Public Schools access road: From PUD Perimeter: From Preserve Boundaries: Principal Structure Accessory Structure . Twc:my-five (25) fOOl minimum principel SlnJCNre sem.ck. ..y be reduced 10 an abIoIutc minimum of rwerllY (20) leer 10 proleCt nltive vqerarioo as appn:wed duriJlglbe pllninl *1('1 SDP process. Five (5) Feet Thirty (30) Feet Thirty (30) Feet Thirty (30) Feet . Twenty-five (25) feet Ten (10) feet D. Maximum Building Height: Fifty (50) feet except for artached steeples. spires. cupolas or related architectural features. which may be a maximum of seventy five (75) feet. E. Required Parking: 9119/03 I. Parking for all permitted uses in the campus area shall be provided based on the following standards: a. School (Pre K thru grade 8) - 5 spaces per 4 faculty members. b. School (grade 9 thru grade 12) - I space per faculty member. plus I space per 5 students. c. No additional parking shall be required for outdoor recreational facilities, administrative offices. chapel. and other permitted uses in the Campus Area. 2 Up to 20 percent of the required parking or up to 70 percent of the parking exceeding the minimum requirements of this Section may be surfaced with grass or lawn with a stabilized subgrade. III-2 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 24 of 49 SECTION IV RESIDENTIAL "R" DEVELOPMENT AREAS ~ 4.1 PURPOSE .. Section IV establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within the Royal Palm Academy PUD that are designated Residential "Rn on the PUD Master Plan. 4.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION A. Areas designated as "Rn on the PUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate a broad range of residential types. recreational uses. essential services, and customary accessory uses. Acreage is based on a conceptual design. Actual acreage of the development and preserve areas shall be established at the time of Site Development Plan or Preliminary Subdivision Plat approvals in accordance with the Collier County LDC. Areas designated as URn accommodate intemal roadways. open space. parks and amenity areas. lakes and water management facilities. and other similar facilities that are accessory or customary to residential development. B. Areas designated as "Rn are intended to provide a maximum of 550 dwelling units, 4.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. Principal Uses and Structures I, Single-family detached dwelling units. 2. Single-family patio and zero lot line dwellings. 3, Single-family attached and townhouse dwellings. 4. Two-family and duplex dwellings. 5. Multiple-family dwellings. 6. The existing school campus shall be relocated to the area designated Campus "e" on the conceptual master plan, concurrent with phases of construction and building completion of the 2nd classroom building. B. Accessory Uses and Structures 1. 2. 3. 4. Common area recreational facilities. Gatehouses. Temporary sales facilities. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted in this area. 9/19/03 IV-I Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 25 of 49 4.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Table I sets forth the development standards for land uses within the "R" Residential District. B. Required Parking: Parking within the residential area shall be provided based on the following standards: I. Single-family house. townhouse. multi-family dwelling unit - 2 spaces per unit. 2. Recreation Facilities - 2 spaces per court. I per 600 square feet of building area, I per 200 square feet of pool water area. No additional parking spaces shall be required for outdoor playground facilities. Up to 10 parking spaces per recreational facility may be directly loaded off a private roadway serving the recreational area. 3. Temporary Model Sales Facility - minimum 6 parlcing spaces per building. Parking for models or temporary sales facilities shall be pennitted to back directly onto private roadways serving the units. c. Standards for parking. landscaping. signs and other land uses where such standards are not specified herein or within the Royal Palm Academy PUD. shall be in accordance with the LDC in effect at the time of site development plan approval. Unless olherwise indicated, required yards. heights. and floor area standards apply 10 principal structures. D. Development standards for uses not specifically sel forth in Table I shall be established during the site development plan approval as set forth in Division 3.3. of the LDC in accordance with those standards of Ihe zoning district which is most similar to the proposed use. 9/19/03 1V-2 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 26 of 49 TABLE I ROYAL PALM ACADEMY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR "R" RESIDENTIAL AREAS Permitted Uses and ~g1e Patio & Zero Two Family Single Family Mulli-Family Standards l'amily Lot Line And Duplex Attached and Dwellings Detached Townhouse Minimum Lot Area S,OOO SF S,OOO SF 3,500 SF 1.700 SF NA Minimum Lot Width 50' 40' 3S' IT 90' Minimum Lot Depth 100' 100' 100' 100' 100' Front Yard Setback' 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' Side Yard Setback'- 6' 0' or6' O' or6' O' or6' IS' Rear Yard Setback'" 15' IS' 15' 15' 15' Livingston Road R-O-W Setback........7 20' 20' 20' 20' 20' Rear Yard Accessory Setback..2 10' 10' 10' 10' 15' Preserve Setback.... . Accessory 10' 10' 10' 10' 10' Principal 25' 2S' 2S' 2S' 25' Maximum Building 2 Stories 2 Stories 2 Slories 2 Slories 3 Stories Heieht .....3 or35' or 35' orJS' or 35' or 45' Distance Between.......:! Princioal Structures 12' O' 0' O' 20' Floor Area Min. (SF) 1000 SF 1000 SF 1000 SF 850 SF 7S0 SF All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. .' Front yards .shAll be mea~ured as follows: A. If the parcel is served by III public righl..oJ.way, setback is measured from the adjacent right-or-way line. B. Iflhe parcel is served by a private road. setback is measured from tne back of curb (if curbed) or edge of pavemenllifnot curbed). C, If the parcel has frontage on IWO sides. setback is measured from the side with the longest frontage with the other frontage designed