Agenda 03/11/2008 Item # 8B
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11. 2008
Page 1 of 51
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PUDZ-2007-AR-12248, Sabal Palm Development, LLC, represented by Robert L. Duane,
AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc. and Ricbard D. Yovanovich of Goodlette, Coleman, and
Johnson, are requesting a rezone from the Rural Agricultural (A) to the Commercial
Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as Napoli
Village. The subject 8.97-acre site, proposed to permit au adult congregate living facility, is
located east of Tamiami Trail North (US 41), west of Sterling Oaks PUD, and north of the
Community Congregational Church, at 15450 Tamiami Trail North, in Section 9,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) consider an application to rezone the
subject site from the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Commercial Planned Unit
Development (CPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Napoli Village CPUD,
while making certain that the project is in harmony with the applicable County codes and
regulations to ensure that the community's intercsts are maintained.
CONSIDERATIONS:
The petitioner proposes an "adult care living facility," which, according to Section 1.08.02 of the
Land Development Code (LDC), is defined as an assisted living facility (ALF). Such facilities
are described as those that "provide.. . housing, food service and one or more personal
services.. .and.. .provide limited nursing services, when licensed to do so." According to LDC
Section 2.03.06.C.3, the Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district is
construed to include the entire range of uses permitted in the General Commercial (C-l) through
(C-5) zoning districts, which includes ALFs. The ALF proposed with this application would
provide a maximum 234,440 square feet of gross floor area for both independent and assisted
living units for renters aged 55 years and older. The actual mix of independent vs. assisted living
units has not yet been determined by the applicant; however, the development conditions limit
the total number of units to 225 with a maximum of 175 independent living units. A variety of
associated accessory uses, such as a dining area, beauty shop, exercise room, swimming pool and
a medical care facility, for the exclusive use of residents and their guests, is also proposed. The
ALF would be comprised of two, four-story buildings with a maximum zoned height of 50 feet.
The actual height, including appurtenances, would be a maximum of 67 feet.
As shown in the PUD documents (see Appendix I, Exhibit E), the applicant is requesting a
deviation from the 0.45 floor area ratio (FAR) permitted by Section 5.05.04.D.I of the LDC to
permit an FAR of 0.60, which would represent an increase of 0, I 5 FAR. The applicant maintains
that the purpose of this deviation, which will be discussed further in the "Zoning Review"
portion of this report on page five, is to provide the additional recreational amenities demanded
by today's market.
Page 1 of 7
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 2 of 51
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 CPUD 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 Management 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, fifty
percent of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project are required to be
paid simultaneously with the approval of each fmal local development order. Other fees
collected before the issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees and utility
fees associated with connecting to the County's water and sewer system.
Please note that the inclusion of impact fees and taxes collected are for informational purposes
only; they are not included in the criteria used by Staff and the Planning Commission to analyze
this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE):
The subject property is designated Urban Residential, as identified on the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM) of the GMP. Per Policy 5.8 of the Future Land Use Element of the GMP, ALFs shall be
permitted within the Urban Designated Area, subject to the definitions and regulations as
outlined in the Collier County LDC and consistent with the locational requirements in Florida
Statutes, Chapter 419.001. An ALF is not subject to the density rating system, but rather subject
to the criteria contained in 5.05.04., Group Housing, D. of the LDC. These criteria are listed in
italics below, followed by staffs comments:
a) The maximum floor area ratio shall not exceed 0.45 FAR.
As shown in Exhibit E of the PUD document, the applicant is seeking a deviation that
would permit an FAR of 0.60. Comprehensive Planning staff will defer to Zoning and
Land Development Review staff as they review the petition in its entirety.
b) No structure shall be erected within twenty (20) feet of any abutting lot or parcel which is
zoned residential, or within twenty-five (25) feet of a road right-of-way.
As stated in Exhibit B of the PUD document, a minimwn of 150 feet would separate the
proposed facility from the nearest abutting residential lots to the east. As shown on the
Conceptual Site Plan in Exhibit C of the PUD documents, setbacks are well in excess of
the 25-foot minimwn from the right-of-way.
c) Parking spaces required: a. Independent living units, one (I) per dwelling unit; b.
Assisted living units, 0.75 per assisted unit; c. Nursing care units, f1W (2) parking spaces
Page 2 of 7
Agenda Item No. 86
March 11. 2008
Page 3 of 51
per five (5) beds. As previously stated, the applicant has not yet determined the ratio of
independent vs. assisted living units; however, one parking space per independent unit
and 0.75 spaces per assisted living unit will be required at the time of Site Development
Plan (SDP) approval, pursuant to this provision.
In order to promote "Smart Growth" policies and support the existing development character of
Collier County, adherence to Policies 7.1 through 7.3 is required. Policy 7.1 encourages
connection to collector and arterial roads. The project is consistent with this policy as its access
would be provided via US 41, an arterial roadway. In support of FLUE Policy 7.2, an internal
roadway system would be provided via a connected loop road. Policy 7.3 encourages new and
existing developments to provide interconnection to other developments. To support this policy,
the existing vehicular interconnection to the Community Congregational Church to the south
would remain, and linkages to the sidewalk system along the US 41 frontage would be provided
to permit pedestrian access to the church and to Christus Victor Lutheran Church to the north.
Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed PUD may be deemed consistent
with the Future Land Use Element.
Transportation Element:
Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has
determined that the proposed rezone is consistent with Policy 5.1 and Policy 5.2 of the
Transportation Element.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element:
In accordance with Policy 6.1.1, fifteen percent of the existing native vegetation must be retained
on-site. The Master Plan indicates 1.35 acres, or 15 percent, of native vegetation will be provided
in two preserve areas abutting the eastern property boundary, identified as P-I and P-2 on the
Conceptual Site Plan, in compliance with Policy 6.2.6. No jurisdictional wetlands were identified
on the site.
GMP Conclusion:
The Growth Management Plan is the prevailing document supporting land use decisions such as
the proposed CPUD. Staff is required to make a finding of consistency or inconsistency with the
overall GMP as part of its recommendation of approva~ approval with conditions, or denial of a
rezoning petition. Staff believes this petition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE as
indicated above; and with the GMP Transportation Element, as noted. Based upon the above
analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses may be deemed consistent with the goals, objectives
and policies of the overall GMP.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT:
This request contains no provisions to address the affordable/workforce housing demands that it
may create.
Page 3 of 7
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 4 of 51
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
There are no environmental issues associated with this PUD rezone petition. The applicant was
not required to submit an Environment Impact Statement (EIS) for this project, nor was a hearing
before the Environmental Advisory Council required, because the site is below the 10-acre size
threshold requirement for tracts located landward of the coastal management boundary.
Furthermore the site is not located within a Special Treatment (ST) overlay area.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION:
As noted, this petition was not heard by the EAC.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION:
The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) heard this petition at their February 7, 2008
meeting, and voted 9-0 to forward this petition to the BCC with a recommendation of approval,
subject to the following revisions to the attached PUD document:
1. The passive recreational uses on the preserve tract, outlined in Exhibit A of the PUD
document, shall meet the development standards for accessory uses of Exhibit B of the
PUD document.
2. Irrespective of that shown in the staff report, the Conceptual Site Plan (Exhibit C)
approved by the CCPC shall be the one dated December 7, 2007, which was presented by
the applicant at the January 8, 2008 CCPC hearing.
3. An executed Access Agreement with the church to the south shall be submitted by the
applicant prior to the BCC hearing March 11,2008; or the Master Plan shall be revised to
reflect the church's existing access easement on the subject property.
4. The preserve acreage in Exhibit F, 2.A. shall be corrected to 1.36 acres (instead of 1.35
acres) ,
Although the CCPC recommendation of approval was unanimous and no letters of objection
have been received, this petition has not been placed on the summary agenda at the applicant's
agent's request so that he might discuss with the BCC the possibility of revising the terms of
condition #3, above.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This is a site specific rezone from an Agricultural (A) Zoning District to a "CPUD" Commercial
Planned Unit Development Zoning District for a project to be known as the Napoli Village
CPUD. Site specific rezones are quasi-judicial in nature. As such the burden falls upon the
applicant to prove that the proposed rezone is consistent with all the criteria set forth below. The
burden then shifts to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC), should it consider denying the
rezone, to determine that such denial would not be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable.
This would be accomplished by finding that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed
criteria below.
Criteria for CPUD Rezones
Page 4 of 7
Agenda Item No. 86
March 11, 2008
Page 5 of 51
Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for
approval or not.
1. Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development
proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic
and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of agreements,
contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as
they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation
and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained
at public expense? Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only
after consultation with the county attorney.
3. Consider; Conformity of the proposed CPUD with the goals, objectives and policies
of the Growth Management Plan.
4. Consider: The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions
may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and
buffering and screening requirements.
5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve
the development?
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the purpose of
assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and
private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to
accommodate expansion.
8. Consider: Conformity with CPUD 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.
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?
10. Will the proposed CPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use
pattern?
11. Would the requested CPUD 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.
Page 5 of 7
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 6 of 51
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 or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction
phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety?
16. Will the proposed change create a drainage problem?
17. Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas?
18. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations?
20. Consider; Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to
an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare.
2]. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot ("reasonably") be used m
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 fmd other adequate sites in the county for the
proposed use in districts already pennitting such use.
24. Consider; The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site
alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range
of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification.
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed CPUD 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, art. II], as amended.
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the CPUD rezone request that
the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the
public health, safety, and welfare?
Page 6 of 7
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11. 2008
Page 7 of 51
The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by the
written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report, Executive
Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony presented at the
BCC hearing as these items relate to these criteria. (MMSS)
RECOMMENDATION:
Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends approval of PUDZ-2007-AR-12248,
the requested Deviation outlined in this report (included as Exhibit F to the Ordinance) and the
CCPC recommendations.
PREPARED BY:
John-David Moss, AICP, Principal Planner
Department of Zoning & Land Development Review
Page 7 of 7
Item Number:
Item Summary:
Meeting Date:
Page I of 2
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 8 of 51
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
88
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. PUDZ-2007-AR-12248 Sabal Palm Development LLC, represented
by Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich of Goodlette,
Coleman, and Johnson. requesting a rezone from the Agricultural (A) to the Commercial
Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Zoning District for project to be known as Napoli Village.
The +1-8.97- acre site is proposed to permit an adult congregate living facility, comprising two
four-story buildings. The subject site is located east of Tamiami Trail North (US 41), west of
Sterling Oaks PUD, and north of the Community Congregational Church, at 15450 Tamiami
Trail North, in Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida,
3/11/2008900:00 AM
Prepared By
John-David Moss
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Senior Planner
Date
Zoning & Land Development
2/14/20084:31 :28 PM
Approved By
Judy Puig
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Operations Analyst
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
Date
Approved By
2/15/20081 :29 PM
Ray Bellows
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Chief Planner
Date
Approved By
Zoning & Land Development Review
2/21/2008 11 :19 AM
Joseph K. Schmitt
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Community Development &
Environmental Services Adminstrator
Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
2/26/2008 1 :32 PM
Approved By
Susan Murray, Ale?
