Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Agenda 01/14/2020 Item #9A (PL20180002899 - Enbrook RPUD)
01/14/2020 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 92-43, as amended by Ordinance Number 92-77, and 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 the herein described real property from a Residential Multifamily (RMF-16(8)) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district, to allow for development of up to 526 multi-family dwelling units, two-family attached and townhouse residential dwelling units, or 265 single-family dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types subject to a traffic cap for a project to be known as Enbrook RPUD; and by eliminating the 100 foot wide greenbelt along the entire east and south property lines and eliminating the two-story height limitation described in Ordinance No. 92-43 and Ordinance No. 92-77 for the Royal Fakapalm Planning Community; and providing an effective date. The subject property consisting of 65.88 acres is located on the south side of Manatee Road approximately 1500 feet east of Collier Boulevard, in Section 10, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20180002899] OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of County Commissioners (Board) review staff’s findings and recommendations along with the recommendations of the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) regarding the above referenced petition and render a decision regarding the petition; and ensure the project is in harmony with all the applicable codes and regulations in order to ensure that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERATIONS: The subject 65.88± acre Enbrook RPUD property is currently zoned “RMF- 16(8)” (Residential Multi-family at a density of eight dwelling units per acre). The zoning was evaluated as part of Collier County’s zoning reevaluation program in 1992. The density of eight dwelling units generates 526 dwelling units. The petitioner proposes to rezone the subject property from RMF -16(8) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) with a maximum of 526 multi-family dwelling units or 265 single-family detached, two-family attached, and townhouse dwelling units. A residential amenity center will also be provided. (See Attachment A-Proposed PUD Ordinance.) Ordinance Number 92-43 and Ordinance Number 92-77 require a 100-foot wide greenbelt along the entire eastern and southern property lines and a two-story building height limit. These ordinances are proposed to be amended. (See Attachment B-Ordinance Number 92-43 and Attachment C-Ordinance Number 92-77.) The buildings will have a maximum zoned height of 35 feet and an actual height of 40 feet. Setbacks from the Planned Unit Development (PUD) boundaries are a minimum of 15 feet. Ingress/egress will be provided from Manatee Road. The Master Plan provided in the Staff Report depicts the area of proposed residential development, amenity area, and a 12.84± acre preserve. Landscape buffering requirements are met by a 15 -foot-wide Type B Landscape Buffer (trees 25 feet on center and a six-foot-tall hedge or wall) along the PUD perimeters. A required 20-foot wide Type D Landscape Buffer (trees 30 feet on center) is provided along Manatee Road. 9.A Packet Pg. 111 01/14/2020 The petitioner seeks six deviations related to street width, on-premise signs, wall height, architectural standards, and parking. For further information, please see the Deviation Discussion section of the Staff Report. FISCAL IMPACT: The PUD Rezone (PUDR) by and of itself will have no fiscal impact on Collier County. There is no guarantee that the project, at build-out, will maximize its authorized level of development. However, if the PUD Rezone is approved, a portion of the land could be developed, and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public facilities. The County collects impact fees prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to help offset the impacts of each new development on public facilities. These impact fees are used to fund projects identified in the Capital Improvement Element of the Growth Management Plan as needed to maintain the adopted Level of Service (LOS) for public facilities. Additionally, in order to meet the requirements of concurrency management, the developer of every local development order approved by Collier County is required to pay a portion of the estimated Transportation Impact Fees associated with the project in accordance with Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Other fees collected prior to issuance of a building permit include building permit review fees. Please note that impact fees and taxes collected were not included in the criteria used by staff and the Planning Commission to analyze this petition. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUDR and has found it consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. See Attachment D-FLUE Consistency Review. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC, heard Petition PUDR-PL20190002899, Enbrook RPUD on October 31, 2019, and voted 5-2 to forward this petition to the Board with a recommendation of approval. The two dissenting commissioners denied the petition because a commitment was not made to limit the density to 298 units. The remaining commissioners recommended approval subject to the following revisions to the PUD Document: - A two-story building height limit shall be added to the Development Standards Table footnotes. The requested revision has been made. See Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance. Letters of objection have been received. Therefore, this petition has been placed on the Regular Agenda. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This is a site specific rezone to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District for a project to be known as Enbrook RPUD. 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, 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 RPUD Rezones Ask yourself the following questions. The answers assist you in making a determination for approval or not. 9.A Packet Pg. 112 01/14/2020 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 RPUD 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 RPUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least 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 RPUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land use pattern? 11. Would the requested RPUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts? 12. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 13. Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. 14. Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood? 15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traf fic 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. 21. Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot (“reasonably”) be used in accordance with existing zoning? (a “core” question…) 22. Is the change suggested out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county? 23. Consider: Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 9.A Packet Pg. 113 01/14/2020 24. Consider: The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed RPUD rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County 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 RPUD rezone request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare? The Board 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 Board hearing as these items relate to these criteria. The proposed Ordinance was prepared by the County Attorney’s Office. This item is approved as to form and legality, and requires an affirmative vote of four for Board approval. (HFAC) RECOMMENDATION: Staff concurs with the recommendation of the CCPC and further recommends that the Board of County Commissioners approve the request for Petition PUDR -PL20190002899, Enbrook RPUD. Prepared by: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner, Zoning Division ATTACHMENT(S) 1. Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (PDF) 2. Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (PDF) 3. Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (PDF) 4. Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (PDF) 5. Attachment D-Consistency Review 9-25-19 (PDF) 6. Letters of Objection-Enbrook (PDF) 7. [Linked] Attachment E-Application (PDF) 8. Legal Ad - Agenda ID 11069 (PDF) 9.A Packet Pg. 114 01/14/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Board of County Commissioners Item Number: 9.A Doc ID: 11069 Item Summary: This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve an Ordinance amending Ordinance Number 92-43, as amended by Ordinance Number 92-77, and 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 the herein described real property from a Residential Multifamily (RMF-16(8)) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district, to allow for development of up to 526 multi-family dwelling units, two-family attached and townhouse residential dwelling units, or 265 single-family dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types subject to a traffic cap for a project to be known as Enbrook RPUD; and by eliminating the 100 foot wide greenbelt along the entire east and south property lines and eliminating the two-story height limitation described in Ordinance No. 92-43 and Ordinance No. 92-77 for the Royal Fakapalm Planning Community; and providing an effective date. The subject property consisting of 65.88 acres is located on the south side of Manatee Road approximately 1500 feet east of Collier Boulevard, in Section 10, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. [PL20180002899] Meeting Date: 01/14/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal – Zoning Name: Nancy Gundlach 12/06/2019 3:59 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 12/06/2019 3:59 PM Approved By: Review: Growth Management Department Judy Puig Level 1 Reviewer Completed 12/06/2019 4:25 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Additional Reviewer Completed 12/10/2019 12:18 PM Growth Management Department James C French Deputy Department Head Review Completed 12/13/2019 12:28 AM Growth Management Department Thaddeus Cohen Department Head Review Completed 12/16/2019 4:51 PM County Attorney's Office Heidi Ashton-Cicko Level 2 Attorney of Record Review Completed 12/30/2019 10:38 AM County Attorney's Office Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review Completed 12/30/2019 2:38 PM Office of Management and Budget Valerie Fleming Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review Completed 12/31/2019 9:22 AM Office of Management and Budget Laura Zautcke Additional Reviewer Completed 12/31/2019 12:15 PM County Manager's Office Nick Casalanguida Level 4 County Manager Review Completed 01/02/2020 8:19 AM 9.A Packet Pg. 115 01/14/2020 Board of County Commissioners MaryJo Brock Meeting Pending 01/14/2020 9:00 AM 9.A Packet Pg. 116 PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 1 of 19 STAFF REPORT TO:COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM:ZONING DIVISION ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT -PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE:OCTOBER 17,2019 SUBJECT: PUDR-PL20190002899,ENBROOK RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT AND AGENTS: Owner: Rimar Enterprises, Inc. 8040 S.W. 69th Avenue Miami, FL 33143 Applicants: Rimar Enterprises, Inc.D.R. Horton 8040 S.W. 69th Avenue 10541 Six Mile Cypress Miami, FL 33143 Fort Myers, FL 33966 Agents: D.Wayne Arnold, AICP Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire Q.Grady Minor & Associates Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC)consider amending Ordinance Number 92-43, as amended by Ordinance Number 92-77, and amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) 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 the herein described real property from a Residential Multifamily (RMF-16(8)) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district, to allow for development of up to 526 multi-family dwelling units, two-family attached and townhouse residential dwelling units, or 265 single-family dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types subject to a traffic cap for 9.A.a Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 2 of 19 a project to be known as Enbrook RPUD; and by eliminating the 100-foot wide greenbelt along the entire east and south property lines and eliminating the two-story height limitation described in Ordinance Number 92-43 and Ordinance Number 92-77 for the Royal Fakapalm Planning Community; and providing an effective date. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 3 of 19 9.A.a Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 4 of 19 9.A.a Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 5 of 19 9.A.a Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 6 of 19 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property consisting of 65.88±acres is located on the south side of Manatee Road approximately 1500 feet east of Collier Boulevard, in Section 10, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.(See the Location Map on page 2 of this Staff Report.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject 65.88±acre --family at a density of eight reevaluation program in 1992. The density of eight dwelling units generates 526 dwelling units. The petitioner proposes to rezone the subject property from RMF-16(8) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) with a maximum of 526 multi-family dwelling units or 265 single-family detached, two-family attached, and townhouse dwelling units. A residential amenity center will also be provided. (See Attachment A-Proposed PUD Ordinance.) Ordinance Number 92-43 and Ordinance Number 92-77 require a 100-foot wide greenbelt along the entire eastern and southern property lines and a two-story building height limit. These ordinances are proposed to be amended. (See Attachment B-Ordinance Number 92-43 and Attachment C- Ordinance Number 92-77.) The buildings will have a maximum zoned height of 35 feet and an actual height of 40 feet. Setbacks from the Planned Unit Development (PUD)boundaries are a minimum of 15 feet. Ingress/egress will be provided from Manatee Road. The Master Plan provided on the previous page of this Staff Report depicts the area of proposed residential development, amenity area, and a 12.84±acre preserve. Landscape buffering requirements are met by a 15-foot-wide Type B Landscape Buffer (trees 25 feet on center and a six- foot tall hedge or wall)along the PUD perimeters. A required 20-foot wide Type D Landscape Buffer (trees 30 feet on center) is provided along Manatee Road. The petitioner seeks six deviations related to street width, on-premise signs, wall height, architectural standards, and parking. For further information, please see the Deviation Discussion section of this Staff Report. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North:Manatee Road, a two-lane road and then developed mobile homes with a zoning designation of Mobile Home (MH) East: Developed water booster pumping facility,and undeveloped land with a zoning designation of Public (P) and Mobile Home (MH) South:Vacant land with a zoning designation of A.S.G.M. Business Center PUD West:Developed multi-family residential uses with a zoning designation of RMF-16,and a shopping center with a zoning designation of intermediate Commercial (C-4) 9.A.a Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 7 of 19 AERIAL PHOTO GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUD Rezone and has found it consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE)of the GMP. See attached Exhibit D -FLUE Consistency Review. Transportation Element: 2018 Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Transportation Planning staff used the current 2018 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR) for these findings. Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states: conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with Subject Site 9.A.a Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 8 of 19 consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is projected to operate below an adopted Level of Service (LOS) Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved.A petition or application has significant impacts if the traffic impact statement reveals that any of the following occur: a. For links (roadway segments) directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; b. For links adjacent to links directly accessed by the project where project traffic is equal to or exceeds 2% of the adopted LOS standard service volume; and c. For all other links,the project traffic is considered to be significant up to the point where it is equal to or exceeds 3% of the adopted LOS standard service volume. Mitigating stipulations shall be based upon a mitigation plan prepared by the applicant and submitted as part of the traffic impact statement that addresses th Staff finding: According to the PUD and the TIS provided with the proposed rezoning,the applicant is requesting a maximum of 526 single-family and multi-family residential dwelling units. This development is currently entitled to 526 multi-family units. The requested rezone is proposing either the development of 265 single-family units or 526 multi-family units or a combination of both single and multi-family units so long as the trip cap of 259 two-way PM peak hour trips is not exceeded. Staff also notes that this development is vested for 483 multi-family units according to amended Certificate of Occupancy (COA)(reference number 06-018-09) with a vested trip limit of 240 two- way PM peak hour trips. See also attachment A below. This development has vested transportation rights. Staff evaluated the TIS and the scenarios presented accurately reflect trip generation calculations in combination with PUD Exhibit F, Developer Commitments, Section 4, Transportation. Staff also reviewed the current adjacent roadway segments,according to the 2018 AUIR,for issues related to any potential scenario that exceeds the vested trip limit of 240 two-way PM peak hour trips. The adjacent roadway segments are as follows: Collier Boulevard (CR 951) from Wal-Mart Driveway to Manatee Road has a current service volume of 2,000 trips,a remaining capacity of approximately 243 trips,and is currently operating at Level of Service (LOS). Collier Boulevard (CR 951) from Manatee Road to Mainsail Drive has a current service volume of 2,200 trips,a remaining capacity of approximately 259 trips,. In conclusion,and as noted above, this development has a vested trip limit. Based on the information provided in the TIS and PUD for the petition,Transportation Planning staff finds the proposed development in compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff have found this project to be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME)of the GMP.The project site consists of 11.62 acres of native vegetation. A minimum of 2.91 acres, 25%,preserve is required. However, 12.84 acres of preserve shall be placed under preservation and dedicated to Collier County. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 9 of 19 GMP Conclusion: STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition,including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.02.13 B.5., Planning Commission Recommendation (commonly referred ,and Section 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report ollier County recommendation.The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the Board of Collier County Commissioners (BCC), who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed belo ing and Land Development Review In addition, staff offers the following analysis: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed the petition,and the PUD Document to address environmental concerns. As previously stated, the preserve requirement is 2.91 acres or 25%of 11.62 acres. The proposed PUD Master Plan provides 12.84 acres preserve, which meets the minimum 25 percent native vegetation preservation requirement in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07. No listed species were observed on the property. This project does not require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of this project. Landscape Review: Landscape Review staff has reviewed this petition for compliance with the LDC and recommends approval of this project. School Board Review: At this time,there is existing or planned capacity within the next five years for the proposed development at the elementary, middle,and high school levels.At the time of Site Development Plan (SDP)or Plans and Plat (PPL),the development would be reviewed for concurrency to ensure there is capacity either within the concurrency service area the development is located within or in adjacent concurrency service areas. Utilities Review:The project lies within the regional potable water service area and the south wastewater service areas of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. Water and wastewater services System capacity must be confirmed at the time of development permit (SDP or PPL) review, and a commitment to provide service will be established upon permit approval. Storm Water Planning Review:The Drainage outfall discharge resulting from this PUD Rezone will 9.A.a Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 10 of 19 system will be reviewed and approved by the South Florida Water Management District and Collier County staff during the SDP process. Zoning and Land Development Review: As previously stated, this PUD Rezone petition will allow for 526 multi-family dwelling units or 265 single-family dwelling units, or a combination of single- family and multi-family dwelling units subject to a traffic cap. The ingress/egress will be from Manatee Road. The proposed PUD will provide adequate buffering with existing neighbors. An approximate 700- foot wide preserve separates the proposed residential development from the existing commercial area to the west. An approximate 80-foot wide preserve area and minimum code required 15-foot wide Type B Landscape Buffer (trees 25 feet on center and a 6-foot high hedge, fence or wall) screens the proposed residential development from the undeveloped commercial PUD to the south. A Type B Landscape Buffer along the east and west property boundaries screen the developed residential, undeveloped mobile homes,and developed utility site. Along Manatee Road, a Type D Landscape Buffer (trees 30 feet on center) will buffer the proposed development from Manatee Road. The proposed building height of 35 feet and actual height of 40 feet are compatible with the adjacent zoned building heights ranging from 30 feet to 75 feet. The required 60% open space will be provided. Therefore, staff finds the proposed PUDR compatible with the surrounding land uses. REZONE FINDINGS: Staff completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 10.02.13 B.5., Planning Commission Recommendation ,and Subsection 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the BCC, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed In addition, staff offers the following analysis: 1.Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the GMP. The Comprehensive Planning staff has indicated that the proposed PUD Rezone is consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP. See Attachment D -FLUE Consistency Review. 2.The existing land use pattern. be characterized as residential multi-family, mobile home, commercial, business park,and public lands. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 11 of 19 3.The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. The subject parcel is of sufficient size that it will not result in an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. 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,as discussed in Items 2 and 3. 5.Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezone necessary. The growth and development trends, changing market conditions, specifically the development of the site with residences, and the development of the surrounding area, support the proposed PUD. This site is located within an area of development with a mixture of residential and other uses. The proposed PUD rezoning is appropriate, as limited in the PUD Document and the PUD Master Plan based on its compatibility with adjacent land uses. 6.Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed PUD Rezone -use policies upon adoption that are reflected by the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. Development in compliance with the proposed PUD Rezone should not adversely impact living conditions in the area. 7.Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time, i.e., GMP consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat). management regulations when development approvals are sought. 8.Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed PUD Rezone will not create a drainage problem. Furthermore, the project is subject to the requirements of Collier County and the South Florida Water Management District. 9.Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. The proposed change will not seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. 10.Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 12 of 19 Staff is of the opinion this PUD Rezone will not adversely impact property values. However, zoning by itself may or may not affect values, since value determination is driven by market value. 11.Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Properties around the Enbrook RPUD are developed and undeveloped. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application, when combined with the SDP approval process and PPL process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of adjacent property.Therefore, the proposed zoning change should not be a deterrent to the improvement of adjacent properties. 12.Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The development complies with the GMP, which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed PUD Amendment does not constitute a grant of special privilege. Consistency with the FLUE is further determined to be a public welfare relationship because actions consistent with plans are in the public interest. 13.Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The subject property can be developed within the parameters of the existing zoning designation. 14.Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed PUD Rezone is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or County. The petitioner has provided adequate commitments in PUD Exhibit F to mitigate for traffic congestion impacts. 15.Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There may be other sites in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed; however, this is not the determining factor when evaluating the appropriateness of a zoning decision. The petition was reviewed on its merit for compliance with the GMP and the LDC,and staff does not review other sites in conjunction with a specific petition. 16.The physical characteristics of the property and the degree of site alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 13 of 19 Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require considerable site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the site development plan approval process and again later as part of the building permit process. 17.The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County GMP and as defined and implemented through the Collier County adequate public facilities ordinance. The activity proposed by this amendment will have no adverse impact on public utilities facility adequacy. 18. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety,and welfare. To be determined by the BCC during its advertised public hearing. PUD FINDINGS: LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5 states that : 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 subject site is surrounded by mobile home development to the north, undeveloped land and a water booster pumping facility to the east, an undeveloped business park to the south, and by a shopping center to the west. The adjacent roadway network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed development. Water distribution and wastewater transmission mains are readily available within the Manatee Road right-of-way, and there is adequate water and wastewater treatment capacity to serve the proposed PUD. 2.Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for Rezones 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 provided satisfactory evidence of unified control of the property.Additionally, the development will be required to gain SDP and PPL approval. These processes will ensure that appropriate stipulations for the provision of, continuing operation of, and maintenance of infrastructure will be provided by the developer. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 14 of 19 3.Conformity of the proposed Planned Unit Development with the goals, objectives,and policies of the GMP. County staff has reviewed this petition and has offered an analysis of the relevant goals, objectives, and policies of the GMP within the GMP discussion of this staff report. Based on that analysis, staff is of the opinion that this petition can be found consistent with the overall GMP. 4.The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The proposed landscaping and buffering standards are compatible with the adjacent uses. Staff has concluded that this PUD Rezone externally. 5.The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The amount of open space set aside for this project meets the minimum 60% requirement of the LDC. 6.The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. Collier County has sufficient treatment capacity for water and wastewater service to the project. Conveyance capacity must be confirmed at the time of development permit application. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of first development order (SDP or Plat), at which time a new TIS will be required to demonstrate turning movements for all site access points. Finally, th concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or site development plans, are sought. 7.The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including adjacent Collier County Water-Sewer District potable water and wastewater mains, to accommodate this project. 8.Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. This criterion essentially requires an evaluation of the extent to which development standards and deviations proposed for this PUD depart from development standards that would be required for the most similar conventional zoning district. The petitioner is seeking six deviations related to street width, on-premise signs, wall height, architectural standards, and parking. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 15 of 19 Please refer to the Deviation Discussion portion of the Staff Report below for a more extensive examination of the deviations. Deviation Discussion: The petitioner is seeking six deviations from the requirements of the LDC. The deviations are directly extracted from PUD Exhibit F.,and staff analysis/recommendation are outlined below. Deviation #1 Deviation 1 seeks relief from Section 6.06.01 N., Street System Requirements,which requires a 60-foot right-of-way width for Local/Private roads,to instead allow a 50-foot right-of-way width. The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The proposed roadway is private and will not be subject to Collier County ownership and maintenance. The 50-foot right of way width accommodates the required 10-foot lane widths and 5-foot sidewalks per the Community Development Local Street cross-section in Appendix B of the Land Development Code. A 10-foot wide utility easement is proposed on each side of the right of way to accommodate the utility needs of the development. Roadside swales are not proposed as valley gutter will be provided for street drainage to inlets that will discharge to the onsite detention areas;thus the wider right of way widths typically provided for swales is not required. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the of such regu Deviation #2 Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, On-premises Directional Signs,which requires that each sign shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from edge of the roadway paved surface or back of curb, to instead allow a setback of 5 feet from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb. This deviation excludes public roads. The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This deviation will provide locational flexibility for directional signage internal to the RPUD. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal. All directional signage will meet the Clear Sight Distance requirements in accordance with LDC Section 6.06.05. Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the master-planned developments throughout Collier County. All roads and drives will be privately owned and maintained. 9.A.a Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 16 of 19 Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the tified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application Deviation #3 Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C, Fences and Walls, Excluding Sound Walls, which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height, to instead allow an 8-foot high wall on top of a 4-foot high berm along Manatee Road right- of-way. The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The additional wall height is necessary to provide a buffer from the adjacent 2-lane traffic noise,and the ground must be altered to meet water management criteria. The wall height is consistent with the wall height constructed for other residential PUDs. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the Deviation #4 Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i, Architectural and Site Design Standards,which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road, including all rights-of-way, shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4., D.10., D.13., D.15., E, and F. Compliance shall be limited to the building façades facing the arterial or collector road to instead allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This Section of the LDC would be applicable to a building located in the amenity area of the project. It is the intent of the developer to install solid walls on their Manatee Road property boundary. The wall along Manatee Road will be 8 feet in height on top of a berm, making the amenity building largely impossible for the public to see. Requiring additional architectural embellishments for the amenity building is unnecessary. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the 9.A.a Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 17 of 19 devi Deviation #5 Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, Parking Space Requirements,which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multi-family project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to instead allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: The project will have sidewalks throughout allowing residents the ability to walk to the project amenity area. Parking on-site will be provided. It has been this developers experience that the proposed reduction in required parking provides ample on-site parking for residents and guests and that the LDC requirement results in excess parking for the on-site amenity area. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the Deviation #6 Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6.b., On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts,which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a combined sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet, to instead allow a combined sign face area of 160 square feet. The free-standing monument signs, for a maximum height of 12 feet (8-foot high wall on a 4-foot high berm) measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation. If the sign is on the wall, the wall will be 10 feet from the Manatee Road right-of-way. The petitioner states the following in support of the deviation: This deviation is warranted as it is anticipated the signage will be coordinated with the appealing if it is consistent with the scale of the perimeter project wall. Staff Analysis and Recommendation: Zoning and Land Development Review staff recommends APPROVAL, finding that, in compliance with LDC Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a detrimental effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community," and LDC Section 10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the 9.A.a Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) PUDR-PL20190002899, ENBROOK RPUD October 7, 2019 Page 18 of 19 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM on June 5,2019,at Collier County Government Center, BCC Boardroom, located at 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Building F, Naples, Florida.Approximately ten residents attended the meeting For further information, see the NIM Transcript which is contained in attached Exhibit E-Application. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the Staff Report for this petition on October 7, 2019. RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDR- PL20190002899, Enbrook RPUD to the BCC with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: Attachment A-Proposed PUD Ordinance Attachment B-Ordinance Number 92-43 Attachment C-Ordinance Number 92-77 Attachment D-FLUE Consistency Review Attachment E-Application 9.A.a Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.a Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Staff Report-Enbrook w signtr 10-7-19B(flat) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.b Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Attachment A- Proposed Ordinance - 121819(1) (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.c Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance 92-043.pdf see page 369 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.d Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.d Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.d Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.d Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.d Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.d Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.d Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Attachment C-Ordinance 92-077.pdf see page 59 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 1 of 3 Growth Management Department Zoning Division Comprehensive Planning Section MEMORANDUM To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA # 1244, Principal Planner Zoning Division, Zoning Services Section From: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division Date: August 26, 2019 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: PUDZ – PL201800002899 - REV 4 PETITION NAME: Enbrook (formerly Journey’s End) RPUD Rezone REQUEST: The petitioner is requesting to rezone approximately ±65.88 acres from “RMF-16(8)” (Residential Multi- Family at a density of 8 Dwelling Units per acre) Zoning District to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Zoning District to allow for a maximum of 526 multi-family, two-family attached and townhouse dwelling units or 265 single-family dwelling units or any combination of dwelling unit types subject to a vehicular trip cap. Creating a RPUD zoning district allows the petitioner to request a number of deviations from the Land Development Code (L.D.C.) and to retain the previously approved maximum number of 526 multi-family dwelling units. Based on Staff review comments, Submittal 4 has revised PUD Documents: Exhibit A and E, as well as the Master Plan (Exhibit C). LOCATION: The ±65.88-acre subject site is located on the south side of Manatee Road, approximately 1,500 feet east of Collier Blvd. (CR951), in Section 10, Township 51 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject site is identified as Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict, and it’s within the Coastal High Hazard Area as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). The site is also identified on Map FLUE-12 as “Consistent by Policy.” This site is currently zoned RMF-16 (8), which allows a maximum density of 8 multi-family dwelling units per acre (DU/A) or 527 DUs (65.88 acres * 8 DU/A). The petition seeks to rezone the site to PUD to permit 526 dwelling units of various types (single and multi-family). Staff reviewed the proposed land use for consistency with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. The FLUE states, “Urban designated areas will accommodate… (a) Residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplex, and mobile home. The maximum densities allowed are identified in the Districts, Subdistricts, and Overlays…” A base density of 4 residential dwelling units per gross acre may be allowed in the Urban Designated Area, though this is not an entitlement. This base level of density may be adjusted as determined through the Density Rating System depending upon the location and characteristics of the project. The FLUE states in relevant text, “If the project lies within the Coastal High Hazard Area, one dwelling unit per gross acre shall be subtracted from the eligible base density of four dwelling units per acre.” This results in a maximum density of 3 dwelling units per acre (65.88 acres x 3 DU/A = 197.64 dwelling units = 198 DUs). However, because the site is Consistent by Policy, FLUE Policy 5.3 is applicable. 9.A.e Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Attachment D-Consistency Review 9-25-19 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 2 of 3 Policy 5.3 in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) states, in part, “All rezonings must be consistent with the Growth Management Plan.” FLUE Policy 5.3.(c) includes a two-part test: “For such residentially-zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the authorized number of dwelling units in the new zoning district does not exceed that authorized by the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of development allowed by the new zoning district does not exceed that allowed by the existing zoning district, except as provided for in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay.” Policy 5.3 (e.) states “Overall intensity of development shall be determined based upon a comparison of public facility impacts as allowed by the existing zoning district and the proposed zoning district.” Part 1 test: The number of multi-family dwelling units authorized by the existing zoning district is 527 DUs. The proposed PUD allows 526 multi-family, townhouse and 2-family attached DUs or 265 single-family DUs or a combination of DU types. Since the proposed number of DUs does not exceed that presently permitted, the Part 1 test is met. Part 2 test: The proposed PUD lists a variety of housing types including (265) single-family detached homes (265) as allowable Principal Uses. The PUD also proposes to allow 526 2-family attached DUs which are defined in the LDC as a type of SF DU. However, the previously existing trip cap for the presently approved 526 MFDUs will remain. Therefore, the traffic impact remains neutral (does not increase). Single-family homes tend to generate more traffic than multi-family dwelling units. The original zoning approval was for 526 multi-family dwelling units. The consultant analysis submitted for Review 3 shows that there are no additional public facility impacts associated with the proposed RPUD. Select FLUE Policies are shown below (in italics), followed by staff analysis in [bracketed bold text]. FLUE Policy 5.6: New developments shall be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the Land Development Code (Ordinance 04-41, adopted June 22, 2004 and effective October 18, 2004, as amended). [Comprehensive Planning staff leaves this determination to Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety.] Policy 7.1: The County shall encourage developers and property owners to connect their properties to fronting collector and arterial roads, except where no such connection can be made without violating intersection spacing requirements of the Land Development Code. [Exhibit “C”, Enbrook RPUD Master Plan, shows one ingress/egress point on Manatee Road, a local road which connects to Collier Blvd. (SR951), an arterial road as identified in the Transportation Element of the GMP). The site does not abut an arterial or collector road.] Policy 7.2: The County shall encourage internal accesses or loop roads in an effort to help reduce vehicle congestion on nearby collector and arterial roads and minimize the need for traffic signals. [Exhibit “C”, Enbrook RPUD Master Plan, shows three looping/interconnecting roads within the project that tie to the access point on Manatee Road.] Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or interconnection points with adjoining neighborhoods or other developments regardless of land use type. The interconnection of local streets between developments is also addressed in Policy 9.3 of the Transportation Element. [Exhibit “C”, Enbrook RPUD Master Plan, shows no interconnections with adjoining neighborhoods or developments; nor does staff believe it to be feasible. Gulf Winds East Condos and Rookery Bay Apartments (both fully developed) lie to the west. Staff does not think it is feasible to retrofit these developments to the west to accommodate an interconnection. Also, to the west of the southern portion of the subject site lies the Naples Outlet Collection/Naples Coastal Shoppes. The Enbrook Master Plan shows a preserve area that lies between the Outlet shops and Enbrook making an interconnection not feasible. Capri Water Works public land lies to the east as well as a 20-acre, undeveloped parcel zoned mobile home that lies east of the southern portion of the subject site and is south of the public land. Staff does not think an interconnection with the Public Lands would be feasible for security reasons. Although an opportunity to create an interconnection with the eastern parcel zoned mobile home might be possible and it appears there is currently a dirt road (Lucy Lane) that runs along the eastern boundary of the public lands and along the eastern boundary of the undeveloped parcel zoned mobile home, the benefit of an interconnection for the future residents of the mobile home zoned parcel and of Enbrook RPUD 9.A.e Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Attachment D-Consistency Review 9-25-19 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 3 of 3 would be minimal. Manatee Road lies to the north of the subject property. The undeveloped A.S.G.M Business Center of Naples PUD lies to the south of the subject property and appears to offer an opportunity for an interconnection. The ASGM Master Plan shows an internal roadway running along the northern boundary of the ASGM PUD adjacent to the Enbrook PUD with an access onto Collier Blvd. Although there appears to be an opportunity to connect with the ASGM PUD roadway, the roadway will traverse land approved for primary and secondary Business Park uses that could include industrial uses. Staff believes it would be inappropriate to encourage residents to utilize this roadway; therefore, staff is recommending this southern interconnection not be pursued.] Policy 7.4: The County shall encourage new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities and a range of housing prices and types. [Exhibit “A” Permitted Uses lists a variety of permitted housing types for this RPUD (single-family detached dwellings, two-family attached, townhomes, and multi-family units). A clubhouse with cafes, snack bars and similar uses to serve residents and their guests is itemized in Exhibit “A” Amenity Area; clubhouses are sometimes used for civic uses, e.g. polling place. Exhibit “C” Master Plan indicates Preserve acreage will be provided for this project; and several allowable common open-space uses and structures to serve residents and their guests are itemized in Exhibit “A” Preserve: A. Allowable Uses. Passive recreational areas are listed as an allowable use in #3. The applicant is not requesting any sidewalk deviations; therefore, sidewalks must be provided per the LDC.] CONCLUSION Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed Planned Unit Development Rezone may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section Raymond V. Bellows, Manager, Zoning Division, Zoning Services Section PUDZ-PL2018-2899 Enbrook RPUD R4.docx 9.A.e Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Attachment D-Consistency Review 9-25-19 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.fPacket Pg. 207Attachment: Letters of Objection-Enbrook (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.fPacket Pg. 208Attachment: Letters of Objection-Enbrook (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.fPacket Pg. 209Attachment: Letters of Objection-Enbrook (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.fPacket Pg. 210Attachment: Letters of Objection-Enbrook (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) 9.A.fPacket Pg. 211Attachment: Letters of Objection-Enbrook (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) Your Scur€e for the latest,,. THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED PE- AI PROPERTY FHOM A RESI'nrrvrlr nauLlrnMILv (nur- 16{A)I ZONING DISTRICT TO A niiriisrurnt PLAnINED uNlr DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZON' ING DISTRICT. TO ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 526 MULTI.FAMILY DWELLING UNITS- TWO FAMILY ATTACH-io airo rowugousr arsr DFNTIAL DWELLIN6 IINITS, OR 255 SINGLE FAMILY DWELT- IIIG UNITS OR ANY COMBINA' TION OF DWELLING UNIT TYPES SUBJECT TO A TRAEFIC CAP TOB A PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS ENBROOK RPUD; AND BY ELIMINATING THE 'IOO FOOT WIDE GREENBELT ALONG THE ENTIRE EAST AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES AND ELIMINATING THE TWO STORY HEIGHT LIMITATION DESCRIBED IN ORDINANCE NO. 92.43 AND ORDINANCENO 92.77 FOR THE ROYAL FAKAPALIvI PLANNING cOM- MUNITY: AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CONSISTIN6 OF 65,88 ACRES IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH 5IDE OF MANA' TEE ROAD APPROXIMATELY 15OO EEET EAST OF (OLLIER BOULEVARD, IN SECNON 10, TOWNSHIP 51 sOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLI-IER COUNTY, FLORTDA. tP1201900028991 A roov o{ the oroposed Ordi- nin.t'i! on file with the clerk to the Bo6rd and is available for insoection. All interested parties are invited to attend NOiE: Alt persons wishing to soeak on 'any aqenda item ;rct reoister with the County manaoe; prior to Presentation.f ih; aoiinda item to be ad- dressed. " lndividual speaker5 will be limited to 3 minut€s- on anv item, The selertlon ot anv individual to speak on be hilf o{ an oroanization or oroup is encouiiqed. l{ rec_ i,"nrieil bv the Chairman, a sobkesoersirn for a group or oroaniiation may be allotted 1O_ minutes to speak on an item. Persons wishinq to have writ_ ten or qraPhi. materials ln- .t.,.r^.r i; ihp Board aoenda or.t"tt mult tubmit saia mE- ierial a minimum of 3 weeks nrior to the relpective PUblic Learlno. ln anv case, written materi;ls intended lo be con- lidered bv the Board shall be qubmitted to the aPPropriate countv staff a minimum ot seven'davs !rior to the Publi' hearinq. Al[ materials used rn preseniatrons before the Board will become a Perma_ nent part of the re(ord. Anv person who decides 10 ^n6eil anv decision ot the Bb;rd will need a record.o+ the proreedinqt Pertarnrngrhereio and there{ore, maY need to ensure that a verba' tim record of the Proc€edings i! made. whi<h record includes the tesiimonv and evidence upon whi(h the apPeal is ba5ed. l{ you are a perron with a dis- abilitv who needs any ac(om mod;tion in order to partici- pate in thk proceedinq, you are eniitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain a5- sistanae. Please contact the collier Couniv Facilities Man agement Division, located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East, 5uite 101, Naples, FL 34112-5356, 12391 25243a0, at least two davs prior to the meeting. As- <i<ied listenino devi(es for the hearino imoaired are .vaila- hle in-the Board of Countv Commis5ioners Offi(e. NOTICE OF PUBLIC I{EARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONsIDER AN ORDINANCE Notice is herebv qiven that ts oublic hearina iviii be held bv tf,e Collie, C-ounty Board of countv Commissionerson lanuarv 14.2020, in the Bo.rd of C'ountv Commissionert Meetino Raom, Third Floor, collier - Government Center. 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Na- otes FL.. the Board ol County tommissioners (BC() will con- sider the enaciment oT a Countv Ordinan(e. The meet' ihf, ;ill rommence at 9:00 A.-M. The title o{ the Pro- posed Ordinance is as follows: AN ORDIIIANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS. SIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDIN6 ORDI. NANTE NUMEER 92.43, A5 AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NUMEER 92.77, AND AMEND. ING ORDINAN(E NUMBER 2004.41, A5 AMENDED. THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DE. VELOPMENT CODE WI{ICH IN- CLUDES THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE UNTNCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORI. DA, BY AMENDING THE AP- PROPRIATE ZONING ATTAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHANGING ? BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS. SIONERs COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA WILLIAM L. MCDANIEL, JR., CHAIRMAN CRYsTAL K, KINZEL, CLERK By: Mai(ha Vergara, Deputy clerk (5EAL) Pub Date: Dec 26, 2019 #1960885 NAPLESNEWS.COM r THURSDAY, D ECEM B ER 26, 2019 i, 13D ..i 9.A.h Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Legal Ad - Agenda ID 11069 (11069 : PL20180002899 Enbrook RPUD) Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 Application and Supporting Documents October 17, 2019 CCPC Hearing November 12, 2019 BCC Hearing Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com February 11, 2019 Ms. Nancy Gundlach, AICP Collier County Growth Management Division/ Planning and Regulation Land Development Services Department Comprehensive Planning Section 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 RE: Collier County Application for Public Hearing, Enbrook RPUD Rezone – PL20180002899, Submittal 1 Dear Ms. Gundlach: A Collier County application for Public Hearing for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Rezone for properties located on the south side of Manatee Road approximately 1,500 feet east of Collier Boulevard is being filed electronically for review. This application proposes to rezone 65.88± acres from the RMF-16(8) Zoning District to the Residential Planned Unit Development Zoning District to allow a maximum of 526 residential dwelling units. Documents filed with submittal 1 include the following: 1. Cover Letter 2. Application for a Public Hearing for PUD Rezone 3. Evaluation Criteria 4. Utility Dedication Statement 5. Pre-application meeting notes 6. Affidavit of Authorization 7. Property Ownership Disclosure Form 8. Covenant of Unified Control 9. Completed Addressing Checklist 10. Warranty Deed(s) 11. Boundary Survey 12. Aerial Location Map Ms. Nancy Gundlach, AICP RE: Collier County Application for Public Hearing, Enbrook RPUD Rezone – PL20180002899, Submittal 1 February 11, 2019 Page 2 of 2 13. Environmental Data Requirements 14. Traffic Impact Study 15. Waiver of Historical Survey 16. School Impact Analysis Application 17. PUD Exhibits A-F 18. Deviation Justifications Please feel free to contact Rich Yovanovich at 435-3535 or me should you have any questions. Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP c: Rimar Enterprises, Inc. D.R. Horton, Inc. Richard D. Yovanovich GradyMinor File 1 Sharon Umpenhour From:GundlachNancy <Nancy.Gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent:Friday, December 07, 2018 2:47 PM To:FeyEric Cc:Wayne Arnold; ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com; Michael Herrera; BellowsRay; WeeksDavid Subject:RE: PL20180002899 Journey's End (PUDZ) Hi Eric, I have researched this and have confirmed that the 100-foot wide greenbelt was part of a zoning re- evaluation in 1992. Unless someone, somewhere has an objection, I am o.k. with the removal of the 100-foot wide greenbelt. Respectfully, Nancy Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA Principal Planner Zoning Services (239)252-2484 From: GundlachNancy Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 1:01 PM To: FeyEric <Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov>; Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com> Cc: ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com; Michael Herrera <MHerrera@gradyminor.com> Subject: RE: PL20180002899 Journey's End (PUDZ) Hi Eric, I will research this and will let you know. It may take a week or so. Wayne, If you can provide any research that you might have, please do so. Thank you- Respectfully, Nancy Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA Principal Planner Zoning Services (239)252-2484 2 From: FeyEric Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 9:24 AM To: Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com>; GundlachNancy <Nancy.Gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com; Michael Herrera <MHerrera@gradyminor.com> Subject: RE: PL20180002899 Journey's End (PUDZ) Assuming that to be the case, Nancy, would you support eliminating the 100’ green belt along the east property line given that the adjacent CCWSD property was rezoned from Agricultural (A) to Public Use (P) in 2007, 15 years after imposition of that condition? Respectfully, Eric Fey, P.E. Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division Continuous Improvement NOTE: Email Address Has Changed 3339 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303, Naples, Florida 34112-5361 Phone: 239.252.1037 Cell: 239.572.0043 From: Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 8:21 AM To: FeyEric <Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com; Michael Herrera <MHerrera@gradyminor.com>; GundlachNancy <Nancy.Gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: PL20180002899 Journey's End (PUDZ) Eric, I spoke with David Weeks and he indicated that none of the original files exist that would have been created for each parcel evaluated under the old zoning re-evaluation program. David didn’t recall specifically a basis for the 100’ greenbelt, but he suspects it was simply to insure an appropriate buffer for higher density zoning to transition to lower density lands that did not have urban densities at that time. They clearly were not based on any environmental assessment given that the 100’ can be used for water management, etc. From: FeyEric <Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 11:40 PM To: Wayne Arnold <WArnold@gradyminor.com> Cc: ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com; Michael Herrera <MHerrera@gradyminor.com>; GundlachNancy <Nancy.Gundlach@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: PL20180002899 Journey's End (PUDZ) Wayne, At the subject pre-application meeting on 10/30/18, we discussed the 100’ green belt required along the east and south property lines of the Journey’s End property, pursuant to Ord. 92-77. As I mentioned at the end of the meeting, we have a similar restriction on our adjacent parcel at 1300 Manatee Rd, more particularly a 100’ setback on all sides of the 3 property, pursuant to Ord. 07-56. Based on the attached email, it appears our condition was imposed by the Planning Commission. I have requested the agenda item and minutes for RZ-2005-AR-7271, which was heard at the 1/4/2007 CCPC meeting. I will let you know what I learn once I receive the requested documents. Have you gained any historical context on the 100’ green belt condition? I imagine this was also a condition imposed by the Planning Commission. Respectfully, Eric Fey, P.E. Senior Project Manager Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division Continuous Improvement NOTE: Email Address Has Changed 3339 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303, Naples, Florida 34112-5361 Phone: 239.252.1037 Cell: 239.572.0043 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 1 of 11 Application for a Public Hearing for PUD Rezone, Amendment to PUD or PUD to PUD Rezone PETITION NO PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED PUD Rezone (PUDZ): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F., Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code Amendment to PUD (PUDA): LDC subsection 10.02.13 E. and Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code PUD to PUD Rezone (PUDR): LDC subsection 10.02.13 A.-F. APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner(s): _________________________________________________________ Name of Applicant if different than owner: _____________________________________________ Address: _________________________City: _______________ State: _________ ZIP: ___________ Telephone: _______________________ Cell: ______________________ Fax: __________________ E-Mail Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Name of Agent: ____________________________________________________________________ Firm: _____________________________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________City: _______________ State: _______ ZIP: __________ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: ____________________ Fax: _______________________ E-Mail Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Be aware that Collier County has lobbyist regulations. Guide yourself accordingly and ensure that you are in compliance with these regulations. To be completed by staff Rimar Enterprises, Inc., 8040 SW 69 Ave, Miami, FL 334143 Rimar Enterprises, Inc. and D.R. Horton, Inc. 10541 Six Mile Cypress Fort Myers FL 33966 239-225-2651 JWEverett@drhorton.com / rreyes@ravbahamas.com D. Wayne Arnold, AICP / Richard D. Yovanovich Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. / Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs FL 34134 239-947-1144 warnold@gradyminor.com / ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com 4 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 2 of 11 REZONE REQUEST This application is requesting a rezone from: _________________________ Zoning district(s) to the ________________________________ zoning district(s). Present Use of the Property: _________________________________________________________ Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: _________________________________________ Original PUD Name: ________________________________________________________________ Ordinance No.: ____________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY INFORMATION On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: • If the request involves changes to more than one zoning district, the applicant shall include a separate legal description for property involved in each district; • The applicant shall submit 4 copies of a recent survey (completed within the last six months, maximum 1" to 400' scale), if required to do so at the pre-application meeting; and • The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed survey may be required. Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ Size of Property: _______ ft. x _______ ft. = ________ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: _________ Address/ General Location of Subject Property: __________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ PUD District (refer to LDC subsection 2.03.06 C): Commercial Residential Community Facilities Industrial Mixed Use Other: ________________ Not applicable RMF-16(8) Undeveloped Residential dwelling units Not applicable 10 51 26 N.A. N.A. N.A. Please see boundary survey for legal description N.A. N.A.00736200103 and 00736200404 Irregular Irregular 2869732.8+/-65.88+/- 1158 Pisa Lane and 1144 Padova St. which is on the south side of Manatee Road, east of Collier Boulevard. RPUD COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 3 of 11 ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N S E W If the owner of the subject property owns contiguous property please provide a detailed legal description of the entire contiguous property on a separate sheet attached to the application. Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________ ASSOCIATIONS Required: List all registered Home Owner Association(s) that could be affected by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner’s website at http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=774. Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ Name of Homeowner Association: _________________________________________________ Mailing Address: ____________________________ City: _________ State: ______ ZIP: ______ MH, RMF-12 and RMF-16 Mobile Homes A.S.G.M. BUSINESS CENTER PUD Undeveloped P and MH Public Utility Site and Undeveloped C-4, RMF-12 and RMF-16 Commercial and Multi-family residential N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. SOUTH BAY PLANTATION CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. 