as a side yard. B. For strUctures wilh side emU')' garages. the minimum front yard may be reduced 10 12'. , n- Rear yards for principal and accessory struCt~.5 on 10fS and lracts which abut lake. or open $paCe may be reduced 10 O' feet; however. a reduced building sclback shall nol reduce lhe width of any required lnndicape buffer. as may be applicable. ...) Bu.ilding heighl shall be lhe: vertical diSUlnce measured from the firsl tuabitable finished noor elevation to the uppermosl finished ceiling elevation of the structure. ......4 For purposes of this Sec1ion. accessory strUctures shall include but nor be limited 10 attached screen enclosures and roofed lanais. .....5 Building separation may be zero (0) feet with a minimum building sepm'3tion of twelve (12) feet between detached structures. DetllChed garages may be separated by a minimum of ten (10) feet. ......6 Twenty-five (25) foot minimum principal structure setback. may be reduced 10 an absolute minimum of twenty (20) feet to pro1ect native vegetation 4S approved during the planing and/or SOP process. ..... ."7 No principal slructure shall be located within 5' ofa rcqui~ landscape buffer. 9/19/03 IV-3 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 27 of 49 SECTION V PRESERVE "P"AREAS 5.1 PURPOSE Section V establishes permitted uses and development regulations for areas within the Royal Palm Academy PUD that are designated as Preserve "P" on the PUD Master Plan. 5.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Areas designated as "p" on the PUD Master Plan are designed to accommodate natural systems existing or created as preserves and limited water management uses and functions. 5.3 PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES A. No building or structure. or part thereof. shall be erected. altered or used, or land or water used, in whole or in part. for other than the following: B. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures I. Boardwalks and nature trails (excluding asphalt paved trails). 2. Water management facilities. 3. Educational kiosks and shelters, 4. Any other preserve and related open space acl1Vlly or use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses and which the Board of Zoning Appeals determines to be compatible in the Preserve Area. 5.4 PRESERVE AREA ADJUSTMENTS The proposed preserve areas depicted on the Royal Palm Academy PUD Master Plan are intended to meet the native vegetation requirements of the Collier County Growth Management Plan and the Collier County LOC. Adjustments may be made to the location of the preservation areas at the time of preliminary plat or site development plan approval based on jurisdictional agency permit requirements. If adjustments are needed. the Developer will have the option to increase the preservation in other areas. enhance and preserve another area. or provide increased native landscape per the Collier County We. The Preserve area shall consist of a minimum of 39 acres of native vegetation. 9119/03 V.I Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 28 of 49 SEcrION VI DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS 6.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the commitments for the development of this project. 6.2 GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with final site development plans, final subdivision plans and all applicable State and local laws. codes. and regulations applicable to this PUD. in effect at the time of final plat. final site development plan approval or building permit application as the case may be. Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise. the standards and specifications of the official County LDC shall apply to this project even if the land within the PUD is not to be platted. The Developer. his successor and assigns. shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this document. The Developer. his successor or assignee. shall follow the PUD Master Plan and the regulations of this PUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property. In addition. any successor in title, or assignee, is subject to the commitments within this Document. 6.3 PUD MASTER PLAN A. Exhibit "A", PUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature, Proposed area, lot or land use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to be final and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as final platting or site development plan approval. Subject to the provisions of Section 2.7.3.5 of the Collier County LDC. amendments may be made from time to time, 6.4 SCHEDULE OF DEVELOPMENTIMONITORING REPORT A. The landowners shall proceed and be governed according to the time limits pursuant to Section 2.7.3.4 of the LDC. B. Monitorin2 Reoort: An annual monitoring report shall be submitted pursuant to Section 2.7.3.6 of the LDC. The monitoring report shall be accompanied by an affidavit stating that representations contained therein are true and correct. 9/19/03 VI-I Agenda Item No. 12C June 24. 2008 Page 29 of 49 6.5 ENGINEERING A. This project shall be required to meet all County Ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval. B. Design and construction of all improvements shall be subject to compliance with appropriate provisions of the Collier County LDC. Division 3.2. Subdivisions. 6.6 SURFACEWATERMANAGEMENT . In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), this projecl shall be designed for a storm event of 3-day duration and 25-year return frequency. A. The project will be permitted with the South Florida Water Management District and copies of the applicable permits and plans. which have been approved by SFWMD, will be provided to Collier County prior to issuance of applicable County permits. B. Lakes shall be designed in accordance with the SFWMD permit. C. Final construction plans will be reviewed and approved by Collier County Engineering Services Staff. 