The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 09/09-10/2008 Item #17D .' r~G.ENOA. TE -'- SEP n c 2d-f EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I Pg 1 ".r-'.j "lOR -'~~=LL 5 -~ PUDA-2008-AR-12861, Kevin Ratterree of G.L. Homes of Naples II Corporation, "~J represented by Robert Duane, AICP of Hole Montes, Inc., requesting a PUD Amendment to the Terafina POO to change the side yard setbacks for zero lot-line dwellings, as established in Section 6.5, Development Standards, Table 1, of the approved PUD Ordinance, from zero or 12 feet to zero or ten feet. The:!:: 636.8-aere subject property is located in the Terafina PUD, Section 16, Township 48, Range 26, Collier County, Florida OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) consider an amendment to the Terafina Planned Unit Development (PUD) to change the side yard setbacks for zero lot line dwellings from zero or 12 feet to zero or ten feet; and to make celtain that the project is in harmony with the applicable County codes and regulations in order to maintain the community's interests. CONSIDERATIONS: On March 9, 2004, the BCC approved Ordinance No, 2004-15 for the Terafina PUD. On JanualY 23, 2007, Ordinance No. 2007-31, was approved which granted two, two-year extensions for the PUD. The petitioner now proposes to amend the original ordinance to revise the side yard setbacks for zero lot-line dwellings from zero 01' 12 feet to zero or ten feet. The proposed change is shown in a strike-through and underline format in the amending ordinance attached to this report. No other changes to the approved ordinance or to the PUD Master Plan are proposed. FISCAL IMPACT: The rezoning action, in and of itself, will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build out, will maximize its authorized level of development; however, if the PUD is approved, a portion of the existing land will be developed and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. The County collects all applicable impact fees before the issuance of building permits to help offset the impacts of each new development on its public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Growth Managemen1 Plan's (GMP) Capital Improvement Element (CIE) as needed to maintain adopted Levels of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order to meet the requirements of Section 10.02.07(C) of the Land Development Code, SO percent of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project are required to be paid simultaneously with the approval of each flnallocal development order. Other fees collected before the issuance PUDA 2008-AR-12861 1 ";-~,,, .:,t'-' II "0 ...,! '_i' ;" fin p" :::1, r-{{r . 8.~,0D;-;) ~ of a building pelmit include building pelmit review fees and utility fees ass07iatecr'\i~'ftFr.~cc.""'~ connecting to the County's water and sewer system. It should be noted that the inclusion of impact fees and collected taxes are for informational purposes only, and they are not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWfH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMP ACT: The subject propelty is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the GMP. The proposed amendment does not affect the approved density of 1.3 dwelling units pel' acre within the PUD, which is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). As such, staff deems the subject PUDA to be consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT: Affordable housing was addressed at the time of the original rezone and is not affected by this application. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: Enviromnental Services staff has reviewed this amendment to revise the side yard setbacks and has determined that there are no environmental issues associated with it, as all environmental concerns were addressed at the time of the original rezone. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: This petition was not heard by the EAC as no Environmental Impact Statement was required for the proposed amendment. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard this petition at their July 3, 2008 meeting, and voted 8-0 to forward this petition to the BCC with a recommendation of approval. Because this item received a unanimous recommendation of approval and no letters of objection were received from the community, it has been placed on the BCC's Summary Agenda. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is an amendment to the existing Terafina PUD (Ordinance No. 2004-15) which proposes to amend the PUD's side yard setbacks for zero lot-line dwellings. This proposed amendment is quasi-judicial in nature. As such the bmden falls upon the applicant for the amendment to prove that the proposal is consistent with all of the PUDA 2008-AR-12861 2 N~~Et~ SC/';'-J~ ~Q 'tu-"c-'-~ * ~ I criteria set forth below. The burden then shifts to the BCC, should it consider deniai;'that. - ...c.~c-..:: such denial is not arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that the amendment does not meet one or more of the listed criteria. Criteria for PUD Rezones Askyourse(fthefollowing questions. The answers assist you in making a determination lor approval or not. I. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattem of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements, contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided 01' maintained at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. 3. Consider: Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. 4. Consider: The intemal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development? 6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 8. Consider: ConfOlmity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the pmticular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. 9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan? PUDA 2008-AR-12861 3 ,<""" 10. IIJA.GEND, lEt. ./ o _,'~,~__'" "~"----'._-- "F-" "I ...., } \l.t _, ,f >~ ~)fH!~ i Will the proposed PUD Rezone be appropriate considering thi~k~Stlng:filn~f,-?~ f use pattern? 11. Would the requested PUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. 14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, . because of peak volumes 01' projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety? 16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? 17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas? 18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area? 19. Will the proposed change be a dete11'ent to the improvement 01' development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations? 20. Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ("reasonably") be used in accordance with existing zoning? (a "core" question...) 22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county? 23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. PUDA 2008-AR-12861 4 I~-: ,cu I fe, 0~.j-..i'" ')...nDJ,' ~:~~,,-,c"~C'~5 i 25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed PUD -.' rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.106, article II], as amended. 26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the PUD rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem impOltant in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, suhstantial evidence presented by the written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the Board of County Commissioners hearing as these materials relate to these criteria. MMSS RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve PUDA-2008-AR-12861. PREPARED BY: John-David Moss, AICP, Principal Planner Department of Zoning & Land Development Review PUDA 2008-AR-12861 5 AGENDA IIEM'''-- , II", ~'-, , 'I . -...........-.,,-......, S'L'" '..,' : E'f=~.... L~ 5 ~ This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure DE! prollided by Commission members. PUDA-2008-AR-12861, Kevin Ratterree of G.L Homes of Naples II Corporation, represented by Robert Duane, AICP of Hole Montes, Inc., requesting a PUD Amendment to the Terafina PUD to make a minor change to Section 6.5, Development Standards, of the PUD Ordinance to change the side yard setbacks. The subject property is located in the Terafina PUD, Section 16, Township 48, Range 26, Collier County, Florida. f 71) Prepared By: Department Zoning and Land Development Review Date 8127120087:04:59 AM Approved By: Department Approval County Attorney Approved Date 812812008 1 :12 PM Approved By: Department Approval Approved Date CDES 8128120082:13 PM Approved By: Department Approval Date Office of Management and Approved 8128120085:21 PM Budget Approved By: Department Approval Date County Manager's Approved 8/3012008 1 :25 PM Office ATTACHMENTS: a WJ~lLmr:n_t~J.a~pgf Cl s.tafLn~IJ,RQ.f Q t!?J-'J..q.pp"pdf [} tara ord.odf Description: Executive Summary Staff Report Application Ordinance Type: Executive Summary Staff Report Application Ordinance Name: CO~T County AGE A ITEM~ ~;~~~ 1 ~! STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES HEARING DATE: JULY 3, 2008 SUBJECT: PETITION NO: PUDA-2008-AR-1286I, TERAFINA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) APPLICANT: AGENT: Kevin RattelTee G.L. Homes of Naples II Corporation 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 300 Sunrise, FL 33486 Robeli L. Duane, AICP Hole Montes, Inc. 950 Encore Way Naples, FL 34110 REOUESTED ACTION: The petitioner is requesting that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) recommend approval of an amendment to Ordinance No. 2004-15, the Terafina Planned Unit Development (PUD), to change the side yard setbacks for zero lot-line dwellings, as established in Section 6.5, Development Standards, Table 1, of the approved PUD Ordinance, from zero or 12 feet to zero or ten feet. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The :t 636.8-acre subject property is located approximately one mile north of Immokalee Road (CR 846) and 1.25 miles east of 1-75 in Section 16, Township 48, Range 26, Collier County, Florida (see the location map on following page). PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: On March 9, 2004, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved Ordinance No. 2004-15 for the Terafina PUD. The BCC also approved Ordinance No. 2007-31, which granted two, two- year extensions on January 23, 2007. The petitioner now proposes to amend Ordinance No. 04-15 to revise the side yard setbacks for zero lot-line dwellings from zero or 12 feet to zero or ten feet. The proposed change is shown in a strike-through and underline format in the amending Terafina PUDA-2008-AR-12861 July 3, 2008 CCPC Pagel 015 I' '~~:~;A.IT:- I \1 '" lpg=~qh~f-IT-! I..J 0.. <( ~ C) z z o N ~ '" '" N ~ '" < , '" <> <> N , < ""'~"" / z- Cl - => "- .. z 0 I ! ~ E I '. I- 'Ii lh "'~I i w tz t I "- wQ ! ~t;; 00 lIll1l-Vlll :::g 1ItN.II'1'\OII lIlIrJlOO rfltfJllllL I' I il , 0.. ,I 5. <( I ' . ., 0 _lJOI'\\' 'I ~ ! z I: Ii" ~~a 0 z I~. '" "IiI - 0 " I- w I lJWAi"YW)lIlNllCl <( W ~ Il , I. () ! . 5, l~ . 0 '~ " ~~~ ~ ~" ....J ~i . . - I' I' I- Ii IfJI"""NMI IIt-illV.l8la1Nl 1I'lIl1.lllH_"IJlO_~ II .t-IU.VUIlr.UN Ui iI~. -.... . - ,-~ i.J.J c:: y- Li.i CD >:t=> 00 ....0 N 0 .... 0 ct:01O <I:=>O ,00N ~<l:g~ OZN- N- ..1:::: II.L......~ <I:<I:~.. o c:: .0'$ =>W...ns 0.1-0.0 00 o - ~ ll) ------ . . , ~ ~ " << M M K ~ :go I'- It) ~ ~ ~ a . . << 0 ~ 8 " " < < ~ ~ ~ 1; ~ ~ . ,; c; ~ " ~ : ~ :n ;: VI ':i. ill ~ ~ ", 'I l'I ,II z :l 0- 0:" WI- 1-- 11)" ,,:i; :ltlj d ;:; .: :f~~"'i i~~1 .i[ g -, I 0.: '" i I~i "- w ~ c:i ~ '. . '" III ~ 9 e 0 c .- <l- e t... Q) l- ~ ~ffi IU m1f II II ::>~ III CJu I I! . .- ., I\! I o " ~ ~ :j :j 1l rn ~ ~!~~~~ffi~ ~:8:D~Vi~;~ ~ ~ e; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ III t: :( ~ :. S o s ~ , . ~ <@ ~i: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N . ..: ~ ~ ~ [ ~ I 1 . I i !'!' ~ ! Ilhl m 10': O' ~;: lll'. . ;.:J ;' ;,: >- .... ~ ffi'~e; ~ E ~~~ ~ I .8~ ~~ m ~ . ~ ~ P:i ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 . l ~ S l); ~ i5 f ~ . ~ i --- ...........,..... ......._, ...-....._..;......."."'""""",.,\ NAGE1 0,_,_ I ~ , SE? .,... )~~flO' if-G'. Ib, ,d.-, ordinance attached to this report. No othcr changes to the approved ordinanc;;~the .p~ >. ; Master Plan are proposed (however, the PUD document has been revised to delete references to '- .- specific sections of the LDC, as recently directed by the CCPC for all PUD amendments). SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: Vacant and partially cleared land; zoned Parklands PUD, with an approved density of 2.5 dwelling units/acre Vacant land; zoned Mirasol PUD, with an approved density of 0.51 dwelling units/acre, and A (Rural Agricultural) Single-family homes and golf course; zoned Olde Cypress PUD, with an approved density of 2.1 dwelling units/acre Single-family homes of the Quail Creek subdivision; zoned RSF-2 East: South: West: AERIAL VIEW GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject property is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the GMP. The proposed amendment does not affect the approved density of 1.3 dwelling units per acre within the PUD, which is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). As such, staff deems the subject PUDA to be consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Terafina PUOA-200B.AR-12B61 July 3. 2006 eepe Page 2 of 5 ANALYSIS: M SEP 0:] ?W'p I .., , Y{;_~f.d~' S ----=:::..~-:.:::...._,. Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the LDC criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Subections 10.02.13.B.5. and 10.03.05.H, which establish factual bases to support a recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. These evaluations are completed as separate documents, and have been attached to the staff report as Exhibits A and B. In addition to these documents, staff offers the following analysis: Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has reviewed this amendment to revise the side yard setbacks and has detelmined that there are no environmental issues associated with it, as all environmental concerns were addressed at the time of the original rezone. Transportation Planning Review: TranspOltation Planning staff has reviewed tlus project, and has determined that the proposed amendment will not add any new site-generated trips. Therefore, there are no transportation issues associated with this petition. Utilities Review: According to the CUlTent 2005 Water and Wastewater Master Plan Updates, the project location is within the Collier County Water - Sewer District Service Area. All portions of this project to be developed shall be required to comply with current Ordinance 2007-60 and subject to the conditions associated with a Water and Sewer Availability Letter from the Collier County Public Utilities Division at the time of Site Development Plan (SDP). Based on the County's GIS system, there is an existing 16-inch water main on Olde Cypress Blvd, that it is connected to the existing 20-inch water main on Immokalee Road. Per GIS, there is an existing 20-inch force main located on Immokalee Road. However, there is no sewer utility infrastructure available adjacent to this project site. All utilities placed within the extension or continuation of tile Olde Cypress Boulevard would be the sole responsibility of the developer. All water and wastewater utilities constructed or extended within the public right-of-way would be conveyed to, owned by, and maintained by Collier County Water-Sewer District, and in compliance with the most CU1l'ent Utilities Standards Manual. Emergency Management Review: Since the proposed amendment will not increase the number of approved dwelling units, there will be no adverse impacts on the evacuation and sheltering requirements for the County. Zoning Review: As noted in the preceding GMP consistency review, the subject parcel is located in the Urban Residential Mixed Use Subdistrict, which pelmits the uses outlined in the PUD. The subject petition proposes to reduce the side yard setbacks for zero lot-line dwellings by two feet so that these unit types would be attached on one side and have a minimum side yard of ten feet on their opposite side (ratller than a minimum of 12 feet as is currently required). It should be noted, however, that the CCPC has a history of requiring a minimum of six-foot side yard setbacks (so that the combined setback of two structures is a minimum of 12 feet), from which approval of this petition would be an obvious depalture. Neveltheless, the proposed ten-foot standard has been approved for zero lot-line dwellings in all of the PUDs adjoining the subject PUD (Parklands PUD to the north, Mirasol POO to the east, and Olde Cypress PUD to the south), L'1erefore, no Terafina PUDA-2008-AR.12861 July 3, 2008 CCPC Page 3 of 5 compatibility issues would be anticipated. AGE No -,,-- . /II I i\.1 I '" ,SEP, f,',' "-1(1" Q ~?-.t:;f-'i-s- --~-----.:::=:::=:~--_: NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): (Synopsis provided by Cheri Rollins, Administrative Assistant) The meeting was duly noticed and held by the applicant on May 19, 2008 at 5:30 p,m. at the Quail Creek Country Club. Ten people from the public attended, as well as the applicant, his agent and county staff. Bob Duane, the agent for the applicant, presented an overview of the requested PUD Amendment, explaining that it would simply decrease the side yard setback for all zero-lot-line dwellings from the presently approved zero feet to 12 feet to zero feet to ten feet. He stated that this setback would be consistent with other zero-lot-line dwellings in area developments. Kevin Ratterre, with G.L. Homes, stated that the change would enable them to build homes with rooms that were two feet wider, creating a much nicer end-product. One resident in attendance wanted to know if a berm would be constructed between the development and Olde Cypress. Kevin Ratterre with O,L. Homes replied that they would plant Areca Palms. However he stated that who would be responsible for irrigation was still being worked out between G.L. Homes and Olde Cypress and would be resolved at a later date, Another resident wanted to know if fi'ont and rear setbacks would also change, to which Bob Duane answered that only side setbacks would change. Another attendee was particularly concerned about the smoke issues created by the County's issuance of a burning permit, and he wanted to make sure that the CCPC was aware of it. Mr. Ratterree said that the burning had been stopped and that there would be no more burning at the site. Most of residents' concerns were not actually relevant to the proposed PUD Amendment but focused on other changes proposed in their community. For instance, much discussion centered on the Logan Road extension, and the landscaping that would be along it once it was complete. The NIM meeting ended at approximately 6: 15 p.m. As of the writing oftl1is report, staff has received no letters of objection from the conununity. RECOMMENDATION: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends that the Collier County PlaJming Commission forward Petition PUDA-2007-AR-12861 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. APPENDICES: I. Rezone Findings 2. PUD Findings Teralina PUDA-2008-AR-12861 July 3, 2008 CCPC Page 4 of 5 PREPARED BY: ~~Q'~ JO -DAVID MOSS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: ~., OOI~-~ . A O~~STUD'NT-STIRLING ~ ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY ~~M ~ RA OND V. BELLOWS, MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ~ YYJ ,\:!J2~ SUSAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: J S H K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR o MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & IRONMENTAL SERVICES DNISION N~G NO, . -- , SEP G ,; 2nnA L.f'2-=L~_!'J . /---=~-~ ~/~ 00 -- DATE I S-30-oe DATE 6 - 6 - 01S' DATE (o/;/ /O~ . DATE C; /IO/fJ g/ . DATE Tentatively scheduled for the May 27, 2008 Board of County Commissioners Meeting. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: I) "IAc . , (V ('J {', .U----J MARK PI STRAIN, CHAIRMAN Torofino PUDA-2008.AR-12861 Juno 27, 2008 CCPC Page~ ,)f 6 1- 3- 09 DATE REZONE FINDINGS AGEN I' ~ , 1II0s..~.c~i'e~ II fe P!J= i q v {~-:d- "",-,- -.- --'-~__.._~ f PETITION PUDA-2008-AR-12861 Terafina PUD Chapter lO.03,05.G of the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners shall show that the Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following, where applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. As stated in the staff report, the subject property is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). According to the Future land Use Element (FLUE), the uses proposed with the development are allowed by the Subdistrict. Therefore, the project is consistent with the GMP. 2. The existing land use pattern; The subject site is bordered by residential PUDs, the A zoning district, and single-family homes of the Quail Creek subdivision, which is zoned RSF-2. Therefore, the proposed uses are complementary to the existing land use pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; Approval of the subject petition would not create an unrelated isolated district. As noted above, the GMP anticipates the uses plarmed for by the PUD and the surrounding residential uses have a similar density. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The existing boundaries of the subject property are not irregularly drawn. The location map on page two of the staff report highlights the logical boundary of the subject PUD. 5, Whethel' changed 01' changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed PUDA is not imperative. However, the request is reasonable because the proposed design standard for a reduction of two feet for zero lot-line dwellings' side yards has already been approved in all of the PUDs adjoining the subject PUD: Parklands PUD to the north, Mirasol PUD to the east, and Olde Cypress PUD to the south. Page 1 of3 A 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living condi~:Ji. neighborhood; The proposed change to the Terafina PUD will not adversely affect the living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The proposed change will have any impact on traffic congestion as the overall density would remain unchanged. 8. Whether the p,'oposed change will create a drainage problem; The proposed amendment would not change the current approved development plan or intensity of development Therefore, approval of the amendment would not create drainage or surface water problems. Additionally, the LDC and GMP have regulations in place to ensure review for adequate drainage on the proposed PUD. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; The proposed change would not have an adverse impact on adjacent properties in terms of the reduction oflight or air. 10. Whether the pr'oposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results which may be internal or external to the subj ect property. Propelty valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; however zoning by itself mayor may not affect values, since value determination is driven by the market. There is no guarantee that the project would be marketed in a manner comparable to the surrounding developments. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterr'ent to the improvement or development of adjacent p"operty in accordance with existing regulations; The adjacent properties are already almost all developed or have already been rezoned for development. Therefore, the proposal would not be a detel'l'ent to their improvement. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; As stated, the proposed amendment complies with the Urban Residential Subdistrict designation of the GMP. Fmthelmore, land use applications are subject to a public Page 2 00 ! l't '-i-''lUM, I j l:lvl I' o. __~_~____"._"_ , '~~_ r , i:lt:-'\''i!!;.-1 p,,=I~<:;f ~.. IJ D ----itppendix 1 hearing process to insure that they do not constitute a grant of special privilege or are inconsistent with other properties in the vicinity in which they are situated. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; No, the owner would simply like to utilize the ten-foot side yard setback for zero lot-line dwelling units that has been approved for similar units in the adjoining PUDs. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighbol'hood or the County; The proposed amendment conforms to the goals and objectives of the GMP and is consistent with the approved density of adjacent zoning. Therefore it is compatible with the sUl1'ounding propelty. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. The proposed amendment will not change the permitted uses already approved for the subject site; and it was reviewed and deemed compliant with the GMP and the LDC. Therefore, the fact that other adequate sites for the proposed uses exist should not be a determining factor. 16. The ph,'sical chal'acteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration, which would be required to make the property usable for any of the l'ange of potential uses un del' the proposed zoning classification. Any development would require some site alteration and the subject site would have to be cleared to execute the development of the PUD project whether this PUDA were approved or not. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. The proposed PUD amendment will have not have a greater impact on public facilities or services than the existing, approved PUD since the density would remain the same. Page 3 of3 _..---- ~ A(::;C't..'f"^ ,''''''-^' Ap N~_~ 0 EM endi;x2~- -StF' (1) ?nn~ F!J~~L '7 c...f . '--..~-----.-." -----'-~. - FINDINGS FOR PUD PETITION PUDA-2008-AR-12861 Terafina PUD Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Mastel' Plans' compliance with the following criteria: 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, sUlTounding areas, traffic and access, dl'ainage, sewer, water, and other utilities, The project is located within the Urban Residential Subdistrict. The uses in the Terafina PUD are consistent with those permitted in the Subdistrict. The proposed PUD amendment is, therefore, consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The minor changes to the PUD would not affect surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water 01' other utilities. However, it should be noted that the development of the PUD would have to be in accordance with all applicable sections of the Land Development Code (LDC) and Growth Management Plan (GMP) at the time of issuance of any development order. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or fOl' amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may ,'elate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Evidence of unified control was provided with the application. All arrangements for the continuing operation and maintenance of the Terafina PUD were made at the time of the original rezone and would not be affected by this PUDA. 3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The project as proposed is consistent with the Future Land Use Map (FLUM), which designates the subject property as Urban Residential Subdistrict. The subject petition has been found consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the GMP, as stated on page two of the staff report. 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictious on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. Section 4.07.02 of the LDC has specific development requirements for PUD districts to insure that they are compatible with established or planned uses of the sUlTounding Page 1 on I ..AGENOA, 1-... ~f t _ "~~f;""'>'" I \1 0 '...fJL~L<ipf- S-s- A.ppendix 2 neighborhoods. As noted in the staff report, the subject parcel is located in the Urban Residential Subdistrict, which permits the approved uses, Additionally, the proposed side yard setback standard has been approved in the abutting PUDs. As such, the project would be compatible both intel'11ally and extel'11ally. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The minimum 30 percent open space requirement of the LDC would still have to be met if this amendment were approved. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public aud private. No capacity issues would be created by the approval of this petition. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. No flll'ther expansion would be permitted on the Terafina PUD, and approval of this petition would not affect surrounding areas. 