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Zoning & Land Development Director
Date
Approved By
Zoning & Land Development Review
2/28/2008 11 :58 AM
Date
Marjorie M. Student~Stirling Assistant County Attorney
2/28/200812:12 PM
Approved By
County Attorney County Attorney Office
OMS Coordinator
Applications Analyst
Date
file://C:\AgendaTest\Export\ I 02-March%20 II ,%202008\08,%20ADVERTISED%20PUBLI... 3/5/2008
Page 20f2
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 9 of 51
Administrative Services
Information Technology
2129120087:27 AM
Approved By
Mark Isackson
Budget Analyst
Date
County Manager's Office
Office of Management & Budget
2129120089:36 AM
Approved By
James V. Mudd
County Manager
Date
Board of County
Commissioners
County Manager's Office
3131200810:25 AM
file:l/C:IAgendaTestIExportl] 02-March%20 11, %202008108.%20ADVER T1SED%20PUBL1... 3/5/2008
T
Agenda Item No. 86
March 11, 2008
Page 10 of 51
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET
(i)
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR:
o PUD REZONE (PUDZ) 0 PUD TO PUD REZONE (PUDZ-A)
PETITION NO (AR)
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT NUMBER
DATE PROCESSED
ASSIGNED PLANNER
To be completed by staff
APPLICANT INFORMATION
NAME OF APPLlCANT(S) SABAL PALM DEVELOPMENT, LLC
ADDRESS 7995-B PRESERVE CIRCLE CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34119
TELEPHONE # 239593-9641 CELL # FAX # 239434-0986
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
NAME OF AGENT ROBERT L. DUANE. AICP OF HOLE MONTES, INC.
ADDRESS 950 ENCORE WAY CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34110
TELEPHONE # 239 254-2049 CELL # FAX # 239254-2099
E-MAIL ADDRESS: BOBDUANE(ii)HMENG.COM
NAME OF AGENT RICHARD D. YOV ANOVICH, OF GOODLETTE. COLEMAN & JOHNSON
ADDRESS 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL N CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34103
TELEPHONE # 239435-3535 CELL #
FAX # 239435-1218
E-MAIL ADDRESS: RYOVANOVICH(ii)GCJLAW.COM
C :\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLlCA TION.doc
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 11 of 51
BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF
ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULA nONS.
ASSOCIATIONS
Complete the following for all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. Provide additional
sheets if necessary.
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: STERLING OAKS CLUBHOUSE
MAILING ADDRESS: 822 STERLING OAKS BLVD CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34110
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: AUDABON AT NAPLES C/O CYNTHIA BASS
MAILING ADDRESS 15725 TAMIAMI TR N. CITY :-IAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34110
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
NAME OF MASTER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
NAME OF CIVIC ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Intemet Fjles\OLK5A5\APPLICA TION.doc
T
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 12 of 51
I Disclosure of Interest Information
a. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety,
tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest
as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary).
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
b. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders
and the percentage of stock owned by each.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
Frank P. Potestio. Jr.
120 Galleria Dr.. Naples. FL 34102
40%
David J. Mola
2025 Lal!:una Wav. Naples. FL 34109
40%
J. Thomas Conrov. III
2210 Vanderbilt Beach Rd.. Naples. FL 34109
20%
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 of Ownership
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLlCA TION.doc
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 13 of 51
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the
name of the general and/or limited partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
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
Date of Contract:
f. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all
individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
Name and Address
g. Date subject property acquired D
leased D Term of lease yrs./mas.
If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
Date of option:
Date option terminates:
Anticipated closing date
. or
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Tcmporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLICA TION .doc
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 14 of 51
h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts 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.
I. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all
individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust.
Name and Address
g. Date subject property acquired I2;;J leased AUllust 13,2005 n Term of lellse
yrs.fmos.
If, Petitioner hils option to buy, indicate the following:
Date of option:
Date option terminlltes:
Anticipated closing date
, or
h. Should any chllnges of ownership or chllnges in contracts for purchase occur
subsequent to the dllte of application, but prior to the dllte of the finlll public
hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit
II supplemental disclosure of interest form.
PROPERTY LOCATION
Detailed lel!al description of the property covered bv the application: (II space is inadequate,
attach an separate page.) II request involves change to more than one zoning district, include
separate legal description lor property involved in each district. Applicant shall submit lour (4) copies
01 a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale) il required to do
so at the pre-application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible lor supplying the correct legal description. II questions arise
concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required.
SectionfT ownship/Range
9
I 488 I 25E
Lot:
Block:
Subdivision: N/A
Plat Book N/A Page #: Property 1.0.#: # 00142600009, 00142680003-
Metes & Bounds Description: (O.R. BOOK 1847. PAGE 1850)
C :\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLICA TION .doc
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 15 of 51
SO MUCH OF THE SOUTH 332 FEET OF THE NORTH 732 FEET OF THE SOUTH Y, OF
THE NORTH Y, OF SECTION 9. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER
COUNTY. FLORIDA. ALL LYING EAST OF U.S. 41.
A.1\JD
(O.R. BOOK 1847. PAGE 1848)
SO MUCH OF THE SOUTH Y, OF THE NORTH 1/2 OF SECTION 9. TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH. R25E. AS LIES EAST OF U.S. 41. COLLIER COUNTY. FL. LESS THE NORTH
732 FEET THEREOF. AND ALSO LESS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL.
COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST-WEST Y, SECTION LINE OF
SECTION 9. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST AND THE EASTERN RlGHT-OF-
WAY OF STATE ROAD 45 (U.S. HIGHWAY 41) AS MONUMENTED BY THE FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. AS A PLACE OF BEGINNING:
THENCE IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION ALONG THE EASTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINE OF STATE ROAD 45 (U.S. HIGHWAY 41). A DISTANCE OF 400 FEET:
THENCE IN A EASTERLY DIRECTION. PARALLEL TO. AND A DISTANCE OF 400
FEET FROM. THE EAST-WEST ~ SECTION LINE OF SECTION 9. TOWNSHIP 48
SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST. A DISTANCE OF 545.00 FEET:
THENCE IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION. PARALLEL TO. AND A DISTA.,"ICE OF 545.00
FEET FROM. THE EASTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 45 (U.S.
HIGHWAY 41). A DISTA."ICE OF 400 FEET.
THENCE IN A WESTERLY DIRECTION ALONG THE EAST-WEST ~ SECTION LINE
OF SECTION 9. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST. A DISTANCE OF 545.00 FEET
TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING.
Size of property: IRREGULAR ft. X
Address/!!enerallocation of subiect propertv:
15450 TAMIAMI TRAIL. NAPLES. FL
ft. = Total Sq. Ft. 390.887 Acres 8.97
PUD District (LDC 2.03.06):
o Residential
~ Commercial
o Community Facilities
o Industrial
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Zoning
Land use
N A-CU
S A-CU/PUD
E PUD
W U.S. 411PUD
CHURCH
CHURCH
RESIDENTIAL
R.O.W.!AUDUBON COMMERCIAL
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLlCATION.doc
1
Agenda Item No. 86
March 11. 2008
Page 16 of 51
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject property? If
so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If space is inodequate,
attach on separate page). NO
Section IT ownsh ip (Range
lot: Block:
Plat Book_ Page #:
Metes & Bounds Description:
N/A/ /
Subdivision:
Property 1.0.#:
REZONE REQUEST
This application is requesting a rezone from the L zoning district{s) to the CPUDzoning district{s).
Present Use of the Property: VACANT NURSERY WITH ONE (1) DILAPIDATED STRUCTURE-
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY
Original PUD Name: N/A
Ordinance No.:
EVALUATION CRITERIA
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 pattern of development proposed in relation to
physical charaderistics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer,
water, and other utilities.
THE CPUD COMPRISING I 9.0 ACRES IS PROPOSING AN ADULT CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY
THAT IS AN ALLOW ABLE USE IN THE URBAN AREA. THE PROPERTY IS A VACANT NURSERY WITH
ONE DILAPIDATED STRUCTURE. IT IS LOCATED BETWEEN TWO CHURCHES, THE COMMUNITY
CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH TO THE SOUTH, AND THE CHRISTUS VICTOR LUTHERAN TO THE
NORTH. BOTH SITES ARE ZONED AGRICULTURE WITH CONDITIONAL USES FOR THESE
FACILITIES. LAND TO THE EAST IS ZONED FOR STERLING OAKS PUD, DEVELOPED WITH
RESIDENTIAL USES. LAND TO THE WEST INCLUDES U.S. 41 RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE AUDUBON
COUNTRY CLUB PUD THAT IS DEVELOPED WITH RETAlL USES ALONG U.S. 41 WEST OF THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS INFILL PROPERTY IS WELL SUITED FOR AN ADULT CONGREGATE
LIVING FACILITY THAT WILL HAVE CONVENIENT ACCESS TO U.S. 4t, COMMUNITY FACILITIES,
AND RETAIL DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE EMERGING IN THE GENERAL AREA. THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY ALSO HAS ACCESS TO SEWER, WATER, AND OTHER UTILITIES TO SUPPORT
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE PROPOSED CPUD CAN BE FOUND TO BE
COMP A TlBLE WITH EXISTING USES IN THE GENERAL AREA, AND A SUBSTANTIAL BUFFER EXISTS
ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE TO SEPARATE THE PROPOSED CPUD FROM RESIDENTIAL
LANDS LOCATED TO THE EAST IN STERLING OAKS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, THEREFORE, IS
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Scttings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLlCA nON.doc
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11. 2008
Page 17 of 51
SUITABLE FOR THE lYPE OF USE PROPOSED AND THE PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE
GENERAL AREA.
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 natto be pravided or maintained at public expense. Findings and
recommendatians of this type shall be made only after consultatian with the county allorney.
THE SUBJECT PROPERlY IS UNDER UNIFIED CONTROL FOR THE PURPOSE OF OBTAINING THIS
CPUD REZONJNG. ARRANGEMENTS WILL BE MADE FOR THE CONTINUING OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF COMMON AREAS BY A HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION AND NO FACILITIES ARE
PROPOSED TO BE MAINTAINED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE.
3. Confarmity of the propased PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth
management plan.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE URBAN MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT ON
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. GROUP HOSING IS A PERMITTED USE IN THE URBAN DESIGNATED
AREA. THEREFORE, CONSISTENCY CAN BE ESTABLISHED WITH THIS ELEMENT OF THE GMP.
IN SUMMARY, CONSISTENCY CAN BE ESTABLISHED WITH ONE OR MORE ELEMENTS OF THE GMP
WITH THE PROPOSED REZONING REQUEST TO ESTABLISH COMPLIANCE WITH THE ABOVE
CRITERIA NUMBER 3.
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.
FOUR STORY BUILDINGS ARE PROPOSED ON THIS SITE. A 150 FEET BUILDING EASTERN SETBACK,
WITH A SUBSTANTIAL VEGETATED BUFFER AREA, IS PLANNED ALONG THE STERLING OAKS
PROPERTY TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL BUFFERING AND SCREEENJNG FOR THE PROPOSED
BUILDINGS AND USE. THE BUFFER AREA WILL CONSIST OF A CYPRESS HEAD AND RESTORED
NATIVE VEGETATION, WITH THE WIDEST SECTION OF THIS BUFFER BEING ABOUT 130 FEET. THE
SITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE PLANNED ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE SITE, AWAY FROM STERLING
OAKS; THE PRESERVE tS PLANNED NEXT TO STERLING OAKS. (SEE ALSO EXHIBIT C-l FOR
ADDITIONAL PLANTtNG AND LINE OF SIGHT DETAILS.)