6,7 UTILITIES A. Water distribution, sewage collection and transmission and interim water and/or sewage treatment facilities to serve the project are to be designed. constructed, conveyed. owned and maintained in accordance with Collier County Ordinance No. 0 I-57. as amended. and other applicable County rules and regulations. B. All necessary easements, dedications. or other instruments shall be granted to insure the continued operation and maintenance of all service utilities in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at Ihe time approvals are requested. C. A portion of the projecl is located within Collier County Wellfield Protection Zone WS/4. Development within Ihe Royal palm Academy PUD shall be consistent with Division 3.16, Groundwater Protection of the LOC. 6.8 TRAFFIC The development of this PUD Master Plan shall be subject to and governed by the following conditions: 9/19/03 VI-2 9/19103 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 30 of 49 A. All traffic control devices used shall be in accordance with the traffic control standards as adopted by the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT). and as required by Florida Statutes - Chapter 316 Uniform Traffic Control Law, B. All traffic speed limit postings shall be in accordance with the Speed Zoning Manual. as amended. and as adopted by the Florida Department of Transponation (FOOT). as required by Florida Statutes - Chapter 316 Uniform Traffic Control Law: c. Arterial level street lighting shall be provided at all development points of ingress and egress. Said lighting shall be in place prior to the issuance of the first permanent certificate of occupancy. D. External and internal improvements determined by Collier County Staff to be essential to the safe. ingress and egress to the development shall not be considered for impact fee credits. E. Road Impact Fees shall be paid in accordance with Collier County Ordinance 200 1-13, as amended. F. Any and all points of ingress and/or egress as shown on any and all plan submittal{s) are conceptual in nature and subject to change. as determined by Collier County Staff. The County reserves the right to modify or close any ingress and/or egress location(s) determined to have an adverse affect on the health. safety and welfare of the public. These include. but are not limited to, safety concerns, operational circulation issues and roadway capacity problems. The previous conditions notwithstanding. the County acknowledges that access to a public road will be maintained at all times and the County is prohibited from denying access to a public road. G. Any and all median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy. as amended. and LDC, as amended. Median access and control will remain under the County's authority. The County reserves the right 10 modify or close any median opening(s) determined to have an adverse affect on Ihe health, safety and welfare of the public. These include but are not limited to safety concerns. operational circulation issues and roadway capacity problems. H. Nothing in any development order will vest the right of access over and above a right in/right out condition. Neither will the existence of nor lack of a future median opening be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the Developer(s). its successor(s) in title. or assignee(s). I. The development will be designed to promote the safe travel of all users including pedestrians and bicyclists. Notwithstanding standards otherwise specified in this VI-3 9119/03 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 31 of 49 document pedestrian and bicycle travel ways will be separated from vehicular traffic areas in accordance with recognized standards and safe practices. J. The Developer(s) shall provide any and all site related transportation improvement(s) including. but not limited to. any and all necessary turn lane(s) improvement(s) at the development entrance(s) prior to the issuance of the first permanent certificate of occupancy. Said improvements are considered site related. and therefore. do not qualify for impact fee credits. When said turn lane improvement(s). whether left tum lane(s) and/or right turn lane(s). are determined 10 be necessary, right-of-way and/or compensating right-of-way. will be provided in conjunction with said improvement(s), as determined by Collier County Staff. K. All work within Collier County right-of-way shall meet the requirements of Collier County Ordinance No. 93-64. L. All intemal access(es). drive aisles and sidewalk(s) not located within the County right-of-way shall be privately maintained by an entity created by the Developer(s), its successor(s) in title, or assignee(s). M. The Developer shall pay its fair share cost of traffic signals required at the project access points. The traffic signals will be designed, installed. owned. operated. and maintained by Collier County. N. There shall be a full access intersection at the primary entrance to the school on Livingston Road. When justified by traffic warrants. this intersection shall be signalized. o. The Developer is not obligated to permit Dr construct Marquis Boulevard. However, in the event that Marquis Boulevard is constructed by a third party, any excess mitigation credits owned by the Developer shall be made available to the third party for use in permitting and constructing Marquis Boulevard if such credits are permitted to be utilized by applicable governmental agencies. P. An access and utility easement in the general area depicted on the conceptual PUD Masler Plan. located along the northern property line and east of Livingston Road, shall be conveyed to the property owners to the north. provided thaI the Developer's share of the cost of constructing any roadways, landscaping and utilities within the easement is not greater than 113 the actual cost of constructing the roadway. landscaping and utilities, VI-4 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 32 of 49 6.9 PLANNING Pursuant to Subsection 2.2.25.8.1 of the Land Development Code. if during the course of site clearing. excavation or other construction activity a historic or archaeological artifact is found. all development within the minimum area necessary to protect the discovery shall be immediately stopped and the Collier County Code Enforcement Department contacted. 