8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. Staff has reviewed this petition and found it to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and all the elements of the GMP. The proposed design standard has already been approved for zero lot-line dwellings in all of the PUDs adjoining the subject PUD. As such, no compatibility issues are anticipated. Page 2 of2 ..:.::: ':.~i;i:":,"" ",':":'.:.:,"':",';'::, .,i.",>>...:...."..c. " ~:'-~\"":' .,...'."','i'~. '~~;\~~~~:;K~\;?fji~~t,r)t"':!;'j':',.::: ":~"";;;";J).:;:';"!;;P,<": ,':"",'::_,:::"',".-" .;'.':'.:,':,;,,:,.'" ':;,' ;:-"" ,::",: :" :': .'::,,:,-,; ":", ':;,:,;.:-":::_ '.,.,:';:_::':-'::,; ~:',:"i_"" ::;"::' '/:;'::' '.::: ':'-':,-:,' :,,"'. . '." '.;:, ,:' ;-,: .:',' , .' ','.,". .-.,;,:-...,'....:..:.'...:<-.:....,.:..:.:,:,-.'.::_:.:"...:.,.,0..:::...:::.,.:::".":....:.,>;......,:...:. ,,,',,,":.::.",::.-.::':'.:',..:.'::,\"::..:',"'" :,'c:,::"":','-:-;,:,:":::-:':""';:-::-"':":,",''',_''.':'i""'-:"_,_."'_,' COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT. .. . . DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW' WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET ., .., ... (i) "'::::.",., ,''',-..'< ;';:::'-",:::')i_,:,:::\: ,~, :C,":, . .'. \;;~:".'~> '''",,'''. , .I,.' ., PETITION NO (AR) PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER DATE PROCESSED ASSIGNED PLANNER : PUDA-2008-AR-12861 REV: 1 TERAFINA PUD : Project: 2002050014 Date: 2/7/08 DUE: 3/7/08 NAME OF APPLlCANT(S) KEVIN RATTERREE, V.P. G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES II CORPORATION . ADDRESS 1600 SAWGRASS CORPORATE PKWY, STE 300 CITY SUNRISE STATE FL ZIP 33486 TELEPHONE # 954-753-1730 CELL # FAX # 954-575-5240 E-MAIL ADDRESS:KEVIN.RATTERREE@GLHOMES.COM NAME OF AGENT ROBERT L. DUANE, AICP ADDRESS 950 ENCORE WAY HOLE MONTES, INC. CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34110 TELEPHONE # E-MAIL ADDRESS: 239-254-2000 CELL # FAX # 239-254-2099 BOBDUANE@HMENG.COM BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. Application For Public Bearing For PUD Rezone 01/18107 Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. if necessary. NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: OLDE CYPRESS PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION MAILING ADDRESS C/O CAROL WILSEY, PRESIDENT 88911 JTH AVENUE N #202 CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34108 NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: QUAIL WEST MAILING ADDRESS C/O SANDRA HESSE, PRESIDENT 5950 BURNHAM ROAD CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34119 NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: OLDE CYPRESS MAILING ADDRESS C/O SANDY HOULDSWORTH. ASSOCIATION MGR. 4501 TAMIAMI TR N #300 CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34103 NAME OF.HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: LONGSHORE LAKES FOUNDATION MAILING ADDRESS C/O MARY KAY ESCHBACH, PRESIDENT 11399 PHOENIX WAY CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34119 NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP "'-"";"',',..:.;, .:: v:,:,~:_,;,,,::,:_;,;,:,,.<<,:,,,!:,:,..''';''C-I'!:!::'i:ti:';;::::::'i Disclosure oUnte);'estJl!fa'ijillibon i'}:::~:i::'!?~:~~ij:~~;~:'E~_i:ij~1~~::l,F,C'!" ; '1;':;:;~;:~':Ci:; i::i,!;.,;t::i: a. if the properly is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A Application For Public Hearing For pun Rezoile 01118/07 b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage 01 Ownership NfA c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage 01 Ownership NfA d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Iislthe name of the general and/or limited partners. Name ond Address Percentage 01 Ownership G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES ASSOCIATES II, LTD. BY, G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES II CORPORATION, GENERAL PARTNER (SEE ATTACHED AFFIDAVIT) Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01118/07 STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF BROWARD BEFORE ME, the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared N. Maria Menendez (the -Afflalll"). to me well known to be the person who made end subscribed the following Affidavit. who, upon being first by me duly sworn on oath. deposed and said as follows: 1. Affiant is the ViCe President of G.l. HOMES OF NAPLES II CORPORATION, a Rorida ccrporallon. the sole general partner of G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES ASSOCIATES II, LTD., a Florida limned partnership (Ihe "Partnership") and as such has personal knowledge of the business and affairs of said Partnership and of all facts stated hereunder. 2. The sole general partner of the Partnership Is G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES II CORPORATION. a Rorida ccrporation (the "Corporation"), having an address of 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 300, Sunrise, Florida 33323. (a) The sole shareholder of the Corporation is G.L. HOMES OF FLORIDA HOLDING CORPORATION, a Florida corporalion ("Florida Holdlng"), having an address of 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Sone 300, Sunrise. Florida 33323. (b) The sole shareholder of Rorida Holding is Itzhak Ezratti, having an address of 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway. Suite 300, Sunrise. Florida 33323. 3. The limIted partners of the Partnership are: (a) G.L. HOMES OF FLORIDA LIMITED CORPORA nON, a Florida ccrporation ("Florida Limited"). having an address of 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, sune 300, Sunrise. Florida 33323; and (b) RESIDENTIAl FUNDIN~ CORPORATION. a Delaware ccrporation ("RFC"), having an address of 8400 Nomandale La Boulevard. Sune 250. Minneapolis. Minnesota 55437. (a) The sole shareholder of Florida limited is Florida Holding, having an address of 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 300, Sunrise, Florida 33323. (I) The sole shareholder of Florida Holding is Itzhak Ezrattl, having an address of 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 300. Sunrise. Florida 33323. (b) The sole shareholder of RFC Is RESCAP CORPORATION, having an address of . 8400 Normandale lake Boulevard. sune 250, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55437. (i) The soJe shareholder of RESCAP CORPORATION Is GENERAl MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, having an address of 8400 Nonnandale Lake Boulevard, Suile 250. Minneapolis. Minnesota 55437. 4. This Affidavit is made and given in connection with that certain application for a Development Order Extension for the Terafina PUD by Ihe Partnership. This Affidavit is made under penalties of peljury. In addition, Affiant declares that Affiant has examined this Affidavit and to the best of Affiant's knowledge and belief n is true, ccrrect, and complete. Affiant further declares that Affiant has the authority to execute this Affidavit on behalf of the Partnership. 5. AffIant is executing this Affidavit solely in her capacity as Vice President of the general partner of the general partner of the Partnership, and no resort shall be had to any of AffIant's personal assets on account hereof. 6. This affidavn is being given to ccrrect an In inadvertent inaccuracy contained in paragraph 3(b) of the Affidavit previously delivered to Collier County in connection with that certain application for a Development Order Extension for the Terafina PUD by the Partnership, a copy of whic' is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". G.L. HOMES OF NAPLES ASSOCIATES II, LTD., a Floride limited partnership ~ SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me lhls~ day af March, 2006. Name: n Notary Public, State of Commission Na.: o >"y PO'<\-, Anna B. .Ernst ~~. ';: Co.mmission # DD~514 ~~ \)"" expires July 25, 2009 <~fY' fJ1'"-~TI\)fF_.~,W SOl).3llI}.row Perso.nally known 10. me, ar Produced idenliflCBlion e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual ar individuals, a Carparatian, Trustee, ar a Partnership, list the names af the cantract purchasers belaw, including the afficers, stackhalders, beneficiaries, ar partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N/A Date of Contract: f. If any contingency clause or contrad terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address g. Date subject properly acquired [8J leased 0 Term of lease 05/05/2003 yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Date of option: N/A Date option terminates: , or Anticipated closing date h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contrads for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07 Detailed lel!al description of the property covered bv the application: (If space is inadequate, on separate page.) If request involves change to mare than one zoning distriel, include separate legal description for property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum I" to 400' scale) if required to do so 01 the pre- application meeting. NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the coneellegal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section/T ownship/Range 16 / 48S / I 26E lot: Plat Book Block: Subdivision: Page #: Properly 1.0. #: 00183600000 Meles & Bounds Description: All of Section 16, Township 4BS, Range 26E, Collier County, Florida, less and except the westerly 80 feet thereof. Size of property: 5280 fl. X S260 fl. = Total Sq. Ft. 2,777,280 Acres 636.8 Address/l!enerallocation of subiect property: One mile north of Immokalee Road, north of the Olde Cypress PUD and east of Quail Creek PUD District (LDe 2.03.06): ISJ Residential 0 Community Facilities o Commercial 0 Industrial :-".:-::;:.::.':_I~~~li~li!f_~;~!~~14J!tll~~j1i~:;<~Wff: ;)~f~~~~Th:~m~M~i[,:t2~:~;:~~t\t:]~~~4~!~i~~~ Zoning land use N PUD Parklands S PUD/Olde Cypress E PUD Marasol Vacant Residential/Golf Course Vacant WPUD Quail West/Golf Course Does the owner of the subject properly own properly contiguous to the subject properly? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous properly. (If space is inadequate, allach on separate page). Section/Township/Range N/A / / lot: Plat Book Block: Subdivision: Page #: Properly I.D. #: Metes & Bounds Description: Application For Public Hearing For POO Rezone OllIS/O? EVALUATION CRITERIA Nt>. TERAFlNA POO AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NO. 04-15 ~Fr- L.>' I ~1?1~~ 10. rJs.--s' POO Rezone Considerations (LDC Section IO.02.13.B) ]. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic access, drainage, sewer, water and other utilities. Based on the background information contained in the cover letter to this Application, the 850 dwelling units permitted by the Terafina PUD Ordinance are consistent with the density rating system or a density of:l: 1.35 dwelling units per acre, whereas, up to four (4) dwelling units per acre are allowed by the Future Land Use Element (see also attached Executive SummUlY from the BCC Agenda for January 23, 2007 concluding the same in the review of their zoning extension request). As noted in the cover letter this Application was not acted upon because of tolling considerations and the clock for commencement of the life of the zoning began in August of 2007. In summary, there are no GMP Provisions adopted since the BCC last reviewed the petition in 2007 that would result in an inconsistency with the GMP. Therefore, the proposed request to reduce the side yard setback for zero lot lines from 12 feet to 10 feet can be found consistent with the foregoing request. Due to the limited nature of this l'eview many of the foregoing criteria are not applicable. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. The Application of these criteria has been satisfied with the Statement of Unified Control, submitted with this Application. Evaluation Criteria Items 3 thru 7 are Not Applicable to this Application. H:\1995\1995087\WP\PUD Terafina PUDA for set back change ZOO8\EV ALVA T10N CRlTF...RlA.doc ~"',.,...::~: ,lai~~~l~!_Il~i(~ill~i~}i~i~li..m~j This application is requesting a rezone from the Present Use of the Properly: Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the properly: ~oning district(s} to the ~oning district(s}. Original PUD Name: Ordinance No.: SEE ATTACHED RESPONSE TO THE EVALUATION CRITERIA I Pursuant to Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County land Development Code, staff's analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. PUD Rezone Considerations flOC Section 10.02.13.B\ 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pallern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of ony proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to . arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. 3. Conformity of the proposed PUO with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. (This is to include identifying what Sub-district, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that Sub-district, policy or other provision.) 4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. 6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas 10 accommodate expansion. Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 0 III 8/07 8. ConFormity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modiFications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modiFications of justiFied as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to liieral application of such regulations. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded From enforcing deed restrictions, however, mony communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use oetitions on the subied DroDerfv: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? 0 Yes ~ No If so, what was the nature of thot hearing? NOTICE: This application will be considered "open" when the determinatian of "sufficiency" has been made and the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered "closed" when the petitioner withdrows the application through written notice or ceases to supply necessary information to continue processina or otherwise actively pursue the rezonina for a oefiod of six (6) months. An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and an application "closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrown. An application deemed "closed" may be re- opened by submitting a new application, repoyment of all application fees and granting of a determination of "sufficiency". Further review of the project will be subject to the then current code. (LDC Section 10.03.05.Q.) Application FOT Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07 AFFIDAVIT #" A/,4 Pk€!: .4.s.SpcII4'/2'$:U; -"".