IN SUMMARY, EXTERNAL COMPATIBILITY CAN BE MAINTAINED WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED
LANDSCAPING. INTERNAL COMPATIBILITY IS ACHIEVED THROUGH THE INTERNAL
ARRANGEMENT OF STRUCTURES AROUND PLANNED OPEN SPACE AND WATER MANAGEMENT
AREAS TO ESTABLISH CONSISTENCY WITH CRITERIA NUMBER 4. A MINIMUM SETBACK OF 150
FEET WILL BE MAINTAINED FROM THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. (SEE ALSO EXHIBIT B.)
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
THE PROPOSED CPUD CONTEMPLATES FOUR STORY BUILDINGS CLUSTERED AROUND OPEN
SPACE AND THE PROPOSED WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. A MINIMUM OF 30% OPEN SPACE IS
REQUIRED FOR A CPUD AND THE SUBJECT PROPERlY PROVIDES FOR," 60% OPEN SPACE, (SEE
CPUD MASTER PLAN).
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLICATION.doc
t
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 18 of 51
6. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available
improvements and facilities, both public and private.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A SMALL '" 9-ACRE INFILL DEVELOPMENT TIlAT WILL BE
CONSTRUCTED IN ONE PHASE. GIVEN THE SIZE AND THE SCALE OF THE PROPOSED REZONING
REQUEST, ALONG WITH THE LDC'S CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENTS, ADEQUATE PUBLIC
FACILITIES WILL BE AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT THE NEEDS OF THE PROPOSED REQUEST. U.S.4t
HAS ADEQUATE CAPACITY TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BASED ON
THE RESULTS OF THE T.I.S. PROVIDED IN THIS APPLICATION. THEREFORE, COMPLIANCE CAN BE
ESTABLISHED WITH CRITERIA NUMBER SIX.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion.
THE SUBJECT AREA AND NEARBY SURROUNDING AREAS CAN READILY ACCOMMODATE THE
PROPOSED EXPANSIONIDEVELOPMENT. AS NOTED PREVIOUSLY, LANDS TO THE SOUTH, NORTH
AND EAST OF TIlE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE ALREADY DEVELOPED. THEREFORE, COMPLIANCE
CAN BE ESTABLISHED WITIl CRITERIA NUMBER 7.
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 literal application of such regulations.
THE PROPOSED CPUD REZONING CAN GENERALLY MEET ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF
THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, INCLUDING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS. HOWEVER, ONE DEVIATION IS REUESTED TO INCREASE THE
FLOOR AREA RATION FROM 0.45 TO 0.60 SO AS TO ALLOW FOR A WIDE RANGE OF AMENITIES.
THEREFORE, CONSISTENCY CAN BE ESTABLISHED WITH CRITERIA NUMBER 8. (SEE DEVIATION
#1)
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many
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 Detitions on the subiect DroDertv: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been
held on this property within the lost year? D Ves [2J No
If so, what was the nature of that hearing?
NOTICE:
This application will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency" has been made
and the application is assigned a petition processing number. The application will be considered
"closed" when the petitioner withdraws the application through written notice or ceases to supply
necessary information to continue orocessino or otherwise activelv oursue the rezonina for a
period of six (6) months. An opplication deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and
an application "closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An application deemed
"closed" may be re-opened by submitting a new application, repayment of all application fees
and granting of a determination of "sufficiency". Further review of the proiect will be subiect to
the then current code. [lDC Section 10.03.05.Q.)
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLlCATION.doc
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11. 2008
Page 19 of 51
STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS
FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST
APPLICANT INFORMATION
NAME OF APPLICANT(S) SA8AL PALM DEVELOPMENT. LLC
ADDRESS 7995-8 PRESERVE CIRCLE CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA
ZIP 34119
TELEPHONE # 239593-9641 CELL #
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
FAX # 239434-0986
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Section IT ownsh ip IRonge
9 / 48S / 25E
Lot:
Block:
Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #: Property I.D.#: # 00142600009.00142680003
Metes & Bounds Description:: (O.R. BOOK 1847. PAGE 1850)
SO MUCH OF THE SOUTH 332 FEET OF THE NORTH 732 FEET OF THE SOUTH 'l\ OF THE
NORTH 'l\ OF SECTION 9. TOWNSffiP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST. COLLIER COUNTY.
FLORIDA. ALL LYING EAST OF U.S. 41.
~
(O.R. BOOK 1847. PAGE 1848)
SO MUCH OF THE SOUTH 'h OF THE NORTH 112 OF SECTION 9. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH. R25E.
AS LIES EAST OF U.S. 41. COLLIER COUNTY. FL. LESS THE NORTH 732 FEET THEREOF. AND
ALSO LESS THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PARCEL.
COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST-WEST 'l\ SECTION LINE OF SECTION
9. TOWNSffiP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST AND THE EASTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY OF STATE
ROAD 45 (U.S. HIGHWAY 4\) AS MONUMENTED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION. AS A PLACE OF BEGINNING:
THENCE IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION ALONG THE EASTERN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF
STATE ROAD 45 (U.S. IDGHWAY 4\). A DISTANCE OF 400 FEET:
THENCE IN AN EASTERLY DIRECTION. PARALLEL TO. AND A DISTANCE OF 400 FEET
FROM. THE EAST-WEST I< SECTION LINE OF SECTION 9. TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25
EAST. A DISTANCE OF 545.00 FEET:
THENCE IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION. PARALLEL TO. AND A DISTANCE OF 545.00 FEET
FROM. THE EASTERN' RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 45 (U.S. HIGHWAY 4\). A
DISTANCE OF 400 FEET.
THENCE IN A WESTERLY DIRECTION ALONG THE EAST-WEST I< SECTION LINE OF
SECTION 9. TOWNSffiP 48 SOUTH. RANGE 25 EAST. A DISTANCE OF 545.00 FEET TO THE
PLACE OF BEGINNING.
C:'J)ocuments and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLICA TION.doc
r
Agenda Item No. 86
March 11, 2008
Page 20 of 51
I TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED
(Check applicable system):
COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM
a. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM
b. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM
PROVIDE NAME
d. PACKAGE TREATMENT PLANT
(GPD capacity)
SEPTIC SYSTEM
~
o
o
o
o
TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED
a. COUNTY UTILITY SYSTEM
b. CITY UTILITY SYSTEM
c. FRANCHISED UTILITY SYSTEM
PROVIDE NAME
d. PRIVATE SYSTEM (WELL)
~
o
o
o
TOTAL POPULATION TO BE SERVED: 175 x 1.5 = 263
PEAK AND AVERAGE DAilY DEMANDS:
A. WATER-PEAK 72,844 AVERAGE DAilY 48.562
B. SEWER-PEAK 49.576 AVERAGE DAilY 38.135
(185 aocd)
(145 aocd)
IF PROPOSING TO BE CONNECTED TO COlliER COUNTY REGIONAL WATER SYSTEM,
PLEASE PROVIDE THE DATE SERVICE IS EXPECTED TO BE REQUIRED JANUARY 2009
NARRATIVE STATEMENT: Provide a brief ond concise norrative statement ond schematic
drawing of sewage treatment process to be used os well as a specific statement
regarding the method of affluent and sludge disposal. If percolation ponds are to be
used, then percolation data and soil involved shall be provided from tests prepared and
certified by a professional engineer.
SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED BY COLLIER COUNTY
COLLIER COUNTY UTILITY DEDICATION STATEMENT, If the project is located within the
services boundaries of Collier County's utility service system, written notarized statement
shall be provided agreeing to dedicate to Collier County Utilities the water distribution
and sewage collection faciiities within the project area upon completion of the construction
of these facilities in accordance with all opplicable County ordinances in effect at the at
time. This statement shall also include on agreement that the applicable system
development charges and connection fees will be paid to the County Utilities Division prior
to the issuance of building permits by the County. If applicable, the statement shall contain
shall contain an agreement to dedicate the oppropriate utility easements for serving the
water and sewer systems.
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temponu)' Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLICA nON.doc
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 21 of 51
UTILITIES TO BE DEDICATED TO COLLIER COUNTY AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTION PLAN
APPROVAL.
STATEMENT OF AVAilABILITY CAPACITY FROM OTHER PROVIDERS: Unless waived or
otherwise provided for at the pre-application meeting, if the project is to receive sewer or
potable water services from any provider other than the County, a statement from that
provider indicating that there is adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided.
C:\Documents and Senings\MossJohnDavid\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OIX5A5\APPLICATION.doc
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 22 of 51
PUD AMENDMENT (PUDA)
PUD REZONE (PUDZ)
PUD to PUD REZONE (PUDZ-A)
APPLICATION
SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED
BELOW W/COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION.
#OF NOT
REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED
, .,... ,'.... STANDARD REQUIREMENTS, > , .,
1 Additional set if located in the BayshorejGateway Triangle
RedeveloDment Area)
Copies of detailed description of why amendment is necessary 24 X
Completed Application with list of Permitted Usesi Development Standards Table; List 24
of proposed deviations from the LDC (if any); List of Developer Commitments and
Statement of Compliance narrative X
(download application from website for current form)
Pre-application meeting notes 24 X
PUD Conceptual Master Site Plan 24" x 36" and One 8 V2" x , 1" copy 24 X
Revised Conceptual Master Site Pion 24" x 36"and One 8 V2" x'1"copy 24 X
Original PUD document/ordinance and Master Plan 24" x 36" ONLY IF AMENDING 24 X
THE PUD
Revised PUD application with changes crossed thru & underlined 24 X
Revised PUD application w/amended Title page wiard #'s, LDe 10.02.13.A.2 24 X
2 Copies of the following: " .'. .
Deeds/Legal's 8. Survey (if boundary of original PUD is amended) 2 X
List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 2 X
Owner/Affidavit signed & notarized 2 X
Covenant of Unified Control 2 X
Completed Addressing checklist 2 X
..... .... . ..... , 4.CopiiEtsofthefollowing: . . ............. .c"=
Environmental Impact Statement {EIS} and digital/electronic copy of EIS or exemption X X
justification 3
Historical Surveyor waiver request 4 X
Utility Provisions Statement w /sketches 4 X
Architectural rendering of proposed structures 4 X
Survey, signed & sealed 4 X
Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) or waiver 7 X
Recent Aerial Photograph (with habitat areas defined) min scaled 1" 400'
5
Electronic copy of all documents in Word format and plans (CDRom or Diskette)
1
NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITT AlS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
If located in RFMU (Rural Frinae Mixed Use) Receivina Land Areas
Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. Lacavera, State of Florida
Division of Forestry @ 239-690-3500 for information regarding
"Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan", LDC Section 2.03.08.A.2.a.(b)i.c.
Applicant/Agent Signature
Date
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavid\Local Scttings\Temporaty Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLlCATION.doc
EXHIBIT C
Napoli Village CPUD for Adult Congregate Living Facility
MASTER PLAN
C:\Documents and Settings\MossJohnDavidlLocal Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5A5\APPLlCA nON.doc
T
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11. 2008
Page 23 of 51
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 24 of 51
ORDINANCE NO. 08-_
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE
NUMBER 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH INCLUDES THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, BY
AMENDING THE APPROPRIATE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS
BY CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF TIlE HEREIN
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FROM AN AGRICULTURAL (A)
ZONING DISTRICT TO "CPUD" COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT FOR A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS THE NAPOLI
VILLAGE CPUD, LOCATED WEST OF TAMlAMI TRAIL NORTH
(US 4t), IN SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 8.97+/- ACRES;
AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Robert L. Duane, AICP, of Hole Montes, Inc., representing Sab<ll Palm
Development, LLC. petitioned the Board of County Conmlissioners to change the zoning
c1flssiflcatLon of the herein desclibed real property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of (he herein described real property located in Section 9,
Township 4S South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, is changed from an AgIicultural (A)
Zoning District to a "CPUD" Commercial Planned Unit Development Zoning District for a
project to be known as the Napoli Village CPUD in accordance with the Exhibits A tlu'ough F,
attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps,
as described in Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development
Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly.