6.10 ENVIRONMENTAL 9/19/03 A. An exotic vegetation removal, monitoring, and maintenance (exotic-free) plan for the site. shall be submitted 10 Environmental Services Staff for review and approval prior to Final Site Development Plan/Construction Plan approval for all parcels included on that project. B. A minimum of thirty (30) percent of the gross site area shall he open space, as described in Section 2.6.32 of the LOC. A minimum of 39 acres of native vegetation shall be retained within the PUD. c. Buffers shall be provided around wetlands. extending at least fifteen (15) feet landward from the edge of wetlands in all places and averaging twenty-five (25) feet from the landward edge of wetlands. Where natural buffers are not possible. structural buffers shall be provided in accordance with the State of Florida Environmental Resources Permit Rules and be subject to review and approval by the Environmental Services Review Staff. D, The petitioner shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) regarding potential impacts to protected species and their habitats on site. A Habitat Management Plan for those species shall be submitted to Environmental Services staff for review and approval prior to final site plan/ construction plan approvaL At a minimum. a plan shall be provided for woodstorks that were observed on site. E. Setbacks from preserves shall he as required in the Royal Palm Academy PUD. Table I. F. All conservation areas shall be designated as conservation/preservation tracts or easements on all construction plans and shall be recorded on the plat with protective covenants per or similar to Section 704,06 of the Florida Statutes. G. A current gopher tortoise survey shall be submitted prior to the first development order approval. A gopher tortoise management plan may be required at this time. VI.5 _,~ EXHBt'A.II7......../III. dl Agenda Item No. 12 """I June 24, 200 !Q! Page 33 of 4 I --- . Url ~ i II I I U " i r. il i; I I il ll'j'l ".; I' ~'Il I I II I II P' ;;M I l! "II I I I. . II I . I I . I " I . I . !I I ~ " I . .L_ ---- _w. = . ~ . _ _ _: .J! _ . I ~ . I , I J.1 . I ll~H I . I I II. I I I Exhibit "A" ........ Hili II i a elf nd .....1 ~ .1 11.1 t 'i "'11i - I I 1'1 I j", 0;: ~ I ~i ~ j!:! ! I i>( I H - . . I i I ~ Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 34 of 49 STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier county, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of: ORDINANCE 2003-54 Which was adopted by the Board of County commissioners on the 23rd day of September, 2003, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 26th day of September, 2003. DWIGHT E. BROCK ,,' "'P.. Clerk of Courts and Clerk' Ex-officio to Board1of., .~ County Commissi?ners ~ ~ ~~f:~ i'" By: Patricia L';~organ, ,,:'''' Deputy Clerk '):J''':~' Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 September 18.~35of49 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples. Florida. September 18. 2003 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that Ihe Collier County Planning Commission in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room. Administration Building. County Governmenl Center. 3301 Tamiami Trail, East, Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Kenneth Ahernathy Mark Strain Dwight Richardson Lara Jean Young Lindy Adelstein Brad Schiffer Paul Midney Russell Budd David Wolfley ALSO PRESENT: Joseph Schmitt, Community Development & Environmental Services; Raymond Bellows. Planning Services; Mmjorie Student, Assistant County Attorney; Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney Page I Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 September 18. ~ 36 of 49 Item 8D- V A-2003-AR-4426, Andrew 1. Solis. Esquire. representing 1=1. S gh General Contra 'ng. Inc., requesting a 7.4-foot variance from the required 15-fo ront yard setback to .4 feet. Property is located at 105 1 Sl Street S.W.. further cribed as the east 105 feet of tr t 123, Golden Gate Estates Unit 12. in Section 9. Township 49 South. Range 27 East.!lier County. Florida. consisting of 1.46+acres.,/ Mr. Abernathy swo:~ ih,all testifying on hehalf of this iss~~--7 Budd disclosed that he met with the applicant and,his agent. Ms. Young diSclos~~he met with the applicant and his agent. . Mr., Strain disclosed that he Jf:l:d a conference all with the applicant and his agent. / . . Andrew I. Solis, Esquire represe~tirtgJ.1.. S <:llaon": General Contracting, Inc. . Mr, Budd questioned whether coi'ls;;;;iio~ stopped when the error was found. . Mr, Solis responded it was stoppe~~en petitioner submitted the spot survey, he met wilh Ms. Worsley and Mr. ~mitfllll.d they approved the spot survey so the petitioner went ahead. ./ "., . Mr. Richardson asked what il'ie state of the prol><\rty is right now. Mr. Solis responded that construcli ' is almost completed. 14z. Schmitt staled thallhe builder is responsible w' in ten days of placing the slilb to come in and have the , spot survey approve nd anything done within that time is done at the builders risk. Mr, Schmitt i icated that there was an error and the 'Board allowed the petitioner to con' ue building at his own risk. Mr. Schmitt indk,ated that all inspections hay. been made by the County, ", None Public Speakers: '" ~ " " ~ Ms. Strai ade a motion to approve the petition with stipulations that no future variance will be quired, hOlTIe may be rebuilt in same location. The motion was seconded by Mr. W lfey. The motion was approved 9-0. Item 8E-PUDZ-2002-AR-2944, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP. of Q, Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., and Richard Y ovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman and Johnson, representing Royal Palm Academy. requesting a rezone from "A" Rural Agricultural and "A-ST" Rural ArgiculturallSpecial Treatment to "POO" Planned Unit Development 10 be known as Royal Palm Academy POO for an Educational Campus and Residential Community consisting of up to 650 dwelling units for property located at 6000 Livingston Road, in Section 13. Township48 South, Range 25 East. Collier County. Florida. consisting