-A being first duly sworn, depose and say that owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data, and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application. are honest and tme to the best of our knowledge and belief We/I understand that the information requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form. whether computer generated or County printed shall nor be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete. and all required information has been submitted. As property owner We/lfurther authorize Robert L. Duane to act as our/my representative in any matters regarding this Petition. Typed or Printed Name of Owner ~~ ,v.~ Signature of Property Owner *' (i.t.. i-IOIl<{[S ,F NA",",s ASSQ",A'T.?~ :zr, L.T~. ~75y:t:i.-".H"MES ~FJ,J,1"<€s"ZC:Cl.eA?.MT1o'1 t$~~ JIy-.. ~III'" Z:1r7U.eU. jI,~ ?~ .~~ Typed or Printed Name of Owner Signature of Property Owner The foregoing instrume'J{ was acknowledged before me this ;; f- day of ~"U ~/''1 20()i, by jce,,~.; 14/(t!"'(L<!'C' who is personally known to me or has produced - as identification. - State of Florida County of Collier ~ LL?-&.. (SigtGture of Notary Public - State of Florida) ,,\\\\lIIIIIIIIi/1 ",\,~Cl\.. DElUc}ll~ :$ ~",..~.........:1 ~ .~ G/~bSION(~_... 'l Notary Stamp ~.. ~ 25 17"" .. ~ ~ ."'0r::3 ~~('j '<0 .~.. ~ :::: :::... ~ -'ojJ'>~*= =:: .~~ .. ::. -.. .- "- -*".. ..""C- ~ t iD04~5S00 :/lg .~~;.. ~ 8on~~~#~"~~ ~-?1>......qI}'PubIiCU~;'..~ ~ 1'1. rp"....u....~<:(,.f::J~ 1'/1/ veLie Sit:>. ~\",'''' IflUtlllht\\\\\'\ The property described herein is the subject of an application for a ( PUD) zoning. We hereby designate Robert L. Duane, legal representative tbereof, as the legal representatives of the property and as such, tbese individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to. the hiring and authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning approval on the site. These representatives win remain the only entity to authorize development activity on the property until such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to Collier County. COVENANT OFUNIflED CONTROL her~by swear or affirm that we arc the fee simple titleholders and owners of record as TERAFINA run 7340 .oI.IlE CYPRESS BLVD. (Street address and City, State and Zip Code) and legally described in Exhibit A attacbed hereto. The undersigned recognize the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the project: I. The property will be developed and used in confonnity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed on the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the plalU1ed unit development rezollmg. 2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions. safeguards, and stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in part, unless and until a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County. 3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a failure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or safeguards provided for in the planned unit development process will constitute a violation of the Land Development Code. 4. All tenns and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and restrictions which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within the planned unit development must be consistent with those terms and conditions. 5. So long as this covenant is in force, Collier County can., upon the discovery of noncompliance with the tenns, safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel compliance. The County will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit development and the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with all terms, conditions and safeguards of the planned umt deVelOpmen~ ~ I t/.!? Owner t>>LII"...~t'AlAll+t ASt'p",A;H.2L, o-U, +_ n,>- ... ~i': ..t'-. ,q."'eJ ,.. )/;lIIf,~.1l" c..K/""~,7.AI. &-~ fik.-.. -p)5Y'ed' .I::P"'41 ;&~<-, Vf."I'j(FI'},4-, Printed Name nnt [Name STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this ~ day of f!e<lIA) /(/J 1T e,u. 6'~ ~N",q,.('( . 20~ by wbo is p!,rsonally known ~ me or has produced ~jt1~_ N~P't!"I)II() / 6eLvut.- (Name typed, printed or stamped) .\\\HUIJJHJ~ as identification. """CJl.l'\Ol Dt:1 :~//;. ~ If....... 4V.....~ ~ ..:~~MISSJo;:-.l..-1'~ s . V" '''p;_ io'!: ~ ..~-..1l)lry.2,f."tO-_ ~ .:::*: <<,.rq-- ~~~::; :: : $rn: :: -Z. -... ._ %'3:., #DD4BSSoo i* ~ ~~...% 61.... l~~ 'i:7;o.~4:psqthlU.:.~. &~ ~ v;..;WCI.tn~:-..&:.~ ~J: OZIC ....... it '"~ ~ .''1111'; srATEO\\,,\\~ Application For Public HearinlifW\in-~ ReZOne 01/1&107 (Serial Number, if any) PUD REZONE (PUDZ) PUD 10 PUD REZONE (PUDZ-A) PUD AMENDMENT (PUDA) APPLICATION SUBMlTT AL CHECKLIST , SEF fiR::>' ' !jI ===-..:7 THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMlrrED WlrH APPtlCA TION, PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W /COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION. . NOTE, INCOMPLETE SUMBITT ALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. #OF NOT REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRE!> 1,~t;~fi!!}j."I!p.:mllg!lLI!.EM~.N~-j;)~~,f{,~'%~~WXi[~f,~fi;1Itci;;;'~',y'."";;:',,:,'" .,.,'), .'-" " '.--'-, ,.... 1 Addifionals:et if localed in the BayshorefGateway Triangle X RedeveloDment Area) Copies of defailed description of why amendment is necessary 24 >C i Comoleted ApDflcotion (download from web site for current form) 24 X' PrG~appncatiOn meeting notes 24 y PUD Document & Conceottlol Site Plan 24't x 36" and One 8 Y2'. x 11" COOY 24 X Revised Conceptual She Pion 24" x 36"ond One a y,," x 11" CO()V 24 'X Original PUO docvmenl and Mos.er Pion 24" x 36" ~ ONLY IF AMENDING 24 THEPUD Revised ruo document with changes crossed thru & underlined . 24 )(' Revlsed PUD document wi amended TUle poge w/ord #'s, tDe lO.02.13.A.2 24 V - .1>. . _~.: ", ~~~,;; ~lltit~~I~I~~~~!l{%:1.~~~r.i~tr#~$1~~@~~i.L~~~ Deeds/legal', & Survey Hf boundary of orIginal PUO Is amended) 2 x'" Ust ldentlfying Owner & all porties of corporotion 2 ,>( Owner / Affidavltslgned & notorized 2 X Covenant of Unifred Control 2 X Completed Addressing checknst 2 X Environmentol Impad Stotement (EfS) and digitol/electroni<: wpy of EIS or 'I- exemotion iustiUcotlon 3 Historical Surveyor woiver request 4 X Utility Provisions. Statement w/sketches 4 >< Architectural renooringof proposed structures 4 X Survey, signed & seoled 4 X.- Traffic lrnpact Statement (TIS) or waiver 7 z5 Aerial photographs (token within the previous 12 months min. sc'oled 1"=200'), soowino FlUCCS Codes, leaend, and orolOO bovndory 5 Eledronk copy of all documents in Word format cnd pIons. (CORom O( X Disken.l 1 ;M~~~~;1l,1~!!'!i~fl~~8;€~~1i~~ic~~i,(i!opm~rii!g~~,~~11';1;.rp.[~ai".. .. . .. 0 EDC "Fast Troclt:.. must submit opproved copy of offfcial 2 x: application D Affordable Hous.lng "Expedited" m!Jst submit copy of s.igned Certtficate of Aoreement. If located in RFMU fRural Frlnae Mixed Use) Recelvino lond Areas Applk:ont must conted Mr~ Gerry ). locovero, SIDte of Florida Oiviston of Forestry @ 239~690~3500 for Information regarding "Wildfire Mltigotion.& Prevention Plan", lDC Sadion 2.03.08..A~2.a.(b)i.c. -2- G:\Current\Pre-Application Forms 2006\PUD Rezone. PUD Amendment PUD to PUD Rezone pre-app 050404,doc P~~~~fE~ pUPlp'p , -; :'(':-<~:;i''!"'' THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W (COVER SHEETS A IT ACHED TO EACH SECTION. 24 [gJ 24 [gJ 24 0 24 [gJ 24 [gJ 24 [gJ 2 [gJ 2 [gJ 2 [gJ 2 [gJ 2 NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBIIT ALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. REQUIREMENTS #OF COPIES ;~~~'ijJ1l;ff~.iR~1I~Q;U"ijt~~~jJ~~;~~~H0~j~~~i~;lYjf:\~~0i)%~~I~~f~(;;F42~~~~~!~~:I~~YJf~~~!f~i1:]~~f~~~~~'i~f 1 Additional set if located in the BayshorejGateway Triangle Redevelopment Area) Copies of detailed description of why amendment is necessary Completed Application with ltst of Permitted Usesj Development Standards T oblej List of proposed deviations from the lDC (if any); list of Developer Commi1ments and Statement of Compliance narrative (download application from website for curren' form) Pre-op lieation meeting notes PUD Conce tual Master Site Pion 24" x 36" and One 8 Y2" x 11" co y Revised Conce tuol Master Site Plan 24" x 36"and One 8 V2" x 11" cop O,;glnol PUD documenl!ordinonce and Moster Plan 24" x 36" - ONLY IF AMENDING THE PUD Revised PUD application with changes crossed thru & underlined Revised PUD 0 Iieation w amended Title po e word #'s, LDC 10.02.13.A2 i~~\ . ~: .,~; ~ ~m!"< q :;. ~t7P, ' ~~ "~B'":'. Deeds/legal's & Survey (if boundary of original PUD is amended) list identifying Owner & all parties of corporation Owner/Affidavit signed & notari2ed Covenant of Unified Control Completed Addressing checklist I~'it~. .~,;~R" 1!"]lt:~u~~i)~4tf'"" ~;~~~~~'~'"E11~.~~ " Environmental Impact Statement (EtS) and digitalj electronic copy of EIS or exemption justification Historical Surveyor waiver request Utility Provisions Statement w/sketches Architectural rendering of proposed structures Survey, signed & sealed Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) or waiver Recent Aerial Photograph (with habitat areas defined) min scaled 1 "-400' Electronic eopy of off documents in Word format and plans (CDRom or Diskette) 24 24 4 4 4 4 4 7 5 1 REQUIRED [gJ [gJ o o o o o o o [gJ If located in RPMU (Rural Prinae Mixed Use) Receivina land Areas Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. laeoveroJ State of Florida Division of Forestry @ 239-690.3500 for information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan", LDC Section 2.03.0B.A.2.o.(b)i.c. ~ ~ 71J',pt/ .2.~/ 2~~B Applicant! Agent Signature Date Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01 II 8/07 NOT REQUIRED o o o [gJ o o o o o o o [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ [gJ o "'.'.-,.:..:':"-',:,' ~.:. : , :,:. . " :. ',:.' ::": .- NM HOLE MONTES ENG'NEERS. PlANNERS. SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 950 Encore Way. Naples, Florida 34110' Phone: 239.254.2000' Fax: 239.254.2099 AGENDA '.EM --.-.,.,;., FeblUary 6, 2008 SfP (l "'1'1',"'-' .~ ,,' r.; '. Pg3.) * 'Ly~ \ ---"~"'~-,~.= ' ~~ Mr. James Seabasty Collier County Government Community Development Services 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 PUDA-2008-AR-12861 REV: 1 TERAFINA PUD Project: 2002050014 Date: 217108 DUE: 3/7/08 RE: Terafina POO Amendment Ordinance No. 04-15 HM File No. 1995.087 Dear Mr. Seabasty: Enclosed are 24 copies of an application to amend the Terifina POO Ordinance No. 04-15. An application fee in the amount of $8,992.00 (less the $500.00 Pre-Application Fee) is enclosed to process the petition. The pre-application meeting notes are attached. THE REOUEST The request is to make a minor change to Section 6.5 Development Standards of the POO Ordinance to change the side yard setback from 0-12 feet to 0-10 feet for zero lot line dwelling units. The same standard is in effect in the Olde Cypress POO to the south of the subject property for zero lot line dwelling units. The ParkIands POO to the north ofthe subject property also allows 0-10 setbacks for zero lot line dwellings. There are no other changes to the POO Ordinance proposed. Because of the limited nature of the proposed request staff review should be generally confined to the proposed change to the development standard contained in Section 6.5 of the POO Ordinance. An Ordinance is attached in a format acceptable to County Staff that amends the existing POO Ordinance for Terafina to minimize changes to the existing POO Ordinance. BACKGROUND The property is located in the Urban Mixed District/Urban Residential Subdistrict as depicted on the Future Land Use Map. This allows a gross density of up to 4.0 dwelling units per acre or a maximum of2586 dwelling units. The 850 dwelling units approved for the TerafinaPUD results in a gross density of 1.3 dwelling units per acre. The gross density is, therefore, consistent with the FLUE. 1\I.....l..~ . i:"r1 u""...... \I"",;"... 6,2008 Seabasty Terafina POO Amendment HM File No. 1995.087 N~~E Al'~f ~-""'- f ---:-"~'"'-,:, : Sf" u ..,1-' ....0:"'.'-..,..:.::. ".;. If< ~4-r~--: =.lI=:...",:::c:: ~s_) The POO also allows for 5,000 S.F. of Convenience CommerciallNeighborhood Village Center Uses, located within the Recreational Center/Neighborhood Village Commercial Center depicted on the POO Master Plan, and is also consistent with the Future Land Use Element and POO Neighborhood Village Center Subdistrict. (See attached POO Ordinance and Master Plan.) The POO Master Plan designates the following uses for the general use designations on the Master Plan: Use Percenta~ 1. Residential 167.87 26.83 2. Neighborhood Village/Recreation Site 7.21 1.13 3. Right-of-Way 45.25 7.11 4. Lakes 86.94 13.65 5. Preserve 67.32 10.57 6. Preserve Flow Way 210.42 33.05 7. Open Space 51.71 8.12 Total 636.72 100% The POO also allows for a full range of residential land uses including single-family detached zero lot lines, two-family and duplex dwellings, single-family attached and townhouse dwellings, and multi-family dwellings. Recreational facilities are also allowed and a large preserve area is contained in the POO comprising ""267 acres as can be seen from the table above and on the attached POO Master Plan. On May 4, 2006, the BCC entered into an amended and restated Developer Contribution Agreement (DCA) with the property owner for the extension of Logan Boulevard between Vanderbilt Beach Road and lmmokalee Road; this improvement was completed in 2007. The agreement upon completion of the road vests the property for concurrency purposes for ten (I 0) years from the execution of the DCA or until May of2016. In January of 2007 the petitioner requested two two-year extensions of the extension of the zoning for Terifina. The BCC at this time agreed that the date for triggering the beginning of the "life" of the zoning was at such a time as a non-appealable permit from the South Florida Water Management District was issued for the subject property as the subject property was in litigation at that time. This litigation was ultimately resolved on Augnst 7, 2007 by SFWMD Permit Modification No. 11-02055-P (a copy of the permit is attached). Therefore, for sunsetting purposes the subject property's zoning life began in Augnst of2007. Sunsetting for the property will not commence until August of 201 0 based on the foregoing. At the present time Collier County has approved subdivision plats for the subject property and development will be commencing shortly. H:\1995\1995087\WP\PUD Terafina PUDA for set back change 2008\1S 0801 15 app cover ItT.doc ." J February 6, 2008 Mr. Jim Seabasty Terafma POO Amendment HM File No. 1995.087 SEP' f, '. o'i1"'>' -3..