1901 ROOKERY BAY DRIVE Naples FL 34114 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. 6704 Lone Oak Blvd Naples FL 34109 RIVERWOOD ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. 6704 Lone Oak Blvd Naples FL 34109 ENCHANTING SHORES CO-OP, INC. 17 Turquoise Ave Naples FL 34114 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 4 of 11 EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative 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. On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. a. 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. b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. (This is to include identifying what Sub-district, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that Sub-district, policy or other provision.) d. 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. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. h. 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. 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 asce rtain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 5 of 11 Previous land use petitions on the subject property: To your knowledge, has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? If so, what was the nature of that hearing? __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? Yes No if so please provide copies. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 3 E. of the Administrative Code and LDC section 10.03.06. Following the NIM, the applicant will submit a written summary and any commitments that have been made at the meeting. Refer to Chapter 8 B. of the Administrative Code for the NIM procedural requirements. Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s) immediately. RECORDING OF DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS Within 30 days of adoption of the Ordinance, the owner or developer (specify name) at their expense shall record in the Public Records of Collier County a Memorandum of Understanding of Developer Commitments or Notice of Developer Commitments that contains the legal description of the property that is the subject of the land use petition and contains each and every commitment of the owner or developer specified in the Ordinance. The Memorandum or Notice shall be in form acceptable to the County and shall comply with the recording requirements of Chapter 695, FS. A recorded copy of the Memorandum or Notice shall be provided to the Collier County Planned Unit Development Monitoring staff within 15 days of recording of said Memorandum or Notice. LDC subsection 10.02.08 D 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 processing or otherwise actively pursue the rezoning, amendment or change, for a period of 6 months. An application 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 submission of a new application, repayment of all application fees and the grant of a determination of “sufficiency”. Further review of the request will be subject to the then current code. No COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 6 of 11 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): _______________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________ City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: ______________________ E-Mail Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ______________________________________________ City: _________________ State: ________ ZIP: _________ PROPERTY INFORMATION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: __________________________ d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): _________________________ e. Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: __________________________ d. Private System (Well) Total Population to be Served: ________________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water-Peak: _________ Average Daily: __________ B. Sewer-Peak: _________ Average Daily: __________ If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________________ D.R. Horton, Inc. 10541 Six Mile Cypress Fort Myers FL 33966 239-225-2651 JWEverett@drhorton.com 1158 Pisa Lane and 1144 Padova St. Naples FL 34114 10 51 26 N.A. N.A. N.A. Please see boundary survey for legal description N.A. N.A.00736200103 and 00736200404 X X 526 Residential Dwelling Units 364,650 GPD 234,100 GPD 272,250 GPD 181,500 GPD January 2020 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 7 of 11 Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as 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. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Collier County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an 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 an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 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 adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. Not applicable Please see "Utility Dedication Statement" document COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 8 of 11 COVENANT OF UNIFIED CONTROL The undersigned do hereby swear or affirm that we are the fee simple titleholders and owners of record of property commonly known as ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ (Street address and City, State and Zip Code) and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. The property described herein is the subject of an application for ______________ planned unit development (______________PUD) zoning. We hereby designate___________________, legal representative thereof, as the legal representatives of the property and as such, these individuals are authorized to legally bind all owners of the property in the course of seeking the necessary approvals to develop. This authority includes, but is not limited to, the hiring and authorization of agents to assist in the preparation of applications, plans, surveys, and studies necessary to obtain zoning approval on the site. These representatives will remain the only entity to authorize development activity on the property until such time as a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to Collier County. The undersigned recognize the following and will be guided accordingly in the pursuit of development of the project: 1. The property will be developed and used in conformity with the approved master plan including all conditions placed on the development and all commitments agreed to by the applicant in connection with the planned unit development rezoning. 2. The legal representative identified herein is responsible for compliance with all terms, conditions, safeguards, and stipulations made at the time of approval of the master plan, even if the property is subsequently sold in whole or in part, unless and until a new or amended covenant of unified control is delivered to and recorded by Collier County. 3. A departure from the provisions of the approved plans or a failure to comply with any requirements, conditions, or safeguards provided for in the planned unit development process will constitute a violation of the Land Development Code. 4. All terms and conditions of the planned unit development approval will be incorporated into covenants and restrictions which run with the land so as to provide notice to subsequent owners that all development activity within the planned unit development must be consistent with those terms and conditions. 5. So long as this covenant is in force, Collier County can, upon the discovery of noncompliance with the terms, safeguards, and conditions of the planned unit development, seek equitable relief as necessary to compel compliance. The County will not issue permits, certificates, or licenses to occupy or use any part of the planned unit development and the County may stop ongoing construction activity until the project is brought into compliance with all terms, conditions and safeguards of the planned unit development. ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Owner Owner ____________________________________ ___________________________________ Printed Name Printed Name STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me this day of , 201__ by ____________________ who is personally known to me or has produced _____________________________ as identification. ____________________________________ Notary Public (Name typed, printed or stamped) Property I.D. Numbers 00736200103 and 00736200404 1158 Pisa Lane and 1144 Padova St., Naples FL 34114 Residential R COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 9 of 11 Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code Amendment to PUD- Ch. 3 G. 2 of the Administrative Code PUD to PUD Rezone- Ch. 3 G. 1 of the Administrative Code The following Submittal Requirement checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At final submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with an up-to-date application. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. A Model PUD Document is available online at http://www.colliercountyfl.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=76983. REQUIREMENTS # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Cover Letter with Narrative Statement including a detailed description of why amendment is necessary Completed Application with required attachments (download latest version) 1 Pre-application meeting notes 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Notarized and completed Covenant of Unified Control 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Warranty Deed(s) 1 List Identifying Owner and all parties of corporation 1 Signed and sealed Boundary Survey 1 Architectural Rendering of proposed structures 1 Current Aerial Photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. 1 Statement of Utility Provisions 1 Environmental Data Requirements pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 1 Environmental Data Requirements collated into a single Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) packet at time of public hearings. Coordinate with project planner at time of public hearings. Listed or Protected Species survey, less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys. 1 Traffic Impact Study 1 Historical Survey 1 School Impact Analysis Application, if applicable 1 Electronic copy of all required documents 1 Completed Exhibits A-F (see below for additional information)+ List of requested deviations from the LDC with justification for each (this document is separate from Exhibit E) Checklist continues on next page 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 10 of 11 Revised Conceptual Master Site Plan 24” x 36”and One 8 ½” x 11” copy Original PUD document/ordinance, and Master Plan 24” x 36” – Only if Amending the PUD Revised PUD document with changes crossed thru & underlined 1 Copy of Official Interpretation and/or Zoning Verification 1 *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement +The following exhibits are to be completed on a separate document and attached to the application packet: Exhibit A: List of Permitted Uses Exhibit B: Development Standards Exhibit C: Master Plan- See Chapter 3 E. 1. of the Administrative Code Exhibit D: Legal Description Exhibit E: List of Requested LDC Deviations and justification for each Exhibit F: List of Development Commitments If located in RFMU (Rural Fringe Mixed Use) Receiving Land Areas Pursuant to LDC subsection 2.03.08.A.2.a.2.(b.)i.c., the applicant must contact the Florida Forest Service at 239- 690-3500 for information regarding “Wildfire Mitigation & Prevention Plan.” PLANNERS – INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams & David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers Immokalee Water/Sewer District: City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other: ASSOCIATED FEES FOR APPLICATION Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 PUD Rezone: $10,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre PUD to PUD Rezone: $8,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre PUD Amendment: $6,000.00* plus $25.00 an acre or fraction of an acre Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $2,250.00 Environmental Data Requirements-EIS Packet (submittal determined at pre-application meeting): $2,500.00 Listed or Protected Species Review (when an EIS is not required): $1,000.00 Transportation Review Fees: o Methodology Review: $500.00, to be paid directly to Transportation at the Methodology Meeting* *Additional fees to be determined at Methodology Meeting. o Minor Study Review: $750.00 o Major Study Review $1,500.00 X X X X X 4 4 4 4 X COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 11 of 11 Legal Advertising Fees: o CCPC: $1,125.00 o BCC: $500.00 School Concurrency Fee, if applicable: o Mitigation Fees, if application, to be determined by the School District in coordination with the County Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected at the time of application submission and those fees are set forth by the Authority having jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notification mailers for Applications headed to hearing, and this fee is collected prior to hearing. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. As the authorized agent/applicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of processing this petition. *Additional fee for the 5th and subsequent re-submittal will be accessed at 20% of the original fee. ___________________________________ _____________ Signature of Petitioner or Agent Date ___________________________________ Printed named of signing party X X X D. Wayne Arnold, AICP February 11, 2019 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 6 of 11 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR PUD REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): _______________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________ City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: ______________________ E-Mail Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ______________________________________________ City: _________________ State: ________ ZIP: _________ PROPERTY INFORMATION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ TYPE OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: __________________________ d. Package Treatment Plant (GPD Capacity): _________________________ e. Septic System TYPE OF WATER SERVICE TO BE PROVIDED Check applicable system: a. County Utility System b. City Utility System c. Franchised Utility System Provide Name: __________________________ d. Private System (Well) Total Population to be Served: ________________________________________________________ Peak and Average Daily Demands: A. Water-Peak: _________ Average Daily: __________ B. Sewer-Peak: _________ Average Daily: __________ If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________________ COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 July 30, 2018 Page 7 of 11 Narrative statement: Provide a brief and concise narrative statement and schematic drawing of sewage treatment process to be used as 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. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ Collier County Utility Dedication Statement: If the project is located within the service boundaries of Collier County’s utility service system, a notarized statement shall be provided agreeing to dedicate the water distribution and sewage collection facilities within the project area to the Collier County Utilities. This shall occur upon completion of the construction of these facilities in accordance with all applicable County ordinances in effect at that time. This statement shall also include an 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 an agreement to dedicate the appropriate utility easements for serving the water and sewer systems. __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 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 adequate capacity to serve the project shall be provided. March 2, 2015 Joanne Janes, Project Administrator VIA: E-MAIL Grady Minor 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Subject: Journey’s End Parcel #: 00736200103; 00736200404 Water, Wastewater and IQ Availability Dear Ms. Janes: Water service is available for this project from a 10” water main running along Manatee Road. Wastewater service is available from 10” force main running along Manatee Road. Irrigation Quality (IQ) water is not available to the project at this time. Connection points for the system tie-ins to water and wastewater lines may be made after submission and approval of the hydraulic calculations by the Planning and Project Managem ent Department, validating that the up/downstream systems are adequate to handle the increase in demand or flow. This letter implies no guarantee that other developments throughout the District will not have an impact on the quantity of water and wastewater treatment and disposal capacity available to this property until the project has received a commitment for service. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at (239) 252-5366. Sincerely, Kris Van Lengen, Principal Planner Planning and Project Management Department cc: Aaron Cromer, Principal Project Manager Eric Fey, Engineering Review 1 Sharon Umpenhour From:Steve Martin Sent:Thursday, April 04, 2019 9:47 AM To:Wayne Arnold Cc:Sharon Umpenhour Subject:FW: Enbrook RPUD - PL20180002899 Per one of the Zoning comments, the below email string indicates confirmation that Collier County has water and wastewater capacity for 526 residential units. From: BullertBenjamin <Benjamin.Bullert@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 9:43 AM To: Steve Martin <SMartin@gradyminor.com> Cc: FeyEric <Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Enbrook RPUD - PL20180002899 Steve, There is water availability for the proposed development. If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you. Benjamin (Ben) N. Bullert, P.E. Interim Principal Project Manager Public Utilities Department Engineering and Project Management Division Motto: “Continuous Improvement” NOTE: Email Address Has Changed 3339 Tamiami Trail East | Suite 303 | Naples, FL 34112-5361 Office: (239) 252-2583 | Cell: (239) 877-6339 From: Steve Martin <SMartin@gradyminor.com> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 4:43 PM To: BullertBenjamin <Benjamin.Bullert@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Enbrook RPUD - PL20180002899 Hi Ben, Per the below email and attachments, I am writing to request water availability for the subject project which is proposed for 526 residential units. Please note this project was approved for 483 units under PL20150000094, none of which were not constructed, so this is a difference of 43 additional units. For convenience, I am attaching two sets of flow calculations based on the overall proposed 526 units, and for the additional 43 units above the permitted 483 units for comparison purposes. 2 Please let me know if any questions. Steven A. Martin, P.E. Project Manager 6150 Diamond Centre Ct., Suite 1003 Fort Myers, FL 33912 Phone - 239.947.1144 Fax - 239.947-0375 Web - http://www.gradyminor.com Please consider the environment before printing this email DISCLAIMER: This communication from Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., along with any attachments or electronic data is intended only for the addressee(s) named above and may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure. The recipient agrees and accepts the following conditions: The electronic file/data is for informational purposes only and is the responsibility of the recipient to reconcile this electronic file/data with the approved and certified "plan of record" along with actual project site conditions. Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. reserves the right to revise, update and improve its electronically stored data without notice and assumes no responsibility due to a virus or damages caused by receiving this email. From: StevensMichael <Michael.Stevens@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 4:34 PM To: Steve Martin <SMartin@gradyminor.com> Cc: FeyEric <Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Enbrook RPUD - PL20180002899 Email Ben Bullert at Benjamin.Bullert@colliercountyfl.gov Ben is the interim Principal Project Manager for Water. Respectfully, Michael Stevens, P.E. Principal Project Manager Engineering & Project Management Division “Continuous Improvement” 3339 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303, Naples, FL 34112-5361 Phone: 239-252-2589 Cell: 239-877-7192 www.colliergov.net 3 From: Steve Martin <SMartin@gradyminor.com> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 4:32 PM To: StevensMichael <Michael.Stevens@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: FeyEric <Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Enbrook RPUD - PL20180002899 Michael, thank you for confirming the wastewater capacity. How do I obtain confirmation of the water system capacity for the additional units? Steven A. Martin, P.E. Project Manager 6150 Diamond Centre Ct., Suite 1003 Fort Myers, FL 33912 Phone - 239.947.1144 Fax - 239.947-0375 Web - http://www.gradyminor.com Please consider the environment before printing this email DISCLAIMER: This communication from Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., along with any attachments or electronic data is intended only for the addressee(s) named above and may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure. The recipient agrees and accepts the following conditions: The electronic file/data is for informational purposes only and is the responsibility of the recipient to reconcile this electronic file/data with the approved and certified "plan of record" along with actual project site conditions. Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. reserves the right to revise, update and improve its electronically stored data without notice and assumes no responsibility due to a virus or damages caused by receiving this email. From: StevensMichael <Michael.Stevens@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 4:22 PM To: Steve Martin <SMartin@gradyminor.com> Cc: FeyEric <Eric.Fey@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Enbrook RPUD - PL20180002899 Steve, This email serves as confirmation that the 10” wastewater forcemain on Manatee Road has the capacity to accept the additional peak hour flow of 31.6 gpm. Respectfully, Michael Stevens, P.E. Principal Project Manager Engineering & Project Management Division “Continuous Improvement” 3339 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303, Naples, FL 34112-5361 Phone: 239-252-2589 Cell: 239-877-7192 4 www.colliergov.net From: Steve Martin <SMartin@gradyminor.com> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 10:38 AM To: StevensMichael <Michael.Stevens@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: StevensMichael <Michael.Stevens@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Enbrook RPUD - PL20180002899 Hello Mike, Per our phone call this morning regarding Eric Fey’s below review comment of our pending PUD rezone, I am attaching the estimated water and wastewater flow calculations for the subject project which proposes 526 residential units. We are requesting Letters of Availability for water and sewer from Collier County for 526 residential units. Please note this project was approved for 483 units under PL20150000094 which were not constructed, so this is a difference of 43 additional units. Per your request, I am attaching two sets of calculations based on the proposed 526 units, and for the additional 43 units for comparison purposes. As a summary, below is an image of the estimated flows for 526 units. And below that are the estimated additional flows for the 43 units. Please review and let me know if any questions. 5 Thank you, Steven A. Martin, P.E. Project Manager 6150 Diamond Centre Ct., Suite 1003 Fort Myers, FL 33912 Phone - 239.947.1144 Fax - 239.947-0375 Web - http://www.gradyminor.com Please consider the environment before printing this email DISCLAIMER: This communication from Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., along with any attachments or electronic data is intended only for the addressee(s) named above and may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure. The recipient agrees and accepts the following conditions: The electronic file/data is for informational purposes only and is the responsibility of the recipient to reconcile this electronic file/data with the approved and certified "plan of record" along with actual project site conditions. Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. reserves the right to revise, update and improve its electronically stored data without notice and assumes no responsibility due to a virus or damages caused by receiving this email. Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 1 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com Pursuant to LDC subsections 10.02.13 B, 10.02.08 F and Chapter 3 G. of the Administrative 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. On a separate sheet attached to the application, provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. Enbrook RPUD is a 65.88± acre property located on the south side of Manatee Road, approximately ¼ mile east of Collier Boulevard. The property is Designated Urban Residential, Urban Mixed Use Residential, Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map. The property is currently zoned RMF-16(8) and the applicant proposes to rezone the property to a Residential PUD (RPUD) to permit a maximum of 526 dwelling units. The application proposes to permit a variety of dwelling unit types including single-family, two-family attached, townhome, and multi-family residential dwelling unit types. Residential amenities will be provided on-site for the use of residents of the RPUD. Access to the site is from Manatee Road. The property was evaluated for a compatibility exception under the County’s Zoning Re- evaluation program, and in 1992 the Board of County Commissioners rezoned the property from RMF-16 to RMF-16(8). Ordinance 92-77 restricted the overall density to 8 dwelling units per acre and placed two other development restrictions on the property in addition to the density reduction: a) building height limitation of 2-stories, and b) a 100’ wide greenbelt requirement along the eastern and southern boundaries. The proposed 526 dwelling units, which represents 8 dwelling units per acre, is consistent with the density permissible by ordinance 92-77. The proposed conceptual PUD Master Plan eliminates the previously required 100’ wide greenbelt and will provide a minimum of 25% of the on -site native vegetation as a preserve, consistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and LDC Section 3.05 requirements. The greenbelt was at the time a measure to provide sufficient buffering and a wildlife corridor to undeveloped properties having lower intensity zoning located to the south and east of the subject property. Based on current vegetation mapping, the proposed preserve area will retain the highest quality of vegetation that exists on the site and in a location that will abut areas likely to become preservation areas on adjacent property once developed. a. 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. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 2 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com The proposed 65.88± acre residential planned unit development is located in an area, which has been designated for residential development on the County’s Future Land Use Map. Other residential, commercial and institutional developments are located nearby making the location desirable for a planned residential community. The site is currently zoned for multi-family and townhome uses. The proposed PUD has the effect of adding single -family and two-family residential uses for a full range of residential uses similar to many oth er PUD’s. The site is within the Collier County Water and Sewer District boundaries. Both wa ter and sewer lines are available proximate to the site. Capacity is available for water and sewer, and there are no anticipated deficiencies in the system. A traffic analysis has been prepared and a trip cap is proposed consistent with the intensity of the proposed 526 dwelling units. The property owner participated in the consortium that contributed funds toward the improvements to the Collier Boulevard and U.S. 41 intersection improvements. b. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the county attorney. The property is under unified control via a contract for purchase for the entire 65.88± acre parcel. Upon approval of the proposed rezoning, the land will be acquired with the intent to develop a residential community consistent with the approved PUD. A homeowner association will be established to insure that common community elements such as open space and surface water management will be maintained. c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the Growth Management Plan. (This is to include identifying what Sub-district, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that Sub-district, policy or other provision.) Future Land Use Element: The 65.88± acre project is designated Urban Residential, Urban Mixed Use Residential , Urban Coastal Fringe on the Future Land Use Map. The property was evaluated as part of the County’s Zoning Re-evaluation program, and the property was restricted to a maximum den sity of 8 dwelling units per acre by Collier County Ordinance 92 -77. The proposed 526 dwelling units represents 8 dwelling units per acre for the 65.88± acre property and is therefore consistent with the Future Land Use Element via Policy 5.12 of this Element. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 3 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com Policy 5.5 of the Future Land Use Element discourages urban sprawl to minimize the cost of public infrastructure necessary to serve new development. The proposed RPUD represents infill development within our Urban designated area. All necessar y infrastructure to serve the project such as roads, water, sewer, schools, and other essential services are located at or near the property. Policy 5.6 requires new projects to be compatible and complementary to the surrounding land uses. The proposed RPUD proposes a range of dwelling unit types, which are similar to other approved and developed PUD’s in the surrounding area. Immediately adjacent uses include a water booster pumping facility, a multi-family condominium project and a commercial shopping center. The site is presently zoned for residential use and the property will be developed with buffers and appropriate development standards to insure compatibility. Policy 5.7 encourages development of land designated for urban intensities before designating other areas for urban intensity. As d iscussed in the Policy 5.5 analysis, the property is designated for urban intensities and the existing zoning permits the requested 526 dwelling units. This residential PUD is consistent with this policy. Policy 7.1 encourages new development to connect directly to collector and arterial roads. The project will have access to Manatee Road, which is a local roadway. Policy 7.3 encourages all projects to provide interconnections to adjoining neighborhoods or developments. Interconnection to adjoi ning parcels is not feasible or practical for the proposed RPUD. Properties to the east are developed a Collier County utility facility, property to the west is developed with a multi-family residential project, and to the southwest is a developed shopping center. The land area near the project’s southern boundary is anticipated to be the project’s native vegetation preservation area due to the presence of wetlands, therefore, providing any potential to the south is not feasible or practical. Further, the properties to the east are zoned Estates and Mobile Home and are undeveloped. These properties have access to Manatee Road and/or Roost Road. Interconnections would not provide access to a road other than Manatee Road, which is also the roadway access for Enbrook RPUD, and would not serve to provide alternate access for any of the properties. Conservation and Coastal Management Element: Policy 6.1.1 requires that residential and mixed-use projects greater than 25 acres retain 25% of the existing native vegetation on-site. The project contains approximately 11.62 acres of native vegetation, which would require preservation of approximately 2.91 acres of native vegetation on-site. The proposed conceptual master plan identifies areas of retained native vegetation consistent with this policy. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 4 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com Policy 7.1.2 indicates that development should be directed away from areas having listed species and habitat. The subject property has been evaluated by professional biologists and have determined that there are no listed species inhabiting the site. Further analysis will be completed as part of the State Environmental Resource Permit process and as required in this Policy any required management plans will be completed to insure protection of listed species. Transportation Element: Policy 5.1 requires that all projects are evaluated to determine their affect on the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR. This RPUD application includes a comprehensive assessment of the transportation impacts associated with the project. No level of service impacts result from the proposed 526 dwelling unit residential project therefore the project is consistent with Policy 5.1. d. The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The proposed residential PUD provides for a variety of dwelling unit types, consistent with those approved and/or developed in nearby communities. The existing conventional zoning permits a maximum of 526 multi-family dwelling units, and is consistent with the proposed maximum intensity for the RPUD. Development standards have been established which are appropriate for the site and which will insure that the form of development will be compatible with nearby residential, commercial and institutional development. Project buffers will be provided to insure that the immediate neighboring communities will have appropriate separation and transition between the uses. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The project will provide a minimum of 60% open space consistent with the requirements of the LDC, which will include native vegetation preserve areas, lakes, buffers and recreational areas. The PUD will include an amenity area for community residents and guests. The PUD document includes a variety of recreational amenities that may be provided including swimming pool, outdoor courts, fitness facilities and the like. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 5 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. The project will not require phasing due to infrastructure availability. Adequate infrastructure is in place at the project site to service the proposed residential community. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The project has developed property on two sides and is bounded by Manatee Road to the north. There are no plans or opportunities to expand beyond the 65.88± acres. h. 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 PUD includes development standards and conditions which will assure compatible and complementary development. Deviations from certain LDC provisions have been requested as part of the application. The deviations will facilitate development of the property in a manner consistent with other communities developed by the applicant and pose no harm to the public. 10.02.08 - Requirements for Amendments to the Official Zoning Atlas F. Nature of requirements of Planning Commission report. When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations of the Planning Commission to the Board of County Commissioners required in LDC section 10.02.08 E shall show that t he Planning Commission has studied and considered the proposed change in relation to the following findings, when applicable: 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. Future Land Use Element: The 65.88± acre project is designated Urban Residential, Urban Mixed Use Residential , Urban Coastal Fringe on the Future Land Use Map. The property was evaluated as part of the County’s Zoning Re-evaluation program, and the property was restricted to a maximum density of 8 dwelling units per acre by Collier County Ordinance 92 -77. The proposed 526 dwelling units represents 8 dwelling units per acre for the 65.88± acre property and is therefore consistent with the Future Land Use Element via Policy 5.12 of this Element. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 6 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com Policy 5.5 of the Future Land Use Element discourages urban sprawl to minimize the cost of public infrastructure necessary to serve new development. The proposed RPUD represents infill development within our Urban designated area. All necessary infrastructure to serve the project such as roads, water, sewer, schools, and other essential services are located at or near the property. Policy 5.6 requires new projects to be compatible and complementary to the surrounding land uses. The proposed RPUD proposes a range of dwelling unit types, which are similar to other approved and developed PUD’s in the surrounding area . Immediately adjacent uses include a water booster pumping facility, a multi-family condominium project and a commercial shopping center. The site is presently zoned for residential use and the property will be developed with buffers and appropriate development standards to insure compatibility. Policy 5.7 encourages development of land designated for urban intensities before designating other areas for urban intensity. As d iscussed in the Policy 5.5 analysis, the property is designated for urban intensities and the existing zoning permits the requested 526 dwelling units. This residential PUD is consistent with this policy. Policy 7.1 encourages new development to connect directly to collector and arterial roads. The project will have access to Manatee Road, which is a local roadway. Policy 7.3 encourages all projects to provide interconnections to adjoining neighborhoods or developments. Interconnection to adjoi ning parcels is not feasible or practical for the proposed RPUD. Properties to the east are developed a Collier County utility facility, property to the west is developed with a multi-family residential project, and to the southwest is a developed shopping center. The land area near the project’s southern boundary is anticipated to be the project’s native vegetation preservation area due to the presence of wetlands, therefore, providing any potential to the south is not feasible or practical. Conservation and Coastal Management Element: Policy 6.1.1 requires that residential and mixed-use projects greater than 25 acres retain 25% of the existing native vegetation on-site. The project contains approximately 11.62± acres of native vegetation, which would require preservation of approximately 2.91 acres of native vegetation on-site. The proposed conceptual master plan identifies are as of retained native vegetation consistent with this policy. Policy 7.1.2 indicates that development should be directed away from areas having listed species and habitat. The subject property has been evaluated by professional biologists and Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 7 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com have determined that there are no listed species inhabiting the site. Further analysis will be completed as part of the State Environmental Resource Permit process and as required in this Policy any required management plans will be completed to insure protection of listed species. Transportation Element: Policy 5.1 requires that all projects are evaluated to determine their affect on the overall countywide density or intensity of permissible development, with consideration of their impact on the overall County transportation system, and shall not approve any petition or application that would directly access a deficient roadway segment as identified in the current AUIR or if it impacts an adjacent roadway segment that is deficient as identified in the current AUIR. This RPUD application includes a comprehensive assessment of the transportation impacts associated with the project. No level of service impacts result from the proposed 526 dwelling unit residential project therefore the project is consistent with Po licy 5.1. 2. The existing land use pattern. The subject property is located south of Manatee Road. To the west is the existing South Bay Plantation condominium community and the Prime Outlet mall shopping center, and to the east is a Collier County utility site. The properties are zoned RMF -12, C-4 and P respectively. To the south an undeveloped commercial property zoned BPPUD. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. Rezoning to the PUD zoning district will not cr eate an isolated district. Properties adjacent to the project are developed. The rezoning to the PUD zoning district is the appropriate district to permit a variety of dwelling units to be constructed on the property consistent with the Future Land Use Element. 3. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The boundaries are not illogically drawn and comprise all of the property under the unified control of the applicant. 4. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 8 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com The property is currently zoned RMF-16(8), which only permits multi-family and townhome type dwelling units. In order to respond to changing market conditions, the prospective developer wishes to expand the permitted uses to include single-family and two-family dwellings. The PUD is the appropriate vehicle to authorize the various types of dwelling units. 5. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The PUD document includes development standards to insure that it is compatible with the immediately surrounding properties. The PUD master plan identifies appropriate buffers and open spaces which will further insure that the development of the residential community will have no adverse impacts to the neighborhood. Access to the project is from Manatee Road, a County owned right-of-way. 6. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. A traffic impact analysis has been submitted in support of the proposed residential PUD. That analysis concludes that there are no current or anticipated level of service issues associa ted with the proposed 526 unit project. Access will be from Manatee Road and should not create any impacts during construction. 7. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The project will be required to obtain an Environmental Resourc e Permit (ERP) through the South Florida Water Management District. The ERP review evaluates historic surface water flows and controls the off-site discharge of stormwater from the site. The project will have internal water management facilities including lakes to control the drainage for the project. No drainage issues will result from this project. 8. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. Given the limitation on building heights, and the proximity to other land uses, there will be no reduction in light or air for adjacent properties. 9. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 9 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com The proposed residences will be market rate and will not adversely impact property valu es in the area. 10. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Development of the property for residential dwellings will not deter improvement or development of adjacent property. The property is zoned for residential use at the same intensity proposed with the PUD zoning. 11. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. Rezoning the property to a residential planned development will not constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner. The subject PUD is consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Collier County Growth management Plan. The public will benefit from payment of impact fees and property taxes resulting from the development of residences on the property. 12. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The site is presently zoned for uses that include only multi -family dwelling units. The applicant believes the highest and best use will include a variety of dwelling unit types, consistent with approvals for most other PUD’s. 13. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed rezoning is in scale with the needs of the neighborhood and Collier County. The proposed PUD is of a scale that makes economic sense and is consistent with the long range planning policies of Collier County. The proposed PUD will permit the same number of units as permitted under the current zoning. 14. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. It is not impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for residential development; however, this site is presently zoned for residential development and is owned by the developer/applicant. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Evaluation Criteria April 2, 2019 Page 10 of 10 DRHJEPPL-Evaluation Criteria-rev1.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com 15. 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. The subject property has been previously approved for a multi-family apartment complex consistent with the approved zoning. That plan and any other development plan will require clearing and filling in order to bring the site elevations up to required elevations to meet the standards for the South Florida Water Management District. 16. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch. 106, art. II], as amended. There are adequate roadways and utilities available at the site. There are no public facilities deficiencies at the present time and none will occur as a result of this project. 17. Such other factors, standards, or criteria that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. The project is consistent with the Growth Management Plan and it is compatible with surrounding development. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) FLUE Policy 5.3 Consistency Analysis June 3, 2019 Page 1 of 2 DRHJEPPL-Policy 5.3 Analysis-rev2.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com The property is approximately 65.88± acres and is zoned RMF-16(8). The zoning was evaluated as part of the County’s zoning reevaluation program in 1992. The density of 8 dwelling units per acre would generate a maximum of 526 dwelling units. The property owner is proposing to rezone the property from RMF-16(8) to Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) with a maximum of 526 dwelling units of varying types including single family, and multi-family dwelling units. An analysis of public facility impacts as required by FLUE Policy 5.3 is provided below. The analysis concludes there are no additional public facility impacts associated with the RPUD. Collier County 2018 AUIR: Potable Water 150 gal per capita day 2019 Required Capacity 39.6 2.4 pp household Permitted Capacity 48.7 Existing 561 x 2.4 x 150 = 202,320 Proposed 561 x 2.4 x 150 = 202,320 Wastewater 100 gal per capita day 2019 Required Capacity 2.4 pp household x 100 South 14.58 mgd Existing 561 x 2.4 x 100 = 134,640 Proposed 561 x 2.4 x 100 = 134,640 2019 Permitted Capacity South 16 mgd Existing 561 x 2.4 x 100 = 134,640 Proposed 561 x 2.4 x 100 = 134,640 Solid Waste 10 years of permitted landfill capacity and 2 years of lined cell capacity at previous 3 years average tons per capita disposal rate. Current rate is 0.59 tons per capita/year (561 x 2.4 x 0.59 = 794,376) Existing vs. proposed – No change Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) FLUE Policy 5.3 Consistency Analysis June 3, 2019 Page 2 of 2 DRHJEPPL-Policy 5.3 Analysis-rev2.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com Drainage Discharge rate established for Basin ERP approved by SFWMD No additional discharge permitted with RPUD Roadways Vested for 480 multi-family 561 multi-family/townhouse allowed by zoning TIS assumes: o 265 single family 259 Trip Cap 2 way p.m. peak o 526 multi-family 259 Trip Cap 2 way p.m. peak o Combination 259 Trip Cap 2 way p.m. peak No additional trips resulting from RPUD Parks 265 single family 561 multi-family Community $247,464 $255,367 Regional $713,994 $690,164 No LOS issues result from RPUD Schools Impact Fees 265 single family vs. 561 multi-family $2,329,228 $1,595,590 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification Letters. 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. Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary. 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: Name and Address % 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 % of Ownership c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and Address % of Ownership Rimar Enterprises, Inc., 7700 N. Kendall Drive, #802, Miami Florida 33156 100 Alejandro Capo, President Carmen Capo, Vice President Arthur Hernandez, Secretary COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 2 of 3 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 % 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 % 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 _______________ Leased: Term of lease ____________ years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: D.R. Horton, Inc. (a publicly traded company)100 10541 Six Mile Cypress, Fort Myers, FL 33966 12/21/2004 8/29/18 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing. Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section. PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type) BL (Blasting Permit) BD (Boat Dock Extension) Carnival/Circus Permit CU (Conditional Use) EXP (Excavation Permit) FP (Final Plat LLA (Lot Line Adjustment) PNC (Project Name Change) PPL (Plans & Plat Review) PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) PUD Rezone RZ (Standard Rezone) SDP (Site Development Plan) SDPA (SDP Amendment) SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP) SIP (Site Im provement Plan) SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP) SNR (Street Name Change) SNC (Street Name Change – Unplatted) TDR (Transfer of Development Rights) VA (Variance) VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit) VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit) OTHER LEGAL DESCRIPT ION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached) FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one) STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned) PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only) LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right- of-way PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable) SDP - or AR or PL # SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties) CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable) Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 1 of 2 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724 Please Return Approved Checklist By: Email Personally picked up Applicant Name: Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Folio Number Approved by: Date: Updated by: Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED Fax Email/Fax:Phone: Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application; indicate whether proposed or existing) Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 2 of 2 STATE ROAD 951(D&F)COLLIER BOULEVARD(F)1091.83'S 1°56'12" W 1339.16' S 1°57'46" W 684.81'N 89°13'01" W 1369.16'N 89°12'47" W 739.18'N 2°26'10" E 671.07'S 89°16'21" EN 0°43'39" E 1350.15' (C) 1039.52'S 89°17'55" EMANATEE ROADCOUNTY ROAD 31PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONNOTES:JOURNEYS END1216 MANATEE ROADLYING INCOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDABOUNDARY SURVEY DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:JOB CODE:SCALE:DATE:FILE:SHEET:27 MARCH 20181" = 120'JETHDLSKJG18-24-BS4PLT.DWG1 of 1GradyMinorCivil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCert. of Auth. EB 0005151Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151Business LC 26000266Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.3800 Via Del ReyBonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380NAPLES, FL, 34114SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST LEGENDP.O.B. Collier BLVDSilver Lakes BLVDPADOVA STDiamond Lake CIR Riverwood RD Rookery RD Henderson DR Turquoise AVE Beverly DRManatee RD Derhenson DR Amethyst AVE Skyline DRSonderhen DR Queen Palm DRAquamarine AVE Peridot AVE Lake Diane DRSNOOK CIR PECAN STA u d u b o n R D PISA LN Rookery Bay DR T o w e r R D HIBISCUS LNCreek CIR Loon LN Grosbeak LNELSA LNS onderhen C IR SORRENTO DR Eagle RDOpal Lake PTJade Lake PTNickel Lake PTManatee RD Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Enbrook RPUD Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY . 820 0 820410 Feet Project No. 2014-42 11000 Metro Parkway Suite 4 Fort Myers, Florida 33966 (239) 418-0671 phone / (239) 418-0672 fax Enbrook PUD Section 10; Township 51 South; Range 26 East Collier County, Florida Protected Species Survey Report Prepared by: Kimberly Schlachta, CSE February 4, 2019 Revised March 18, 2019 Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2 INTRODUCTION An environmental scientist from Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. conducted a field investigation on the 65.86± acre property on February 1, 2019. The site is located in portions of Section 10, Township 51 South, and Range 26 East in Collier County, Florida. Specifically, it is situated along Manatee Road approximately 0.35 miles east of Collier Boulevard and approximately 1.15 miles south of US 41 (see the attached Project Location Map, Exhibit A). The purpose of the field investigation was to identify and document the presence of any listed species and any potential listed (endangered, threatened, etc.) species inhabiting the site that are regulated by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). The field survey was completed by David Mason, a Senior Environmental Scientist with with Boylan Environmental Consultants. Mr. Mason has over 13 years of experience conducting wildlife and protected species surveys in Florida. The report was compl eted by Kimberly Schlachta, an Environmental Consultant with Boylan Environmental with over 20 years of experience conducting species surveys and writing reports. METHODOLOGY The survey method consisted of overlapping belt transects performed for all FLUCFCS communities onsite in compliance with the Collier County Land Development Code 10.02.02.A.4.g.i. The specific methodology includes pedestrian surveys of parallel transects. This survey is comprised of a several step process. First, vegetation co mmunities or land-uses on the study area are delineated using the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS). Please see the attached FLUCFCS Map (Exhibit B) and FLUCFCS Map with Aerial (Exhibit C). Next, the FLUCFCS codes are cross- referenced with the Protected Species List. This protected species list names the species which have a probability of occurring in any particular FLUCFCS community. An intensive pedestrian survey is conducted using parallel belt transects that are approximately 10-40 feet apart as a means of searching for listed species. The distance between transects depends upon both the thickness of vegetation and line of sight visibility. In addition, periodic “stop-look-listen” and quiet stalking methods are conducted for animals. Signs or sightings of these species are then geo -located via a hand held GPS unit and marked in the field with flagging tape. The table at end of the report lists the FLUCFCS communities found on the parcel and the corresponding species which have a probability of occurring in them. Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 3 Transects were walked approximately as shown on the attached Protected Species Survey Map (Exhibit D) and Protected Species Survey Map with Aerial (Exhibit E). Specific attention was placed on locating any gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) burrows, potential fox squirrel (Sciurus niger shermani) nests, locating red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) cavity trees, and Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus) roosting cavities. TABLE 1: SURVEY DATE AND WEATHER CONDITIONS Survey Date Survey Time Weather Conditions 1-FEB-2019 9 AM – 6 PM Partly cloudy with light breeze and temperatures ranging from the upper 60s to the lower 80s EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Site Details – The boundary is approximate and based upon Collier County GIS and assumed to be 65.86± acres. The site was undeveloped but appears to have a long history of disturbance through agricultural use. In general, the property is composed of other open lands (rural). The site is bordered by roadways and both residential and commercial development on the northern and western perimeters. Other fallow framed lands and agriculture surround the southern and eastern perimeters. Soil Type - The soils on the property have been mapped by the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS, formerly the Soil Conservation Service). Please see the attached NRCS Soils Map (Exhibit F). These mappings are general in nature but can provide a certain level of information about the site as to the possible extent of wetland area. According to these mappings, the parcel is underlain by Oldsmar Fine Sand (16; non-hydric) and Holopaw Fine Sand (27; hydric). Vegetation Communities – Each community was mapped in the field according to the system in use by the agencies, the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS). Listed below are the vegetation communities or land -uses identified on the site. Vegetation is one parameter used in determining the presence of a wetland; the other parameters include the presence of wetland hydrology and hydric soils. These community mappings will generally reflect whether an area could be considered as wetlands. The following descriptions correspond t o the mappings on the attached FLUCFCS map. See Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (Department of Transportation 1999) for definitions. FLUCFCS CODES/DESCRIPTION 260/422M Mesic Abandoned Agricultural/Brazilian Pepper (10.09± acres) Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 4 This community occupies 10.09± acres of the site and is located in the western portion of the property. Vegetation consists of live oak, slash pine, earleaf acacia, melaleuca, and cabbage palm in the canopy. The sub -canopy contains wax myrtle, laurel oak, earleaf acacia, melaleuca, and Brazilian pepper. Groundcover vegetation observed includes grapevine, bahiagrass, poison ivy, rosy camphorweed, rosary pea, climbing hempvine, Caesar weed, smilax, dog fennel, scattered blackberry, tickseed, chocolateweed (Melochia corchorifolia), bushy bluestem (Andropogon glomeratus), and broomsedge bluestem. 260/422H Abandoned Agricultural/Brazilian Pepper, Hydric (1.53± acres) This community occupies 2.93± acres of the site and is located in the western portion of the property. Vegetation consists of live oak with scattered slash pine and cabbage palm in the canopy. The sub-canopy contains Brazilian pepper. Groundcover vegetation observed includes grapevine, bahiagrass, poison ivy, rosy camphorweed, rosary pea, climbing hempvine, Caesar weed, smilax, dog fennel, scattered blackberry, tickseed, chocolateweed, bushy bluestem, swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum), Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica), yellow- eyed grass (Xyris elliottii), watergrass (Luziola fluitans). 619 Exotic Wetlands/Brazilian Pepper, Hydric (1.40 acres) This community occupies 1.40± acres of the site and is located in the western portion of the property. The sub-canopy contains Brazilian pepper. Groundcover vegetation observed includes swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum), and Virginia chain fern (Woodwardia virginica). 740 Disturbed Land (51.94± acres) This community occupies 51.94± acres of the site and composes a majority of the current site conditions. The vegetation has been recently cleared, although vegetative debris remains. 742 Borrow Area (0.92± acres) There are two small excavated borrow ponds located on the property that occupy approximately 0.92± acres of the site. One is adjacent to the western property line and the other is located in the southeast corner of the parcel. The canopy is open. The sub-canopy vegetation along the banks include includes willow (Salix floridana) and Brazilian pepper. TABLE 2: FLUCFCS COMMUNITY TABLE FLUCFCS Code Community Description Acreage 260/422M Mesic Abandoned Agricultural/Brazilian Pepper 10.09± ac. 260/422H Other Open Lands (Rural)/Brazilian Pepper, Hydric 1.53± ac. Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 5 619 Exotic Wetlands, Brazilian Pepper, Hydric 1.40± ac. 740 Disturbed Lands 51.94± ac. 742 Borrow Areas 0.92± ac. Total 65.88± ac. SPECIES PRESENCE The site does contain two man-made open water bodies. While wading birds were not seen during the site inspection it would be expected that wading birds would use the water bodies for foraging. No alligators were observed on the property. No listed plant species were noted. No other signs of listed species were observed during the survey. DISCUSSION Due to the disturbed nature of the site, the abundance of exotic plant species, and the historic agricultural land-use of the site and surrounding areas, it is unlikely that this site supports or would provide habitat for protected wildlife species or protected plants. Community locations were estimated and drawn by using a non-rectified aerial with approximate property boundaries hence, their location, aerial extent, and acreage is approximate. NATIVE OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS For native preservation requirements, FLUCFCS codes that meet the definition of native vegetation in Collier county are included in the calculation. FLUCFCS Code Community Description NATIVE Acreage 260/422M Mesic Abandoned Agricultural/Brazilian Pepper Yes 10.09± ac. 260/422H Other Open Lands (Rural)/Brazilian Pepper, Hydric Yes 1.53± ac. 619 Exotic Wetlands, Brazilian Pepper, Hydric No - 740 Disturbed Lands No - 742 Borrow Areas No - 11.62± ac. Total Native = 11.62 Acres Required 25% = 11.62 x 0.25 = 2.905 Areas preserved = 12.84 acres provided Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. 