of 162.7+ acres. Mr. Abernathy swore in all testifying on behalf of this issue. Mr. Strain disclosed that he had a brief discussion with Mr. Arnold. . Richard Yovanovich representing the petitioner discussed the following: . Location of siFe 5 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 September 18. ~ 37 of 49 . Access road from Livingston Road to the west to a middle school. No use of road by residential development On east side of Livingston Road there will be an interconnecl for property owners to the north to gain access to lighted intersection. Four units per acre are being requested Access for the residents of Imperial is being provided - . . . ,*. . Discussion between Mr, Ahernathy and Mr. Y ovanovich regarding PUD. . Discussed traffic issues and compatibility . Discussed sidewalks . Discussed density. Wayne Arnold, Grady Minor & Associates . Ms. Young inquired regarding the environmental issues. . Mr. Danzer of Phoenix Environmental Group discussed environmental issues and indicated Ihal the wetlands that are currently on the property were analyzed from a wetland rapid assessment procedure that analyzes the value of those based on the quality of habitat. . Norman Trebilcock. Civil Engineer and Certified Planner. Discussed condition of site with regard to water. . Mr. Richardson questioned regarding the easement on the south side. how it will work, how long will it take, and what is it going to take to get the easement in for emergency services. . Mr. Arnold responded that it would be determined by whoever the applicant is to construct the road. the easements are written in favor of the public, . Mr. Richardson commented thaI he is concerned with what the County can do to get some improved safety access for Phase V. and Mr. Arnold responded that it is the developer's intent to construct a portion of that road that serves our community. after the residential portion of our site, we don't have a benefit of the road. . Discussion of roadway capacities ,residential setbacks. and sidewalks. 6 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 September 18. ~ 38 of 49 Public Speakers Mr. Abernathy swore in Herbert Oehlers who is testifying regarding the issue. . Herbert Oehlers, homeowner Imperial Golf Estates. Mr. Oehlers had concerns regarding whether developer would assume responsibility for impact mitigation re the access road. . Developer indicated capacity to assume responsibility for impact mitigation depends on the Board decision regarding sidewalks, Bruce Anderson, representing Center Point community church. expressed concerns regarding access easement being granted to the church and cost sharing. Applicant agreed to access easement and cost sharing of one-third, one-third. one-third. . Mr. Arnold discussed sidewalks on one side of the street as opposed to both sides of the street. . Mr. Schiffer questioned whether the developer was requesting lower density. . Mr. Arnold responded that the developer would forego 100 unils if a commitment can be gained allowing the conslruction of sidewalks on only one side of the street. . Mr. Schiffer questioned whelher the rear property lines on Livingston Road would go to the Livingston Road right-of-way. . Mr. Arnold responded that is correct. . Mr. Schiffer discussed the issue of the buffer. Ten Minute Break . Mr. Trebilcock stated that regarding the buffer, the 20 feet provided is the buffer for landscaping and the setback. and the closest accessory structure would be outside of any setback or buffer from Livingston Road. . Mr. Schiffer suggested wording be added indicating that no principle structure would be allowed within the buffer. . Mr. Budd made a motion that the Planning Commission forward this pelition 10 the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval subject to the staff report, in addition clarifying Item 4A6 removing the phase of 7 Agenda Item No. 12C ,.illJA'.\' 24, 2008 September 18, ~ 39 of 49 transition out of the existing upon the completion of the second classroom building, that there be 25 foot minimum roadway radius on a 40 foot roadway. that regarding the wetland mitigation credits, any extra credits that are available through the petitioner's process be held in favor of the Imperial neighborhood and their access roads. that the sidewalks be a single side sidewalk in exchange in part but also in exchange and receipt of a reduction of ] 00 units to a net of 550, that there be an easement for the Center Point Community Church as Mr. Anderson requested and Mr. Y ovanovich agreed to. and no principle structure within the rear yard buffer. Ms, Young seconded the motion. Mr. Midney asked for clarification regarding the sidewalk. It was agreed that Ihe motion should be amended to include all roads. one side. Motion was further amended to read 5- feet from the lanai rather than 8-feet. Motion was carried 9-0. ---~ -~ '-~-- Item 8H-PDI-2003-AR-4061, J. Gary Butler. of Butler Engineering, Inc., re senting Briarwoo Development Corp., requesting an insubstantial change to the B arwood PUD Masler PIa 0 provide two access interconnect points to the 40-acre Spi IIi Land holding, LLC zone parceL The subject property is located in Sectio I, Township 49 South. Range 2 ast, Collier County. Florida, (Companion to RZ)603-AR-04041). , / Mr. Abernathy swore all testifying on behalf of this issue. l\Y. Budd disclosed that he had a telephone convers . on with Mr. Spinelli regarding Ihio/matter. . Discussion regarding hether a new PUD was l)eing requested. Bruce Anderson representing the pplicant discussed proposal to build interconnection / within the Briarwood PUD. Mr. An erson indi91ted that the developer is in agreement with all slaff stipulations including sp ificallythat all of the lots within Ihe additional 40 acres will be incorporated into the Bri o,dHomeowners Association and will pay their proportionate share of all association fee~ d costs. Mr. Anderson addressed concerns of San Marcos resident. Mr. Anderson ,.state at the applicant has agreed that regarding the properties that abut the eastern boundary w . h do not have the benefit of the separation of the FL&L easement t uild a two f t berm with a five-foot hedge planted on top of the berm. . Discussion of emerge cy vehicle access. traffic i deviation. Kay Deselem. A.I.e.P rincipal Planner. Collier County Com unity Development and Environmental ServO es Division discussed access. compatibility, oning. . Discussi n as to what constitutes a substantial change to the r d system and it was as rtained that 23 % consti tutes a substantial change. Ms;beselem discussed the inclusion of a stipulation on project AR- I that requires those particular lots to be included in the Briarwood Homeown s Association so that the impacl on that project will be addressed, . 