> .:r ",I " , , [11 <'-'0 _.5:) i -_.-.-,-~._-- "~._-::'."...~-_.-!' CONCLUSION The Terafina POO is consistent with Collier County Growth Management. Therefore, the proposed change to the setback requirements for zero lot line dwellings can also be found consistent with the GMP. Furthermore, the reduction in the setback proposed for dwellings in Section 65 of the Terafina POO, as noted, is the same as the Olde Cypress POO south of the subject property and in the Longshore Lakes POO to the north. In further support of the request, the only similar standard in the LDC for zero lot lines is found in the clustering provisions of the LDC in Section 4.02.04 C.z. This design standard table for the remaining side to the zero lot line is also ten (10) feet, the same as proposed in this Amendment request. While Terafina is not a clustered development per say, it does provide for do 277 acres of uplands and wetlands to be preserved out of the total site area of do 637 acres. The proposed adjustment to the zero lot line setback to 10 feet on one side of the lot is an appropriate standard for this planned unit development based on the foregoing. Also be advised that while the POO criteria in the attached application generally are addressed including the rezoning criteria, many of these criteria are not applicable to the proposed request due to the limited nature of this request. We are enclosing the following: . Twenty-four (24) copies of a cover letter outlining the requested amendment, this is the original. . Twenty-four (24) copies of the Application for Public Hearing for an Amendment to POO (POOA) (including the Evaluation Criteria Response). . Twenty-four (24) copies of the LDC Section 10.03.0S H Rezone Findings Response. . Twenty-four (24) copies of the Pre-Application Meeting Notes dated October 17, 2007 with J.D. Moss presiding. . Twenty-four (24) copies of the POOEX-2006-AR-9610 Executive Summary dated January 23,2007. . Twenty-four (24) copies of the existing POO Document and POO Site Plan on 24" X 36" paper, one copy on 8-1/2" X 11" paper. . Twenty-four (24) copies of Revised POO Ordinance changes crossed through and underlined, Title Page w/Ord #'s, LDC 10.02,13.A.3. . Twenty-four (24) copies oftl1e South Florida Water Management District Environmental Resource Permit Modification No. 11-020SS-P dated Angust 7, 2007. H:\! 995\1995087\ WP\PUD Terafina PUDA for set back change 2008\JS 080115 app cover Itr.doc 6,2008 " SEP :lPs3l:-. -'-:<"'_':~':"':""":""""= Jim Terafina POD Amendment HM File No. 1995.087 . Two (2) copies of the Deed. . Two (2) copies of the List identifying Owner and All Parties of Corporation. . Two (2) copies of the Owner/Affidavit signed and notarized. . Two (2) copies of the Covenant of Unified ControL . Two (2) copies ofthe Addressing Checklist. . Four (4) copies of email dated January 16, 2008 to John-David Moss requesting the utility review be waived for this application. . One (I) CDRom containing the above listed documentation. Thank you for your consideration in this matter and if I can provide you any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, R:~?ld~ Robert L. Duane, A.LC.P. Planning Director/Associate RLD/mmm Encl. cc: Mr. Kevin Ratterree H:\J995\19950B7\WP\PUD Terafina PUDA fOT set back change 2008\.JS 080115 app cover Itr.doc I l COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT ------ DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW WWW.COLlIERGOV.NET (i) 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE D NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 403-2400 FAX (239) ~D N~~ND J .-----._---~ IVE SEP!) M:? _21eK -----=:::::=:: -.' PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES o PUD Rezone (PUDZ) o PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDZ-A) ~PUD Amendment (PUDA) I / /OJ, L/,'/lYl Date: (() '7 Time: _ f- V() /' / 1U- A.--h Y>.A- Firm: if U.r /AAtf~ / !3J/? ( l?~ Proiect Name~ PUD 4[, ~$ If j1!~(!.f lJ Size of Project Sit!; fa 3> 7 acres Applicant Name: Phone: Owner Nama: Phone: iVr--fl r' /l ~ /t-w.i 4i 3C() Owner Address: L!I< V V ofll",Jg1'Cl.fS (JNl'- r 1 dCily~te_Pt- ZIP 3, 3.3 2...-5 Existing PUD Name and Number ~f, ~ PV'D ( () rJ - 0 tf - / s) ,JD MfiJJ Assigned Planner Meeling Attendees: (allach Sign In Sheel) Submlltal requirement. (se.enexl'page .checklist): PUDA-2008-AR-12861 REV: 1 TERAFINA PUD Project: 2002050014 Date: 2/7/08 DUE: 3/7/08 -1 - G:\Current\Pre-Application Forms 2006\PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment PUD to PUD Rezone pre-app 050404.doc PUD REZONE (PUDZ) PUD 10 PUD REZONE (PUDZ-A) PUD AMENDMENT (PUDA) APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST SEP !Pe' ~S =.~~ ".. - --- "~l (j: F-- THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WlrH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LlsrED BELOW W!COVER SHEETS AfTACHED TO EACH SECTION. NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED REQUIREMENTS (,S:f;\l(NQ:ffl!pm~Qjjlii:i;MEN;tSi:':~1,iiff;~,1)i(;';;,W,~!:;;i'q:%',; ',."" " 1 Additional set If locoted in the Bayshore{Galeway Triangle Redevelonmenl Area) Copies of detolled description of why amendment is necessory Comoleted Apol1cotlon (download from web site for current form) Pre.opolication meeting notes PUD Document & Conceotual Site Plan 24" x 36" and One 8 V2" x 11 >t copy Revised Conceotual SIte Plan 24" x 36"and One 8 \12" x 11" copy Orlglnal rUD document and Master Pion 2.4" x; 36" ONLY IF AMENDING THE PUI> Revised PUD document witl1 chanaes crossed thnJ & underlined Revised PUD document w/omended Title pone wIard #'s, toe 10.02.13.A.2 ;~~~~!>>gttf,~~~ml1i!{ij_~m'f,~~~1~~;?;f;~~~i~~~~~i[~~i1.~~ft8:~N.~f~J!!~:;t~~~~~~j~,~~~ Deeds/legal's & Survey (If boundary of original PUD Is amended) Ust Identifying Owner & 011 portles of corporation Owner / Afftdovlt signed &. n.otarlz.ed Covenant of Unified Control Completed Addressing checklist Environmen1ollmpoct Stotement (EIS} and digilal/electronic copy of EIS or exemDtion justiflcatlon Historical Sv(vey or waiver request Utility ProvIsions Statement w/sketches Architectural rendering of proposed structures Survey, signed & sealed Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) or waiver Aerial photogropl'ls (token wlrhln the previous 12 months min. scaled 1"=200'), showina FLUCCS Codes, legend, and mated boundary Electronic copy of all documents. in Word format and plans (CDRom or Diskeltol ;:~.~~~~~~t~w;~Wl~~~~t~~.#~h"~.~.~~!~~y.~!o.p-Jj1'~.~t:9~~,:~'~ibP.!~H.~d'-:'. -.. ':.' .. o EDe "fast Track" must submit approved copy of official application o Affordobl& Housing "Expediled" must submit copy of signed Certificate of Aoreement. If located in RFMU {Rural Frinae Mixed U~e\ Rp-celvina land Areas Applicant must conlod Mr. Gerry J. loco.....ero, Stote of Florida Division of Forestry @ 239~Q90~3500 for InfQrmation regordlng "Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan", LDC Sedion 2.03.08.A.2.a.{b)i.c. #OF NOT COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED X 24 X 74 V 24 Y 24 V 74 '>< 74 24 ':X 74 V 2 Y 2 ;< 2 X 2 X 2 X 3 y.. 4 X 4 >< 4 V 4 X/ 7 ;3 5 1 X 2 x:. - 2- G:\Current\Pre-Application Forms 2006\PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment PUD to PUD Rezone pre-app 050404,doc I Fee., Application Fee. 0 $10,000 (PUD Rezone) + $25 per acre {or fraction thereof) GEN o $8,000 (PUD to PUD) + $25 per acre (or fraction thereof) 11I0 - _.l!A '-', -U ,,' . ~$6,000 (PUD Amendment) + $25 per ocre (or froction thereof) SFP .] / )!f!P 0' $150.00 Fire Code Review :_P!l ". 5 c n $2,250.00 Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review -,-~=J, c. .?"" ) )9... $500.00 Pre.applicotlon fee (Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the last pre-app meeting shall not be credited towards application fee6- and Q neW pre.application meeting will be required. ~ $729.00 legal Advertising Fee for eepe meeting (to be reconciled upon receipt of Invoice from Naples Dally ~ News). . l3I., $363.00 legal Advertising Fee for Bee meeting o $2500.00 Environmental Impact Statement review fee ~ Property Owner Notification fees. Property Owner Notifkanons $1.00 Non~cerlifjedi $3.00 Cerfjfied return receipt mail (to be paid after receipt of Invoice from Dept. of Zoning & Development Review) T ronsportotion Fees, if required: o $500.00 Melhodology Review Fee, if reqUirer) ;:4 o $750.00 Minor Study Review Fee, If required )JIN-'p o $1,500.00 Maior Study Review fee, if required / '7 Fee T 0101 $ PLANNER MARK IF NEEDED TO BE ROUTED TO REVIEWERS BELOW: Comments should be forwarded to the Planner rior to the due date SCHOOL DISTRICT PARKS & REC - Amanda Townsend SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS IMMOKALEE WATER/SEWER DISTRICT DR/EM1 - EMER. MGMT - Jim Von Rintein UTILITIES ENGINEERING - Zamlra Deltoro COES Coordinator - Linda B. Route Sheet onl I .. ~ ~~?~~ M<i L1)~ii5cJ-Y\l-e~~~ Meeting Note~-= I ~Aj~oAsi ihdwi;~ bJl~ AI> ~A? K.,nE5 #r77I6 -?/NG:7 -3- G:\Current\Pre-Applicatlon Forms 2006\PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment PUD to PUD Rezone pre-app 050404.doc ~ "~.::' +:f Q1 dol ~ d o ':1 5 ~ p.. Sio< 1 4) , ~ ~ [; rIJ. ~ Z "". '""" '(fJ <0~ q: ~ ';; <ll t:>! - C <ll E a.. Qi o c -; :> ~ 0 c 2l -g .! c '0 ~ @ tll Ul C Ul 'c E ~ 3! .... > o c _ 'tl c C <ll ~ E ,2- 1: v; C Ul a.. <ll <ll ~ C 'tl -0 <l: w :E <( z ti w .., o ~ 0.. Ul Ul o ,_ :E C -0 ~ ';; w o C . c ~ I-.... o M -, C'I Ii! :i w 0 Z M Z ~ <l: <ll ..... ..I:l Do E a :;) w Z Z <ll C> C Vi 0 ~ f. fl t 'l;t~ ~ ',.,:~,:"..."., '-~;"'< ;: ;.~...ij,'< VI "iI W ~ C c <l: ..... <( ~ w 0:: w. lQ ::E ~ Z uJ Z o :x: 0.. .. ~ "" ^I '-l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ \ ~ N) 0 ('l) \ cY\ N '2 t\) w ::E <l: Z ---. z O::E -0:: VI_ >u. o ~ o >- I- Z ::> o u p OAI~.-I;' 'y ,.:....-;nll:; , J~ I ~ Sl ~ N ~ - "" -0 :g '> l'! o o "0 tJj W I '" ;f Z <9 ~ :'l ~ c l'! :; Sl o Fees; Appllcotion Fee, o $10,000 (PUD Rezone) + $25 per acre (or fraction thereof) o $8,000 (PUD to PUD) + $25 per acre (or fraction thereof) . J:a:$6,000 (PUD Amendment) + $25 per acre (or fraction thereof), ~ $150.00 Fire Code Review ' ~ $2,250.00 Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review ~... $500.00 Pre-appllcation fee (Applicalions submitted 9 months or more afler Ihe dale of the lasl pre-app meeting shan n01 be credited towards application fees and a new pre~application meeting will be required. ~ $729.00 Legal Advertising Fee for CCPC meeting (to be re<ondled upon receipt of Invoice from Naples Dally News). 8C $363.00 Legal Advertising Fee for BCe meeting o $2500.00 Environmental Impact StateIMnl review fee ~ Property Owner Notification fees. Property Owner NotifIcations $1.00 Non-certiFiecli $3.00 Certiliecl return receipt mail ( 10 be paid after receipt of Invoice from Dept. of Zoning & Development Review) - Transportation Fees, If required: o $500.00 Methodology Review Fee, if reqUireB -i. o $750.00 Minor Study Review Fee, 11 required jUlN o $1,500.00 Malar Study Review Fee, if required ~ SEP n., .., Ii'~; zonR Pg_ 4 / <-+~ ~--=::::-.;.::;-= L; Fee T alai $ PLANNER MARK IF NEEDED TO BE ROUTED TO REVIEWERS BELOW: Comments should be forwarded to the Planner rior to the due date SCHOOL DISTRICT PARKS & REC - Amanda Townsend SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS IMMOKALEE WATER/SEWER DISTRICT DRlEM1 _ EMER. MGMT - Jim Von Rintein UTILITIES ENGINEERING - Zamira Deltoro CDES Coordinator - Linda B. Route Sheet onl [ Meeting Notes NI~ Ai; ~Ar.K';-,m5 #rTlI6 "7/~G:': -3- G:\CurrentIPre-Application Forms 20061PUD Rezone, PUD Amendment PUD to PUD Rezone pre-app 050404.doc Details ~.,'... ,. .< [------- -_.~-----_.....-- . Property Record r-"-A~~i';I--][-Sketch~~-____L.....__..__ ~ Folio No.~ 00183600000 Current Ownership Property Addre.sll7340 OLDE CYPRESS BLVD Owner Name GLH DEVELOPMENT lUP Addresses SU1TE 300 1600 SAWGRASS CORPORATE PKWY cityl SUNRISE Stat. I FL LOg.11I16 48 26 ALL. LESS W 80FT II Section ~ Township Ranglt Acres 16 48 26 636.79 Sub No. il 100 ACREAGE HEADER ~ Use Cods 99 I NON-AGRICULTURAL ACREAGE Map No. 3B16 -1J 122 2007 Preliminary Tax Roll (Subject to Change) N~ ' - MJ' SfP '/f/i. I~.!:IL-;;_ Lf'J...~~ ' ~ ZIpll33323 .. 2891 Strap No. 482616001.0D03B16 Latest Sales History If all Vah.tCl& shown below equal 0 this parcel was created after the Final Tax Roll I~and Value $ 17,629,870.00 (+) Improved Value $ 0.00 = Market Value $17,629,870.00 H SOH Exempt Vafue $ 0.00 (=)Assessed Value $17,629,870.00 H Homestead and other Exempt Value $ 0,00 (=) TaKable Value $ 17 .629,870.00 SOH "" ~Save Our Homes" exempt value due 10 cap on assessment Increases. Date 05 I 2003 07/1995 Book H Page ;l284-1?n Zlllli.UM ~ rhe InformaUon is Updated Weekly. Amount $ 15,891,600.0D $ 0.00 http://www . collierappraiser_com/RecordDetail.asp?Map=&F olioID=OOOOOOO 183600000 10/16/2007 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT MODIFICATION NO. 11-02055-P DATE ISSUED: AUGUST 7, 2007 Pg.