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of Connty
Canunissioncrs areallier County, Florida, this __ day of .2008.
ATTEST:
DWIGHT B. BROCK, CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
, Deputy Clerk
By:
TOM HENNING, CHAIRMAN
By:_.
Approved as to fonu
and legal sufficiency:
'IY)('J~" Yri t.\h.dJlA.ot. -MAih;,^
Maljori . Student-S irling ~""---o
Assis~nt County Attorney
Exhibit A - List of Permitted Uses
Exhibit B - Development Standards
Exhibit C - Master Plan
Exhibit D - Legal Description
Exhibit E - List of Requested Deviations from the LDC
Exhibit F - Development Commitments Spedfic to the Project
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 25 of 51
EXHIBIT A
Napoli Village CPUD
LIST OF PERMITTED USES
I. PERMITTED USES
No building or structure, 01' part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole
or in part, for other than the following:
A. Principal Uses and Structures:
I. Assisted living facilities and independent living facilities for persons over age
55.
B. Accessory Uses and Amenities
The following uses shall comprise a minimum of 20 percent of the total amount of
gross floor area:
I. Dining rooms, small meeting areas for socializing, bingo, card games, etc.,
balcony gathering areas, atrium gathering areas, indoor facilities such as
rehabilitation room, beauty shop, medical support facilities, media and
exercise rooms, personnel service areas and similar kinds of uses to support
the facility.
2. Any other accessory and related use that is determined to be comparable to the
foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, pursuant to the process outlined in
the Land Development Code (LDC).
C. Miscellaneous Accessory Uses and Amenities
The following uses shall not be counted towards the minimum 20 percent of the
total amount of gross floor area:
I. Signs, water management areas, essential services, covered parking facilities,
van transportation area, nature trails, outdoor recreational facilities such as
swimming pool and deck and similar kinds of uses to support thc facility.
2. Any othcr accessory and related use that is determined to be comparable to the
foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, pursuant to the process outlined in
the LDC,
Revis€d 1116/08
I
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 26 of 51
n.
PRESERVE TRACT USES
No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole
or in part, for the preserve area depicted on the CPUD Master Plan, which shall be a minimum of
1.36 acres, other than the following:
A. Principal Uses and Structures:
I. Passive recreation areas, boardwalks and recreational shelters,
2. Water management and water management structures.
3. Mitigation areas.
4. Passive recreational uses such as pervious nature trails or boardwalks are allowed
within the preservc areas, as long as any clearing required to facilitate these uses
does not impact the minimum required vegetation,
5. Any other conservation and related use that is determined to be comparable to the
foregoing by the Board of Zoning Appeals, pursuant to the process outlined in the
We.
Revised 1116108
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 27 of 51
EXHIBIT B
Napoli Village CPUD
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Development of The Napoli Village CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of
this Ordinance and applicable sections of the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP)
in effect at the time of issuance of any development order, such as, but not limited to,
final subdivision plat, final site development plan, excavation permit, and preliminary
work authorization, to which such regulations relate, Where these regulations fail to
provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district, the C-3
(Commercial Intelmediate District) of the LDC shall apply.
Table I below sets fOlih the development standards for land uses within the CPUD
Commercial Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those
specitied in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as ofthc date of approval of the SDP
or subdivision plat.
TABLE I
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES
MINIMUM LOT AREA NI A
MINIMUM LOT WIDTH NI A
MINIMUM FLOOR AREA NIA
MINIMUM FRONT YARD 25 feet
MINIMUM SIDE YARD 25 feet
MINIMUM REAR YARD 25 feet
MINIMUM PRESERVE SETBACK 25 feet
MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN
PRINCIP AL STRUCTURES 1/2 building height (BH)
MAXIMUM BUILDING
HEIGHT
4-Stories, not to exceed 50-foot
zoned BH or 67-foot actual BH
The setback from the east property line shall be a minimum of 150 feet.
The delivery service areas will be limited to the nOlih and south of the proposed building
or buildings.
Revised 2/8108
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 28 of 51
B. ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
FRONT SETBACK
15 feet
SlOE SETBACK
1 0 feet
REAR SETBACK
I 0 feet
PRESERVE SETBACK
10 feet
MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
10 feet
MAXIMUM BUILDING
HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED
1 story, not to exceed 25 feet zoned height
and 30 feet actual BH
GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth above shall be understood to be
in relation to individual parcel 01' lot boundary lines, or between structures.
C. PRESERVE TRACT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Same as for Commercial Development Accessory Structures, see Table LB. above.
D. DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY
A maximum floor area ratio of 0.60 is permitted for this CPUD, equivalent to a
maximum of two-hundred thirty-four thousand four-hundred forty feet (234,440) square
feet ofliving area.
The maximum number of units shall be 225 units, Out of this number of units, the total
number of independent living units shall not exceed 175 units,
The maximum amount of area devoted for project amenities shall comprise a minimum
of 20 percent (20%) of the total amount of iloor area (see Exhibit A. 1. B, for the
permitted accessory uses and amenities).
Revised 218/08
mco~
coO""'
.0_
ON 0
Z.......:.m
r~N
i33,-m
:::::~ ~
"''''D-
~:;;:
'"
0>
<(
;!
~
C
,"0
,,~
0"
N
;
~
e
t.. "..J.
::~:::;i::::>:J:
'1' "'l:!'" . ",
\;;l
t '.1
\.1\':.\/\\\\)\1\'
I
t
,~ or,'
;,
!
~
~
;,
Cl i~ g
z s !!
w
'" ;~ 5 '" w
W w m
...J "~ ~ ~ii ~I.
.. il . c~ ~~I
-$
'" ~. ~I w ~~I 501
w >
I- ~~ ffi [g11 "'i"
0 . ~" c ~d
z ilo ~" ~ sL
9~~ ~ ~ ..
...J
<2 ~~~ a DLJJI
w ~!f ~~ : : :: :\:;il::~
r i~ z
UJ =~ :i
.. '" ...i c:i
Ii -'
, .. .. , .< 5 r2
_~i<~
<H,..
~im:c
z ~"
0"
N 0
U
I ,-; c ~ /", /?
I I.. uJ c,.:t ,'I" ",
I ,/ Zo _ "- " " ,
I I __ (./ .../
1 .. N'" '~~....._._-~
tf-------~--------- -- r______r_ -------- w -- ~;~ri.;l------------~\
g~
..
~
g~
geE
...~
'"
\ p ,
\"l a'..'
~ -.......,..
~ ---------.-
.
~~,f'J~~:!1! ~
CIlmlD"'N~mOi' 0
~CN"":';ooi ~
... (II ... ...~ ?
l ! ~ j ( ! . !
il NrD~rr:I_D1t-:a) ~
tl)aot\lo~ollO (It
~ :t ":ONO":OOc.i ED
<( I! \ i i ;
all i;' I!
~ !! I [wl
w l f_;~~
tf) ifi If) :C:C:c w
::J:g !i!~~i ;~~~ ~
@ ~ ~:J~~~mm; ~.
:s :5 a~~~~g:g:~ ~
ffi
o
'"
w
..
d
~
.lO'1!ll<D/lt'V"
/'
. !
t:J
17......
L:;/
.1O-'E>>mnN~
~.I ,jll\\\I"
~ ~ i 1\ ' i I
... ~ r: I I \ I
I ,.1
.... : ~ I I
: II' .111
...~~ . '1'
\ "\\'I!\111
: : 1\
\ ) III \11
/: \jl
!' '.'
/ ;11 'Uti
1,1: 1\1
\ Ii 1 I iil J I
~ 1 \11
l g: I I .(11 I
I ~' 'ld,
~i \Ii! 1.1 i\li~~
I I ~ II m
I I IJ hi fil\5
I I ": z:~
II t lH:::J
II'! 1'1 i::11
, ,\1
ilp I ~ III
!I"~ 1!jI '1'111 I
il~' ... I
:l\<j \ 'I'!
1_, , \ I L I \
I '"
: 11\1\
1 II '\~
\\ I 1 j it! I I
..)y ~~ \ \
~:~I I',!', I
,,'(j~ i I
II 'r,...1' Iii
/ l . II [ll"d I
,/, 1"1
n: ]['1
ji' Ill.
j1~! 11\
,I I ",
l!: jlll
I! i : 11'1
'I' "
~\ II lH
.\ I l:j
II' 'I'
" 1'1
It II \I.
'1\' '11
,'I 1\1'1
d ~ l L
"I
' I l \ L
:q
I:,
~11'1
'i. l'lj'
. I
'I t:!\1
e~ , I.,
'i <fIlII
III ~ 1\ ! !
I II:
,. ,
'I'
I' \ i, I
I, II'
t! I 1,1 II
[' ,. I
,../ :11
q I. ,
~f":::_ II!!:
kill
U~ j '\; 1\ [.j i
5o'l '!~ \11 l i !
'I t: 1 'I
: -I: II
(::-'
., !
d
W
1-",
>i;Sw
"'01-
X...J'"
0",,,,
o:~
"-",
;'(
!i
i
J01D_~
z
o
~
,..
:3.
1l~
gill
'""
~"
53~
15"
.."
o~
00>
w'
",m
~
i'l
'"
'"
~
'"
~
~~
~~
"'''
'"
.."
a..
in~
om
H
>
o
~
..
t
w~
>~
'"
w_
'"
'" "
'"
....
~
o-
w
!.';"
~..
,,0>
W
~~
.
"')
1
::;
o
~
5
-' .
<3~
~
~05
~~~
...
~ 5~iSg
Z [J;...J1;5n.
~ 5~5--
o w
N 'v
I-
Z
UJ
(,)
<(
..,
o
<>:
o
w . . .
~~~~
>
O<;l)t--1tI
O:::MIJl~
L
00_
W
> ~ U II
'"
m .t.
W.....NI-
tt;. . . 0
1l..<'1.0..1--
6cE0
-=-- .
<(ll..<(::>
~!_ ~r
a:~5cn
~jj'JCfl~
iJ... ~
'-::>a: x
.:(1-0 (.)
tl)l-Wlr
OH"'5~
Wo;l-l :c
z:c> (.)
"u -'
N
~ v
I "I .
1",-
g it
I 'i. ~
! ~ I fj
cZ:
;;;::\
';0.
U\IJ..
IlIt:P
",<Il,..
::\....i1i
~:l~
"'w
::dli
00
..z:
<0
Z:O
i~~'~
I'~ii
~~...~Ji
..aft
.'Fi
In
5:~1
Q,)
M
rn
~
.-
'0
a.
rn
Z
~
.....-... ..............-.- ,,_......~ - ...,.........-------..