6 TABLE 3: LISTED SPECIES BY HABITAT WITH CURRENT STATUS FLUCFCS Code FLUCFCS Description Common Name Scientific Name Percent Coverage Observed USDA FDA&CS FWS FWC 260 Other Open Lands (Rural) Audubon’s crested caracara Polyborus plancus audubonii 80 -- -- -- T T Gopher tortoise Gopherus polyphemus 80 - - - T T Least tern Sterna antillarum 80 -- -- -- E T 422 Brazilian Pepper N/A -- 80 -- -- -- -- -- 619 Hydric Brazilian Pepper N/A - 80 - - - - - 740 Disturbed Lands N/A -- 100 -- -- -- -- -- 742 Borrow Areas N/A -- 90 -- -- -- -- -- C = Commercially Exploited, SAT = Similarity of Appearance Threatened, SSC = Species of Special Concern, T = Threatened, E = Endangered Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Exhibit A Project Location Map TAM I A M I T R L DAVIS BLVD COLLIER BLVDALLIGATOR ALYRADIO RD N COLLIER BLVDAIRPORT RDRATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK BAYSHORE DRLELY RESORT BLVD5TH AVE S FERN ST11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4Fort Myers, FL 33966 Phone: (239)418-0671Fax:(239)418-0672 Enbrook Location Map Exhibit NumberCreated by: Drawn by: Project Number SEC/TWP/RNG Catergoy County Date: Date: KAS 2014-42 9/25/14 Location Map 10/51S/26E Collier BKM 2/4/19 COLLIER LEE HENDRY MONROE Project Location Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Exhibit B FLUCFCS Map 619 $F 260/422H $F 260/4232M $F 742 $F 742 $F 740 $F NOTES:FLUCFCS lines estimated from1"=200' aerial photographs andlocations approximated.FLUCFCS per Florida Land Use,Cover and Forms ClassificationSystem (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1999).CategoryJob NumberScale:CountyS/T/RDate:RevisionsDate:ExhibitPageNB E CDrawn By:KAS2/4/201910/51S/26EFLUCFCS1" = 400'CollierEnbrookFLUCFCS MapScale: 1" = 400'2014-42Wetlands $F Other Surface:DWHUV $F .GIGPF11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4, Ft. Myers, FL 33966 (239) 418-0671Wetland & Wildlife Surveys, Environmental Permitting,Impact AssessmentsBoylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Exhibit C FLUCFCS Map with Aerial 619 $F 260/422H $F 260/4232M $F 742 $F 742 $F 740 $F NOTES:FLUCFCS lines estimated from1"=200' aerial photographs andlocations approximated.FLUCFCS per Florida Land Use,Cover and Forms ClassificationSystem (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1999)Aerial photographs were acquiredthrough Collier County PropertyAppraiser's office with a flightdate of December, 2017.Wetlands $F Other Surface:DWHUV $F .GIGPFCategoryJob NumberScale:CountyS/T/RDate:RevisionsDate:ExhibitPageNB E CDrawn By:KAS2/4/201910/51S/26EFLUCFCS1" = 400'CollierEnbrookAerial FLUCFCS MapScale: 1" = 400'2014-4211000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4, Ft. Myers, FL 33966 (239) 418-0671Wetland & Wildlife Surveys, Environmental Permitting,Impact AssessmentsBoylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Exhibit D Protected Species Survey Map 619 $F 260/422H $F 260/4232M $F 742 $F 742 $F 740 $F NOTES:FLUCFCS lines estimated from1"=200' aerial photographs andlocations approximated.FLUCFCS per Florida Land Use,Cover and Forms ClassificationSystem (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1999)Wetlands $F Other Surface:DWHUV $F .GIGPFCategoryJob NumberScale:CountyS/T/RDate:RevisionsDate:ExhibitPageNB E CDrawn By:KAS2/4/201910/51S/26EPSS1" = 400'CollierEnbrookProtected Species Survey MapScale: 1" = 400'2014-4211000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4, Ft. Myers, FL 33966 (239) 418-0671Wetland & Wildlife Surveys, Environmental Permitting,Impact AssessmentsBoylan Environmental Consultants, Inc.PSS SurveyTransects Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Exhibit E Protected Species Survey Map with Aerial 619 $F 260/422H $F 260/4232M $F 742 $F 742 $F 740 $F NOTES:FLUCFCS lines estimated from1"=200' aerial photographs andlocations approximated.FLUCFCS per Florida Land Use,Cover and Forms ClassificationSystem (FLUCFCS) (FDOT 1999)Aerial photographs were acquiredthrough Collier County PropertyAppraiser's office with a flightdate of December, 2017.CategoryJob NumberScale:CountyS/T/RDate:RevisionsDate:ExhibitPageNB E CDrawn By:KAS2/4/201910/51S/26EPSS1" = 400'CollierEnbrookProtected Species Survey Map with Aerial PhotographScale: 1" = 400'2014-42Wetlands $F Other Surface:DWHUV $F .GIGPFPSS SurveyTransects11000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4, Ft. Myers, FL 33966 (239) 418-0671Wetland & Wildlife Surveys, Environmental Permitting,Impact AssessmentsBoylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Enbrook PUD Protected Species Survey Boylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Exhibit F NRCS Soils Map 2716NOTES:Soils were acquired from theFGDL and are from the NRCSSoils Maps.CategoryJob NumberScale:CountyS/T/RDate:RevisionsDate:ExhibitPageNB E CDrawn By:KAS2/4/201910/51S/26ESoils1" = 400'CollierEnbrookNRCS Soils MapScale: 1" = 400'2014-4211000 Metro Parkway, Suite 4, Ft. Myers, FL 33966 (239) 418-0671Wetland & Wildlife Surveys, Environmental Permitting,Impact AssessmentsBoylan Environmental Consultants, Inc. Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 1 COLLIER COUNTY WAIVER APPLICATION FROM THE REQUIRED HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND ASSESSMENT DATE SUBMITTED: _______________ PLANNER: PETITION NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THE WAIVER: _____________________ (To Be Completed By Zoning and Land Development Review Staff) PROJECT NAME: Enbrook RPUD LOCATION: (Common Description) The subject property is located on the south side of Manatee Road approximately 1,500± east of Collier Boulevard ________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY OF WAIVER REQUEST: The proposed Enbrook RPUD property is approximately 65.88± acres, which is undeveloped. The Archaeological Probability Map #6, shows the project maybe partially located in an area that indicates areas of Historical/Archaeological probability or known sites. The project is located in Section 10, Township 51 S, Range 26 E on the south side of Manatee Road. (Properties located within an area of Historical and Archaeological Probability but with a low potential for historical/archaeological sites may petition the Community Development & Environmental Services Administrator County Manager or designee to waive the requirement for a Historical/Archaeological Survey and Assessment. Once the waiver application has been submitted, it shall be reviewed and acted upon within five (5) working days. The waiver request shall adequately demonstrate that the area has low potential for historical/archaeological sites.) Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 2 SECTION ONE: APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DATA A. Name of applicant (s) (if other than property owner, state relationship such as option holder, contract purchaser, lessee, trustee, etc.): D. R. Horton, Inc. Mailing Address: 10541 Six Mile Cypress, Fort Myers, FL 33966 Phone: (239) 225-2651 FAX: _______________________ E-Mail: JWEverett@drhorton.com B. Name of agent(s) for applicant, if any: D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Mailing Address: Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Phone: 239.947.1144 FAX: 239.947.0375 E-Mail: warnold@gradyminor.com C. Name of owner(s) of property: Rimar Enterprises, Inc. Mailing Address: 7700 N. Kendall Drive, #802, Miami Florida 33156 Phone: (239) 225-2651 FAX: _______________________ E-Mail: JWEverett@drhorton.com Note: If names in answers to A and/or B are different than name in C, notarized letter(s) of authorization from property owner (C) must be attached. SECTION TWO: SUBJECT PROPERTY DATA (Attach copy of the plat book page (obtainable from Clerk’s Office at the original scale) with subject property clearly marked.) A. Legal description of subject property. Answer only 1 or 2, as applicable. 1. Within platted subdivision, recorded in official Plat Books of Collier County. Subdivision Name: Plat Book Page Unit Tract Lot Section 10 Township 51S Range 26 E 2. If not in platted subdivision, a complete legal description must be attached which is sufficiently detailed so as to locate said property on County maps or aerial photographs. The legal description must include the Section, Township and Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 3 Range. If the applicant includes multiple contiguous parcels, the legal description may describe the perimeter boundary of the total area, and need not describe each individual parcel, except where different zoning requests are made on individual parcels. A boundary sketch is also required. Collier County has the right to reject any legal description, which is not sufficiently detailed so as to locate said property, and may require a certified survey or boundary sketch to be submitted. B. Property dimensions: Area: __________________ square feet, or 65.88± acres Width along roadway: 1,091± feet (Manatee Road) Depth: 2,023± feet C. Present use of property: Undeveloped D. Present zoning classification: RMF-16(8) SECTION THREE: WAIVER CRITERIA Note: This provision is to cover instances in which it is obvious that any archaeological or historic resource that may have existed has been destroyed. Examples would be evidence that a major building has been constructed on the site or that an area has been excavated. A. Waiver Request Justification. 1. Interpretation of Aerial Photograph Photo shows property undeveloped with land. 2. Historical Land Use Description: Residential. 3. Land, cover, formation and vegetation description: The site contains vegetation. 4. Other: . B. The County Manager or designee may deny a waiver, grant the waiver, or grant the waiver with conditions. He shall be authorized to require examination of the site by an accredited archaeologist where deemed appropriate. The applicant shall bear the cost of such evaluation by an independent accredited archaeologist. The decision of the County Manager or designee regarding the waiver request shall be provided to the applicant in writing. In the event of a denial of the waiver request, written notice shall be provided stating the reasons for such denial. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the County Manager or designee regarding a waiver request may appeal to the Historic Preservation/Forms/rev. 06/05/08 4 Preservation Board. Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Preservation Board regarding a waiver request may appeal that decision to the Board of County Commissioners. SECTION FOUR: CERTIFICATION A. The applicant shall be responsible for the accuracy and completeness of this application. Any time delays or additional expenses necessitated due to the submittal of inaccurate or incomplete information shall be the responsibility of the applicant. B. All information submitted with the application becomes a part of the public record and shall be a permanent part of the file. C. All attachments and exhibits submitted shall be of a size that will fit or conveniently fold to fit into a legal size (8 ½” x 14”) folder. ______________________________ Signature of Applicant or Agent D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Printed Name of Applicant or Agent ===================================================================== -TO BE COMPLETED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION- SECTION FIVE: NOTICE OF DECISION The County Manager or designee has made the following determination: Approved on: _____________ By:______________________________ Approved with Conditions on: ____________ By: _____________________________ (see attached) Denied on: _______________ By: ______________________________ (see attached) STATE ROAD 951(D&F)COLLIER BOULEVARD(F)1091.83'S 1°56'12" W 1339.16' S 1°57'46" W 684.81'N 89°13'01" W 1369.16'N 89°12'47" W 739.18'N 2°26'10" E 671.07'S 89°16'21" EN 0°43'39" E 1350.15' (C) 1039.52'S 89°17'55" EMANATEE ROADCOUNTY ROAD 31PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONNOTES:JOURNEYS END1216 MANATEE ROADLYING INCOLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDABOUNDARY SURVEY DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:JOB CODE:SCALE:DATE:FILE:SHEET:27 MARCH 20181" = 120'JETHDLSKJG18-24-BS4PLT.DWG1 of 1GradyMinorCivil Engineers●Land Surveyors●Planners●Landscape ArchitectsCert. of Auth. EB 0005151Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151Business LC 26000266Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A.3800 Via Del ReyBonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380NAPLES, FL, 34114SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 51 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST LEGENDP.O.B. Collier BLVDSilver Lakes BLVDPADOVA STDiamond Lake CIR Riverwood RD Rookery RD Henderson DR Turquoise AVE Beverly DRManatee RD Derhenson DR Amethyst AVE Skyline DRSonderhen DR Queen Palm DRAquamarine AVE Peridot AVE Lake Diane DRSNOOK CIR PECAN STA u d u b o n R D PISA LN Rookery Bay DR T o w e r R D HIBISCUS LNCreek CIR Loon LN Grosbeak LNELSA LNS onderhen C IR SORRENTO DR Eagle RDOpal Lake PTJade Lake PTNickel Lake PTManatee RD Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Enbrook RPUD Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY . 820 0 820410 Feet 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 • www.flheritage.com/preservation/sitefile 850.245.6440 ph | 850.245.6439 fax | SiteFile@dos.state.fl.us This record search is for informational purposes only and does NOT constitute a project review. This search only identifies resources recorded at the Florida Master Site File and does NOT provide project approval from the Division of Historical Resources. Contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333 for project review information. December 11, 2018 Sharon Umpenhour Grady Minor and Associates 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Phone: 239.947.1144 Email: SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com In response to your inquiry of December 11, 2018 the Florida Master Site File lists no archaeological sites, two field surveys, and no historic structures found in the following section of Collier County: T 51S R 26E Section 10 with a 150 foot buffer as shown on the corresponding map. When interpreting the results of our search, please consider the following information: • This search area may contain unrecorded archaeological sites, historical structures or other resources even if previously surveyed for cultural resources. • Because vandalism and looting are common at Florida sites, we ask that you limit the distribution of location information on archaeological sites. • While many of our records document historically significant resources, the documentation of a resource at the Florida Master Site File does not necessarily mean the resource is historically significant. • Federal, state and local laws require formal environmental review for most projects. This search DOES NOT constitute such a review. If your project falls under these laws, you should contact the Compliance and Review Section of the Division of Historical Resources at 850-245-6333. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions regarding the results of this search. Sincerely, Cody VanderPloeg Archaeological Data Analyst Florida Master Site File Cody.VanderPloeg@dos.myflorida.com 11083904 21937 19738 23738 564 Esri, HERE, Garmin, © OpenStreetMap contributors, Copyright:©2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed, Source: Esri,DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Cultural Resource Search150 Foot BufferCollier County December 2018 ¯ 0 0.095 0.19 0.285 0.380.0475 Miles Legend Enbrook PUD %2 FloridaStructures Florida Sites HistoricalBridges HistoricalCemeteries National Register ResourceGroups Field Surveys MS# Title Publication Information Year1108Historical/architectural survey of Collier County, Florida. Florida Preservation Services 198621937Cultural Resource Assessment Survey, Jouney's End, Collier County, Florida P15056, Archaeological Consultants Inc., Sarasota, prepared for Rimar Enterprises 2015Manuscript RosterTotal=21 of 1Florida Master Site File Created: 12/11/2018 Collier County School District School Impact Analysis Application Instructions: Submit one copy of completed application and location map for each new residential project requiring a determination of school impact to the Planning Department of the applicable local government. This application will not be deemed complete until all applicable submittal requirements have been submitted. Please be advised that additional documentation/information may be requested during the review process. For information regarding this application process, please contact the Facilities Management Department at 239-377-0267. Please check [√] type of application request (one only): [ ] School Capacity Review [ ] Exemption Letter [ ] Concurrency Determination [ ] Concurrency Determination Amendment For descriptions of the types of review please see page 3, _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I. Project Information: Project Name: ___________________________________________ Municipality: _________________________________ Parcel ID#: (attach separate sheet for multiple parcels): _______________________________________________________ Location/Address of subject property: ____________________________________________________ (Attach location map) Closest Major Intersection: _______________________________________________________________________________ II. Ownership/Agent Information: Owner/Contract Purchaser Name(s): _____________________________________________________________________ Agent/Contact Person: ________________________________________________________________________________ (Please note that if agent or contact inform ation is completed the District will forward all information to that person) Mailing address: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone#: _____________________________ Fax: _________________________Em ail_________________________ I hereby certify the statements and/or information contained in this application with any attachments submitted herewith are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. _____________________________________________________ _____________________________ Owner or Authorized Agent Signature Date _________________________________________________________________________________________ III. Development Information Project Data (Unit Types defined on page 2 of application) Current Land Use Designation: Proposed Land Use Designation: Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: Project Acreage: Unit Type: SF MF MH C G Total Units Currently Allowed by Type: Total Units Proposed by Type: Is this a phased project: Yes or No If yes, please complete page 2 of this application. Date/time stamp:___________________________ Enbrook RPUD Collier County 00736200103 and 00736200404 South side of Manatee Road, east of Collier Boulevard. Manatee Road and Collier Boulevard D.R. Horton, Inc. (Contract Purchaser) D. Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor and Associaties, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239.947.1144 warnold@gradyminor.com November 15, 2018 Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict RMF-16(8) Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) 0 527 526 526 4 Worksheet is required to be completed by the Applicant only if the project is to be phased: Unit Type Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Yr4 Yr5 Yr6 Yr7 Yr8 Yr9 Yr10 Yr 11-20 20+ Years SF MF MH C G Totals by Yr Grand Total Grand Total Insert totals by unit type by years. Unit Types: SF = Single Family MF = Multi-Family/Apartments MH = Mobile Homes C = Condo/Co-Op G = Government EXAMPLE: Unit Type Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Yr4 Yr5 Yr6 Yr7 Yr8 Yr9 Yr10 Yr 11-20 20+ Years SF 25 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- MF 50 0 0 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- MH N/A C N/A G N/A Totals by Yr 75 25 25 25 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Grand Total 150 . 2 Types of Reviews: School Impact Analysis: This review should be divided into two categories: - School Capacity Review (land use and rezonings), and; - Concurrency Determinations (site plans and subdivisions). School Capacity Review is the review of a project in the land use and rezoning stage of development. It is a review of the impact of the development on school capacity and is considered long range planning. This may be a review resulting in mitigation being required. In situations where the applicant may be required to mitigate, capacity may be reserved dependent on the type of mitigation. Concurrency Determination is the review of residential site plans and subdivisions to determine whether there is available capacity. When capacity is determined to be available a School Capacity Determination Letter (SCADL) will be issued verifying available capacity to the applicant and the local government. If a project exceeds the adopted level of service standards, the applicant is afforded the option of a negotiation period that may or may not result in an executed/recorded mitigation agreement Mitigation at this stage is expressed as a Proportionate Share Mitigation Agreement. For those residential developments that may have an impact but are otherwise exempt from concurrency, an exemption letter will be prepared for the applicant upon request. For those residential developments that are determined to not have an impact, a letter of no impact will be prepared for the applicant upon request. Exemption Letter: An applicant may request an Exemption Letter as documentation for the local government. These are projects that would be exempt from school concurrency review or projects that do not impact the public schools. Exemptions from school concurrency are limited to existing single family or mobile home lots of record; amendments to previously approved site plans or plats that do not increase the number of dwelling units or change the dwelling unit type; age restricted communities with no permanent residents under the age of 18; or residential site plans or plats or amendments to site plans or plats that generate less than one student; or are authorized as a Development of Regional Impact (Chapter 380, F.S.) as of July 1, 2005. Concurrency Determination Amendment: An applicant may request an amendment to a previously issued School Concurrency Determination or to an application being processed. This review may require additional staff time beyond the initial concurrency determination review and results in a modified determination being issued. An amendment could result in a negotiation period and/or a mitigation agreement being issued or a previously approved determination being modified and reissued. 3 Collier BLVDSilver Lakes BLVDPADOVA STDiamond Lake CIR Riverwood RD Rookery RD Henderson DR Turquoise AVE Beverly DRManatee RD Derhenson DR Amethyst AVE Skyline DRSonderhen DR Queen Palm DRAquamarine AVE Peridot AVE Lake Diane DRSNOOK CIR PECAN STA u d u b o n R D PISA LN Rookery Bay DR T o w e r R D HIBISCUS LNCreek CIR Loon LN Grosbeak LNELSA LNS onderhen C IR SORRENTO DR Eagle RDOpal Lake PTJade Lake PTNickel Lake PTManatee RD Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Enbrook RPUD Location Map SUBJECT PROPERTY . 820 0 820410 Feet Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Deviation Justification July 8, 2019 Page 1 of 3 DRHJEPPL-Deviation Justification-rev3.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com 1. Deviation 1 seeks relief from Section 6.06.01 N., “Street System Requirements”, which requires a 60 foot right-of-way width for Local/Private roads to instead allow a 50 foot right-of-way width. Justification: The proposed roadway is private and will not be subject to Collier County ownership and maintenance. The 50’ right of way width accommodates the required 10’ lane widths and 5’ sidewalks per the Community Development Local Street cross section in Appendix B of the Land Development Code. A 10’ wide utility easement is proposed on each side of the right of way to accommodate the utility needs of the development. Roadside swales are not proposed as valley gutter will be provided for street drainage to inlets that will discharge to the onsite detention areas, thus the wider right of way widths typically provided for swales is not required. 2. Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a, “On-premises Directional Signs”, which requires that each sign shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from edge of the roadway paved surface or back of curb, to instead allow a setback of 5 feet from edge of roadway, paved surface or back of curb. This deviation excludes public roads. Justification: This deviation will provide locational flexibility for directional signage internal to the RPUD. A unified design theme will be utilized for all signage throughout the community, thereby ensuring a cohesive appearance and increased aesthetic appeal. All directional signage will meet the Clear Sight Distance requirements in accordance with LDC Section 6.06.05. Furthermore, this deviation is typical of many of the master-planned developments throughout Collier County. All roads and drives will be privately owned and maintained. 3. Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C, “Fences and Walls”, Excluding Sound Walls, which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height, to instead allow an 8-foot high wall on top of a 4-foot high berm along Manatee Road right-of-way. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Deviation Justification July 8, 2019 Page 2 of 3 DRHJEPPL-Deviation Justification-rev3.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com Justification: The additional wall height is necessary to provide a buffer from the adjacent 2-lane traffic noise and the ground must be altered to meet water management criteria. The wall height is consistent with the wall height constructed for other residential PUDs. 4. Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i, “Architectural and Site Design Standards”, which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road , including all rights-of-way , shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4., D.10., D.13., D.15., E, and F. Compliance shall be limited to the building façades facing the arterial or collector road to instead allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. Justification: This Section of the LDC would be applicable to a building located in the amenity area of the project. It is the intent of the developer to install solid walls on their Manatee Road property boundary. The wall along Manatee Road will be 8 feet in height on top of a berm, making the amenity building largely impossible for the public to see. Requiring additional architectural embellishments for the amenity building is unnecessary. 5. Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G, “Parking Space Requirements”, which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project, exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses, the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilit ies and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities, to instead allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. Justification: The project will have sidewalks throughout allowing residents the ability to walk to the project amenity area. Parking on-site will be provided. It has been this developers experience that the proposed reduction in required parking provides ample on-site parking for residents and guests and that the LDC requirement results in excess parking for the on-site amenity area. Enbrook RPUD (PL20180002899) Deviation Justification July 8, 2019 Page 3 of 3 DRHJEPPL-Deviation Justification-rev3.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239-947-1144 engineering@gradyminor.com www.gradyminor.com 6. Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6.b., “On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts”, which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a combined sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet, to instead allow a combined sign face area of 160 square feet. The signs are to be located along the Manatee Road frontage of the property on the project’s wall or as free standing monument signs, for a maximum height of 12 feet (8 foot high wall on a 4 foot high berm) measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation. If the sign is on the wall, the wall will be 10 feet from the Manatee Road right-of-way. Justification: This deviation is warranted as it is anticipated the signage will be coordinated with the project’s perimeter wall. The height and size of the project signage will be more aesthetically appealing if it is consistent with the scale of the perimeter project wall. Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Ph. 239-947-1144 Fax. 239-947-0375 3800 Via Del Rey EB 0005151 LB 0005151 LC 26000266 Bonita Springs, FL 34134 www.gradyminor.com May 15, 2019 RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Petition PL20180002899, Enbrook Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Dear Sir or Madam: A Neighborhood Information Meeting hosted by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq. of Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A., representing Rimar Enterprises, Inc. and D.R. Horton, Inc. (Applicants) will be held on: Wednesday, June 5, 2019, 5:30 pm at the Board of County Commissioners’ Chambers, 3rd floor of Building F, Collier County Government Center, 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Naples, FL 34112 Rimar Enterprises, Inc. and D.R. Horton, Inc. have submitted a formal application to Collier County, seeking approval of a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Rezone. The RPUD rezone application proposes to rezone the property from RMF-16(8) to Enbrook RPUD to allow a maximum of 526 residential dwelling units of varying types including single-family, two-family attached, townhome, and multi-family. The rezone also proposes to eliminate the previously required 100’ wide greenbelt and will provide a minimum of 25% of the on-site native vegetation as a preserve, consistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and LDC Section 3.05 requirements. The subject property (Enbrook RPUD) is comprised of 65.88± acres, located on the south side of Manatee Road, approximately ¼ mile east of Collier Boulevard in Section 10, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only, it is not a public hearing. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed by mail, phone, fax or e-mail to: sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375, Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134. Sincerely, Sharon Umpenhour Senior Planning Technician RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), Petition PL20180002899, Enbrook Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) May 15, 2019 Page 2 of 2 Project Location Map: PL20180002899 500' 5/2/2019 Boundary: Parcels 00736200103 and 00736200404 1 NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 LEGAL1 LEGAL2 LEGAL3 LEGAL4 1000 MANATEE RD TRUST 5091 CHERRY WOOD DR NAPLES, FL 34119---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-303 1002 SOUTH BAY LLC 4625 HAWKS NEST DR #202 NAPLES, FL 34114---832 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1002 1503 SOUTH BAY LLC 4625 HAWKS NEST DRIVE #202 NAPLES, FL 34114---832 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1503 2004 SOUTH BAY LLC 4625 HAWK'S NEST DRIVE #202 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2004 2501 SOUTH BAY LLC 4625 HAWKS NEST DRIVE #202 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2501 ALVARADO, NATHALIA 1008 MANATEE RD APT G304 NAPLES, FL 34114---3930 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-304 ARMSTRONG, PERRY A & LYNN M 14 HULL ST RANDOLPH, VT 05060---1102 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 34 AVILA, ROBERT & KATHERINE 911 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 36 AXE, HELEN J AXE, RICHARD J 917 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---8266 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 33 BACHORSKI, WALTER E 14690 APPLEWAY COURT SHELBY TOWNSHIP, MI 48315---4319 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-305 BADEMLI, MUSTAFA & ULKA 1014 MANATEE RD APT F103 NAPLES, FL 34114---3922 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-103 BAILLARGEON, GUY N & BRENDA J 501 BLACK PLAIN RD NORTH SMITHFIELD, RI 02896---9581 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-305 BAIRD, ROBERTA A 300 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3977 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 42 BALFOUR GLOBAL LLC 1172 S DIXIE HWY N 453 CORAL GABLES, FL 33146---0 10 51 26 THAT PORTION DESC IN OR 1927 PG 918 & OR 1927 PG 924 BEN ASSAYAG, ARIE 3800 TREASURE COVE CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34117---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-205 BENNETT, JAMES GENE 2009 FREEPORT RD MADISON, WI 53711---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 10 BENNICI, VITO & JEANIE 909 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---8266 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 37 BERGAU, JENNIFER & GEORGE 905 MANATEE ROAD NAPLES, FL 34116---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 14 BERGERSON, GLENN & LINDA 8609 WAKEMUP SHORES RD COOK, MN 55723---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 39 BERNOSKY, ANTHONY & PHYLLIS A 6710 CROWNED EAGLE LN NAPLES, FL 34113---2681 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-307 BERTHOLD, DENNIS C 3599 VERONA PL SEAFORD, NY 11783---2736 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2408 BLAIS, ROBERT E & JEAN B C/O SHERYL BLAIS 69 PINE ISLAND LAKE WESTHAMPTON, MA 01027---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 63 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1101 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1702 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 202 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1004 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 704 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1901 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2001 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1701 BONICH PROPERTIES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1105 BOSMAN, SCOTT & DAWN W 7003 NARROWS TRL MINONG, WI 54859---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 21 BRENNER, BRAD W 650 WUDING ROAD BUILDING 5 UNIT 1803 SHANG HAI 200042 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-202 BRODER, NATHAN S 1465 FIRWOOD CT MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---3857 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 104 BRONIK ET AL, SANDRA CAROLE CHYBA 1256 MUSKINGUM DR WATERFORD, MI 48327---3335 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-103 BRYAN JR, JOE K & JO ANN H PO BOX 963 OXFORD, NC 27565---963 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 8 BUCKLEY, KEVIN P 4546 N HAVEN AVE TOLEDO, OH 43612---2364 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-107 BURR, JUDITH B 1010 MANATEE RD APT B304 NAPLES, FL 34114---3976 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-304 CABALLERO, EVELYN SALINAS 4128 74TH ST #IR ELMHURST, NY 11373---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2105 CARLETON MHC LLC 6547 N AVONDALE AVE # 301 CHICAGO, IL 60631---0 10 51 26 N1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SE1/4 CARLETON MHC LLC 6547 N AVONDALE AVE # 301 CHICAGO, IL 60631---0 10 51 26 S1/2 OF NE1/4 OF SE1/4 20 AC CAROLINE M GRIMALDI REV TRUST 224 PARK ST APT A2 STONEHAM, MA 02180---2778 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-202 CARRAWAY, JAMES & LINDA 6430 SW 73RD CT MIAMI, FL 33143---2945 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 702 CARRAWAY, JAMES A & LINDA A 6430 SW 73RD CT MIAMI, FL 33143---2945 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 701 CARTER, ARTHUR L & SUSAN P 33 AQUAMARINE AVE NAPLES, FL 34114---8236 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-206 CARTWRIGHT, JERRY D & LISA J PO BOX 204 GOODLAND, FL 34140---204 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-202 CASH, ELEANOR 20 BROOK HAVEN DR APT 10 ATTLEBORO, MA 02703---5158 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-302 CASTELLANOS, CARMEN R 1008 MANATEE RD #G-203 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-203 CATANA, CANDACE A 921 MANATEE ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 31 CHOATE, ARTHUR A & JANET M 211 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BIKD RIVERWOOD S 60FT, E 310FT TO POB, THENCE CONT E 60FT, ALG S BOUNDARY OF CHOATE, WILLIAM C 207 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3946 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2, S 170FT, E 190FT TO POB, CONT E 60FT, N 110FT, W 60FT% S CLOUSE, ROGER L & ADELL L 10473 GLADSTONE RD NORTH JACKSON, OH 44451---9609 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-106 CLUKEY, CRAIG C BARBARA J SHAFFER 304 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3977 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 40 COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0 10 51 26 PROPOSED REALIGNMENT OF SR 951 COOK, THOMAS D 1008 MANATEE ROAD #G303 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-303 COOPER, FRANK W & MARIA E 4158 LORRAINE AVE NAPLES, FL 34104---4737 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 501 CORR JR, ROBERT J SUSAN M DUFFY-CORR 14 SONQUIPAUG RD CHARLESTOWN, RI 02813---2860 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-204 CORREA, ADRIANA MARIA GABRIEL CORREA 2033 ROOKERY BAY DR #1707 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1707 COSLETT, HUBERT C & LUCILLE R 897 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---8218 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 11 COUNTY WATER-SEWER DISTRICT UTILITY DIVISION COLLIER CO. COURTHOUSE 3301 TAMIAMI TRL E BLDG F NAPLES, FL 34112---4902 10 51 26 SE1/4 OF NE1/4 LESS OR 131 PG 497 CRIVICI, ROBERT & PATRICIA 144 GREENWAY W NEW HYDE PARK, NY 11040---2243 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-202 CROSBY, JOHN & PAULA 14 POCAHONTAS DRIVE PEABODY, MA 01960---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2608 CUDA TR, CLAUDIA SUSAN DR THOMAS CUDA TR DR THOMAS CUDA TRUST 5985 CALETA DR LANSING, MI 48911---6473 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-307 D & C SATURNINO REV TRUST 164 PONDEROSA DR WILLIAMSVILLE, NY 14221---2421 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-302 D G & L K PRYOR REV TRUST 250 SHORE ACRES DR WISCONSIN RAPIDS, WI 54494---1854 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-203 DECKER TR, JACK J & JUDEE L JACK & JUDEE REVOCABLE TRUST UTD 12/3/04 1749 OTTAWA BEACH RD UNIT 3 HOLLAND, MI 49424---2465 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 18 DEMAREST, WESLEY C & SUSAN L 158 BEAVER DAM RD SELKIRK, NY 12158---9709 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 41 DEMBINSKI, SCOTT GAYLE CLAYTON 222 ROOKERY ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2 E 360FT ALG N BOUNDARY OF ROOKERY RD TO POB E 60FT N DIAUTO, DENNIS F & JOAN M NICOLE M DRISCOLL 6 MOHAWK CIRCLE PLYMOUTH, MA 02360---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-305 DIAZ, YULEY 2110 ROOKERY BAY DR #3001 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3001 DICKERSON, ROBERT D & DEBORAH 307 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3978 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 60 DIMITROV, PETAR IRENA ANGELOVA 2601 S ROOSEVELT BLVD APT 104C KEY WEST, FL 33040---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1203 DIMOVICH, VELKO & NATASHA 35303 KENSINGTON AVE STERLING HTS, MI 48312---3738 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-301 DIMOVSKI, DIMKO & DOBRICA 13220 MEADOWLAND CRES TECUMSEH N8N 4N3 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-306 DINWIDDIE, CAROL 225 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3946 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 9 DONALD A HINTERLONG SR TRUST PATRICIA D HINTERLONG TRUST 85542 RIVER DRIVE NAPERVILLE, IL 60565---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-102 DONOVAN, RICHARD E & BRENDA 1018 MANATEE RD APT E307 NAPLES, FL 34114---3920 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-307 DOROFEEV, YURY G 2110 ROOKERY BAY DR #3008 NAPLES, FL 34114---9374 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3008 DOUGHERTY, THOMAS C & LYNN C 106 STEPHEN DR DOWNINGTOWN, PA 19335---1859 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-202 DOUGLAS & C SATURNINO RE TRUST 164 PONDEROSA DR AMHERST, NY 14221---2421 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-301 DOW, HARRY A & JAYNE DOW 1777 BEVERLY DR NAPLES, FL 34114---3971 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 5 DREVES, FREDERICK J & JULIA 5271 US 31 N PO BOX 334 ACME, MI 49610---334 10 51 26 LT 1 BLK G UNRCD PLAT RIVERWOOD #3 DESC AS COM SE COR LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD #2, S30FT TO C/L ROOKERY RD, DRURY TR, ALLAN R & HISAKO UTD 5-30-97 585 CAMP DIXIE RD PASCOAG, RI 02859---2808 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-302 DUFFY, ALBERT J 1008 MANATEE RD APT G101 NAPLES, FL 34114---3927 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-101 DULL, GORMAN L & ANNA L 109 VALHALLA DR EATON, OH 45320---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD, S 60FT, E 370FT TO POB, CONT E 60FT ALG S BNDRY OF ROOKERY RD, S EDWARD COYNE REV TRUST MARY E COYNE REV TRUST 5717 VANDEMARK RD MEDINA, OH 44256---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-105 ELLERMAN, RICHARD G LILLIAN M ELLERMAN 309 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 20 EL-MOUSSAWEL, RIMA 2594 WOODMONT DR E CANTON, MI 48188---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-304 ENGELSEN, LYNNE 14170 WINCHESTER COURT UNIT 1903 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-302 ENGLISH REV TRUST 1022 MANATEE ROAD D 207 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-207 ENGLISH REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 1022 MANATEE RD APT D102 NAPLES, FL 34114---3907 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-102 ENTRUST IRA SOUTHWEST FL LLC 1227 PEARSON RD MILTON, FL 32583---9193 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1102 EVORA, MARIA DEJESUS 12776 SW 202ND ST MIAMI, FL 33177---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 304 FABRIZI, LINDA M ANDREW FABRIZI SALVATORE R FABRIZI 7023 BIG CREEK PKWY CLEVELAND, OH 44130---4904 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-207 FARAND, ANGELINA 470 MORRISTOWN ROAD MATAWAN, NJ 07747---3910 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-306 FASSO, VINCENT V 883 MANATEE ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 LOT 18 BLK F DESC AS: COMM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4 SEC 10, S 89 DEG E 997.35FT TO PT INTERSECT CO FERGUSON, GEORGE A 1008 MANATEE RD APT G306 NAPLES, FL 34114---3930 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-306 FIORE, PASQUALE A & CAROL M 1010 MANATEE RD B201 NAPLES, FL 34114---3948 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-201 FITZGIBBON, EDWARD 8572 HEMLOCK ST ORLAND PARK, IL 60462---1626 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-203 FITZGIBBON, EDWARD P & CYNTHIA 7854 W 100TH PL PALOS HILLS, IL 60465---1513 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-204 FLORES, PABLO H & LINDA G 209 N BARFIELD DR MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-105 FLORIO, ROBERTO C & ELENA 903 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---8266 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 13 FRANCHINO, JOSEPH 843 BANYAN COURT MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-204 FRANKLIN, JARED SHALLING 1024 MANATEE RD #C-205 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-205 FUIMANO, STEPHEN 913 MANATEE ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 35 GALE, ELLEN T THOMAS A MARTONE 8469 GARFIELD LN CHESTERTOWN, MD 21620---4223 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1602 POList_500_PL20180002899.xls PL20180002899 500' 5/2/2019 Boundary: Parcels 00736200103 and 00736200404 2 GARRY, JOHN 30 PEBBLE HOLLOW COURT SPRING, TX 77381---2 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 46 GARVIN, JAMES P & JOANN F 1024 MANATEE RD UNIT C-202 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-202 GATES, CLARE A 1000 MANATEE RD APT A201 NAPLES, FL 34114---3002 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-201 GAUTHIER, GARY D 744 AUGER BLVD SUDBURY P3A 4T2 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-201 GLADYS RICE REVOCABLE TRUST 727 W LAKE PARK DR ADDISON, IL 60101---3222 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-106 GONZALEZ, ARSENIO MARLEN GONZALEZ MERCY HAZA MARTHA SPAULDING 220 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3945 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2,E300FT TO POB, CONT E60FT,N110.06FT, W60 FT, S110.06FT GW REAL ESTATE TRUST 1164 DEL MAR CT UNION, KY 41091---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-107 HAHN, PAUL J KAREN D HAHN 78 ESPANONG RD LAKE HOPATCONG, NJ 07849---2219 10 51 26 COM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4, RUN S89 DEG E997.35FT TO PT C/L CO RD 31 & INTRSEC OAK DR, RUN N30FT HAHN, PAUL J & KAREN D 78 ESPANONG RD LAKE HOPATCONG, NJ 07849---2219 10 51 26 LOT 11 BLK F OF UNREC RIVERWOOD UNIT 3 DESC AS FOLL, COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2 S HALEY, BRIAN H 893 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4 OF SEC 10, S 89 DEG E 997.35FT, N 30FT, S 89 DEG E 700FT TO POB, N 110.34FT, HAMELIN ET AL, TODD JUDE 1014 MANATEE ROAD UNIT F 101 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-101 HARRINGTON, BRIAN F & CHERYL A 7 HAZELTON COURT MANCHESTER, NH 03103---7060 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-305 HATOSY, WAYNE T & CAROL A 313 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 22 HAYDEN, THOMAS JOYCE HAYDEN 21384 BEVERLY DR MEADVILLE, PA 16335---8482 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-107 HAYS TR, DONNA LOU H WILLIAM M HAYS TR HAYS FAM LAND TRUST UTD 04/17/01 5885 LAFAYETTE PLAIN CITY RD LONDON, OH 43140---8843 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-201 HENNESSY, ADRIENNE 2102 ROOKERY BAY DRIVE #2901 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2901 HILDEBRANT, TODD A & NICOLE S 1022 MANATEE RD APT D302 NAPLES, FL 34114---3909 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-302 HIMARAS, BILL T & RISA L 25 MANHATTAN AVE MIDDLETOWN, NY 10940---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-206 HOLMES ET AL, DENISE 1257 BLUEBIRD AVE MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2302 HOPTON, JAMES F & LORRAINE D 907 MANATEE ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 15 HUGHES, PETER J & MARY ANN 1281 FRUITLAND AVE MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-104 IANCU, FLORICA 6548 N GREENVIEW CHICAGO, IL 60626---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-305 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 12000 BISCAYNE BLVD #407 N MIAMI BEACH, FL 33181---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1205 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE # 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2805 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE # 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 802 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE # 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1005 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE # 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 708 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE # 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 707 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE # 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 705 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2704 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2606 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2607 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2806 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 902 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 706 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 903 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2602 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1006 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1107 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2703 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2604 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 907 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 804 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2504 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2603 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2705 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2505 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2506 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2801 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 906 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2707 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2507 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 905 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 806 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2403 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2205 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2407 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2402 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2204 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2305 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2108 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2107 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2406 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2203 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2201 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2306 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2502 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2308 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2202 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2207 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2807 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2908 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3101 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3002 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2808 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2902 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2903 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3004 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3006 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3104 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3103 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3107 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3102 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3106 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3105 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3005 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3003 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2907 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3007 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2906 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE# 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 805 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE#505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1007 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE#505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33181---1111 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2508 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD #505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1204 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 500 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 108 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 500 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 201 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 500 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 203 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 407 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1806 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 305 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1604 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 408 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1902 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1708 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 605 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1807 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 406 POList_500_PL20180002899.xls PL20180002899 500' 5/2/2019 Boundary: Parcels 00736200103 and 00736200404 3 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1903 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1502 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1501 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 307 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1208 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1606 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1607 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1504 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 308 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1805 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 102 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2007 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1908 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 602 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1001 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 106 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1505 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1603 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 508 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 403 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 401 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 606 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 607 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 306 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1703 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 506 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2003 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1705 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1704 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1206 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 107 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 206 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2002 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1907 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 505 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1508 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1706 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 3108 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1608 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1904 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 205 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1108 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1605 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1403 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1506 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 502 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1808 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2008 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1601 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 405 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 507 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1802 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2103 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 608 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 603 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD SUITE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 101 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD SUITE 801 HALLANDALE, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 908 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 9520 HARDING AVE STE 1 SURFSIDE, FL 33154---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 503 INFINITY SOUTH BAY LLC 9520 HARDING AVENUE SUITE 1 SURFSIDE, FL 33154---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 803 INFINITY SOUTHBAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE # 505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1103 INFINITY SOUTHBAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BCH BLVD STE #505 HALLANDALE BCH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2701 INFINITY SOUTHBAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 500 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2005 INFINITY SOUTHBAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 103 INFINITY SOUTHBAY LLC 1920 E HALLANDALE BEACH BLVD STE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2106 INFINITY SOUTHBAY LLC 1920 EAST HALLANDALE BCH BLVD SUITE 505 HALLANDALE BEACH, FL 33009---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1905 INFINITY SOUTHBAY LLC 9250 HARDING AVE BAL HARBOR, FL 33154---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 404 INVADOR3 LLC 256 PEBBLE BEACH CIR UNIT 104 NAPLES, FL 34113---7691 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 204 JABNIAN, NARSIS HAMEST VIVIAN ABKARIAN 124A BEDFORD ST BURLINGTON, MA 01803---2712 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-203 JARRETTE, NATALIE CARA MARY ELIZABETH JARRETTE 1022 MANATEE RD APT D106 NAPLES, FL 34114---3908 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-106 JAY W KOWALSKI TRUST 6123 DELLWOOD DR TOLEDO, OH 43613---1509 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-104 JAY W KOWALSKI TRUST 6123 DELLWOOD DR TOLEDO, OH 43613---1509 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-101 JCD LLC 20507 NE 9TH PL MIAMI, FL 33179---1932 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 303 JIMENEZ, MANUEL STEPHANIE ADAMS 13 DART COURT BOWMANVILLE L1C 5C7 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-206 JOHNSON, EDWARD C & CARLA W 10056 S KIMSBROUGH CT SANDY, UT 84092---3849 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-306 JOHNSON, W TIMOTHY & LINDA 1784 BEVERLY DR NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOTS 23 & 24 JOHNSTON, JEFFERY B & NANCY A 3645 ROBERTA DR TOLEDO, OH 43614---2378 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-301 JOHNSTON, MARK & LORI 10410 US HIGHWAY 24 GRAND RAPIDS, OH 43522---9347 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-203 JONES, SHERRY PO BOX 372 MURPHY, NC 28906---0 10 51 26 UNREC BLK F LOT 21,COMM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4, RUN S 89DEG E 997.35FT TO PT OF INTERSEC OF CTY RD JOSEPH GIOFFRE FAMILY TRUST 1821 EAST COOKE ROAD COLUMBUS, OH 43224---2224 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-307 JOZEFEK, JACQUELINE PAUL HAHN 23 WILLOW DR CHESTER, NJ 07930---2811 10 51 26 COMM SW CNR OF NE 1/4 OF NW1/4, RUN S 89DEG E 997.35FT TO PT OF INTERSEC OF CTY RD 31, N 30FT NLY R/W LI KALEEV, YANKO 1997 ROOKERY BAY DR APT 904 NAPLES, FL 34114---9317 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 904 KALEEV, YANKO IVANOV 1997 ROOKERY BAY DR UNIT904 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1408 KANE, ROBERT F & JUDITH H 400 STATE HIGHWAY 10A JOHNSTOWN, NY 12095---4938 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 47 KECK, JAMES TYSON LINDA RUTH KECK 971 DAYTON DRIVE CARMEL, IN 46033---0 10 51 26 LOT 3 BLK G UNIT 4 UNREC RIVERWOOD, COMM AT SE CNR LT 9 BLK D, RUN S 30FT, S 89DEG E 617.42FT, N 160FT, S KIDD, FANZE E & VIRGINIA C 686 BIG INDIAN RD CORYDON, IN 47112---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 6 KIENOW JR, LEONARD C 294 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 45 KIETZ, VICKIE K KIETZ, HOWARD E 312 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3977 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 17 KING, DONALD GENE MARILYN SUE KING 20713 DURBIN RD NOBLESVILLE, IN 46060---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 7 KINNEAR, STEVEN J & SANDRA L 6041 DEERSPRINGS RD CICERO, NY 13039---0 10 51 26 LOT 9 BLK F RIVER-WOOD UNIT 3 UNREC SUBD DESC AS FOLL: COMM SE CNR LT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD #2 RUN S170FT, KINNEAR, STEVEN J & SANDRA L 6041 DEERSPRINGS RD CICERO, NY 13039---9348 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR LOT 9,BLK D, RIVERWOOD UNIT 2 S 170FT, E 430FT TO POB, E 60FT, N 110FT TO S BNDRY KINNEY, MARK A 7137 540TH STREET MENOMONIE, WI 54751---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-104 KIRKPATRICK, BRIAN R STEPANIE FLOR 205 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3946 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR LOT 9,BLK D, RIVERWOOD UNIT 2,S170FT, E130FT TO POB, E60FT,N110FT TO S BDRY ROOKERY RD, KOERT, LEE ANN 308 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3977 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 38 KOLTCHAGOV, KOSTADIN PAVLINA KOLTCHAGOVA 643 CHARLEVOIX MONTREAL H3K 2X8 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-204 KOZLOWSKI, MARY TAMMY EBERT DEBORAH MOLLOY 16816 S 91ST AVENUE ORLAND HILLS, IL 60487---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-105 KRUEGER, MARTA 17 CHERRY ST RED BANK, NJ 07701---5302 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-302 LACASSE, ELISA C 305 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3978 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 61 LANDON, JACK W & MARLENE M 776 FERNWAY TRL KEWADIN, MI 49648---9300 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-303 LARRY & BONITA LAUFFER TRUST 226 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 UNREC'D LOT 18 DESC AS: COMM AT SE CNR OF LOT 9,BLK D, RIVERWOOD UNIT #2,S 30FT, S 89 DEG E 617.42FT, LARRY & BONITA LAUFFER TRUST 226 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2 S 89 DEG 20 MIN 26 SEC E 420FT TO POB, CONT ALG SAID LI 85FT, LARRY & BONITA LAUFFER TRUST 226 ROOKERY ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2, S 60FT, E 550FT TO S BNDRY OF ROOKERY RD TO POB, E 60FT, S LAURA M HAASE REV LIV TRUST 1473 BIRCHCREST DR DEARBORN, MI 48124---4001 GULF WINDS EAST CONDO, UNIT I APT C201 LECOURT, PAMELA A 1022 MANATEE ROAD UNIT D-307 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-307 LENA P MOLINARI IRREV TRUST 1422 E 54TH ST BROOKLYN, NY 11234---3306 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-101 LESSARD, ALEXIS ANN 1010 MANATEE ROAD UNIT B 101 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-101 LIMA, ESTHER C 2058 ROOKERY BAY DR #2303 NAPLES, FL 34114---9367 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2303 LOGAN, LINDA 54 OAK TREE LN SE WARREN, OH 44484---5611 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-101 POList_500_PL20180002899.xls PL20180002899 500' 5/2/2019 Boundary: Parcels 00736200103 and 00736200404 4 LOHNES, ROBERT H & LINDA G 1000 MANATEE RD APT A101 NAPLES, FL 34114---3939 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-101 LONG, ROBERT H & LAUREL 14547 MANCHESTER DR NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-106 LORI K FREDERICKS REV TRUST 1271 JAMAICA RD MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---3977 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-205 LUPPINO, JAMES P 58 FAIRFIELD AVE KENMORE, NY 14223---2816 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-207 LYNN L ESPEJO REVOCABLE TRUST 4226 LAKEWOOD BLVD # 5 NAPLES, FL 34112---6120 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-306 MAC DADE, JAMES T & KAREN R PO BOX 943 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34146---943 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-207 MADSEN, GUY E & RITA M G 91 NUGENT DR CLIFTON, NJ 07012---1716 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 604 MAGANA, JOSE R & ADELA S 875 MANATEE RD # 68 NAPLES, FL 34114---8218 10 51 26 UNREC BLK F LOT 22,COMM SE CNR LOT 9, BLK D,RIVERWOOD UNIT 2, RUN S 170FT, S 89DEG E 130FT TO MAGRAS, DENIS ANA LIMO-MAGRAS PO BOX 32083 NEWARK, NJ 07102---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-206 MALKOUNIAN, MARAL 92 IRVING ST WATERTOWN, MA 02472---2708 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-306 MANNING, JOHN 4465 10TH STREET NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0 10 51 26 COMM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4 SEC 10, S 89 DEG E 997.35FT, N 30FT, S 89 DEG E 700FT, N 110FT TO POB, N MANNING, JOHN R SIMONE CASTELLARIN-MANNING 4465 10TH STREET NE NAPLES, FL 34120---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 12 MARCHESE, THOMAS A 1000 MANATEE RD APT A105 NAPLES, FL 34114---3939 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-105 MARION, MICHAEL L MARIE M JONES 3812 E MARKET ST WARREN, OH 44484---4704 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-301 MARNELL, DARREN RICHARD 1941 ROOKERY DAY DRIVE #301 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 301 MARSTON, RICHARD A & KAREN C 321 SONGO SCHOOL RD NAPLES, ME 04055---5515 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-301 MATTHEW, HENRICK & LEONA 2005 ROOKERY BAY DR #1008 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1008 MAXWELL JR, EDWARD R LINDA M MAXWELL 57 RED BRIDGE LN SOUTH HADLEY, MA 01075---2228 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-301 MC KAIG, PATRICIA A 17 RUTHERFORD PL N ARLINGTON, NJ 07031---6301 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-303 MCCLOY, DAVID A & YELENA 919 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 32 MCGRATH, SHARON KATHLEEN EBERLY OVITT 1008 MANATEE RD #103 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-103 MEDLEY ULBERG LIV TRUST 8008 N NORMANDIE STREET SPOKANE, WA 99208---6019 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-205 MEISTER, TIMOTHY J & KAREN S 1008 MANATEE ROAD #G-204 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-204 MELLO, ROBERT & BEVERLY PO BOX 19306 JOHNSTON, RI 02919---306 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-303 MENDOZA, RAMON & LAURA I 1000 MANATEE RD APT A305 NAPLES, FL 34114---3935 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-305 MEYER, PAUL MARGARET SHEA 2935 PRADA DR MISSOULA, MT 59808---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-201 MEYERS, MICHAEL PATRICK NANCY K CARDENAS ORSORNIO 1024 MANATEE RD UNIT C-105 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-105 MICHAEL TR, LOIS E LOIS E MICHAEL REV TRUST UTD 11/23/10 4520 KNOWLES RD NORTH ADAMS, MI 49262---0 10 51 26 RIVERWOOD UNIT 3,UNREC LOT 17, BLK F, DESC AS:COMM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4, S 89DEG E 997.35FT TO MILLER, WILLIAM G LINDA J ENGLEBERT 21400 VALLE DR MEADVILLE, PA 16335---8412 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-105 MILUTICO LLC 4653 RIO POCO CT NAPLES, FL 34109---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2503 MINGRONE SR, LAWRENCE 167 PROMENADE DR HAMDEN, CT 06514---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-302 MITOVA, TEODORA G 4625 HAWKS NEST DR APT 202 NAPLES, FL 34114---832 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1804 