- - CORRECTED PERMIT FO~'015'l ~"..0lliII5 PERMITTEE: G,L. HOMES OF NAPLES ASSOCIATES I', LTD, (SATURNIA FALLS (F,K.A TERAFINA P,U.D)) 1600 SAWGRASS CORPORATE PKWY. STE 300, SUNRISE. FL 33323 ORIGINAL PERMIT ISSUED: ORIGINAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROJECT LOCATION: PERMIT DURATION: APR'L ", 2002 AN ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT TO AUTHOR'ZE THE CONSTRUCT'ON ANO OPERATION OF A SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WHICH SERVES A 436.1 ACRE RES'OENTlAL AND GOLF COURSE OEVELOPMENT WITH'N A 646,5 ACRE PARCEL. THE SYSTEM O'SCHARGES TO THE COCOHATCHEE CANAL, MODIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE PERMIT NO. 11-02055-P TO AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION ANO OPERATION OF A SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SERV'NG A 639.28-ACRE RESIDENflAL OEVELOPMENT. PART OF THE 646.49-ACRE PROJECT KNOWN AS SATURNIA FALLS (FKA TERAFINA PUO) ANO CONCEPTUAL AUTHORIZATION OF A SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SERVING THE REMAIN'NG 7.21-ACRE RECREATIONAL AREA, WITH OISCHARGE TO THE COCOHATCHEE CANAL V'A ONSITE AND OFFS'TE WETLANDS ANO A 48" DRAINAGE OUTFALL PIPE, COLLIER COUNTY. SECT'ON 16 TWP 48S RGE 26E APPROVED MODIFICATION: See Special Condition NO.1. See attached Rule 40E-4.321, Florida Administrative Code. This Permit Modification is approved pursuant to Application No. 060713~9, dated July 11, 2006. Permittee agrees to hold and save the South Florida Water Management District and its successors harmless from any and all damages, claims or liabilities which may arIse by reason of the construction, operation, maintenance or use of any activities authorized by this PermIt. This Permit is issued under the provisions of Chapter 373, Part IV Florida Statutes(F.S.), and the Operating Agreement Concerning Regulation Under Part IV, Chapter 373 F.S. between South Florida Water Management District and the Department of Environmental Protection. Issuance of this Permit constitutes certification of compliance with state water quality standards where necessary pursuant to Section 401, Public Law 92-500, 33 use Section 1341, unless this Permit is issued pursuant to the net improvement provisions of Subsections 373.414(1 )(b), F.S., or as otherwise stated herein. Permit MOdification may be revoked, suspended, or modified at any time pursuant to the appropriate provisions of Chapter 373, F .S., and ...."'....iioos 40E-4.351(1). (2), and (4), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). This Permit Modification may be transferred pursuant to the appropriate provisions of Chapter 373. F,S., and Sections 40E-1,6107(1) and (2), and 40E-4,351(1), (2), and (4). FAC. All specifications and special and limiting/general conditions attendant to the original Permit, unless specifically rescinded by this or previous modifications, remain in effect. This Permit Modification shall be subject to the Environmental Resource Permit set forth in Rule 40E-4.3B1, F.A.C., unless waived or modified by the Governing Board. The Application, and Environmental Resource Permit Staff Review Summary of the Application, including all conditions, and aft plans and specifications incorporated by reference, are a part of this Permit Modification. AU activities authorized by this Permit Modification shall be implemented as set forth in the plans, specifications, and performance criteria as set forth and incorporated in the Environmental Resource Permit Staff Review Summary. Within 30 days after completion of construction of the permitting activity, the Permittee shall submit a written statement of completion and certification by a registered professional engineer or other appropriate individual, pursuant to the appropriate provisions of Chapter 373, F.S. and Sections 40E-4.361 and 40E-4.381, FAC. In the event the property is sold or otherwise conveyed, the Permittee will remain liable for compliance with this Permit until transfer is approved by the District pursuant to Rule 40E-1.6107. FAC, SPECIAL AND GENERAL CONDITIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: SEE PAGES 2 - 6 OF a (36 SPECIAL CONDITIONS). SEE PAGES 6 - 8 Of B (19 GENERAL CONDITIONS). PERMIT MODlFICA HON APPROVED BY THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT BY ORIGINAL S'GNED BY: ELIZABETH VEGUIUA OEPUTY CLERK ON PAGE 1 OF 8 PUDA-2008-AR-12861 REV: 1 TERAFINA PUD Project: 2002050014 Date: 2/7/08 DUE: 3/7/08 AGEN,jA' =--, --) No_ .-..:..:....#;In=- l""' t!JL':~~ c t";/. ' PERMIT NO; 11-02055-P PAGE 2 OF 8 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 1. The conceptual phase of this permit shall expire on August 7. 2009. The construction phase of this permit shall expire on August 7. 2012. 2. Operation of the surface water management system shall be the responsibility of SA TURNIA FALLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. Within one year of permit issuance or concurrent with the engineering certification of construction completion, whichever comes first, the permittee shall submit a copy of the recorded deed restrictions (or declaration of condominium. if applicable), a copy of the filed articles of incorporation, and a copy of the certificate of incorporation for the association. 3. Operable structures WCS-1 and WCS-2 shall be maintained by the Saturnia Falls Homeowners Association, Inc. in accordance with Exhibits 5.00 - 5.06 and operated by Big Cypress Basin (BCB) Service Center in accordance with Exhibits 2.17 and 5.00 - 5.06. No work shall occur on the project site until a Control Structure Agreement between SFWMDIBig Cypress Basin, G,L. Homes of Naples Associates II, Inc. and the Saturnia Falls Homeowner's Assocation, Inc. regarding the operation and maintenance of the structures is fuliy executed and approved by the District's Governing Board. 4. Discharge Facilities: Structure: WCS-1 1 - 9.00' WIDE BROAD CRESTED weir with crest at elev. 15.36' NGVD. 1 - 6.00' W X 0.35' H RECTANGULAR NOTCH with invert at elev. 13.40' NGVD. 6,500 LF of 48" dia. REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE culvert. 1 - 10.33' W X 12.00' l drop iniet with crest at elev. 18.00' NGVD. Receiving body: COCOHATCHEE CANAL (LOGAN BLVD OUTFALL) Control elev: 13,40 feet NGVD. Structure: WCS-2 1 - 1.39' W X 1.20' H 60 degree V-NOTCH weir with crest at elev, 14.20' NGVD. 1 - 20' WIDE BROAD CRESTED weir with crest at elev. 15.40' NGVD. 1 - 6,00' W X 0.35' H RECTANGULAR NOTCH with Invert at elev.13.40' NGVD, Receiving body: ONSITE AND OFFSITE WETLANDS Control elev: 13.40 feet NGVD. 5. The permittee shall be responsible for the correction of any erosion, shoaling or water quality problems that result from the construction or operation of the surface water management system. 6. Measures shall be taken during construction to insure that sedimentation and/or turbidity violations do not occur In the receiving water. 7. The District reserves the right to require that additional water quality treatment methods be incorporated into the drainage system if such measures are shown to be necessary. 8. lake side slopes shall be no steeper than 4:1 (horizontal:vertical) to a depth of two feet below the control elevation, Side slopes shall be nurtured or planted from 2 feet below to 1 foot above control elevation to Insure vegetative growth, unless shown on the plans. g, Facilities other than those stated herein shall not be constructed without an approved modification of this permit. NAGENOA I"M 0._____ j _ r SfP~ Lpg~.5J ~~~tH~, -----........:.:..._~ PERMIT NO: 11-02055.P PAGE 3 OF 8 10. A stable, permanent and accessible elevation reference shall be established on or within one hundred (100) feet of all permitted discharge structures no later than the submission of the certification report. The location of the elevation reference must be noted on or with the certification report. 11. The permittee shall provide routine maintenance of all of the components of the surface water management system in order to remove all trapped sedimentsldebrls. All materials shall be properly disposed of as required by iaw. Failure to properly maintain the system may result in adverse flooding conditions. 12. This permit is issued based on the applicant's submitted information which reasonably demonstrates that adverse water resource related impacts will not be caused by the compieted permit activity. Should any adverse impacts caused by the completed surface water management system occur, the District will require the permittee to provide appropriate mitigation to the District or other impacted party. The District will require the permittee to modify the surface water management system, if necessary, to eliminate the cause of the adverse impacts. 13. Minimum building floor elevation: 16.60 feet NGVD. 14. Minimum road crown elevation: 15.70 feet NGVD. 15. Minimum parking lot elevation: 15.70 feet NGVD. 16. No work shall occur within the Cocohatchee Canal right-of-way until all necessary right-of-way'occupancy permits are obtained authorizing the proposed work in the District's right-of-way. 17. Prior to any future construction of the area with conceptual authorization only, the permittee shall apply for and receive a permit modification. As part of the permit application, the applicant for that phase shall provide documentation verifying that the proposed construction is consistent with the design of the master surface water management system, including the iand use and site grading assumptions. 18. A Water Use Permit for dewatering activitias must be oblainad for dewatering beyond May 9, 2007. 19. The Permittee shall utilize the criteria contained in the Construction Pollution Prevention Plan (Exhibit No. 2.21) and on the applicable approved construction drawings for the duration of the projects construction activities. 20, The Permittee shall utilize the criteria contained in the Urban Stormwater Management Program (Exhibit "E" of the Saturnia Falls Homeowners Association documents) for post construction activities. Exhibit "E" of the Saturnia Falls Homeowners Association documents, Urban Stormwater Management Program have been included in this permit by reference as Exhibits No, 4,0-4.6. 21. Grading and structural buffers adjacent to the preserve areas, as shown on Exhibit 2, shall be maintained In perpetuity. 22, The successful completion of the mitigation plan is heavily dependent on proper site grading as shown on Exhibits 2 and 3.2. Therefore, prior to demobilizing equipment from the site and prior to planting, the permittee shall provide an as-built survey and schedule an inspection by District Environmental Resource Compliance staff to ensure that appropriate elevations and slopes have been achieved. 23, The wetland conservation areas, upland buffer zones. and upland preservation areas shown on Exhibits 2 and 3 may in no way be aitered from their natural or permitted state. Activities prohibited within the conservation areas Include, but are not limited to: construction or placing of buildings on or above the ground; dumping or placing soil or other substances such as trash; removal or destruction of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation - with the exception of exotic vegetation removal; excavation, dredging, or removal of soil materials; diking or fencing; and any other activities detrimental to drainage. flood control, water conservation, erosion control, or fish and wildlife habitat conservation or preservation. 24. Wetiand preservatlonlmitigatlon areas, upland buffer zones andlor upland preservation areas shall be dedicated as N~G::~~~.'-~~~~r-n D ,SEr ' ". , f !~Pli.....:!~ cf ~"\-f- I'~. 11-02055-1' PAGE 4 OF 8 conservation and common areas in the homeowner association documents as well as on the plat if the project will be platted. Restrictions for use of the conservationl common areas shall stipulate: The wetland preservationlmltigation areas, upland buffer zones, andlor upland preservation areas are hereby dedicated as conservation and common areas. The conservation/common areas shall be the perpetual responsibility of the homeowners association and may in no way be altered from their natural or permitted state as documented in Permit No. 11-02055-1' from the South Florida Water Management District, with the exception of permitted restoration activities. Activities prohibited within the conservation areas include, but are not limited to: construction or placing soli or other substances such as trash; removal or destruction of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation - with the exception of exotic/nuisance vegetation removal; excavation, dredging, or removal of soil material; diking or fencing; and any other activities detrimental to drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, or fish and wildlife habitat conservation or p'reservatlon. Copies of recorded documents shall be submitted to the District's Environmental Resource Compliance staff concurrently with engineering certification of construction completion. 25. Prior to any construction. the permittee shall submit the executed agreement. Exhibit 5.00 - 5.06. that provides for operation of WCS 1 and 2 by the Big Cypress Basin, 26. Endangered species, threatened species andlor species of special concern have been observed onsite and/or the project contains suitable habitat for these species. It shall be the permittee's responsibility 10 coordinate with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission andlor the U,S. Fish and Wildlife Service for appropriate guidance, recommendations andlor necessary permits to avoid impacts to listed species. 27. Prior to the commencement of construction and in conformance with the work schedule in Exhibit 3.5, the permittee shall provide an original performance bond In the amount of $2.288,840.95 to ensure the permittee's financial ability and commitment to compiete the proposed mitigation, monitoring and maintenance plan as shown on Exhibit Nos. 3.1 through 3.4. The performance bond shall utillze the form attached as Exhibit No. 3.8. When a performance bond is established, the permittee shall also establish a standby trust fund for deposit of all payments under bond. The bond shall remain in effect for the entire period of the mitigation and monitoring program. Notification of the District by the financial institution that the bond will not be renewed or is no longer In effect shall constitute non-compliance with the permit. 28. A monitoring program shall be implemented In accordance with Exhibit No. 3.3 and 3.4. The monitoring program shall extend for a period of 5 years with annual reports submitted to District staff. At the end of the first monitoring period the mitigation area shall contain an 80% survival of planted vegetation. The 80% survival rate shall be maintained throughout the remainder of the monitoring program, with replanting as necessary. If native wetland. transitional, and upland species do not achieve an 80% coverage within the initial two years of the monitoring program, native species shall be planted in accordance with the maintenance program. At the end of the 5 year monitoring program the entire mitigation area shall contain an 80% survival of planted vegetation and an 80% coverage of desirabie obligate and facultative weiland species. 