, "
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 30 of 51
EXHIBIT D
Napoli Village CPUD
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
(O.R. Book 1847, Page 1850)
So much of the South 332 feet of the North 732 feet of the South 12 of the North
12 of Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, all
lyingEastofU,S,41. And
(O,R. Book 1847, Page 1848)
So much ofthe South 12 of the North 1/2 of Section 9, Township 48 South, R25E,
as lies East ofu'S. 41, Collier County, FL, less the North 732 feet thereof, and
also less the following described parcel.
Commencing at the intersection of the East-West 12 section line of Section 9,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East and the eastern right-of-way of State Road 45
(U.S. Highway 41) as monumented by the Florida Department of Transportation,
as a place of beginning:
Thence in a northerly direction along the eastern right-of-way line of State Road
45 (U.S. Highway 41), a distance of 400 feet;
Thence in a easterly direction, parallel to, and a distance of 400 feet from, the
East-West V. section line of Section 9, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, a
distance of 545.00 feet:
Thence in a southerly direction, parallel to, and a distance of 545.00 feet from, the
eastern right-of-way line of State Road 45 (U.S. Highway 41), a distance of 400
feet.
Thence in a westerly direction along the East-West Y. section line of Section 9,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, a distance of 545.00 feet to the place of
beginning,
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 31 of 51
EXHmIT E
Napoli Village CPUD
LIST OF REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC
This deviation seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.I to allow the floor area ratio
(FAR) to be increased from 0.45 to 0.60 for an adult living facility. Since the 0.45 FAR
was established many years ago, building code changes have resulted in an increase in
the size of public areas. In addition, the level of amenities provided to serve residents has
increased, as has the unit size demanded by residents. To meet the dcmand for incrcased
amenities, the minimum amount of on-site recreational and support amenities shall
comprise a minimum of 20 percent of the total amount of floor area (see Exhibit A. I. B,
for the permitted accessory uses and amenities).
Revised 1/16/08
I
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 32 of 51
EXHIBIT F
Napoli Village CPUD
DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS SPECIFIC TO THE PROJECT
1. TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS
A. All traffic control devices, signs, pavement marking, and design criteria shall be
in accordance with the Florida Depattment of Transportation (FDOT) Manual of
Uniform Minimum Standards (MUMS), CUlTent edition, FDOT Design Standards,
current edition, and the Manual On Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD),
current edition,
B. Arterial-level street lighting shall be provided at all access points. Access lighting
shall bc in place prior to the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy (CO).
C. Access points shown on the CPUD Master Plan are considered to be
conceptual. Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of
access at any specific point along any property boundary. The number of access
points constructed may be less than the number depicted on the Master Plan;
however, no additional access points shall be considered unless a PUD
amendment is approved.
D. Site related improvements (as opposed to system related improvements) necessary
for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined by Collier County, shall
not be eligible for impact fee credits. All required improvements shall be in place
and available to the public prior to commencement of on-site construction.
E, Nothing in any development order (DO) shall vest a right of access in excess of a
right-in/right-out condition at any access point. Neithcr shall thc existence of a
point of ingress, a point of egress, or a median opening, nor the lack thereof, be
the basis for any future causc of action for damages against the County by the
developer, its successor in title, or assignee. Collier County reserves the right to
close any median opening existing at any time which is found to be adverse to the
health, safety, and welfare of the public. Any such modifications shall be based
on, but not limited to, safety, operational circulation, and roadway capacity.
F, If any required turn lane improvement requires the use of any existing County
rights-of-way or easement(s), then compensating rights-of-way or easements shall
be provided at no cost to Collier County as a consequence of such
improvement(s) upon final approval of the turn lane design during the first site
development plan approval stage. The typical cross-section may not differ from
2/12/08
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 33 of 51
the existing roadway unless approved, in writing, by the Transportation Division
Administrator, or his designee,
G. If, in the sole opinion of Collier County, traffic signal(s), other traffic control
devices, signs, pavement marking improvements within a public right-of-way or
easement, or site related improvements (as opposed to system related
improvementR) necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project, as determined
by Collier County, are detennined to be necessary, the cost of such improvement
shall be the responsibility of the developer, its successors 01' assigns. The
improvements shall be paid for or installed, at the County's discretion, prior to the
issuance of the appropriatc corresponding CO.
2. ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS
The purpose of this Section is to set forth the environmental commitments of the
project dcveloper.
A. All conservation/preservation areas (1.36 acres minimum) shall be
designated as Preserve on all construction plans, and shall be recorded on
the plat as a separate tract or easement with protective covenants per or
similar to Section 704.06 of the Florida Statues, Preserve areas shall be
dedicated on the plat to the project's homeowners association or like entity
for ownership and maintenance responsibilities and to Collier County with
no responsibility for maintenance.
2/12/08
~~-C
Page 34 of 51
Co1W:r County
STAFF REPORT
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 7, 2008
SUBJECT:
PUDZ-2007-AR-12248: NAPOLI VILLAGE COMMERCIAL PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD)
PROPERTY APPLICANT/AGENT:
APPLICANT: Sabal Palm Development, LLC
7995-B Preserve Circle
Naples, FL 34119
AGENTS: Robert 1. Duane, AICP
Hole Montes, Inc.
950 Encore Way
Naples, FL 34110
Richard D. Yovanovich
Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson
4001 Tamiami Trail North
Naples, FL 34103
REOUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests that the Collier County. Planning Commission (CCPC) consider.a rezone of
the subject site from the Rural Agricultural (A) zoning district to the Commercial Planned Unit
Development (CPUD) zoning district for a project to be known as the Napoli Village CPUD.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The 8.97-acre subject property is located on the east side of Tamiami Trail North (US 41), west of
the Sterling Oaks PUD, approximately 1,700 feet south of the Lee County line, in Section 9,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (see location map on the following
page).
PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
If approved, the proposed CPUD would allow for an "adult care living facility," which, according
to Section 1.08.02 of ihe Land Development Code (LDC), is defined more specifically as an
Page 1 of 9
IJ)CO~
coO'"
.0_
ON 0
Z -'"
E:;:::M
OJ.c OJ
~2g'
roroo..
-g;:;;
<D
OJ
<(
0..
<(
:1E
Qg (!)
~a
~ < Z
. \ ,
Q ~ -
~ " ~ ~ Z
<C~~). ~ 0
N
l(y - .~rn) '1'1 '1I\flli Il'IltMVl
~
...
Q ~ N
N
::> ~ ~
0. ~ ci:
. 0(
,
...
0
0
N
,
N
nrnOl.lOll / "E- O
- ::>
0-
..
'"
>- , IWVVI !2
~ ~ ill u
z I-
" _ i l ;::
0 , II
u -, ~!l. l "' w
h 0..
w .' 11
~
.
i i
~ .... 0..
I <(
i :1E
i z
,
,.,..."..... lU".1) III ,I .j.l 0
'1 -
I-
,
, <(
,
. U
0
-l
CJl"'~
",0 en
0_
-NO
-CO
;:.'"
a;.,C Q)
_"OJ
-I-{'C
"''''0-
;2::;;
a;
OJ
<(
~
~
~~
~
~I~,:~
. \"~''''f
:;1~:::Wm:>.:/~r
.1'."'(fi.,.....
o
wo
zoo
O~
N
"
, n
1 f-Z fila /:" "
I 1/5- '- ,~/ l;'/
: N '" 11CI.:"'.10'1____~
> r --- -- -------..--- --- ------- -- - ------- -- ---l7.lll-nij- ------------"'\
LJ ,1I.3dlJ. 9\
~
~
~
Cl
Z
w
'"
W
...J
..
'"
w
b
z
. ~
W
t i ~ z
w
.- '"
Ii
.
"
:i
~
I
E
"
w
>
~
w
u>
w
IE
\ i:\ 1:,1" I',
I if, I \,
i!U) ; ,\\\"
I . 1\1 \ I
r.--"1\ II \ \ \ 11
'\ II \ 1[ III t
J: \\ l
,. \, I
,. '('II
I: I
I I, 1
'\~i ! \ll1
t:i~ I \ l I"
ia:\ ,1
Be I 'I,
, ~~ J1 I I \:,11 \
r ~~ 1 ~lll,
I \!.! '~ iii Ig .
yt' .: 1\', ~5
1 I 'I al
! i II ii: liliiS
I l 'Id ~~
'I I 1\ N
I ' 1'1 1"'11
,\ l :'
I' I 'II
:!b 1 ;;;: \1\
'i'~~' ''" '1'1
I: I :i- 11'
Ii l '1:
I!~ \ \ 1 \\ \ \ I
li: ,d::
'.\. I :1'1"
\:-.J 11 ,I II
rjr 1\'
" ~~ ,t
~~\ l'i ': I \
.1 "ir-~~ n\
! // \ 'I ~loIl I 1
I: l 1\ \\\\:: I
n~! HI
.. I ,I,
d, " ill
1\ ~ ': lV1
Ii ~ 1 I I 1:1'
Iy: "
I I 111'
11 I 01,
II! I \ lH
II 1 III
" I 1\::'
1\ \ I:!
: \1\
II \1,
\ll
, "Iii
~ II,
.. ",
l(I : I,
;. I \\
ii .;tl \ \/1
'i ~'l I , I
, e: 11
1\:.1, Ii:
\ I \, l
:J : I:
~ j I . 1
I:; 111 \\
~ ' I I
l't: \ . ~
i; ,.':::
'~,' : I!
I-L__, 1\\ II
iii'l~~" I I \ ! :
~:I~ :: , I \ ,
50 f:i ;1 \ \. :
U ,1. II .1
~ l /f; \ \
'.
"'
~~
=~
-~ ~
i. e.
< t; ..w
~ 2....
ill '~
05: :i ~
~I!> i"
5~!i ~~.
i:~ li~
~~~ ~~
~" 9 ~
.,iit :10
~ ~
w "
~ - -
~~. Eli
w;1 ;l .
~.~ a>l
olm ffi! i
sU ~~t
D".u';....1
. , ,",,".
.. ",.'
....,;:.:,::.-.!
i3~~
";(;SG
",~","i
w w",
" <<u
20"'
8
"
"
.
.
/'
, ,
I'
,.,
r7^
L::/
(~\
", '
d
~~ \.....
"
"z
wH
z-' ffi
2~ w~
u> ~~
\\q
~ .
" L.
~
\<!
i
,
i
=::~~~~.~:~ -
n
~
w
o
ffi
~
~Jf'~~~!~
OI~:2"'No)<<Jm
~o~Mi";::?~
; !
".
>- ~
!
'"
=>
'"
UJ
'"
=> w
Cl '!l
z "
:5 3
... , ..
., ...
. . .. ,
.. - .
t-iai!":i=..-mr-:0
IOCloCllQl?l>><J:t
":ONO"":OON
.w
, , ,~
_NO
'. oW
~ '" -n.a...3
~w~::.:: 'WUl~
."ffi:i ~i5-
3:J~iD~mCl)~
~~~e5~f~
~
H 5 z
l-
S, H ~
all SI ~ ~g"
;lO> N a ."
u~ ~ ;lu ~,
wN ~~ C.. '" i5~i5g
l(" w~ Z tctir::r:11.
iB~ ~~ >'" ii ... 5~~""
~ z
w_ 11.< . , .
z'" z" on ~~~;j 0 on _
w ::!" w " N '.