MOHNEY, DENNIS J BERNADETTE A MOHNEY 1018 MANATEE RD APT E301 NAPLES, FL 34114---3919 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-301 MONTEVERDI ADVISORS LLC POSTACH 1719 CH-8027 ZURICH SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2006 MULLIGAN, SARA A 1004 MANATEE RD #H-303 NAPLES, FL 34114---3914 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-303 NAGLE, KEVIN D & THERESA 51 MARGINAL ST MARSHFIELD, MA 02050---4015 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-105 NALEPA, DARWIN D & THERESA A 14120 CHEROKEE TRL CLEVELAND, OH 44130---6636 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-102 OCEAN SUN ENTERPRISES LLC PO BOX 130 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34146---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-304 OREY, BRIAN J & JANET A 214 RAILROAD AVE HIGHTSTOWN, NJ 08520---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-106 ORLIC, LISA 1961 ROOKERY BAY DR #402 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 402 ORTEGA, MANUEL % REBECA ORTEGA 1000 MANATE RD UNIT A-203 NAPLES, FL 34114---3002 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-203 OZBEK, OZGUR 1004 MANATEE RD #H-102 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-102 P A FABRIZI DEC OF TRUST 389 COLUMBIA RD VALLEY CITY, OH 44280---9749 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-204 PACKER, COLLEEN 209 ROOKERY RD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR LT 9,BLK D, RIVERWOOD 2, S 170FT,E 250FT TO POB, CONT E 60FT,N 110FT, W 60FT, S 110FT TO PALMER, JUDY M DEBORAH L COONS 1321 6TH AVE MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2, S 170FT, E 70FT TO POB, CONT E 60FT, N 110FT, W 60FT, S PARK, JUDITH R DAVID J VOSSEN 943 NORTH STREET AMERY, WI 54001---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-106 PARKER, DAVID ALAN PATRICIA MARIE PARKER 879 MANATEE ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4, S89DEG E 997.35FT,N 30FT, S89DEG E 280FT TO POB;N 110.34FT, S89DEG E 60FT, PASCU, GABRIEL & SOFIA 121 DEL BROOK WAY MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2307 PATTERSON TR, RICHARD W RICHARD W PATTERSON REV TR SUSAN G PATTERSON TR SUSAN G PATTERSON REV TR 289 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3952 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 65 PERO, SHIRLEY A 4 RALEIGH RD WORCESTER, MA 01602---1426 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-206 PETRUZZI ET AL, DANIEL 873 MANATEE ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 COMM SW CNR OF NE1/4 OF NW1/4, RUN S 89 DEG E 997.35FT TO PT OF INTERSEC OF CTY RD 31 WITH OAK DR, N 30FT PHILLIP E SMITH & ELIZABETH SMITH REVOCABLE TRUST 1024 MANATEE RD #303 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-303 PIETRACUPA, EMMA PATRICIA ANN BOURGEOIS 43 ADELAIDE AVE CANDIAC J5R 3J6 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2 S89DEG E 180FT TO POB, S89DEG E 60FT,N 110.06FT,N89DEG W 60FT, S PILZ, JEFFREY C 1014 MANATEE ROAD UNIT F 202 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-202 PITTMAN, ANN-MARIE 1024 MANATEE RD APT C104 NAPLES, FL 34114---3902 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-104 PLANTZ, GEORGE E & TINA M 2183 MERRIMAC AVE MECHANICSBURG, PA 17055---9303 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-305 POLLARA, NICK 2016 ROOKERY BAY DR APT 1405 NAPLES, FL 34114---9359 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1405 POLLARA, SHARON M 2094 ROOKERY BAY DR #2802 NAPLES, FL 34114---9372 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2802 PROVOST, RICHARD W & MARY G 727 BOBBY CT NISKAYUNA, NY 12309---0 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 9 BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 2, E 240FT TO POB, CONT E 60FT, N 110.06FT, W 60FT, S 110.06FT QUINN, ANDREW F 75 WALL STREET #37J NEW YORK, NY 10005---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-104 RAAKEL BRAUN REVOCABLE TRUST 1000 MANATEE RD APT A304 NAPLES, FL 34114---3935 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-304 RAMIREZ, ALEX & NARDA L 776 SAINT ANDREWS BLVD NAPLES, FL 34113---8934 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-107 RATHKA, RAYMOND A 1480 CAXAMBAS COURT MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-202 REWALD, BARBARA J 1004 MANATEE RD #205 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-205 RICHARD, GERARD S 1024 MANATEE RD #C-103 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-103 RICHARDS, ROBERT & ELIZABETH M 12 JENNIFER LN COVENTRY, RI 02816---5260 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-305 RIMAR ENTERPRISES INC 7700 N KENDALL DR #802 MIAMI, FL 33156---0 10 51 26 COMM AT THE INTERSEC-TION OF THE ELY R/W LINE OF SR 951 & NLY LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4, S 30.01 FT, N 88 RIMAR ENTERPRISES INC 7700 N KENDALL DR #802 MIAMI, FL 33156---0 10 51 26 COM AT + E RW LI 951 & NLY LI OF SE1/4 OF NW1/4, S 30.01FT TO S LI MANATEE RD, E 500FT, S 706.32FT, E 849.37FT, RIVERWOOD ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % GUARDIAN PROPERTY 6704 LONE OAK BLVD NAPLES, FL 34109---0 RIVERWOOD EAST DRAINAGE RETENTION EASEMENT 2.92AC RIVERWOOD ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % GUARDIAN PROPERTY 6704 LONE OAK BLVD NAPLES, FL 34109---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LAKE RIVITUSO, LOUIS 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2101 RIVITUSO, LOUIS 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1401 RIVITUSO, LOUIS 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1507 RIVITUSO, LOUIS 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 808 RIVITUSO, LOUIS E 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1407 RIVITUSO, LOUIS F 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1801 RIVITUSO, LOUIS F 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2206 RIVITUSO, LOUIS F 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2208 RIVITUSO, LOUIS F 709 PEACH TREE DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19380---6488 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2102 RODRIGUEZ-ARCE, YVETTE 2008 ROOKERY BAY DR #1104 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1104 ROMANO, RINALDO P & ELIZABETH 11431 STATE RD NORTH ROYALTON, OH 44133---3262 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-201 ROOKERY BAY BUSINESS PARK LLC 1172 SOUTH DIXIE HWY #453 CORAL GABLES, FL 33146---0 10 51 26 S1/2 OF N1/2 OF SW1/4 E OF SR951 + S1/2 OF NW1/4 OF SE1/4, LESS OR 1193 PG 2223 OR 866 PG 1990 36.25 AC ROSAS, JESUS LAURA RAMIREZ 132 6TH ST NAPLES, FL 34113---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1202 ROSE E MURANO REV TRUST 1004 MANATEE RD #204 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-204 RUBLE, DONNA 1014 MANATEE ROAD F-304 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-304 RUFFNER, RICHARD 69 CARLETON AVE CENTRAL ISLIP, NY 11722---3018 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 207 SACRAIDA, MAURO 2048 ROOKERY BAY DR #2104 NAPLES, FL 34114---9323 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2104 SALEK, PAUL & DIANE 2 LAMBERT CIR OXFORD, MA 01540---2701 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-204 SANDELL, MIKAEL & CARINA RAGSLINGAN 39 ESLOV 241 35 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-103 SANDOVAL, RAMON A & MARIA 406 MOUNTAIN AVE FRANKLIN LAKES, NJ 07417---1446 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2702 SARDELLA, JESSIE ANN 1216 FENCE POST LN CAROLINA SHORES, NC 28467---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-102 SARGENT REVOCABLE TRUST 271 WILSON BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34117---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-102 SCHERMERHORN, PAUL MATTHEW SCHERMERHORN 1010 MANATEE RD B-103 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-103 SCHIAVONE, ANTHONY C & MARY D 1530 16TH ST NE NAPLES, FL 34120---3447 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-306 SCHROEDER, GEORGE L & MARY L 10618 BANE BERRY LANE CONNEAUT LAKE, PA 16316---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-102 SCHROEDER, GEORGE L & MARY L 782 LESLIE RD MEADVILLE, PA 16335---1121 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG G-104 SCHWARTZ TR, ARDEN S & ETHEL M A S & E M SCHWARTZ TRUST 2 LAKE DIANE DR NAPLES, FL 34114---3961 10 51 26 COMM SE CNR OF LOT 2, BLK D RIVERWOOD UNIT 1, E 526.76FT, N 19.94FT,S 64 DEG E 120.83 FT,E 60FT TO POB N SCULLY, MICHAEL F DIANNE T SFERRUZZA SCULLY 90 MAIN STREET PLYMPTON, MA 02367---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 62 SELL, HOWARD & JUDY 1018 MANATEE RD APT E205 NAPLES, FL 34114---3919 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-205 SHARP, BRIANNA ANGELICA 1014 MANATEE RD #F105 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-105 SHECTER, SCOTT & RHONDA 1022 MANATEE ROAD #D 203 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-203 SHIMKO, RONALD G 4705 VENICE HEIGHTS BLVD # 139 SANDUSKY, OH 44870---1433 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2904 SILVICO LLC PO BOX 112011 NAPLES, FL 34108---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-205 SIMON, RISA BETH 2094 ROOKERY BAY DR #2803 NAPLES, FL 34114---9373 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2803 SMITH, MARY JANE 42 LAKE DIANE DR NAPLES, FL 34114---0 10 51 26 UNREC'D LOT 42 DESC AS: COMM AT SE CNR OF LOT 9,BLK D, RIVERWOOD UNIT #2,S 30FT, S 89 DEG E 617.42FT, SOMAR ROOKERY BAY LLC 1939 45TH ST SW NAPLES, FL 34116---5823 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1003 SOMAR ROOKERY BAY LLC 1939 45TH ST SW NAPLES, FL 34116---5823 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1404 POList_500_PL20180002899.xls PL20180002899 500' 5/2/2019 Boundary: Parcels 00736200103 and 00736200404 5 SOMAR ROOKERY BAY LLC 1939 45TH ST SW NAPLES, FL 34116---5823 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 901 SOMKOEMARIE BRYAN LIV TRUST 190 BERMUDA RD MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---3910 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-207 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION CONDO ASSN INC % DE SOL PROPERTY MGMT 8765 SW 165TH AVE #109 MIAMI, FL 33193---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1106 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION CONDO ASSN INC % DE SOL PROPERTY MGMT 8765 SW 165TH AVE #109 MIAMI, FL 33193---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2304 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION CONDOMINIUM ASSN INC % DE SOL PROPERTY MGMT 8765 SW 165TH AVE #109 MIAMI, FL 33193---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 601 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION CONDOMINIUM ASSN INC % DE SOL PROPERTY MGMT 8765 SW 165TH AVE #109 MIAMI, FL 33193---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2405 SOVA, MICHELE A PATRICIA J SOVA 1794 BEVERLY DR NAPLES, FL 34114---3975 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 19 SPRACHMANN, URSULA L JAMES LEONARD 1190 N COLLIER BLVD MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---2548 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-302 SPRACHMANN, URSULA L JAMES LEONARD 1190 N COLLIER BLVD MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---2548 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-102 STAMPER, JENNY K 1014 MANATEE RD APT F107 NAPLES, FL 34114---3923 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-107 STERN, MITCHELL N FORTUNEE GERSHON STERN 14 MASSAPOAG AVE NORTH EASTON, MA 02356---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-307 STEVE JAMES KASELAK FMLY TRUST 7286 CHATHAM CT NORTHFIELD, OH 44067---2886 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-303 STEVEN G & AMY I GERTZ TRUST 13948 WOODENS LANE REISTERSTOWN, MD 21136---4538 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-101 STOLL TR, BRIAN F & JUDITH A B F & J A STOLL REV TRUST UTD 07/07/99 9339 HURON PARK DR BRIGHTON, MI 48116---6298 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 16 SUTHERLANDSRMR LLC 27700 HICKORY BLVD BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34134---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2804 SUYANA LLC 1534 GABRIEL ST HOLLYWOOD, FL 33020---3250 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2601 SUYANA LLC 401 E LAS OLAS BLVD STE #130-655 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1906 SUYANA LLC 401 E LAS OLAS BLVD STE 130-655 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2708 SUYANA LLC 401 E LAS OLAS BLVD FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 703 SUYANA LLC 401 E LAS OLAS BLVD #130-655 FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2706 TAPAGER, DOUGLAS L & LISA M 104 TEAKWOOD ROAD BUTLER, PA 16001---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-206 TENNANT, WILLIAM J & LINDA 296 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3938 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 44 THE GOLDEN GATE REALTY TRUST 923 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---8266 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 30 TIPLADY, WILLIAM L & LISA A 6709 ROAD T LIBERTY CENTER, OH 43532---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-304 TOBY USA LLC 5436 27TH PL SW NAPLES, FL 34116---7514 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1803 TODD, CATHERINE 2058 ROOKERY BAY DR UNIT 2301 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2301 TOMBLIN, CHARLOTTE B 2016 ROOKERY BAY DR #1406 NAPLES, FL 34114---9359 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1406 TRIOLA, PETER T 887 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---8218 10 51 26 UNRECD LOT 16 BLK F DESC AS: COMM SW CNR NE1/4 OF NW1/4, S 89 DEG E 997.35FT INTERSEC CO RD #31 WITH OAK TSAKOS, DARLENE M 6 GREENBRIAR DR #104 NORTH READING, MA 01864---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-201 UNSWORTH TR, DEBORAH J BETSY VARNOLD TR 1981 ROOKERY BAY DR APT 504 NAPLES, FL 34114---9314 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 504 UPHAM, LINA 1010 MANATEE RD B206 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG B-206 V & F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 208 V & F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 807 V & F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 302 V & F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2401 V & F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2404 V & F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1201 V & F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 105 V&F NAPLES LLC 220 S COLLIER BLVD #605 MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2905 VAN ZILE, DENNIS C & KAREN E 40 WHITEWATER DR BARNEGAT, NJ 08005---5616 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-107 VATANSEVER, MEHMET 1151 NORTH COLLIER BLVD MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 2605 VENTURINI JR, ALFRED 1018 MANATEE ROAD #E104 NAPLES, FL 34114---3917 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-104 VISCUSO, MARIA J GIACINTA DEVELLIS 1022 MANATEE RD APT D306 NAPLES, FL 34114---3910 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-306 VOCISANO, LUIGI & JOSEPHINE 21 MYNOPOTI DRIVE PISCATAWAY, NJ 08854---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-205 WAGNER, LETITIA THELMA 881 MANATEE RD NAPLES, FL 34114---8218 10 51 26 UNREC RIVERWOOD UNIT 3, LOT 19, BLK F, DESC AS:COMM SW CNR OF NE 1/4 OF NW1/4, S 89DEG E 997.35FT TO WALLEN TR, CHARLES E CAROL I OMTVEDT WALLEN TR UTD 11-13-97 2220 RAPIDS ST WISCONSIN RAPIDS, WI 54494---6124 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG D-103 WAMPLER, JACK 1172 FOURWINDS AVE MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---3913 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-106 WANGSNESS, CAROL A MASON, VICKI L 298 RIVERWOOD RD NAPLES, FL 34114---3938 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 43 WAYNE HARTMANN REV TRUST NORIETA HARTMANN REV TRUST 99 SCOTT STREET MASSAPEQUA PARK, NY 11762---3501 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 801 WERNER FAMILY TRUST 1142 LAKE RIDGE XING W MADISONVILLE, KY 42431---7200 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG F-203 WEXLER, EVAN & JENNIFER 532 SW 15TH ROAD BOCA RATON, FL 33432---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-104 WILLIAMS, CAROL ANN 2016 ROOKERY BAY DR APT 1402 NAPLES, FL 34114---9359 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1402 WITHEY, KOURT R & SANDRA M 14032 MIRROR DR NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-106 WOODRUFF, GERALD F & DONNA M 536 FAITH DR LAKE ST LOUIS, MO 63367---6469 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG E-207 WYGLENDOWSKI, MARIE E 1004 MANATEE RD APT H103 NAPLES, FL 34114---3911 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-103 YAKOVLEVA, IRINA 2013 ROOKERY BAY DR APT 1207 NAPLES, FL 34114---9319 SOUTH BAY PLANTATION A CONDOMINIUM UNIT 1207 YORK, KAREN R BRENDA WELKER 293 RIVERWOOD ROAD NAPLES, FL 34114---3952 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE II LOT 64 YOUNG, ELLIS E & ROBERTA M 21 LAKECREST CIR WARWICK, RI 02889---2252 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG C-304 ZECCO, NANCIE A 1004 MANATEE RD APT H206 NAPLES, FL 34114---3913 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG H-206 ZEMAN LIVING TRUST 1880 N BAHAMA AVE MARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---0 RIVERWOOD EAST UNIT 4 PHASE 1 LOT 25 ZERAFA, MICHAEL 1000 MANATEE RD A-301 NAPLES, FL 34114---0 GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM BLDG A-301 POList_500_PL20180002899.xls GULF WINDS EAST CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. 6704 Lone Oak Blvd Naples, FL 34109 ENCHANTING SHORES CO-OP, INC. 17 Turquoise Ave Naples, FL 34114 Published DailyNaples, FL 34110 Affidavit of PublicationState of FloridaCounties of Collier and Lee Before the undersigned they serve as the authority, personally appeared Natalie Zollar who on oath says that she serves as Inside Sales Manager of the Naples Daily News, a daily newspaper published at Naples, in Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida; that the attached copy of the advertising was published in said newspaper on dates listed. Affiant further says that the said Naples Daily News is a newspaper published at Na-ples, in said Collier County, Florida, and that the said newspaper has heretofore been continuously published in said Collier County, Florida; distributed in Collier and Lee counties of Florida, each day and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Naples, in said Collier County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he has neither paid nor promised any person, or corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund for the purpose of securing this advertisement for publication in the said newspaper.___________________________________________________________Customer Ad Number Copyline P.O.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ Q. GRADY MINOR & ASSOCIATES PA 2280811 Enbrook RPUD Pub DatesMay 17, 2019 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before meThis May 20, 2019 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) +N APLESNEWS.COM z FRIDAY, MAY 17, 2019 z 15A ND-2280384 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR REZONING The City of Naples City Council will hold a public hearing to consider the following Ordinance on Second Reading: 19-R3 AN ORDINANCE DETERMINING PETITION 19-R3 RELATING TO THE NAPLES BAY MARINA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,REZONING APPROX IMATELY 15 AC RES FROM PD,PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO AN AMENDED AND RESTAT- ED PD,PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,TO CHANGE THE EXISTING LIMITAT ION ON RENTALS FROM A MINIMUM OF ONE WEEK TO A MINIMUM OF 4 NIGHTS FROM MAY 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 31 WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL AND RECREATIONAL AMENITY DISTRICT OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT,ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE COTTAGES AT NAPLES BAY RESORT,AND LOCATED AT 975 SAND- PIPER STREET;MORE PA RTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN;ADOPTING THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT AS AMENDED HEREIN;AND PROVID- ING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE,A REPEALER PROVISION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Pe titioner:The Cottages at Naples Bay Resor t Location:975 Sandpiper Lane Agent:Rachel Kerlek,Esq.,Wo ods,We idenmiller,Michetti and Rudnick Legal Description:A complete legal description is available in the City of Naples Planning Depar tment,295 Rive rside Circle,Naples,Florida (239)213-1050. The Naples City Council will hold a public hear- ing on this Ordinance at a meeting beginning at 8:30 a.m.,We dnesday,June 5,2019,in City Council Chambers,735 8th Street South,Na- ples,Florida,34102.A complete copy of the proposed Development Order can be obtained from the City of Naples Planning Depar tment, 295 Riverside Circle,Naples,Florida (239) 213-1050. ALL INTERESTED PA RTIES ARE INVITED TO APPEAR AT THE MEETING AND BE HEARD WITH RESPECT TO THE PRO- POSED ORDINANCE. Any person who decides to appeal any de- cision made by City Council with respect to any matter considered at this hearing will need a record of the proceedings and may need to ensure that a verbatim record is made,which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be heard.Any person with a disability requir- ing auxiliary aids and services for this meet- ing may call the City Clerk’s office at 213-1015 with requests at least two business days be- fore the meeting date. City Council of the City of Naples Pa tricia Rambosk,City Clerk ND-2280811 NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING Petition PL20180002899,Enbrook Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) A Neighborhood Information Meeting hosted by D.Wayne Arnold,AICP,of Q.Grady Minor and Associates,P.A.and Richard D.Yo vanovich,Esq.of Coleman,Yo vanovich and Koester,P.A.,representing Rimar Enterprises,Inc.and D.R.Horton,Inc.(Applicants) will be held on: Wednesday,June 5,2019,5:30 pm at the Board of County Commissioners’ Chambers,3rd floor of Building F,Collier County Government Center, 3299 Ta miami Tr ail East,Naples,FL 34112 Rimar Enterprises,Inc.and D.R.Horton,Inc.have submitted a formal application to Collier County,seeking approval of a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Rezone.The RPUD rezone application proposes to rezone the property from RMF-16(8) to Enbrook RPUD to allow a maximum of 526 residential dwelling units of varying types including single-family,two-family attached,townhome,and multi-family.The rezone also proposes to eliminate the previously required 100’wide greenbelt and will provide a minimum of 25%of the on-site native vegetation as a preserve,consistent with the Conservation and Coastal Management Element and LDC Section 3.05 requirements. The subject property (Enbrook RPUD)is comprised of 65.88±acres,located on the south side of Manatee Road,approximately ¼mile east of Collier Boulevard in Section 10,To wnship 51 South,Range 26 East,Collier County,Florida. The Neighborhood Information Meeting is for informational purposes only,it is not a public hearing.Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning.If you have questions or comments,they can be directed by mail,phone,fax or e-mail to: sumpenhour@gradyminor.com,phone 239-947-1144,fax 239-947-0375,Q.Grady Minor and Associates,P.A.,3800 Via Del Rey,Bonita Springs,Florida 34134. Providing Superior Surgical,Medical and Cosmetic Dermatology Since 1989 •SK IN CANCER &MOLE REMOVA L •MOHS SURG ERY •LASER TREAT MENTS •BLUE AND RED LIGHT THER APY FOR TREAT MENT OF SUN-DA MAGED SKIN •AC NE TREAT MENT SPECIALISTS •THOROUGH FULL SK IN EXAMS •FILLERS •BOTOX SKIN CAREfortheentirefamily www.Flor idaCoastalDermatolog y.com F LORIDA COASTAL D ERMATOLOGY Lisa D.Zack,MD Brad T.Kovach,MD Board Certified •Fe llowship Tr ained Lidia Starr,PA-C |Hillar y Cachet,PA-C |Kristen McLaughlin,PA-C ACCEPTING NEW PATIENTS ND-FMN0009643-01 ESTERO OFFICE 239.676.8677 19910 S.Ta miami Trail-Suite B NA PLES OFFICE 239.263.1717 801 Anchor Rode Drive-Suite 100 NEW YORK – New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced Thursday that he will seek the Democratic nomination for president, adding his name to an al- ready long list of candi- dates itching for a chance to take on Donald Trump. The mayor announced his run with a video re- leased by his campaign, then headed to the Statue of Liberty, where he said the country is in an “identity crisis” around immigration, which he called “the founding and uni- fying element of the American experi- ence.” “We are figuring out who we are,” he said. “There are American values we need to return to and fight for in order to achieve our greatest potential.” On his campaign’s first day, he dived into an insult match with Trump. During an appearance on “Good Morning America,” de Blasio borrowed one of Trump’s tactics by giving the president a disparaging nickname: Con Don. “He’s a con artist. I know his tricks. I know his playbook,” the mayor said. Trump tweeted that de Blasio was “considered the worst mayor in the U.S.” The president said, “He is a JOKE, but if you like high taxes & crime, he’s your man. NYC HATES HIM!” In announcing his candidacy, de Bla- sio, 58, seeks to claim a role on the na- tional stage that has eluded him as may- or of the biggest U.S. city. When he took office in 2014, de Blasio seemed briefly poised to become a lead- ing voice for an emerging left wing of the Democratic Party. His central message then and now is fighting income in- equality, a theme he hit in the video an- nouncing his candidacy. “There’s plenty of money in this world. There’s plenty of money in this country. It’s just in the wrong hands,” he said. Liberal enthusiasm faded during his first term, partly because of political missteps at home and the emergence of bigger names elsewhere. He could face obstacles trying to distinguish himself in a crowded field. After his appearance at the Statue of Liberty, for a ceremony opening a new museum, de Blasio planned to travel to Iowa to campaign Friday, then fly to South Carolina for events Saturday and early Sunday. De Blasio has drawn small audiences so far in visits to early primary states in- cluding New Hampshire, where just six attendees showed up for a mental health discussion. A recent Quinnipiac University poll found 76% of New York City voters say they believe he shouldn’t run. And de Blasio’s hometown press has, so far, de- lighted in disparaging his presidential hopes. The New York Post on Thursday greeted his candidacy with a front-page photo of people laughing. “De Blasio for President? ‘Nah,’ ” read one recent New York Times headline. “Who hasn’t told Bill de Blasio that he shouldn’t run for president?” asked New York Magazine. Local criticism has focused less on his policies than his reputation for stumbles, like showing up late to a me- morial for plane crash victims, getting into a feud with the state’s Democratic governor and dropping a groundhog during a Groundhog Day celebration. Earlier this week, de Blasio held a news conference in the lobby of Trump Tower to blame the skyscraper for con- tributing to air pollution, but the event turned comical as Trump supporters heckled the mayor, who had to shout to make himself heard. De Blasio joinspresidential race Karen Matthews ASSOCIATED PRESS De Blasio Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 1 Wayne Arnold: Let’s get started. It doesn’t appear that we’re gonna have more attendees at this moment. If they come in late, then we’ll catch them up on what we’re doing. I’ll make some introductions first. I’m Wayne Arnold, and I’m from Grady Minor Engineering. I’m here representing D.R. Horton and Rimar in the, um, rezoning of the subject property. I’m gonna make some introductions. Uh, this is Sharon Umpenhour from our office. She’s recording, uh, the meeting tonight. It’s required by the county code. Wayne Everett is in the back of the room here with D.R. Horton. Um, we have Michael Herrera and Steve Martin, both engineers from our office, and we’re working on all the, uh, preliminary plat information at the moment. And, this is Nancy Gundlach. Nancy: Hello! Wayne Arnold: Nancy is a principal planner with Collier County, and she’s here to answer any county-related questions, and she’s taking some notes, so she knows, uh, what we’re saying. So, with that, I’m gonna get started. We’re here for a project called Enbrook, and it’s Enbrook PUD. Some of you who’ve been in the area long enough remember it as Journey’s End, and it’s, uh, property that’s located on the south side of Manatee Road. It’s about 66 acres. And, right now, it’s zoned RMF16 with a zoning cap of eight units per acre, and that means today, it’s – it’s permitted to have multifamily and townhome development on it at a density of eight units per acre, and that equates to 526 maximum dwelling units. So, our proposal is to rezone it to a planned unit development that would allow 526 units, as it is today, but allow it to also include single-family and two-family residential dwelling units as a development option, and with that – so, we go through the – the typical zone process – many of you have – have heard about that. We were into our first review. The county’s just looking at our second submittal, and the neighborhood information meeting is required by ordinance, so we have to conduct this, and the earliest we can do it is after our first review with staff. So, we didn’t have a lot of issues with staff’s first review, so we thought we’d go ahead and get this scheduled so we can move along to the planning commission and the board of county commissioners, uh, in a timely manner, and we don’t have timeframes for that yet but, uh, we expect that to be sometime in the early fall, uh, probably Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 2 after the board comes back from its summer recess. So, going through the process, um, that’s an outline of the property. It’s on the south side of Manatee Road, and it stretches back to the west, uh, over to the prime outlet shops. We don’t have any frontage on Collier Boulevard, but we do have frontage on Manatee Road, and, uh, one of the things I wanted to point out is that this project – while it has zoning, it also had site plan approval for 483 apartment units on it. That’s been approved by Collier County; it was ready to go to construction. Um, the owners had, uh, contemplated selling the property, and they’re under contract to D.R. Horton. D.R. Horton is going through the process right now of also rezoning and creating a plat for the property. While we’re asking for a variety of housing types, D.R. Horton – if they continue to pursue this and actually close on the land, they’re going to build, uh, just about 300 villa units on the property is what they would propose to do. So, even though we’re asking for the 526 units that they’re entitled to today, we’re ask – we’ll likely be developing something significantly less if D.R. Horton goes ahead with their contract on the property. This is a little bit tighter version. If you’ve been out there along the road, you’ll notice that that aerial photo is about a year old, but it’s, uh, since been cleared – the property has – because of the approvals for the – the, uh, apartment complex. And, all that remains are areas that are going to be retained as preserve areas on the site. This is our conceptual master plan, and just to orient – I’d use a pointer, but they don’t show up well on the TV screens, but obviously – so, the top of the page is Manatee Road, and you can see that we have one single access on Manatee Road, and then, you have in gray the out – the internal street alignment that we’re going to have. There are a couple of interior water management lakes. The amenities center is the area labeled “A” on that plan, and it’s in the northwest corner of the site, and then, to the southwest corner of the site is a little over 12-acre preservation area that extends also along a portion of the southern edge of the property. So, part of this property goes back long enough – it was evaluated back in 1992 as part of something called zoning evaluation ordinance, and Commissioner Fiala is in attendance; she probably remembers a lot of the properties in her district having gone through this, but that’s how the – the density cap of eight units per acre was Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 3 addressed. So, part of the ordinance that affected this is part of the zoning reevaluation ordinance – also said