29. The areas to be temporarily disturbed by the installation of control structures In wetlands will be backfilled and replanted in accordance with Exhibit No.2 and 3 within 30 days of installation. Monitoring of temporary impact areas shall be done concurrently with other required monitoring for Saturnia Falls, in accordance with Exhibits 3.3 through 3.5. 30. A mitigation program for Saturnla Falls shall be implemented In accordance with Exhibit No. 3.1 through 3.4. The permittee shall enhance and preserve 253.04 acres of wetlands, create 0.1 acre of wetlands, and preserve 31.27 acres of uplands. 31, A maintenance program shall be implemented In accordance with Exhibit No, 3.4 for the mitigation areas/preserves on a regular basis to ensure the integrity and viability of those areas as permitted. Maintenance shall be conducted In perpetuity to ensure that the conservation areas are maintained free from Category 1 exotic vegetation (as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council at the time of permit issuance) immediately following a maintenance activity. Maintenance in perpetuity shall also insure that conservation areas, including buffers, maintain the species and coverage of native, desirable vegetation specified in the permit. Coverage of exotic and nuisance plant species shall not exceed 5% of total cover between maintenance activities. In addition, the permittee shall manage the conservation areas such that exotic/nuisance plant species do not dominate anyone section of those areas. N~~:NOA I, -M -'<"~--- - Sa:' Ii. J9___41~ S i P~Rl\.I1TcN/Y.-=~-Il@5:;..P PAGE 5 OF 8 32. The District reserves the right to require remedial measures to ba taken by the permittee if monitoring or other information demonstrates that adverse impacts to onsite or offsite wetlands, upland conservation areas or buffers, or other surface waters have occurred due to project related activities. 33. Silt screens, hay bales, turbidity screenslbarriers or other such sediment control measures shall be utilized during construction. The selected sediment control measure shall be installed landward of the upland buffer zones around all protected wetlands and shall be properly "trenched' etc, in accordance with Exhibit NO.2. All areas shall be stabilized and vegetated Immediately after construction to prevent erosion Into the wetlands and upland buffer zones. 34. Activities associated with the implementation of the mitigetion. monitoring and maintenance plan(s) shall be completed in accordance with the work schedule attached as Exhibit No. 3.5. Any deviation from these time frames will require prior approval from the District's Environmental Resource Compliance staff. Such requests must be made in writing and shall include (1) reason for the change, (2) proposed starVfinish andlor completion dates; and (3) progress report on the status of the project development or mitigation effort. 35. A) Prior to the commencement of construction and prior to recording the conservation easement and in accordance with the work schedule shown as Exhibit 3.5, the permittee shall submit for review and approval, two (2) copies of the following: 1. Project map identifying conservation area(s) 2. Legal description of conservation area(s)including wetlands. uplands and buffers 3. Sealed boundary survey of conservation area(s) by professional Land surveyor 4. Title insurance commitment for conservation easement naming District as beneficiary using approved valuation. 5. Formatting in accordance with paragraph F (beIDw) if available. The above infDrmation shall be submitted to the Environmental Compliance Enforcement staff in the District service center where the applicatiDn was submitted. B) The real estate information referenced in paragraph (a) above shall be reviewed by the District in accDrdance with the District's real estate review requirements. The easement shall nDt be recorded until such approval is received. C) The permittee shall recDrd a conservation easement Dver the 284.41 acres of real property designated es a conservationlpreservationl mitigation areas on attached the Exhibit 3.6. The easement shalt be granted free Df encumbrances or interests which the District determines are contrary to the intent of the easement. The conservation easement shall be granted to the District utilizing the form attached as Exhibit 3.6. Any proposed modifications to the approved form must receive prior written consent from the district. D) The permittee shall record the cDnservation easement in the public records within 14 days Df receiving the Districl's approval of the real estate informatiDn. Upon recordation, the permittee shall submit two certified copies of the recorded conservation easement for the mitigation area and associated buffers and title insurance policy. to the Environmental Resource Compliance staff in the District service center where the application was submitted. E) In the event the conservation easement real estate information reveals encumbrances or interests in the easement which the District determines are contrary to the intent of the easement, Ihe permittee shall be required to provide release Dr subDrdination Df such encumbrances or interests. If such are nDt obtained, permittee shall be required to apply for a modification to the permit for alternative acceptable mitigation. F) The permittee shall submit two certified copies of the recorded conservation easement for the mitigation area and associated buffers. The data should also be supplied in a digital CAD (,dxf) or GIS (ESRI Coverage) format. The files should be in the Florida State Piane coordinate system, East Zone (3601) with a data datum Df NAD83. HARN with the map units in feet. 36. Water quality mDnitDring shall be completed in accordance with sectiDn 6.0 of the Urban Stormwater Management Program for Saturnia Falls attached as Exhibit No. 4.1 - 4.7, Any deviation from these testing and monitoring procedures will require prior approval from the District Environmental Compliance Staff. Such requests must be made in writing and shall include (1) reeson for the change and (2) an outline of the proposed change. I N~~UCJ'Ij'.JA I j EM ,/ ! ~~J15 I 4~ cf-- <;.~ PERMIT NO: 11-02055-P PAGE 6 OF 8 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. All activities authorized by this permit shall be implemented as set forth in the plans, specifications and performance criteria as approved by this permit Any deviation from the permitted activity and the conditions for undertaking that activity shall constitute a violation of lhis permit and Part IV, Chapter 373. F.S. 2. This permit or a copy thereof, complete with all conditions, attachments, exhibits, and modifications shall be kept at the work site of the permitted activity. The complete permit shall be available for review at the work site upon request by District staff. The permittee shall require the contractor to review the complete permit prior to commencement of the activity authorized by this permit. 3. Activities approved by this permit shall be conducted in a manner which does not cause violations of State water quality standards. The permittee shall implement best management practices for erosion and pollution control to prevent violation of State water quality standards. Temporary erosion control shall be implemented prior to and during construction, and permanent control measures shall be completed within 7 days of any construction activity. Turbidity barriers shall be installed and maintained at all locations where the possibility of transferring suspended solids into the receiving waterbody exists due to the permitted work. Turbidity barriers shall remain in place at all iocations until construction Is completed and soils are stabilized and vegetation has been established. All practices shall be in accordance with the guidelines and specifications described in Chapter 6 of the Florida Land Development Manual; A Guide to Sound Land and Water Management (Deparlment of Environmental Regulation. 1988). incorporated by reference in Rule 40E-4.091, FAC. unless a project-specific erosion and sediment control pian is approved as part of the permit Thereafter the permittee shall be responsible for the removal of the barriers. The permittee shall correct any erosion or shoaling. that causes adverse impacts to the water resources. 4. The permittee shall notify the District of the anticipated construction start date within 30 days of the date that this permit is issued. At least 48 hours prior to commencement of activity authorized by this permit, the permiltee shall submit to the District an Environmental Resource Permit Construction Commencement Notice Form Number 0960 indicating the actual start date and the expected construction completion date. 5. When the duration of construction will exceed one year, the permittee shall submit construction status reports to the District on an annual basis utilizing an annual status report form. Status report forms shall be submitted the following June of each year. 6. Within 30 days after completion of construction of the permitted activity, the perm~ee shall submit a written statement of completion and certification by a prOfessional engineer or other individual authorized by law, utilizing the supplied Environmentai ResourcelSurface Water Management Permit Construction Completion/Certification Form Number 0881A, or Environmental ResourcelSurface Water Management Permit Construction Completion Certification - For Projects Permitted prior to October 3. 1995 Form No. 0881B, incorporated by reference in Rule 40E-1.659, FAC. The statement of completion and certification shall be based on onsite observation of construction or review of as-built drawings for the purpose of determining if the work was completed in compliance with permitted plans and specifications. This submittal shall serve to notify the District that the system is ready for inspection. Additionally, if deviation from the approved drawings are discovered during the certification process, the certification must be accompanied by a copy of the approved permit drawings with deviations noted. Both the original and revised specifications must be clearly shown. The plans must be Clearly labeied as "as-buill" or "record" drawings. All surveyed dimensions and eievations shall be certified by a registered surveyor. 7. The operation phase of this permit shall not become effective: until the permittee has complied with the requirements of condition (6) above. and submitted a request for conversion of Environmentai Resource Permit from ConstrJction Phase to Operation Phase, Form No. 0920; the District determines the system to be in compliance with the permitted plans and specifications; and the entity approved by the District in accordance with Sections 9.0 and 10,0 of the Basis of Review for Environmental Resource Perm~ Applications within the South Florida Water Management District, accepts responslbiiiiy for operation and maintenance of the system. The permit shall not be transferred to such approved operation and maintenance entity until the operation phase of the permit becomes effective. Following inspection and approval of the permitted system by the District, the permittee shall initiate transfer of the permit to the approved responsible operating entity If different from the permittee. Until the permit is transferred pursuant to Section 40E-1.6107, F AC., the permittee NAGENIJA liEM o. ~._'__ . SEP --~..,..-:t,~ ( 'lJ.k,$.~t?__t -~--:.- PERMIT NO: 11-02055-P PAGE 7 OF 8 8. shall be liable for compliance with the terms of the permIT. Each phase or independent [ortioll&'ftiepermittedSystem must be completed In accordance with the permitted plans and permit conditions prior to the Initiation of the permitted use of site infrastructure located within the area served by that portion or phase of the system. Each phase or independent portion of the system must be completed in accordance with the permitted plans and permit conditions prior to transfer of responsibility for operation and maintenance of the phase or portion of the system to a local govemment or other responsible entity. 9. For those systems that wiH be operated or maintained by an entity that wiH require an easement or deed restriction In order to enable that entity to operate or maintain the system in conformance with this permit, such easement or deed restriction must be recorded in the public records and submitted to the District along with any other final operation and maintenance documents required by Sections g.O and 10.0 of the 8asis of Review for Environmental Resource Permit applications within the South Florida Water Management District, prior to lot or units sales or prior to the completion of the system, whichever comes first. Other documents concerning the establishment and authority of the operating entity must be filed with the Secretary of State, county or municipal entities. Final operation and maintenance documents must be received by the District when maintenance end operation of the system is accepted by the local government entity. Failure to submit the appropriate final documents wiH result in the permittee remaining liable for carrying out maintenance and operation of the permitted system and any other permit conditions. 10. Should any other regulatory agency require changes to the permitted system, the permittee shall notify the District in writing of the changes prior to implementation so that a determination can be made whether a permit modification is required. 