~x ~ ii;CJJ.I'-CD a~Bih
o~ o~ ~.. a;:t"lomt? f-
~ ~ --:;1- .
om em 0_ co- 2 <(0.<:::)
w . w . w w UJ
~'" 0'" "'''
H H H > " " " '-'
00 > oo~ ~ <t
w " ~,~:;;
0 0 om u> -,
::! ~ W W....NI- 0
"- ~'" a:: . 10 <t z~w~
. a.. a... 0. I-
J0100fl)llJ'l'''
~
"
o
o
o
~
m
w
t;
..
~
b
,
W
f-",
~::iw
.....Of-
~..JH
"'.....'"
a.'"
~aJ
Ij
I
r--
Ij
I
J01D11D01Vd
rL~~ .
___ ___.__________._._..J
'\
IIU:lnt
.O,JtUJ.,gl
au> ~
__:;:>a: X
<1-0 (..l
r/)l- W IX;
DHU:r:~
WO:::""I~
z:r.>::l
00 -'
N
., ~
~ ~ t 't5
I i
'5 ~
. n, ~ C!
i ~ t ~
cj~
~ii
d Wa
w=~
""'...
<",-
::lei!!
>r2R
::; Ihw
00
0.=
<0
=0
1~~'E
j;~p
~!~j!
1,1
III
II
~ .. t
. ','I
II ,
Q)
00
eO
=
>
.-
15
C-
eO
Z
!
......-_..r"..._._......_.....~.....,_"..\ '^"""......._""'..
!
Agenda Item No. 8S
March 11, 2008
Page 37 of 51
assisted livingJacility (ALF). Such facilities are further described as those that "provide.. .housing,
food service and one or more personal services...and...provide limited nursing services, when
licensed to do so." According to LDC Section 2.03,06,C.3, the Commercial Planned Unit
Development (CPUD) zoning district is construed to include the entire range of uses permitted in
the General Commercial (C-I) through (C-5) zoning districts, which includes ALFs. The ALF
proposed with this application would provide a maximum 234,440 square feet of gross floor area
for both independent and assisted-living units for renters aged 55 years and older. The actual mix
of independent vs. assisted living units has not yet been determined by the applicant; howevcr, the
development conditions limit the total number of units to 225 with a maximum of 175 independent
living units. A variety of associated accessory uses, such as a dining area, beauty shop, exercise
room, swimming pool and a medical care facility, for the exclusive use of residents and their
guests, is also proposed. The ALF would be comprised of two, four-story buildings with a
maximum zoned height of 50 feet. The actual height, including appurtenances, would be a
maximum of 67 feet.
As shown in the PUD documents (see Appendix I, Exhibit E), the applicant is requesting a
deviation from the 0.45 floor area ratio (FAR) permitted by Section 5.05.04.D.l of the LDC to
permit an FAR of 0.60, which would represent an increase of 0, 15 FAR. The applicant maintains
that thc purpose of this deviation, which will be discusscd further in the "Zoning Review" portion
of this report on page fivc, is to provide the additional recreational amenities demanded by today's
market.
Aerial view of subject property
- , '":1" - \'''' '~~L ~~...." r\\~~t~~{' i,-.);;~~-. '~":~:~~')~I~::~
~'%--"'~11~: "'.~".:~ ~-'l.ti.;(,( ~J;%''.~~!J{tr~"\~~",,~~...:.,I~'~:\~~.H}I>~';r, :~l.\~' /.~.
., ~,. "" " '~').r. i~" II I,." , ::. ,~ 'T~_", 11 '" ,1 ' . ~~, "",,', _ ~. "
' !~:,}l,~. "'~~I' 'fI,1 I Iii 'j ,j1r'JJ,j' ~r" II /,1 ~f.' v":' 1""
I".'" ,}\,~ <"I!llt "'j\;' ...1\lt"1 . ; _~ ,11_'1 _':'_~;~j~:,~,I"''''''1 ~,~'
I'" c.;, ~ ). jl/~].~, 1" :11" . ,- I', j':' "if,:":'; ", "r.:Q;~'';.., \."/ ., . .
~ \, "'" ~"'!- '" I' I ' "'1 ' '1 I -,', ,C 'l> ~'~ " "'0:11. ~':I~~ l ~.
. ~!l y- If; ~'" ,I .' It_ell!;" ':.:r'."";->-:"""""J,.f,"l}<' -~:"''''''iJlm:' j
/ '.. ' ". 'r~l' I 41 ; I I' 1-' I.. III .1"::' J, fro.."", '1," '( -11.>.:.. ~~I LO.J'" ~
,-~; '\'l-l~\~~~'\.I1J~~l\"I')-:':~"'_' ':'i<' i' "~'~"~;{1.~~tA~ '
, "-' ~.,,,, '"'''{I" ~,..C:f, ~ I I I f' " ". ~_ J' .I.' ,e,
: ,,( t 1 1, \1"( :r~~C;~'f; I' J)! "~rr ~"l,;; ~~' , .'
':':,<.( ,;'r}:\~'/;T~'N11,"II"',' I " "";\~J~,,.,~,...;,d;':.. "....
'01 ' ' "L, '1'" .:}'~Ifi',<;,.':i , '~l\ ~:~~~ '....lIp: ,.P,'
' '. j i ? -'- II:' '1:"_, ' I ,~ . :'1.1J'.: ,;,,\, 'jl
". ..... '. '''(~Y~'1;~~''if,i;~~I~\1 l -j ~'''.t'~-:~) .i~;::~i'''~~''
." t,;d ~..' "\:1 ..,,1,<, ,j I lai~"~ ""' i1."''; t'rM .,
; " ~:' ,71i;. ;fi{.~l:.t8.~l "'~,'!ll'} ,:~~,,~;.~:r.r~ ':
' ,< 'I d, ">"'",,1), '\ I ,r,~,v' 'ii"'" ,
'" "~Y''''''',-,/",~,,\,.,"-I), POl'" ~'l>~ ,."W' \~~
/~".V. i;,".~",,\j,,~,'," .'" I,!!"<,,\'~,,,< '~''<,'" I"~,
",-"", , ,,{,~~'"::'~-\'j;"..:';/1'\,( .~ I~;l;;-r.::'.~l~'\" ',:':,
,.~" 1 " ""...... I' ! I ~.1. D"'::"~~ ,<<' <A.:. <
'.' ,< "I'" I, 'I. oo~; I ' I' ':TO\' H' <.1:'" ". '\I~
.. "'. / 1\'," ~"'"1T:7"'~i'~ ,I . I P . C,'"4 !,>, 7'~" I rl'" '.;-\~ ,'..-< ", ',~~,;.....~~
1# ,')- )"~~lT\L-~V;1111,:\} ')r;"'t~L~;~:lL~~~1411 /'~:'~..,_ ;'),' ~~~.
~-" .". \."'rt.a~'I,,~' ~~1" ,I"~! \'1..';I,'h .,7;'o(;'~...'.~,^,1 > ,,'~ .~ J"':;:1-!'i.~,
'''" 1- ,,, .<c J !"'Lr.'{ ~ I '-'! >,: IJ...,.,,,, ,I ~!"." ,', <',_~ '<,,_,"'; ~.\,~ '.
) 1}') L ;: (~:~J~<flil~II,' l~~' I ~Il'i\' \' r::;.; JC"'~lr .:;'{\:, ,.,.~..'b~~'i(fJ~'~'~~?.p~~2,<~;:~_
~".', ,..'-"-1.', ~';"'':''- __'., J i :-,.... , ,<1 ~"'! ' 'I.,,: "~\-:t~:'.$-" ~'.~' ~.~. .~."."'
<" ,1F.~it{~1' -'~\\_'~"""'~}.~J?"'~ t ~'j".' "':"';l.~r:~.j"<" ':.)'~;j;;~,-'4'
;;~';L{;;ii'l1)l:!''''"- .}f'!),11t~l~
.1.,,,,,;,,,,, . ""y.>,,, ,III " """'.--'i" ",..""g,..
'1"'":/;,~;!,~,::..;t~:~::J:-1~ ",::','i,:;:~" ,,':;.,1. (I'j\" ~>; 1',.\1 ...-~~.!,l--' _ '! Q~~~9n 1 :";,
~."_'~~i~4',<:I_":':"'.r;:;',;:'~""_ ~t.::{,!I,\ .~_ ._,,' '.~:, .'!, ',,""
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North: Christus Victor Lutheran Church, zoned Agricultural
Page 2 019
1
Agenda Item No. 86
March 11, 2008
Page 38 of 51
East:
Single- and multi-family residences, and group care facilities at 3.7 units per acre, zoned
Sterling Oaks PUD
Community Congregational Church, zoned Agricultural
Tamiami Trail North (US 41), then commercial uses, zoned Audobon Country Club PUD
South:
West:
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE):
The subject property is designated Urban Residential, as identified on the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM) of the GMP. Per Policy 5.8 of the Future Land Use Element of the GMP, ALFs shall be
permitted within the Urban Designated Area, subject to the definitions and regulations as outlined
in the Collier County LDC and consistent with the locational requirements in Florida Statutes,
Chapter 419.001. An ALF is not subject to the density rating system, but rather subject to the
criteria contained in 5.05.04., Group Housing, D, of the LDC. These criteria are listed in italics
below, followed by staffs comments:
a) The maximum floor area ratio shall not exceed 0.45 FAR.
As shown in Exhibit E of the PUD document, the applicant is seeking a deviation that
would permit an FAR of 0.60. Comprehensive Planning staff will defer to Zoning and
Land Development Revicw staff as they review the petition in its entirety.
b) No structure shall be erected within twenty (20) feet of any abutting lot ar parcel which is
zoned residential, or within twenty-five (25) feet of a road right-ai-way.
As stated in Exhibit B of the PUD document, a minimum of 150 feet would separate the
proposed facility from the nearest abutting residential lots to the east. As shown on the
Conceptual Site Plan in Exhibit C of the PUD documents, setbacks are well in excess of
the 25-foot minimum from the right-of-way,
c) Parking spaces required: a. Independent living units, one (1) per dwelling wlif; b.
Assisted living units, 0.75 per assisted unit; c. Nursing care units, two (2) parking
spaces per five (5) beds. As previously stated, the applicant has not yet determined the
ratio of independent vs. .assisted living units;. however, one parkil).g space per independent
unit and 0.75 spaces per assisted living unit will be required at the time of Site
Development Plan (SDP) approval, pursuant to this provision.
In order to promote "Smart Growth" policies and support the existing development character of
Collier County, adherence to Policies 7.1 through 7.3 is required. Policy 7.1 encourages
connection to collector and arterial roads. The project is consistent with tIllS policy as its access
would be provided via US 41, an arterial roadway. In support of FLUE Policy 7.2, an internal
roadway system would be provided via a connected loop road. Policy 7.3 encourages new and
existing developments to provide interconnection to other development. To support this policy,
the existing vehicular interconnection to the Community Congregational Church to the south
would remain, and linkages to the sidewalk system along the US 41 frontage would be provided
to pernlit pedestrian access to the church and to Christus Victor Lutheran Church to the north.
Page 3 019
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 39 of 51
Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed PUD may be deemed consistent
with the Future Land Use Element.
Transportation Element:
Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) and has
determined that the proposed rezone is consistent with Policy 5.1 and Policy 5,2 of the
Transportation Element.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element:
In accordance with Policy 6.1.1, fifteen percent of the existing native vegetation must be retained
on-site. The Master Plan indicates 1.35 acres, or 15 percent, of native vegetation will be provided
in two preserve areas abutting the eastern property boundary, identified as P-l and P-2 on the
Conceptual Site Plan, in compliance with Policy 6,2.6. No jurisdictional wetlands wcre identified
on the site.