8 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 40 of 49 September 23, 2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Naples, Florida, September 23,2003 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, and also acting as the Board of Zoning Appeals and as the governing board( s) of such special districts as have been created according to law and having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION in Building tlF" of the Government Complex. East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: VICE-CHAIRMAN: TOM HENNING DONNA FIALA FRANK HALAS FRED COYLE JIM COLETTA ALSO PRESENT: JIM MUDD, County Manager LEO OCHS, Deputy County Manager MICHAEL PETTIT, County Attorney SUE FILSON, Executive Manager Page 1 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 41 of 49 September 23,2003 question can be . sed, and we can review it at th oint if there's any question as to whe somebody's a lobbyist not. With the new ordinance, once it take ffeet, there will one category of folks that appear before you who n are clearlyA'obbyists who when they appear with a certain hat on '11 n9t--be. But I will take it as a practical matter, I'm guessing, I don't mean to single out anybody, but let's say Bruce Anderson~'an bvious example. I'm guessing he's going to be registered as ~bbyist ay because he comes here on so many matters that iyW'ill be too diffi It for him to figure out when he is and when he jsi1t, and he will be reg! ered. CHAIRMfN HENNING: Okay. Next m. ___-..____..____"'c.-"- ----'-~~,,-~~-~ Item #8K ORDINANCE 2003-54 REGARDING PETITION PUDZ-2002-AR- 2944, D. WAYNE ARNOLD, AICP, OF Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES, P.A., AND RICHARD YOV ANOVICH OF GOODLETTE, COLEMAN AND JOHNSON, REPRESENTING ROYAL P ALM INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY, REQUESTING A REZONE FROM "A" RURAL AGRICULTURAL AND "A-ST" RURAL AGRICULTURAL/SPECIAL TREATMENT TO "PUD" PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO BE KNOWN AS ROYAL PALM INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY PUD FOR AN EDUCATIONAL CAMPUS AND RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY CONSISTING OF UP TO 650 DWELLING UNITS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6000 LIVINGSTON ROAD- .A.DOEIED MR. MUDD: The next item is 8(K) which used to be Item 17(J). It reads, "This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex-parte disclosure be provided by commission members." It's PUDZ-2002-AR-2944, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor Page 190 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 42 of 49 September 23,2003 & Associations, P.A., and Richard Y ovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson representing Royal Palm International Academy requesting a rezone from "A" rural agricultural and "A-ST" rural agricultural/special treatment to PUD, Planned Unit Development, to be known as Royal Palm International Academy PUD for the educational campus and residential community consisting of up to 650 dwelling units for property located at 6000 Livingston Road in Section 13, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 162.7 plus or minus acres." CHAIRMAN HENNING: All those wishing to participate in this discussion, please rise and raise your right hand to be sworn in by the court reporter. (Sworn by the court reporter.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Ex parte communications by the Board of Commissioners. Commissioner Coletta. On this particular item -- can you come back to me? I need to pull it out. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Yes. Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Yes. I've talked with some people that are residents of Imperial Golf Estates and have also talked with the petitioner and his clientele. CHAIRMAN HENNING: I had none myself. Commissioner Coyle. COMMISSIONER COYLE: I had meetings with the representatives of the petitioner. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioner Coletta. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Yes, there we go. On (1) I had meetings with Mr. Yovanovich -- actually, three times, numerous phone calls were received and numerous e-mails. I have it in my folder here if anyone would like to see it. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Mr. Yovanovich, thanks for being here today. Page 191 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 43 of 49 September 23, 2003 MR. yaV ANOVICH: Thanks for having me. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Are you registered? MR. yaV ANOVICH: For the record, Rich Y ovanovich. a registered lobbyist. I'm a little disappointed that I won't be a lobbyist for much longer on certain acts. For the record, I'm representing the petitioner. I have with me Wayne Arnold who is the planner on the project. and Norm Trubilcok (phonetic) who is the engineer on the project. What the project is is it's a mixed-use PUD for both a private school and a residential component of the project. The project is located on Livingston Road north ofImmokalee Road straddled both -- there's a western portion of the project and an eastern portion of the project as far as Livingston Road bisecting the project. If I can take you quickly through the site plan. the property -- first there's the aerial. Just to orient you, this is Livingston Road. This is Imperial Golf Estates right here. This is the Mediterra PUD and to the east is Pelican Strand -- I'm