11. This permit does not eliminale the necessity to obtain any required federal, state, local and special district authorizations prior to the start of any activity approved by Ihis permit. This permit does not convey to the permittee or create in the permittee any property right, or any interest in real property, nor does it authorize any entrance upon or activities on property which is not owned or controlled by the permittee, or convey any rights or privileges other than those specified in the permit and Chapter 40E-4 or Chapter 40E-40, FAC.. 12. The permittee is hereby advised that Section 253.77, F.S, states that a person may not commence any excavation, construction, or other actiVITY involving the use of sovereign or other iands of the State, the litle to which is vested in the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund without obtaining the required lease, license, easement, or other form of consent authorizing the proposed use. Therefore, the permittee is responsible for obtaining any necessary authorizations from the Board of Trustees prior to commencing activity on sovereignty lands or other state-owned lands. 13. The permittee must obtain a Water Use permit prior to construction dewatering, unless the work qualifies for a general permit pursuant to Subsection 40E-20.302(3), FAC., also known as the "No Notice" Rule. 14. The permittee shall hold and save the District harmless from any and all damages, ciaims, or liabilities which may arise by reason of the construction, alteration, operation, maintenance, removal, abandonment or use of any system authorized by the permit. 15. Any delineation of the extent of a wetland or other surface water submitled as part of the permIT application, including plans or other supporting documentation. shall not be considered binding, unless a specific condition of this permit or a formal determination under Section 373.421 (2), F,S., proVides otherwise. 16. The permittee shall notify the District in writing within 30 days of any sale, conveyance, or other transfer of ownership or controi of a permitted system or the real property on which the permitted system is located. All transfers of ownership or transfers of a permit are subject to the requirements of Rules 40E-1.6105 and 40E-1.6107, FAC.. The permittee transferring the permit shall remain liable for corrective actions that may be required as a result of any violations prior to the sale, conveyance or other transfer of the system. 17. Upon reasonable notice to the permittee, District authorized staff with proper identification shall have permission to enter, inspect, sample and test the system to insure conformity with the plans and specifications approved by the permit. AG,E,NDA'I'i:::,--M-,~l\D No,.__"..._~,.." 1 . -_... (C'-' r.Jt::~1 i 'ili'. ".. . .., r'1l--.!?Q to~ 50, .'~"=" , ."-.--PSRMlT NO: 11.02055.P PAGE 6 OF 6 18, If historical or archaeological artifacts are discovered at any time on the project site, the permittee shall immediately notify the appropriate District service center. 19, The permittee shall immediately notify the District in writing of any previously submitted information that is later discovered to be inaccurate. l N~GENUA I, EM -_.-._,~-----~- ENYIRONMENTALRESOURCEPERMITSCHAPTER40E-4(OIlO7) SEP" ""',; 40E-4.321 Duration of Penn its. U:g.,. $,J _si_~~ (1) Unless revoked or otherwise modified the duration of an environmental resource permit issued - ----~-- under this chapter or Chapter 40E-40, FAC., is as follows: (a) For a conceptual approval, two years from the date of issuance or the date specified as a condition of the pennit, unless within that period an application for an individual or standard general pennit is filed for any portion of the project. If an application for an environmental resource permit is filed, then the conceptual approval remains valid until final action is taken on the environmental resource permit application. If the application is granted, then the conceptual approval is valid for an additional two years from the date of issuance of the permit. Conceptual approvals which have no individual or standard general environmental resource permit applications filed for a period of two years shall expire automatically at the end of the two year period. (b) For a conceptual approval filed concurrently with a development of regional impact (DRl) application for development approval (ADA) and a local government comprehensive plan amendment, the duration of the conceptual approval shall be two years from whichever one of the following occurs at the latest date: 1. The effective date of the local government's comprehensive plan amendment, 2. The effective date of the local government development order, 3. The date on which the District issues the conceptual approval, or 4. The date on which the District issues a final order pertaining to the resolution of any Section 120.57, F.S., administrative - proceeding or other legal appeals. (c) For an individual or standard general environmental resource pennit, the construction phase authorizing construction, removal, alteration or abandonment of a sys-tem shall expire five years from the date of issuance or such amount of time as made a condition of the permit. (d) For an individual or standard general environmental resource permit, the operational phase of the permit is perpetual for operation and maintenance. (e) For a noticed general permit issued pursuant to Chapter 40E-400, FAC., five years from the date the notice of intent to use the pennit is provided to the District. (2)(a) Unless prescribed by special pennit condition, permits expire automatically according to the tirneframes indicated in this rule. Ifapplication for extension is made by electronic mail at the District's e- Pennitting website or in writing pursuant to subsection (3), the permit shall remain in full force and effect until: 1. The Goveming Board takes action on an application for extension of an individual pemlit, or 2. Staff takes action on an application for extension of a standard general permit. (b) lnstallation of the project outfall structure shall not constitute a vesting of the pennit. (3) The permit extension shall be issued provided that a permittee files a written request with the District showing good cause plior to the expiration of the permit. For the purpose of this rule, good cause shall mean a set of extenuating circumstances outside of the control of the permittee. Requests for extensions, which shall include documentation of the extenuating circumstances and how they have delayed this project, will not be accepted more than 180 days prior to the expiration date. (4) Substantial modifications to Conceptual Approvals will extend the duration of the Conceptual Approval for MO years from the date of issuance of the modification. For the purposes of this section, the tenn "substantial modificationll shall mean a modification which is reasonably expected to lead to substantially different water resource or environ-mental impacts which require a detailed review. (5) Substantial modifications to individual or standard general environmental resource pennjts issued pursuant to a permit application extend the duration of the permit for three years from the date of issuance of the modification. Individual or standard general environmental resource permit modifications do not extend the duration of a conceptual approval. (6) Permit modifications issued pursuant to paragraph 40E-4.331 (2)(b), F,A.C.(Ietter modifications) do not extend the duration of the pennit. (7) Failure to complete construction or alteration of the surface water management system and obtain operation phase approval from the District within the pennit duration shaH require a new permit authorization in order to continue construction unless a permit extension is granted. Specific Authoriry 373,044, 373.113, 668.003, 668.004, 668.50 FS. Law Implemellted373.413, 373.416, 373.419,373.426,668.003,668.004,668.50 FS. History-New 9-3-81,Amended 1-31-82,12-1-82. Formerly 16K-4.07(4). Amended 7-1-86, 4-20-94,10-3-95,5-28-00.10-1-06. ORDINANCE NO. 08- lE~ "'E' ". ') J' . ,,~, '~ 03-- cf- s.~ \ L,f!..~- .~ ---"" ' AGEN No, AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-15, THE TERAFINA PUD, BY PROVIDING FOR SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO COVER PAGE; SECTION TWO: AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 6.5, TABLE 1, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS; SECTION THREE: AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 04-15, THE TERAFINA PUD, TO REMOVE ALL SPECIFIC CITATIONS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THROUGHOUT THE PUD DOCUMENT; AND SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Robert L. Duane, of Hole Montes Incorporated, representing G.L. Homes of Naples Associates II, Ltd., successor by merger to GLH Development, L.L.L.P" petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend Ordinance No. 04- 15, the Terafina PUD Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Terafina property is subject to: (l) that certain "Agreement" by and between GLH Development, L.L.L.P. and the Quail Creek Property Owners Association, Inc.; and (2) that certain "Berm Agreement" dated December 22, 2004, by and between Olde Cypress Development, Ltd., Olde Cypress Master Property Owners Association, Inc., and G.L. Homes of Naples Associates II, Ltd.; and (3) that certain "Agreement" by and between GLH Development, L.L.L.P. and Longshore Lake Foundation, Inc., together with all schedules thereto, as any of the foregoing have been or may be amended, and in accordance with the terms thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO COVER PAGE OF ORDINANCE The Cover Page of the Development Plan (also known as the Planned Unit Development Document), previously attached as Exhibit "A" to Ordinance Number 04-15 for Terafina PUD, is hereby amended to read as follows: 08.CPS.OO808IPUDA.2008.AR.I2861 - MMSS. ,n 719/08. A 7)')il:Y.rJ-. Words stn:leJ: tars\:;\g:k are deleted; words underlined are added, Page 1 of 4 \lD PREPARED BY: AGENOA !,EM No. __~~._"'_._____ HOLE MONTES, INC. 950 ENCORE WAY NAPLES, FLORIDA 34110 SEP ",':: i P~=~2 tc f-<:>-S ---.---.------ -~--:...:-- -'..-. . HM PROJECT 1995087 REVISED JULY 2008 REVISED BY HOLE MONTES ON JULY 25,2003 REVISED BY HOLE MONTES ON NOVEMBER 29, 2001 REVISED BY COLUER COUNTY ON OCTOBER 23, 2001 REVISED AUGUST 9, 2001 REVISED JULY, 2001 REVISED JUNE, 2001 REVISED FEBRUARY, 2001 DECEMBER, 2000 SECTION TWO: AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 6.5, TABLE 1, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS Section 6.5, Table I, entitled "Development Standards for Residential Areas" of Ordinance Number 04-15, the Terafina PUD, is hereby amended to read as follows: 6.5 Development Standards TABLE 1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS PERMITTED USES AND SINGLE ZERO TWO SINGLE MULTI- STANDARDS FAMll.Y LOT FAMll. Y FAMll. Y FAMll.Y DETACHED LINE & ATTACHED DWELLING DUPLEX AND TOWNHOUSE Minimum Lot Areas 6,000 S.F. 3,500 3,500 S.F."! 3,000 S.F. per 1 AC S.F. d.u. Minimum Lot Width \"1 50 35 45 30 100 Front Yard Setback 20(4) 15(4) 15(4) 20(4) 20(4) (principal and accessory uses) Side Yard Setback 6,0 ~ o or6 o or 12 .5 BH o or 10 Rear Yard Setback: Principal 20 20 20 20 25 - lots back to back Rear Yard Setback: Principal - 10 10 10 10 15 lots abutling lake. easement areas and common open space areas 08.CPS-00808/PUDA.2008.AR-J2861 - MMSS. fe" 7/9/08 - A ~ Words "!f".1e tfiro"gh are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 2 of4 AGE,(JA 11I0,._,_ _"'. . -. I ' . '-'(ji ,,'-/: ,)1". , " Rear Yard Setback: 10 10 10 10 Jei-= .J.O) 't *0 ~~ Accessorv Structures Rear Yard Setback: 5 5 5 5 5 Accessory pools and spastS) - lots back to back Rear Yard Setback: accessory 3 3 3 3 3 screen enclosures - lots back to back Rear Yard Setback: accessory 3 3 3 3 3 pools and spas!S) - lots abutting lake,; easement areas and common open space areas Rear Yard Setback: accessory 0 0 0 0 0 screen enclosures - lots abutting lake,; easement areas and common open space areas Maximum Zoned Building Height 35 35 35 35 35 Maximum Actual Buildim! Height 38 38 38 38 38 Distance Between Structures N/A N/A N/A 10 .5BH Floor Area Min. (SF) 1600 1400 1200 1200 1200 Preserve Area Setback: 25 25 25 25 25 Princioal Structures Preserve Area Setback: 10 10 10 10 10 Accessorv Structures All distances are in feet unless otherwise noted. BH = Building Height Notes 1. Each half of a duplex, unit requires a lot area allocation of thirty-five hundred (3,500) square feet for a total minimum lot area of seven thousand (7,000) sqnare feet. 2. Minimum lot width may be reduced by twenty (20) percent for cul-de-sac lots or lots located on curvilinear streets provided the minimum lot area is still maintained. 3. Where the zero (0) foot yard option is utilized, the opposite side of the structure shall have a twelve (12) ten (10) foot sideyard. 4. Setbacks shall be measured from the back of the sidewalk to the face of the garage door and shall be no less than 23 feet. Should the garage door be side loaded, there shall be a 23 foot wide paved, cleared area on a perpendicular plane to the garage door or plans shall ensure that parked vehicles will not interfere with pedestrian traffic. 5. All development lots/units shall meet the LDC standards for minimum landscape and buffers. 08-CPS.QOB08/PUDA-2008-AR-12861 - MMSS. rev. 719/08. AIJ71'Y)-3- Words s~Fl:let t.ftrSHgI::l. are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 3 of 4 --- S"'p n r. _ r ~ t ' f ;~:: ;n!jH iPg~=?Y:v(6'S SECTION THREE: AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 04~15, --mE=----'-j' TERAFINA PUD, TO REMOVE ALL SPECIFIC CITATIONS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THROUGHOUT THE PUD DOCUMENT All sections and subsections of Ordinance Number 04-15, the Terafina PUD, are hereby amended to remove any and all references to specific numeric and lettered citations to specific sections and subsections of the Land Development Code to leave only general references to the Land Development Code or Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, as appropriate, throughout the PUD document. SECTION FOUR: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Depmtment of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this day of ,2008. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: BY: ,Deputy Clerk TOM HENNING, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: ~ Marjorie M. Student-Stirling Assistant County Attorney 08-CPS-00808/PUDA-2008.AR.1286t - MMSS. rev, 7/9/08 - A lyryi104- Words stffiok threHgR are deleted; words underlined are added. Page 4 of 4