GMP Conclusion:
Thc Growth Management Plan is the prevailing document supporting land use decisions such as
the proposed CPUD. Staff is rcquired to make a fmding of consistency or inconsistency with the
overall GMP as part of its recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial of a
rezoning petition. Staff believes this pctition is consistent with the FLUM and the FLUE as
indicated above; and with the GMP Transportation Element, as noted. Based upon the above
analysis, staff concludes the proposed uses may be deemed consistent with the goals, objective
and policies of the overall GMP.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition and the LDC criteria
upon which a favorable determination must be bascd, specifically noted in Sections
1O.02.13.B.5. and 10.03.05.H, which establish factual bascs to support a recommendation. The
Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) uses these same criteria as the basis for their
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners (BCe), 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 Analvsis: All cnvironmental issues have been addressed. The applicant was not
required to submit an Environment Impact Statement (EIS) for this project, nor was a hearing
before the Environmental Advisory Council required, because the site is below the IO-acre size
threshold requirement for tracts located landward of the coastal management boundary.
Furthermore the site is not located within a Special Treatment (ST) overlay area,
TransDortation Analvsis: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the application to assess
the proposal's potential impact on rights-of-way and access. The applicant has incorporated
Transportation Planning's suggested revisions into thc PUD documcnt; and staff rccommends
approval of the petition, subject to the development commitments contained in Exhibit F.
Page 4 of9
T
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 40 of 51
Utility Review: The Utilities Department has reviewed the application and has noted that the
proposed RPUD is located within the Collier County Water and Sewer District and will be
required to have a Water and Sewer Availability Letter from the Collier County Utilities
Division at the time of SDP approval.
Emerf!encv Manaf!ement: According to Emergency management staff, the Napoli Village
CPUD is located in a CAT 3 hurricane surge zone, which requires evacuation during some storm
events. While there is currently no impact mitigation required, it should be noted that approval
of this PUD, in consideration of other development in this area, increases the evacuation and
sheltering requirements for the County.
Zoninf! Review: As depicted on the CPUD Master Plan (Exhibit C), the site would be adequately
separated from the Conditional Uses to the north and south by a 15-foot Type B buffer. The uses
in Sterling Oaks PUD (to the east) would also be shielded from the proposed ALF by a IS-foot
Type B buffer, and further separated from the proposed two, four-story structures by the site's
two preserve areas and a one-acre lake, designed to abut the eastern boundary of the property,
The western boundary of the site would have a 15-foot Type D buffer, and would be separated
from the commercial uses to the west by US 41. Overall, 5.42 acres, or 60 percent of the site's
area, would be retained as open space, affording twice the minimum open space area required by
the LDC.
Proposed Development Standards for Principal Structures vs. C-3 Standards ofLDC
522 feet
".75 feet
none
700sq:ft: (ground .'.
, ..",'.. floor .
. 50ryoofbuilding
hei hi- but >25 feet.
50% of building
hei ht. but:> ISfeet
500/0 of building
hei ht. but> IS feet
. 25 feet
25 feet
25 feet
25 feet
25 feet
V, of building height
50 feet
none
50 feet
The CPUD's development standards are contained in Exhibit B of the PUD documents. As ALFs
are permitted in the C-l through the C-5 zoning districts, the C-3 zoning district was used in the
table above as a benchmark to evaluate the proposed development standards against comparable
LDC standards. As shown in the table, the proposed CPUD would appropriately provide
minimum front-yard, side-yard and rear-yard setbacks of 25 feet for principal structures."
Page 5 of g
Agenda Item No. 86
March 11, 2008
Page 41 of 51
Setbacks from preserve areas would also be 25 feet; but as noted in Exhibit B, setbacks from the
eastern property line, abutting the Sterling Oaks PUD, would be a minimum of 150 feet,
Maximum zoned building height would be four stories and 50 feet, with the actual building
height not to exceed 67 feet. (Group care facilities are also permitted in the abutting Sterling
Oaks PUD, and are likewise limited to four stories in height.) As shown in the table, the
proposed development standards for principal structures would generally meet or exceed the
standards of the C-3 zoning district.
As illustrated below, accessory structures would require front yards to be a minimum of 15 feet.
Rear and side yards would be set back a minimum of ten feet, with ten-foot setbacks from
preserve areas. Distances between accessory structures would be at least ten feet, and the
maximum height would be 25 feet. These standards, as shown below, are either equal to or
slightly less than those required by the C-3 zoning district.
Proposed Development Standards for Accessory Structures vs, C-3 Standards ofLDC
10 feet
swimnling pool:
1 S feet
all others: S.P.S.
s'..yllr@in.gpool:
20 feet, _-y '.
paridng garage: 35'
feet'; - -;".,'<:,' ;,',. .'
allothels:S.P.S.
10 feet'
swimming pool:'
none
lq feet
all others: 10 foot
none
10 ["et
10 feet
1 0 feet
2S feet
Deviation:
As previously stated, the petitioner proposes one deviation, as outlined in Exhibit E to the
application, "List of Requested Deviations from the LDC," The requested deviation of 0.60
FAR, which is 0.15 FAR greater than the 0.45 FAR permitted by LDC Section 5.05.04.D.l, is to
permit a total of 234,440 square feet of floor area. The applicant has noted in Exhibit E that the
increased FAR would allow for increased on-site amenities to support the demands of the
market, and has conunitted to provide a minimum of 20 percent of the allowable area towards
amenities for the exclusive use of residents and their guests.
Staff's findiml:
The proposed deviation is consistent with the 0.60 FAR established for assisted living,
independent living and continuing care retirement communities located within the Vanderbilt'
Page 6 019
T
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11. 2008
Page 42 of 51
Beach Road Neighborhood Commercial Subdistrict, which was established by the BCC on June
7, 2005 (Ordinance No. 05-25) during the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR)-based
Comprehensive Plan amendment process. The BCC considered the existing 0,45 FAR of the
LDC to be an out-dated development standard for many modem group housing developers in
light of market demands for generally larger-sized units and a greater variety and number of
amenities, such as on-site dining, wellness facilities, and recreational amenities. As such, staff
supports the requested 0.15 FAR deviation, furthermore finding the uses and density to be
compatible with the adjacent uses and that the considerably buffered from the single family
homes to the east. Moreover, the proposed on-sitc amcnities would result in a reduction in the
number of residents' trips on the surrowlding roadways. Finally, to illustrate the difference in the
footprints of the proposed buildings with a 0.45 FAR vs. 0.60 FAR, the applicant has provided
conceptual drawings, attached as Exhibit C and Exhibit D.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
The agent for the applicant, Mr. Bob Duane, held the required NIM at 5:30 p.m. on November 20,
2007, at the St. John the Evangelist Catholic Church. Sixteen people attended, in addition to the
applicant's team and county staff. Mr. Duane gave a brief overview of the proposed rezoning request
and the associated development plan. Afterwards, he and the applicant's attorney, Rich Yovanovich,
answered specific questions. According to the applicant, the following was proposed:
. Two structures, four stories in height, with a maximum 240,000 square feet;
. Somewhere in the range of 175 units was expected;
. Units would be unassisted living to begin with, but become assisted as time goes on;
. Units would not be sold like condos, but operated "like Moorings Park, with a monthly
fee for however long you want to stay." (Agent stated that someone to own and/or
operate the facility had not been finalized yet.)
. An access point would be provided to the adjacent property to the south, with primary
access from US-41;
. Re-vegetated preserve areas would go beyond the County standards;
. No gap housing or cornnlercial uses would be on site;
. Project would provide senior housing, for those aged 55 or older;
.. No buildings wOlild be closer than 150' to the property line to the east.
. No deviations to parking code proposed;
. 240,000 square feet would be total building development allowed;
. A kitchen, dining, and housekeeping operation will be provided on site;
. Delivery service areas would be limited to the north and south sides
A representative of the neighboring Congregational Church stated that there was a 188-foot long
by 40-foot wide Congregational Church easement on the site that handled 65 to 80 daily drop-
offs for the church's day care, which he wanted to ensure remain unhindered. Mr. Duane stated
that the easement access would be honored but that the easement would have to be relocated.
The church's rcpresentative stated that the church would "take a very dim view ohelocating the
easement," but agreed to meet with Mr. Duane at a later date to discuss the matter. Staff never
heard from the church's representative, but Mr. Duane reported to staff that a member of his
team had met with the representative as promiscd, and that the submitted Conceptual Site Plan
reflects revisions that have met with the church representative's approval.
Page 7 019
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 43 of 51
RECOMMENDATION:
Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends that the Collier County Planning
Commission (CCPC) forward Petition PUDZ-2007-AR-12248 to the Board of County
Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval, subject to the stipulations incorporated
into the CPUD document.
Page B of 9
f
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 44 of 51
PREPARED BY:
lIlt/Of
JO AVID MOSS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER I DATE
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
REVIEWED BY:
i -2 3 "08
DATE
1- -z,"2-- 0 tI
DATE
~JJh Yh.~
USAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
/ ~O) ROo(;
I DATE
APPROVED BY:
Ik/o(
EPH K. SC TT ADMINISTRATOR / DATE
MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
Tentatively scheduled for the March II, 2007 Board of County Commissioners Meeting
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION;
MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN
DATE
Exhibits: A. Rezone Findings
B. PUD Findings
C. 0.45 FAR Conceptual Site Plan
D. 0.60 FAR Conceptual Site Plan
Page 9 of9
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11, 2008
Page 45 Of 51
Exhibit A
REZONE FINDINGS
PETITION PUDZ-2007-AR-12248
Chapter 10.03.05.G of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) requires that the report and
recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Corrunissioners show that the
Planning Conunission 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 Element (FLUE) and Future Land Use Map and the elements of the
Growth Management Plan (GMP).
Based upon staffs review, the proposed development is in compliance with the Future Land
Use Element (FLUE) and all other relevant goals, objectives and policies of the Growth
Management Plan (GMP).
2. The existing land use pattern.
As shown in the zoning map that is attached to the staff report, the proposed intill development
does not leave any remnant parcels and thus can be accommodated within the existing land use
patterns. Furthermore, the proposed CPUD is compatible with adjacent uses,
3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
The proposed rezone is consistent and compatible with the adjacent Conditional Uses and
residentially-zoned properties. This petition does not create an isolated district because the
subject parcel is an infill project that is compatible with the adjacent and nearby zoning districts
and is consistent with the GMP.
4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change.
The district boundaries are logically drawn.
5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed land use
change necessary.
The proposed change is not necessary, but is appropriate for this location based upon its FLUE
designation and adjoining land-use patterns.
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood.
The Future Land Use Element of the GMP supports such a development at this location, and
the proposal is consistent with the land uses already in the area. Furthermore, the project will
provide adequate landscaping, setbacks and buffering; and all roadway links in the area of the
project will meet the level of service standards.
Page 1 of3
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 46 of 51
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 ofthe development, or otherwise affect public safety.
Evaluation of this project took into account the requirement for consistency with the
Transportation Elemcnt of the GMP and the project was found consistent. Additionally, certain
transportation improvements have been anticipated in the PUD documents.
8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem.
Every project in Collier County approved for a new land use activity is required to mitigate all
subsurface drainage generated by development.
9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas.