sorry, The Strand. The master plan is broken down to a residential component which is both on the west side and east side of Livingston Road, and this is the 50-acre campus right here. It is a private Catholic school that will be pre-k through high school when ultimately completed. We went through the planning commission. and there was a recommendation 9-0 to approve the PUD. The only real issue that came up during the planning commission was a discussion as to what should we do regarding sidewalks on our internal roadways. The proposal that the planning commission voted for 9-0 was that we would be required to have sidewalks on one side of the internal roadways. The rational for the requirement that we only have sidewalks on one side was it's a narrow site. We were able to stay out of preserve areas by having a sidewalk on one side versus a sidewalk on two sides. Also. the planning commission was also very concerned that if Page 192 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 44 of 49 September 23, 2003 there were sidewalks on both sides, you basically were going to have a sea of concrete. One of the planning commissioners half-jokingly said, "Well, why don't we just pave the whole thing and call it a sidewalk" recognizing that it would be one ugly project if you have a sidewalk on both sides. The planning commission -- we proposed to the planning commission that, one, it made good sense to have a sidewalk on only one side because the way we've designed the roads would prohibit a car from actually gaining any speed, so it would be slow traveling roads. We would stay out of the preserve area. We would also potentially have some mitigation credits available because we're mitigating on site. And there's a chance that we will have mitigation credits available that could be used by the residents of Imperial when they extend their roadway. 1m erial, basicall , has a stub out to right here on their site. They're going connect to Mar uis Boulevar w c IS om to be on our SI e, an go to the east to et to Livin stan Road. So that's going to e a secon access or Imperial for them to get out of their p~. They're Ao..tng to have to go throug~preserve, so they know they're going to have some mitigation issues. . Toe intent was to have some mitigation credits left over. if possible, tha~~Cl!l_ be us~(;LQy Im.Q.~rial while the;tre constructing their roaaa:i1d:hoQefully. mitigatini-fo.rJh.~ impact orilieir -secondary roadway. We've already agreed to accommodate the drainage from that secondary roadway into our water management syste]l1. ""-So the planning commission thought that the best planning solution for this project was a sidewalk on one side of the roadway, reduce the density which we agreed to take -- we were originally asking for 650 units, and we've reduced that to 550 units -- make any mitigation credits available to the residents of Imperial, and keep us out of the preserves by not requiring us to put a sidewalk on the second site. Page 193 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 45 of 49 September 23, 2003 That planning commission recommendation 9-0 was supported by planning staff They believe that this makes good planning sense to have the sidewalk on one side, and that was the issue that really came up during the planning commission. Again, the solution that I just discussed and was proposed was recommended 9-0 by the planning commission. If you want to get into more details on the petition, we're happy to do that. Wayne could address any questions you have. I can address any questions or Nonn can address any questions. But other than that, that was the major issue, and that's how it was resolved by the planning commission. Again, they recommended 9-0 to implement the conditions we worked through at the planning commission. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Questions by the Board of Commissioners. COMMISSIONER HALAS: What's the width of that sidewalk that you're proposing? MR. YOV ANOVICH: It is a 5-foot wide sidewalk, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Now, this is going to take up the traffic of the school children and also the possibility of residents out of Imperial Golf Estates? MR. YOV ANOVICH: No. The residents of Imperial, I don't believe, are going to be using our sidewalk system, but definitely our internal residents will be using it. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Well, how about if somebody wants to ride a bicycle? MR. YOV ANOVICH: They'll be using our sidewalk or riding the private streets within the project. COMMISSIONER HALAS: I think that we need to put some more width in there. You're saying four feet? MR. yaV ANOVICH: Five. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Five feet. We may need some Page 194 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 46 of 49 September 23,2003 additional width in there to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians at the same time. I would like to listen to the staff members. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Commissioners, I saw a piece on the TV last night that one school, a private school, is pulling out of Collier County because of the cost of impact fees. As I'm always concerned __ I'm always concerned about additional costs being passed onto the consumer. This is one example of something that can work, you know, for this particular case or the school. I hope that everybody would take that under consideration. Do you want to hear from our staff, Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: If they have any input on this, MR. REISCHL: Fred Reischl, planning services. That was an accurate description of what happened at the planning commission last Thursday. Sidewalks was the predominant discussion. From a planning perspective, we can support the reduction to one side, however, transportation services still has a disagreement with that. Diane Flagg is here to address that if you care to hear her. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And what was the main disagreement on the Planning Commission? MR. REISCHL: The discussion centered around the sidewalk Issue. CHAIRMAN HENNING: The planning commission approved it with the amendments. MR. REISCHL: With the sidewalks on one side, right. In fact, that was in their original PUD. Staff removed it for sidewalks on one side, and then the planning commission agreed to put it back in. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any other questions? COMMISSIONER COLETTA: No. CHAIRMAN HENNING: 1'11 close the public hearing. Commissioners, what's the will of the board? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I just wanted to make sure that there was some other issues taken care of. I believe there's a Page 195 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 47 of 49 September 23, 2003 stormwater issue. Did you people -- well, you came to a conclusion with the stormwater issue when the people in Imperial Golf Estates put that road through; is that correct? MR. YOV ANOVICH: Yes. And I thought I addressed that, but if I didn't, Commissioner, we have agreed to accommodate the drainage from the roadway through our water management system. COMMISSIONER HALAS: And then iftl1e!"e~~EJ1Y credits left in mi!igatio,!h we want to?1~keslg~tl.1at it);~Lear -Y9U'JUO!ngJo assist in~ping gettin~iliillack road exit taken care of. MR . We wilJ eive them whatever credits_ we, have left, and hopefully they will be able to use those in permitting the roadway. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Great. I'm glad you're good neighbors.. MR. MUDD: Mr. Chairman, one point that we need to put on the record, just so that you know, is having sidewalks at 5- foot on one side of the cul-de-sac is different than what your Land Development Code presently states. The Land Development Code requires it on both sides. CHAIRMAN HENNING: And the board has the right to deviate from the Land Development Code. Okay. Thank you. Any further questions? Commissioner Halas. COMMISSIONER HALAS: No. Did we get all the staff members' input into this whole equation here? I think we need to get everybody's input into this. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Mr. White, do you have anything on this item? MR. WHITE: No, sir. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Anybody else? COMMISSIONER HALAS: What about Diane Flagg? MS. FLAGG: The point that I would add is you're dealing with 162 acres of dirt out there, and the Land Development Code does Page 196 Agenda Item No. 12C June 24, 2008 Page 48 of 49 September 23, 2003 require sidewalks on both sides. This is a school that they're planning on putting on this site. We have many areas throughout our community where these school children don't have safe pathways to schools. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay. Any further questions? Entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HALAS: We're going to approve - what are we going to approve here? As it stands or are we going to approve it with -- CHAIRMAN HENNING: 'planning commission's recommendations. . COMMISSIONER COLETTA: That's correct. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Okay. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Is that a second, Commissioner Halas? COMMISSIONER HALAS: I'll be a second. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Okay, Motion by Commissioner Coletta. Second by Commissioner Halas. Any further discussion? (No response.) Seeing none, all in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER HALAS: Aye. COMMISSIONER FIALA: Aye. COMMISSIONER HENNING: Aye. COMMISSIONER COYLE: Aye. COMMISSIONER COLETTA: Aye. CHAIRMAN HENNING: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HENNING: Motion carries, 5-0. Thank you. Next item. Item #9C Page 197 Agenda ft~ff,eJooHc June 24, 2008 Page 49 of 49 WrightJeff ..._...____._'._n_.._..._._"____._._,~. _ .._ _._.____.~_ From: Richard Yovanovich [ryovanovich@gcjlaw.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2008 3:59 PM To: WrighUeff Cc: Alex Figares Subject: Royal Palm Academy Planned Unit Developmenl Jeff As you know, our firm represented the property owner in the adoption of the Royal Palm Academy Planned Unit Development (PUD). Herb Ohlers and other representatives of the Imperial Golf Club community approached our client about providing access through the project to Livingston Road. The access is referred to as Marquis Boulevard. Our client did not agree that any access rights already existed. However, our client agreed to provide access to the residents of the Imperial Golf Club community under two conditions. The first condition was that the state and federal permitting must be completed before access could occur. The second condition was that Imperial Golf Club must pay all costs associated with the design, permitting, mitigation and construction of the access. We made it clear to Mr. Ohlers and the olher representatives of the Imperial Golf Club community that the access would be going through a planned preserve and mitigation would be required. I pointed this fact out at the Board of County Commissioners hearing for the PUD, Mr. Ohlers and the other representatives agreed to the conditions. As a result of and in reliance upon the agreement from Mr. Ohlers and the other representatives of the Imperial Golf Club community, the PUD Master plan shows the access. In addition, Section 6,8 0 was incorporated into the PUD to address the permitting, construction and mitigation for Marquis Boulevard. Rich Y ovanovich Goodlette. Coleman, Johnson, Y ovanovich & Koester, P.A. Northern Trust Bank Building 400 I Tamiami Trail N., Suite 300 Naples, Florida 34103 Phone: 239-435-3535 Fax: 239-435-1218 rxmam9vich@gcjl(iw..cQIIl Both Rich Y ovanovich and Goodlene, Coleman, Johnson, Y ovanovich & Koester intend that this message be used exclusively by the addressee(s). This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under ~Jicablc law, Unauthcrized discloourc or use of this information is strictly prohibited If you have r<<eived this communication in moT, please pennanently dispose of the origna! message- and notify Rich Yovanovich immediately at rvovanovichlU!llcilaw_coJDor (239) 435-3535. Thank YOll 6/1 2/2008