there is a limitation of two stories in height, eight units per acre, and we should create a 100-foot-wide green strip along the east and south boundaries. Female Speaker 1: Is it eight or two units per acre? Wayne Arnold: Eight. Female Speaker 1: Eight? Wayne Arnold: Eight. Eight units per acre, maximum. So, the – the greenspace areas were meant to be buffers, in essence, at the time, because nothing around it had been developed to the east and south. Well, now, to the east is largely the county’s water facility, and then, to the south is Rookery Bay Business Park, undeveloped, but zoned for – for a business park. So, we’re proposing as part of this amendment to eliminate that 100-foot greenspace, and it’ll be replaced with water management and buffers, et cetera, but it’s not a fixed 100 feet t hat we’re proposing. We’ve had staff do the research on this, the owners have researched it, I’ve researched it, and we can’t find anything in the record that demonstrates why there was 100 feet. Um, the resident expert that we talked to, David Weeks in Conference of Planning, thinks that it was simply a number thrown out there because we didn’t know what was going to be there, so it was just meant to be sort of a holding pattern until somebody did come along to develop the property. So, here we are, and we’re proposing to eliminate that 100-foot strict, uh, buffer requirement to the east and south, and that will get replaced in favor of preserve, and – and buffer, and in large part to the south and to the east against the county’s treatment plant, it will be a significant buffer, but not a 100-foot green strip that was in that original ’92 ordinance. We do ask for a few deviations. Uh, some of these are very standard for us. This is an internal street. They’re all going to be private roads. The county general standard is a 60-foot-wide area. We’re asking for a 50-foot-wide area. We do have sidewalks on both sides of those streets internally, and that seems to be the most important thing that we – we deal with with the county. We’re asking for a reduction in setback for our interior signs when Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 4 we have directional signs interior to the subdivision. The county says that you should be 10 feet away from a public street. We’re gonna be a private street, so we’re asking to reduce that to allow some of our internal signs to be a little bit closer to the – the travel way. Um, we’re asking for a noise attenuation wall along Manatee Road that would carry along our entire frontage and then turn south along our amenities center that could be up to eight feet high. The county code allows that wall to be… It is an eight-foot-high wall, isn’t it, Michael? Just to clarify? Michael: Yes. Wayne Arnold: And, that sits on top of a berm, and I’m gonna go back just a couple just to show you. So, on the amenities center that we have – whoops. There it is. So, where we have the “A” amenity area, that wall continues along Manatee Road and then down along the south property line. There are two arrows that, if you’re close enough to the screen, you’ll see, but that indicates the limits of where we’ll also construct a wall adjacent to the amenities center. This is, uh, a detail of the berm and wall combination that the county asked us to provide. And then, we have other, uh, deviations that – there’s an architectural and site design requirement for any amenity building, and if it’s within so many feet of a county road, and we’ve asked for a deviation because we have the eight-foot wall on top of a berm, which makes the single-story amenity center building largely invisible to the traveling public. So, we’ve asked for a deviation. We don’t know if staff will be supporting that yet, but we’ve asked for that. We’ve also asked for a parking space reduction for the amenities center because we’re going to encourage a lot of our residents to walk to get to the amenity area rather than provide a lot of parking. And then, we’ve asked for another deviation that relates to our entry sign near Manatee Road to allow it to go from 64 square feet to a maximum of 80 square feet, and, um, we don’t yet know if staff’s going to be supporting any or all the deviations, but those are the ones that are under review by the county staff, and as we go through this, others can be contemplated, and staff may tell us we might wanna seek another or modify these, in which case we’ll be talking to them about that. So, in a nutshell, that’s what we’re proposing. You know, if I had architectural elevations to show you – I know that, uh, D.R. Horton Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 5 and others would like to for this product. Well, the footprint and the general building configuration are gonna be similar to what they’ve been constructing out at Naples Reserve. They are going to re-skin these a little bit different architecturally because some of the ceiling plates are going to be higher than those under construction is what they’re contemplating, so we don’t have fresh architecture to show you, but if, uh, you’re in the area and you know where Naples Reserve is off of U.S. 41, D.R. Horton is actively constructing a similar twin-villa unit that they proposed to construct here as well. So, with that, I’ll be happy to turn it over to questions. All I would mention before we start taking questions – speak clearly, and if necessary, I’d ask you to use the microphone just because the planning commission likes to hear audiotape of these, so we wanna make sure it’s clear for them and the public to hear if they’d like to review it. So, this is a – I’ll pass this to you, if you don’t mind, and you can speak directly into the microphone. Female Speaker 2: You don’t think I scream loud enough? [Laughs] Wayne Arnold: We wanna make sure we hear you. Female Speaker 2: [Inaudible] [00:10:12] The end result will be 320 villas. And, how much square footage is that? Is this the multifamily home you’re proposing? And, uh, how many parking spaces are being assigned to each, uh, unit, uh, you’ll be accommodating? And, I’ll get into the traffic later, but… Wayne Arnold: Okay. I won’t speak for Wayne, but I think the unit count is going to be just under 300 villas if he moves ahead with his design. We’re in for a plat right now with Collier County. Wayne Everett: Two – two hundred and ninety-eight. Wayne Arnold: It’s 298, so, yes, it’s just under 300 units that they’re proposing to construct. Female Speaker 2: That will – Wayne Arnold: And, each unit would have a garage. It would also have room for two parking spaces. That’s required by code. Female Speaker 2: Two parking spaces assigned to it? Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 6 Wayne Arnold: Per unit, yes. Wayne Everett: It’s got a two-car – these particular units have a two-car garage, and then, uh, there’s 23 feet from the sidewalk to the face of the garage, which would allow another two cars to park in the driveway for guests or visitors. Female Speaker 2: Okay. And, how many – the square footage of the villas is…? Wayne Everett: They’re about 1,500 square feet under air. Female Speaker 2: And, they’re – uh, and, my other question was what are the price ranges of these? Wayne Everett: We don’t set the price ranges until – Female Speaker 2: Is it affordable housing, or…? Wayne Everett: It’s not – it would not be considered affordable housing. Female Speaker 2: It’s… Female Speaker 3: Very cheap lower 300s. Female Speaker 2: What? Female Speaker 3: Lower 300s. Female Speaker 2: Lower 300s? Female Speaker 3: [Laughs] Wayne Arnold: Is there a question? We need to try to get, uh, one at a time on the record so we can have this transcribed too. So, yes? Female Speaker 3: Hi, I’m the owner of Gulf Winds East, and really, my only concern is traffic. Are there any ideas for Manatee Road? Because it’s really unbearable right now as is. And, maybe I’ll go ahead with that – maybe that’s a question for Collier County. I don’t know if the county still does a level of service for the roads, and if so, what’s the actual…? Wayne Arnold: Well, Jim Banks, our traffic engineer, is sitting right back here, and he’s prepared the traffic analysis for the zoning document. He’s also prepared one for the plat submittal that’s – that’s in for review by the county. Nancy is not, uh, one of the county’s transportation reviewers. She’s here to take some notes, and we can certainly – and, Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 7 she can relay certain things on to transportation staff that – that may come out as questions. Female Speaker 3: So – Wayne Arnold: But Jim, I think your question is level-of-service-related on Manatee Road. Jim: As far as I know, there’s not a deficiency on Manatee Road. Uh, Collier County – they have not been doing an annual monitoring on that road, but when we’ve been out there, I did not see a capacity issue. You’ve got a traffic signal at Manatee and 951, and you have a traffic signal at Manatee and Tamiami Trail. Male Speaker: How many accidents do we gotta – Female Speaker 3: No, it’s really – that road – Wayne Arnold: Please – excuse me, sir. One at a time, and let’s be respectful of everybody, please. Female Speaker 3: So, the quest – I have to ask – does county still do your, like, annual level of service report where you do, like, traffic counts and comprehensive plan that says that, say, this road has to be Grade B, and the actual is only C? Jim: Well, Manatee Road would be – an acceptable level of service would be service level D as in David for our peak season. Typically, the grade it on the 100th highest hour that would occur of traffic – Female Speaker 3: So, what’s the actual right now? Jim: As I’ve told you before, the county has not updated their – their level-of-service calculation on Manatee Road, but when we were out there making observations, we did not see that the level of traffic raised to – was at a level that caused, you know, us concern that we were exceeding level of service C – Female Speaker 3: That’s some real data or just watching – anecdotal? Jim: It’s anecdotal other than the fact that we actually traveled on the road and we observed the volume of traffic on the road. We observed the intersection at Manatee and Collier Boulevard as well as Manatee and, uh, U.S. 41, and did not see any substantial queueing at those intersections. It seemed like traffic was flowing fairly well. Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 8 There is a sidewalk on the south side of, uh, Manatee Road that we’ve observed people walking and even bicyclists using, so, again, we just did not see a situation where the traffic demand on Manatee Road rose – rose to a level that we thought that we needed to go out and recalibrate and – and measure the traffic, uh, demand on that road. Currently, again, as I’ve said, Collier County has, in the past, looked at Manatee Road and determined that, uh, there’s adequate capacity on the road. It’s not – it’s not operating at an, uh, insufficient level, but they have not done an annual update on that, uh, road for quite a few years, so I can’t tell you the exact number of vehicles that are on the road. Wayne Arnold: And, I would just reaffirm again that there’s site plan approval in- house that’s approved for construction today for 483 apartments on that same site that we’re talking about. Sir, you had a question or comment? Male Speaker: Yes, how many cars – sure, thank you. Yes, my question is in reference to traffic. They’ve got major accidents up on Collier Boulevard and Manatee Road, okay? Three that I know of within the last three months alone, and that’s just people who have come to my house. Are you proposing another entrance, or are we – we’re gonna have a thousand cars going down Manatee Road, in and out? Wayne Arnold: There’s not gonna be a thousand cars. Male Speaker: You’ve got 500 residences, right? Two cars per residence? Even at one car per residence, we’ve got 500 cars going up and down Manatee Road, and the entrances are all gonna be on Manatee. Jim: It is estimated that what’s being proposed at 298 dwelling units would generate a two-way total of 156 vehicles in the peak hour. Female Speaker 3: Oh. But, what’s the actual… You have a two-car garage for almost 200. That’s 400 cars. Almost 400 cars. Wayne Arnold: The county evaluates this based on peak hours on the roadway. So, in the morning, that’s 7:00 to 9:00 a.m., and in the afternoon, it’s 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. Those are the peak hours that are analyzed for traffic purposes. It doesn’t look at the total volume of traffic over a 24-hour period of time. It looks at these based on the ITE standard for trip generation for the types of units, and I think that – we all drive the roads, and we know what season they’re all busy, but we still analyze these, and the county staff is going to be evaluating our traffic analysis as well. Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 9 Female Speaker 3: You’re doing a trip count, and then generating a traffic report – a study, yeah? Wayne Arnold: Well, Jim Banks has prepared the traffic study, and the transportation staff is evaluating that. We’re going to establish – they’re going to make us establish what’s called a trip cap as part of our PUD, so there will be a maximum number of trips that can be triggered, and Jim, if I’m not incorrect, I believe it’s based on the vested number of units. Jim: That’s correct. I think it’s very important to realize that this project was permitted many years ago, and it was vested for up to – it’s entitled to up to 526 units, and it’s vested for the development of 498 units. Female Speaker 3: And, that – Jim: So, [inaudible] [00:17:30] going through this process today, the developer could go out there and build 498 dwelling units on that site and not go through this process, and what they’re proposing to do is to amend the, uh, the zoning application, and right now, it’s being posted to build only 298, so they’re actually going to build fewer units – Female Speaker 3: Which we’re grateful for. Was that done before the racetrack came in or after? Because that’s when things started to go down, and once the racetrack was put in, it’s just – it’s unbearable. Wayne Arnold: Well, the vested status was determined many years ago because of the approvals – Female Speaker 3: So, before the racetrack? Wayne Arnold: Yes, the vested status of the project was – I’m pretty certain – determined before the racetrack was there. It occurred back when there was a consortium of developers that dealt with all the Collier Boulevard/U.S. 41 improvements. But, the reality of this is – and, I just wanna clarify what Jim said – we’re not modifying the zoning for the 298 units. The plat is for 298 units that D.R. Horton has submitted. The developer is asking for the eight-unit-per-acre density to which they are entitled today. Yes, ma’am? Female Speaker 2: I just wanna know where the entrances are going to be. Wayne Arnold: Okay. The entrances – there’s going to be one entrance. The only access this site has is to Manatee Road. There’s no access over to Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 10 Collier Boulevard and there’s no access to the east or west because we have developments on both sides of us, so the only access – and, the only access that’s been approved for the development that has been authorized to be constructed is on Manatee Road. Female Speaker 2: Do you know where on Manatee Road? Wayne Arnold: On Manatee Road – we’re showing the access point on the easternmost portion of our site. Can you go back to an aerial here? So, on that plan, you can see on the northeast, far right top – that’s where we’re proposing to put our access point, and I’m assuming we’re going to have a turn lane on that entrance. Wayne Everett: A right ingress turn lane. Wayne Arnold: Yeah, it’ll be a right ingress turn lane into the property. Female Speaker 2: You’re going to build a turn lane where the culvert is right there? Wayne Arnold: I don’t know the details of the culvert. Michael, maybe you can answer that specific question. Michael: I’m Michael Herrera, a Grady Minor civil engineer. So, on this property, Collier County is going to require a right turn lane, and as part of that, there’s going to be a taking of right of way. So, the developer is going to lose some property and basically slide everything over, so the roadside swale will be relocated to make room for the new turn lane. Female Speaker 2: And, the sidewalk will remain? Michael: Yeah, there will be a sidewalk that will remain – a new sidewalk. Wayne Arnold: Yes, sir? Chris: I’m Chris Hernandez, property manager for Rookery Bay’s South Bay Plantation. Our concern is the wall barrier. It states that it’s going to be a landscape barrier. Given that it’s going to be in the lower 300s, I assume you guys will probably have seasonal residential there compared to our property, which is 90% annual. Have you guys considered extending that barrier wall down further? Wayne Arnold: Well, the wall that we’ve shown on this master plan abuts the entirety of the amenity track that’s labeled “A” on the master plan. We have not discussed extending that farther south because essentially, those units that would back up to you under this proposal would be twin-villa-type homes with a landscape buffer adjacent to Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 11 your community in those locations, but we were mindful of the fact that we’re not wanting to put anybody next to an amenities center, where there will be a swimming pool, tennis courts, and other active areas. We wanted to make sure we had that screen for the wall and landscaping. Female Speaker 2: Is that incorporated into the amenities center – the pool, the courts? Wayne Arnold: Well, I think the amenity details are still being worked out, but I’m pretty sure D.R. Horton is not going to build it without a swimming pool and probable tennis court or pickleball court, or something comparable to that. I don’t know all the details yet. Wayne, I don’t know if you have more details of what you’re planning, but I think you have a small clubhouse and some other things you’ve been contemplating. Wayne Everett: Currently, we’re looking at an approximately 5,000-square-foot clubhouse with a pool behind it. On one side, we’re anticipating three bocce ball courts, and that is on the west side, adjacent to the condominiums. On the north side, on the east of the clubhouse, we’re looking at doing one tennis court and four pickleball courts. We’ve put them over on that side because I know pickleball tends to be a little noisy, so we moved them to the opposite side of the clubhouse from the condominiums out of respect for that. Wayne Arnold: Anybody else? Yes, ma’am? Female Speaker 4: Has anybody evaluated the school there – Manatee? Because that’s at max right now. Wayne Arnold: We’re required to fill out an application for any residential project that gets submitted to the Collier County School District, and they evaluate that and look at the school impacts. Nancy, correct me if I’m wrong – I don’t think we have a response back from the school district. Nancy: We don’t. Wayne Arnold: They generally only respond if there’s a problem. They have not told us that there is. I think given the fact that there’s already 480-some- odd units approved here, it probably has some impact on that, but on another project – I just reached out to the school district today to ask them, “Hey, I haven’t heard from you, but the staff needs to check the box. Is there an issue or not?” But, we do work with them, and they do review all these applications. Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 12 Female Speaker 4: Will there be a fitness center here? Wayne Arnold: Well, I assume there will be some kind of fitness facility inside your clubhouse, Wayne. Is that correct? Wayne Everett: That is correct. Wayne Arnold: Anybody else? Female Speaker 4: I just have got to say it. I just have to say it. I’m curious – where is Manatee Middle and Manatee Elementary in relation. I know they’re all on Manatee Road, and I know both of those schools are maxed. They’re in trailers. They’re in temporary classrooms. It just seems like an awful lot of traffic – and, I know Journey’s End was approved. I knew that was going to be 400-some-odd units. I wish we could stay at that and not go to 526. You’re also in a coastal flood area, so if there’s a hurricane, everybody’s out if you’re east of the trail. Wayne Arnold: That was one of the reasons – the county’s density on the site used to be 16 dwelling units per acre. It was reduced to eight units per acre as part of the zoning reevaluation because the property was in the coastal line hazard area. So, it has been down -zoned. I know it doesn’t sound like it to a lot of people, but it has been down-zoned from 16 units per acre. Female Speaker 4: [Laughs] Yikes! Wayne Arnold: That’s why it still carries the 16-unit-per-acre density designation, but if you look at the zoning map, there’s an eight after it in parentheses, and that eight means it’s capped at eight units per acre. Female Speaker 3: So, then, what were you reducing in units? Wayne Arnold: The reduction in units is for the plat that D.R. Horton is submitting. They’re at 298 units. Our zoning asked for the eight units per acre, which equates to 526 units. Nancy: He’s reducing to villas, which is 298. That’s good. Wayne Arnold: I think – from what I’m hearing, it’s going in the right direction. It’ just…the property owner can’t really commit to doing that density reduction because D.R. Horton hasn’t closed on the property yet, so they don’t wanna reduce the density – you can understand – to take away what they currently have today. Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 13 Female Speaker 3: I have a question – because we know the condition of the schools, the Manatee Elementary and Middle schools – I have a lot of literature from the community from there. Will you do something about that? They can’t go to school – they close down the school sometimes because they don’t have air conditioning, and when it’s 100 degrees, they send the kids home. They have temporary trailers. The conditions are terrible, to say the least. The community is upset about it. Will you consider…doing something about that, or busing for your people, if you’re…? You have a lot of people coming in. You’re not going to be able to accommodate them in the schools right now as it is. Wayne Arnold: Well, one of the things that we’re required to do is pay school impact fees, and the school district presumably takes that money and spends it on the school district where they need it. My kids grew up in the city of Naples, and they were in portable units at Lake Park Elementary School for their entire time. I think that’s just the nature of our school district. We’ve grown everywhere so much that we’re in temporary conditions for longer than we hope to be. Female Speaker 3: Lake Park is fine. It’s nice when you go there. It’s unbearably hot. Wayne Arnold: I’m not a school district expert, and I don’t think anybody in the room is, but we pay our school impact fees just like everybody else. I don’t know that any other developer has been doing an extraordinary thing. Some of the super-large projects – dedicated school sites, for instance, if there were a regional impact, but this doesn’t rise to that, because in essence, it will be ultimately a reduction in density if D.R. Horton closes on this site. Anybody else? Questions? Comments? Any issues we haven’t touched on? Female Speaker 2: I have a question that has nothing to do with you or this. That place out front that they’re building – all the single-family homes – what is it, “something of Manatee.” Female Speaker 3: Argyll. Female Speaker 2: Yes, Argyll Manatee. Have they started building yet? Wayne Arnold: They cleared the site, and they’re – Female Speaker 2: Yeah, but that was a while back. Wayne Arnold: They did. Yeah, they’re currently working – we actually met with some people who are looking to purchase – it’s a very large, national homebuilder who’s looking to develop home sites there. Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 14 Female Speaker 3: It’s all grown back. Female Speaker 2: Hmm? Female Speaker 3: It’s all grown back. Female Speaker 2: I know. Female Speaker 3: I ride my bike in there. Female Speaker 2: Yeah, so that’s why I was wondering. You know, I don’t know if they’re building or not, and then, if somebody else buys it, would they be building apartment buildings to make it even more dense or, uh, would – you know, I have no idea what they’re doing. Wayne Everett: I just wanted to say one more thing because it seems like there’s a lot of concern over the schools, and – Female Speaker 2: And density. Wayne Everett: – and of course, well, we’re reducing the density, and our market research tells us that what we expect our buyer to be – of course, we can’t discriminate, nor would we – we expect our buyer to be more active adults who would not have school-age children. That’s sort of the demographic that’s been purchasing the similar twin-villa product in Napes Reserve. I just wanted to throw that out. Again, we can’t guarantee that, but that’s what our marketing tells us. Female Speaker 4: Just out of curiosity, are these one-bedroom, two-bedroom? I know you said 1,500 square feet. Wayne Everett: They’re mostly two-bedroom. Some have a den – a two-bedroom with a den. Female Speaker 3: Hypothetically, is there enough right of way on Manatee Road to do a two-lane? Wayne Everett: To do a two-lane? Female Speaker 3: Mm-hmm, to expand Manatee Road. Wayne Arnold: You mean to expand it from two to four lanes? Female Speaker 3: Yeah, that’s what I meant, sir. Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 15 Wayne Arnold: That, I…don’t know. Female Speaker 3: Not enough right away, or don’t know? Jim: No, they’d have to take right of way to do that because they’d have to create pond sites. I mean, they could physically fit the road in the right of way that’s there, but then they’d have to – for drainage, stormwater, and turn lanes, they’d have to take a lot of right of way. So, the answer to your question is no, it’s not set up to be four-lane. As far as I know, it’s not ever planned to be four-lane. Wayne Arnold: Anybody else? Y’all are quiet over there. Any questions? Okay. Female Speaker 2: Will this be posted online? How will we get the documentation as you move further along in this project? Wayne Arnold: Good question. Female Speaker 2: How will we get that? Wayne Arnold: Sharon has a card out front that’s got our website on it. We upload all our information on our planning website, and you can view anything we have that’s current with what we give to the county, so everything we give to the county, you can see. And then, we’re going to have a planning commission hearing that will be a noticed meeting, and we also have a board of county commissioners hearing following that. Female Speaker 2: So, it won’t even be heard in front of the county commission, right? Until the fall? Wayne Arnold: Probably in the early fall. We don’t have hearing dates scheduled yet, but we’re in for re-review on our second review, and that takes 30 days, so call that sometime in July. If we’re deemed sufficient, then we would go to hearing probably to the planning commission in August or September, and then to the board a little bit after that – so, likely September or October to the board of county commissioners. But, again, obviously, the signs will be posted when we absolutely know our hearing dates. Those will go up on the site. And then, Sharon, I’m not sure. Do we post the hearing dates on our website as well? We do? Okay. Female Speaker 2: And, we will get the announcements through the email? Nancy: You’ll get them – you’ll get – did you get the paper copy? Enbrook RPUD PL20180002899 June 5 2019 NIM 16 Female Speaker 2: Yeah, I get – I’m signed up to get the county emails on all the NIMs and other stuff. Wayne Arnold: Anyone who would like Sharon to put you on our mailing list so that we can send you updates, we’d be happy to. Just make sure that you – if you have email, please give us your email address, and Sharon will add you to our email, and we’ll make sure you get it. Nancy: Same here. I can add you to our email list as well. Female Speaker 2: I would write you and get the stuff anyway. Wayne Arnold: Okay. Well, thanks everybody. I appreciate you all coming out and taking the time to be here. [End of Audio] Duration: 32 minutes Petition PL20180002899 Enbrook Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) June 5, 2019 Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs FL 34134 (239) 947-1144 www.GradyMinor.com Project Information 2 Existing Zoning:RMF-16(8) Proposed Zoning:Enbrook Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) Project Acreage:65.88+/-acres Proposed Request:Rezone the property to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)to permit a maximum of 526 dwelling units of varying types including single-family,two-family attached,townhome,and multi-family residential dwelling unit types.Residential amenities will be provided on-site for the use of residents of the RPUD. Location Map 3 Aerial Photograph 4 Proposed PUD Master Plan 5 Requested Deviation 1 6 Deviation 1 seeks relief from Section 6.06.01 N.,“Street System Requirements”,which requires a 60 foot right-of-way width for Local/Private roads to instead allow a 50 foot right-of-way width. Requested Deviations 2 and 3 7 Deviation 2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5.a,“On-premises Directional Signs”,which requires that each sign shall be setback a minimum of 10 feet from edge of the roadway paved surface or back of curb,to instead allow a setback of 5 feet from edge of roadway,paved surface or back of curb.This deviation excludes public roads. Deviation 3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C.1.a and 5.03.02.C,“Fences and Walls”,Excluding Sound Walls,which requires fences or walls in a residential PUD to be 6 feet or less in height,to instead allow an 8-foot high wall on top of a 4-foot high berm along Manatee Road right-of-way. Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i,“Architectural and Site Design Standards”,which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road ,including all rights-of-way ,shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4.,D.10.,D.13.,D.15.,E,and F.Compliance shall be limited to the building façades facing the arterial or collector road to instead allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. Requested Deviation 3 Berm/Wall Exhibit 8 Requested Deviations 4, 5 and 6 9 Deviation 4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08.B.2.a.i and 5.05.08.B.2.c.i,“Architectural and Site Design Standards”,which requires where a proposed project site located within 150 to 300 feet of an arterial or collector road ,including all rights-of-way ,shall be required to comply with LDC sections 5.05.08 D.4.,D.10.,D.13.,D.15.,E,and F.Compliance shall be limited to the building façades facing the arterial or collector road to instead allow the buildings behind a wall to not be subject to this LDC requirement. Deviation 5 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.05.04.G,“Parking Space Requirements”,which requires where small-scale recreation facilities are accessory to a single-family or multifamily project and intended only for the residents of that project,exclusive of golf courses/clubhouses,the recreation facilities may be computed at 50 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are not within 300 feet of the recreation facilities and at 25 percent of normal requirements where the majority of the dwelling units are within 300 feet of the recreation facilities,to instead allow the parking space for the recreation facilities to be computed at 25 percent where the majority of dwelling units are within 500 feet of the recreation facilities. Deviation 6 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.6.b.,“On-premises Sign Within Residential Districts”, which permits two ground signs at a maximum height of 8 feet with a sign face area not to exceed 64 square feet,to instead allow two signs of up to 80 square feet (per sign face)to be located along the Manatee Road frontage of the property on the project’s wall or as free standing monument signs and to exceed the maximum sign height of 8 feet for a maximum of 12 feet in height (8 foot high wall on a 4 foot high berm) measured from the adjacent roadway centerline elevation.If the sign is on the wall,the wall will be 10 feet from the Manatee Road right-of-way. Questions? 1 0