All projects in CoIlier County are subject to the development standards that are specific to the
zoning district in which they are located. The proposcd development standards for open space,
allowable uses, height, setbacks, et cetera were designed to ensure that light penetration and air
circulation are not adversely affected on adjacent properties.
10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area.
This is a subjective determination, based upon myriad internal and external factors affecting the
properties in question. Certainly property values are affected by zoning; however, zoning by
itself mayor may not affect values since valuation is driven by the market.
11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvcment or development of
adjacent property in accordance with existing rcgulations.
The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the Land Development Code
is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process
and/or. subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not be a
deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent properties.
12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual
owner as contrasting with the public wclfare.
The proposed development is consistent with the Growth Management Plan, a public policy
statement implemented by zoning regulations. In light of this fact, the proposed change would
not constitute a grant of special privilege a.nd would be consistent with plans that are in the
public interest.
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why thc property cannot be used in accordance
with existing zoning.
EXHIBIT A
PUDZ-2007-AR-12248
Page 2 of3
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11. 2008
Page 47 of 51
The property is zoned for Agricultural uses. As the property is located on US 41 and is
surrounded by other residential uses and Conditional Uses, the proposed use would be more
compatible with the existing pattern of development.
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the ncighborhood or the
County;
It is staff's opinion that the development request would not be out of scale of the needs of the
neighborhood or the County, As noted, the proposed development is consistent with the
Growth Management Plan, a policy statement which has evaluated the scale, density and
intensity of land uses deemed to be acceptable tluoughout the urban-designated areas of Collier
County.
15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in
districts already permitting such use.
It would not be impossible to find other financially feasible sites for this project.
16. The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would
be required to make the property usable for any of thc range of potential uses under the
proposed zoning classification.
Development of this site would not require considerable site alterations as the portion proposed
for clearing and grading has already been cleared.
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 LDC regarding
Adequate Public Facilities.
A multi-disciplined team responsible for reviewing public facilities requirements of the GMP
and the LDC ha~ reviewed this land use petition and recommended it for zoning approval. A
final determination whether this project meets the full requirements of adequate public facilities
specifications will be determined as part of the site development plan approval process.
EXHIBIT A
PUDZ-2007 -AR-12248
Page 3of3
Agenda Item No. 88
March 11. 2008
Page 48 of 51
Exhibit B
PUD FINDINGS
PUDZ-2007.AR.12248
Section 10.02.l3.B.5 of the LDC of the Collier County Land Development Code requires the
Planning Commission to make a finding as to the PUD Master Plan's 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, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage,
sewer, water, and other utilities.
The nearby area is developed with uses of a compatible nature. The petitioner will be
required to comply with all County regulations regarding access, drainage, sewer, water and
other utilities. The Developer Commitments included in the CPUD documents adequately
address additional impacts from the proposed rezoning. The proj ect will not adversely affect
any adopted level of service standard for, traffic, sewer, water or other utilities.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements,
contracts, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as
they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation
and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained
at public expense.
Documents submitted with the application provide evidence of unified control. The CPUD
documents make appropriate provisions for access and infrastructure
3. Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives, and
policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis in the staff report of the
relevant goals, objectives and policies of the GMP, Staff has determined that this petition is
consistent with the overall GMP,
4. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may
include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on dcsign, and buffering
and screening requiremcnts.
The proposed development standards, landscaping and buffering requirements are designed
to make the proposed commercial uscs compatible with the adjacent residential and
conditional uses. Staffs analysis contained in the staff report indicates that this petition is
compatible, both internally and externally, with the proposed uses and with the existing
surrounding uses.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the
development.
Page 1 of2
Agenda Item No. 8B
March 11, 2008
Page 49 of 51
The amount of open space set aside by this project exceeds the provisions of the Land
Development Code.
6. The timing or sequence of development for tbe purpose of assuring the adequacy of
available improvements and facilities, botb public and private.
Timing or sequence of development in light of concurrency requirements does not appear to
be a significant problem as part of the CPUD rezoning process, but the project's
development must be in compliance with applicable concurrency management regulations
when development approvals are sought.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
County Transportation Division Planning staff has determined that the proposed rezoning is
consistent with the GMP Transportation Element requirements addressing roadway
concerns. The subject property has the ability to support expansion based upon the
conunitments made by the petitioner and the fact that adequate public facilities requirements
will be addressed when development approvals are sought.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations
in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as
meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of sucb
regulations.
Finding: This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which
development standards and deviations proposed for this CPUD depart from development
standards that would be required for the most sjmilar conventional zoning district. The
development standards in this CPUD are similar to the standards of the C- 3 zoning district
and the deviation requested has been approved before in a similar situation in the County.
CPUD FINDINGS
PUDZ-2007-AR-12248
EXHIBIT B
Page 2of2
ooco~
coO"'
0_
--'':'J 0
'0
,.:"'
iV...c !D
=2g>
C1JC1JCl..
-g2
Q)
:J>
<{
,
,
i
,
i
j
....j
l ______________
o
"'!S
~..
g~ ,-
..
'"
fili"i
~ffi
I;;
\ ~
\~
,
'I
L>,~.-.:::~.
II' I
I Ii i III \
.~m" ii!
~~ "I: II :, !! II
..'" : It
, : II 'Ill
"--, I
\ --\I"Ii\11
, II'
I 1 1.j
\ : 1'11'111
, "
:': \! I !:i
/ : '\111 :)0
I: I rii=
'\'~Ili \'1 !1\l11 <i~
9" ,I' !M ..
~ I i 101 ~ III
~ i l : II jlJ' I ~:
\I.! : It 'i\l a~ 6 g
at: I III .~o IlL'"
1 II m C &L
: I~ II: ffil~ z
! ~ ill ~<
II 1'-' jtltl
I '1\
~~ I~ !! III
i~~l :f hI
ll~ \ 1 I illl I
~ ! !i\U
\'..) 11 III 1\
'rJl l\t
/ ~~ l" I
~ "- ~ll '\! t
I J!\'J;>~ !Ii
I /( 1 1\ D\1111
II' I 'I,
I II Ii!
I'm: i'l
I,' I ~ 1\ ' ili
I I "\
j I n,
i I \ I I q~
ill 111
III i II Iii
I ,I Iii
i \ I llll'
i I I [II
i : II Ii!
\ 111
..;.,::=-_____J1 ! ~ It
\ ~ It 'I:
I II I I
1'1: 1'1'
l 111.1
I l11
1 1'1
1 I II
} \ Iii ,l
[': : I:
. I ('I
I . \ 1111
m1:[;~:. j I 1\ l i
L : 1, I
~~ '1---': I Ii! i
~~ \ : I 1\
" 'I ,,'
I, I 1 \ I
i ,', ~ I ,\
L In II
u.:u:u:
aiuiui
000
000
"'00
"':rDN
NG;)!::
1111 II
li1
0M
g!59 on
OM .
......::>
........ 0
. ~n .
0
~
t @~ ~:s:s ~
.' ~~~ ~
Ij ~~~ ~
~~~ '"
8
o 0 ...
"''''1- ...
~
~~8x
<""',..,0
ffi!i~~
z~l!j1i
~(,):z:
"
"
'~J
'J2
. ~7
I . r-; ffi::) /r,' //
I I;J ~ ~ \ l.../ l'j
I ~ N < '--_'.I1lI\_'__~
t ------~--~-------------------------~na---
r' r------ ,8 J<N I
"
("'I
/,
,-,
(7
1<.....)
v
+
----------\
~~
~
\
\
\
,
I
f
I
;
Ii
~
\
i
i
\
Ii
i
""-,
9
I
~ ! . ;
I; I"
'" ...
. ,
. Ll}.. q
! i I ~
u
....
:s
:.a
"1
foil
fUlj
illJi
III
Id
I I
1;;:, I
1111
Q)
bO
m
5:
.-
'0
a.
m
Z
I
-..-----..-..-------
I
I;
I
~~~h
u;:~~
N
o:lCO~
coO'"
0_
ON 0
Z.,......:,"'-
E~'"
Q)~Q)
::=~~
roroo..
-g~
Q)
OJ
<(
\ II II I I i \ \ II
Ilj5 I I I i I
~)\II\\\ll
..__~ :, I I j I I I
\ "':il" \ j I \ I
~ I I 1
I I L'l
'\ l 111 \ I,ll
, "
/: \\ 1\ d
/' \.
l : t 1 \\11 ::ic
~ I' , , 0:-
is 1= ii' l~: t,j ~
<~~i3 \ i \ i:, II ili II '"
a!!! i lliw $ 'Q I ,II ~ 01(
_ ~ u ~ I III ~ W
o"lli , il ': II ,J'II "":C
N.. I" I =\11 I >
j7 ffia "- -,] /7 <J: p,::? o'~~ll1l \~~\ I~ \\\~!. ~~
1/' ~< (~/ /./ .[- L- l.J i '\1 c( II..
\ N ~.~IGI__McPQ-=~__:___ _h_______:__~__, t \ l~ In fiB z
If-------------------------------- ~"'., \ 1\ i I~ In FI
_~________ , I ,11
i \ 1:11 .. 1:\
\ \ !II~~ l@\ii'l
\ j 1", I I'
~l II .1!\1
\ . . I,: .' I: I
\ I I ,~ ' :: 'I'>
\ \"': 111 II
'I Il' c l\t
I ~ ;J!1 I \f: II
i \ I(t) r I \ n1\\ I I III
I l \111\\ I i~
g I e, "
0. ! ~ I I I I Ii
lit 1\,
I i il!
I! : II 1\!
i ~\ I 11\1\
I I I I\.
ill \tI
\. i i 11:1i
\ 1\'
I 1 'l:l!
"I
i 11.
___~_~~________J \ il r~
UJJ..l'\1l 'I I 1,\
,1l.ld.U.9L ;1' 'I'
I .l? 111
I "11. I
\ ' ~ I,:
\.\ \ II \ \, \
l 11 \,1
~,: I \1,
I 1 1'1
.i_) \ I: 1\
1-' : il
.-1!t I . I
iiB tc~==' II \ \ \
8all 1\ "'\ II: i I
11\ ill: ii
/11 \ 1
~
~i
~
:: (1:!:8:;;::::~:
'\""" "':1'
)...2f......j.
::l::::;::~::::::::::t.
.....Ili.....
\\/::\:{.:::::::1:
1.........r
J>>>>?l'
'f" ....... t'
j:.:\):\>UU. .
I
.
~
~
o
wo
~E:
~
~
~
~
~~
'"
ffi;;
~ffi
l-
w
d
~
U:U:U:
ai00
08"
"' 0
N "
cn"":oq"
Nr<?
_N
111111
to
'"
"'~
0:0:0
88;::
-'-O=>
...."
g
"
"
o
~
;1i
~
8
-'
"-
,
"'0:%
~~~
It u~
,"
ij
"-"-"-
00"
M;1i
!U~
-'..J..J
i5~~
000
l-l-l-
,
\
\
\
\
!
Ii
I
Ii
I
;
i
/
\1
~
i
H
,. ,/ JD"ltllllll\lYd
L:::===c.:::::::~t."'::..._._.___ ______._.__._._
1
~~~h
U!:55
N
II) n
.l.
. i; i ~
\ !fi ~
, ~ , i
I in N
I
~
....
:c
:E
i"I
r-l
f!IJi
~Jfd
II
" .
I I
Q)
bl)
~
:>
.-
'0
~
Z
i
----..-.-...-...--
!