Loading...
CCPC Agenda 08/06/2020Collier County Planning Commission Page 1 Printed 7/29/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission AGENDA Board of County Commission Chambers Collier County Government Center 3299 Tamiami Trail East, 3rd Floor Naples, FL 34112 August 6, 2020 9: 00 AM EdwinFryer - Chairman Karen Homiak - Vice-Chair Karl Fry- Secretary Patrick Dearborn Paul Shea, Environmental Joseph Schmitt, Environmental Thomas Eastman, Collier County School Board Note: Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes on any item. Individuals selected to spe ak on behalf of an organization or group are encouraged and may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item if so recognized by the chairman. Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the CCPC agenda packets must submit said material a minimum of 10 days prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, written materials intended to be considered by the CCPC shall be submitted to the appropriate county staff a minimum of seven days prior to the public hearing. All material used in presentations before the CCPC will become a permanent part of the record and will be available for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners if applicable. Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the CCPC will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. August 2020 Collier County Planning Commission Page 2 Printed 7/29/2020 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call by Secretary 3. Addenda to the Agenda 4. Planning Commission Absences 5. Approval of Minutes A. June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes B. June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes 6. BCC Report - Recaps 7. Chairman's Report 8. Consent Agenda 9. Public Hearings A. Advertised 1. ***This Agenda Item was continued from April 2, 2020 CCPC Meeting to the August 6, 2020 CCPC Meeting***PL20160000221-A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Maps to add the Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict to the Estates-Commercial District, to allow uses permitted by right and conditional use in the General Commercial (C-4) zoning district with a total maximum intensity of 200,000 square feet of gross floor area, and furthermore recommending transmittal of the amendment to the Florida Department Of Economic Opportunity. The subject property is 20± acres and located on the west side of Immokalee Road, approximately one half mile north of Randall Boulevard, in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Transmittal Hearing) [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] August 2020 Collier County Planning Commission Page 3 Printed 7/29/2020 2. PL20180002804-An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners amending Ordinance 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element to amend the Urban Mixed Use Activity Center #7 to allow up to 265 multi-family residential rental dwelling units in the Hammock Park Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development in addition to commercial development, and furthermore directing transmittal of the adoption amendment to the Florida Department Of Economic Opportunity. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard, in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 19.13± acres. [PL20180002804] Transmittal Hearing (Companion to PL20180002813) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] 3. MPUD-PL20180002813-An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 07-30, the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), to allow up to 265 multi-family rental dwelling units plus 148,500 square feet of commercial development as an alternative to 160,000 square feet of retail and office currently allowed; by changing the name of the CPUD from Hammock Park Commerce Centre to the Hammock Park Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD); by revising the development standards; by amending the Master Plan and revising developer commitments. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 19.13± acres; and by providing an effective date. (Companion to PL20180002804) [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner] 4. PL20190002017-An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series by changing the designation of property from the Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Subdistrict and the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Sending Lands to the Urban Designation, Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center #9 to allow construction of commercial and industrial development. The subject property is located on the North side of Beck Boulevard near the terminus of Beck Boulevard in Sections 35 and 36, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, and Sections 1 and 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 3.43 acres; and furthermore, recommending Transmittal of the Adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, providing for severability and providing for an effective date. (Companion to PL20190002018) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] August 2020 Collier County Planning Commission Page 4 Printed 7/29/2020 5. PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established 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 an Agricultural (A) zoning district and an Agricultural zoning district with a Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Sending Lands zoning overlay (A-RFMUD-Sending Lands) to an Industrial (I) zoning district for the property located on the north side of Beck Boulevard near the terminus of Beck Boulevard in Sections 35 and 36, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, and Sections 1 and 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 3.43 acres; providing for partial repeal of Ordinance No. 92-56, a conditional use for a telecommunication tower, and by providing an effective date.(Companion to PL20190002017) [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner] 6. PL20190002553-A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission for an insubstantial change to Ordinance Number 16-03, the Rockedge Planned Unit Development by revising the Master Plan to relocate and reconfigure the recreational area tract, the residential tract, the water management lake tracts, the internal roadway network, and the future bicycle and pedestrian interconnection; and by removing a development standard related to providing a wall on the southern boundary of the recreational tract. The property is located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Sabal Palm Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 106.44+/- acres. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner] B. Noticed 10. New Business 11. Old Business 12. Public Comment 13. Adjourn 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.2 Item Summary: PL20180002804-An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners amending Ordinance 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element to amend the Urban Mixed Use Activity Center #7 to allow up to 265 multi-family residential rental dwelling units in the Hammock Park Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development in addition to commercial development, and furthermore directin g transmittal of the adoption amendment to the Florida Department Of Economic Opportunity. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard, in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 19.13± acres. [PL20180002804] Transmittal Hearing (Companion to PL20180002813) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Senior – Zoning Name: Marcia R Kendall 07/20/2020 9:48 AM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 07/20/2020 9:48 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Sue Faulkner Additional Reviewer Completed 07/20/2020 10:46 AM Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 07/20/2020 12:33 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 07/20/2020 1:12 PM Zoning Anita Jenkins Additional Reviewer Completed 07/20/2020 4:51 PM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 07/21/2020 9:48 AM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/22/2020 4:46 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 5.A Packet Pg. 5 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, June 11, 2020 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Karen Homiak, Acting Chairman Mark Strain (remotely) Edwin Fryer Karl Fry (remotely) Joe Schmitt (not present for roll call) Paul Shea ABSENT: Patrick Dearborn Tom Eastman, Collier County School Board Representative ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney Sally Ashkar, Assistant County Attorney June 11, 2020 Page 1 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) P R O C E E D I N G S MR. BELLOWS: You have a live mic. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Good morning, everyone. This is the June 11th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. Would you all please rise for Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) THE COURT REPORTER: I can't hear you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Would you like to give roll call? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I would be happy to. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh. Can you hear me now? THE COURT REPORTER: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'm going to call the role in the same order that I usually do even though it's a little different today. Mr. Eastman. (No response.) COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Shea? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Here? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Fry? COMMISSIONER FRY: Here. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'm here. Chairman Strain? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: I'm out in the netherworld somewhere. COMMISSIONER FRYER: All right. Good. Vice Chairman Homiak? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Here. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Schmitt? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mr. Dearborn? (No response.) COMMISSIONER FRYER: I wasn't counting. What kind of a -- do we have a quorum? One, two, three, four -- yeah, we have a quorum of five? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No, four is our quorum, so we have a quorum. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yeah, but I'm trying to let Karen know how many -- MR. KLATZKOW: Five. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Five. I'm sure you're right. We have a quorum of five, Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: So Patrick -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Patrick is not here and Joe is not here. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Is Patrick going to be on virtual or -- MR. BELLOWS: I talked to Patrick yesterday, and he indicated he was going to participate. He would be one of the virtual participants. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Okay. Addenda to the agenda. We have to end the meeting by 2:00 because there's a -- someone else is using the room later on. So if we don't get through everything, then it will just be scheduled for the next meeting, but I don't see that we would want to take a lunch. Would you -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Would you want to take a break at 12:00 and -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Based upon my expectation of our agenda, I would think we could get done by 1:00, if not sooner. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. June 11, 2020 Page 2 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRYER: That would be my preference as well. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Break at 10:30 and then at 12:00 for 15 minutes. Would that be all right with you? Can you hear me? So it that a plan? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Can I add -- could I make some suggestions that add to the agenda? This is Mark. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: To add to the agenda? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah. What? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Well, under new business, I'd like to add elections of officers, and if -- and I'd like to add an item to discuss the fees that Paul Shea was charged for being a Planning Commission member, if he still was charged those. In the beginning it was controversial, and it dropped out of sight, and I'm not sure he got reimbursed or it got straightened out. Is that okay with the rest of you? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mark, I don't understand what you just said. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. I'd like to add two items under new business. Number one, election of officers. I'm stepping down as chairman. It's not going to work with me being chairman not attending the meetings, and I won't be attending the meetings until the social distancing and mask issues are resolved, and that isn't going to happen between now and the end of year, so I'm going to be attending virtually, and I can't run a meeting this way, and I don't think it's fair for the rest of you for me to do. So that's what I'd like to do is -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Well, you're not -- I'm sorry. But you're not going to be -- I'm running the meetings from here. Somebody has to be in the room. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Right. So I'm suggesting we -- I don't -- I'm chairman. You're vice chair. Why don't we just do an election and elect a new chairman, and I haven't got to -- because I'm dealing still with staff on agendas and things like that, and it's not -- I shouldn't be doing that. Whoever's sitting in that room ought to be doing that. So I'm suggesting I'd like to step down as chairman and let someone else take over going forward, and why don't we just do an election of officers to get that accomplished? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Well, I think we should wait till Tuesday when all the board members are aware of it. Anybody else? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. What's Tuesday? Okay. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I understood your first point, but I didn't understand the second point that you made, Mark. You had two new -- COMMISSIONER STRAIN: When Paul Shea was -- yeah. When Paul Shea was in process to become a Planning Commission member, he was told he had to do a background check and he had to pay $40 for it. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Oh, oh, okay. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: And I had called staff and said, why are we charging a Planning Commission member something like this when he's a volunteer? It isn't right. And originally there was going to be an effort to resolve it and pay it out of Developmental Services. I never got a -- then Paul, of course, got more involved, and I never heard after that if it got resolved. Out of fairness to him, I think it should be. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. BELLOWS: For the record, this is Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager. I will follow up with Paul and inform the Planning Commission if there were fees charged. I don't believe, at the end, they were charged. But we will resolve that and report back at a later date. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. That's all I was asking is just to get it resolved so Paul gets reimbursed if he had to pay it out of pocket, so... MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, I will report back -- COMMISSIONER STRAIN: That needs to be added to the agenda. MR. BELLOWS: I'll report back at the next meeting. June 11, 2020 Page 3 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Well, then the only thing that needs to be added to the agenda, then, is the elections question that I have, and, Karen, I understand your position. I don't know if everybody feels the same way, but at least I'd like to get it resolved, because it's not going to work the way it's set up right now. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: The next meeting is Tuesday. I'd rather -- I think we should have it on the agenda and -- COMMISSIONER FRY: This is Commissioner Fry. I agree with Commissioner Homiak. It could wait until Tuesday. We could all give it some thought. MR. BELLOWS: Again, for the record, we could put that on the agenda for the next Tuesday meeting. (Commissioner Schmitt is now present in the boardroom.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: That would be great. Is that all right with everybody? COMMISSIONER FRYER: It's okay by me. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: That's fine. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Election of officers for next meeting because Mark's stepping down as chair because he's not -- he won't be attending. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: And, Ray, for staff to have agenda reviews and things like that and stuff I've been doing, go to Karen now until the election next Tuesday is resolved. So whatever Tuesday's needs to be done, she should be doing it, not me. MR. BELLOWS: Understood. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: The packet's already out for next week, so... MR. BELLOWS: We can do addenda to the agenda. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: I'm just saying -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Stepping down in total or just as chair? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: No, no, chair. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Since we can't discuss these things outside of a public meeting, awkward as it may be, I'd nonetheless like to know whether you would be interested in becoming chair. MR. KLATZKOW: Aren't we putting it on -- this is regular. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: It's going to be on the agenda for next time. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yeah. But we're going to be -- we're going to be thinking about it next time. I'd just like to know what your intentions might be. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh, I don't know. I was thinking you. I have to think about it. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Well, that's the direction I was going, too, Karen. Ned's pretty much stepped to the plate on all this stuff. He shows up for every meeting. He's there all the time, and he's certainly got the knowledge to do it. So, I mean, that's why I thought it would have been a simple thing to resolve today. MR. BELLOWS: Again, for the record, can we just save this for the next Tuesday meeting? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes, please. So we'll just put it on the agenda. COMMISSIONER FRYER: The only reason I mention that is because we're going to be thinking about it, and that was something that would be first and foremost in my mind is what Karen had wanted. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, understood. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. But, of course, yeah, next Tuesday's fine. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. And Planning Commission absences. Next meeting is Tuesday, the 16th. Will anybody not be able to attend -- June 11, 2020 Page 4 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll be here. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: -- either here or virtually? (No response.) MR. BELLOWS: Can we do a roll call. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. That's right. I have to have a roll call for everything I ask you. So, Mr. Shea? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'll be here. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll be here. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And I'll be here. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I plan on being here. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And, Mark, will -- COMMISSIONER STRAIN: I don't know. I had a commitment made. Because the 18th was supposed to be the regular meeting. It got bumped to the 16th. If I can break my commitment that starts on Monday, then -- and it was supposed to carry over into Tuesday, then I won't need to -- then I'll be there. If I can't, I'll have to do what I've got committed to do. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: I will be there Tuesday. In fact, I'd like to be there in person on Tuesday if there's room for me. Looking ahead, I will not be at either the July 16th or the August 6th meeting. Some kind of vacation plans yet to be determined. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Patrick, are you on there at all? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: No. Is his name up? No. MR. BELLOWS: I don't see him. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. We'll have a quorum for the -- there's no June 18th meeting. So -- and July 2nd. MR. BELLOWS: Correct, that's the next meeting after the Tuesday meeting. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mr. Shea, will you be here on July 2nd? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll either be here or here electronically. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I would be here. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Likewise as Ned, I'm not sure of my schedule, because I'm committed in several other endeavors, but I'll try and be here in person. If not, I'll be here electronically. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And, Mark. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: What date are you on? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: July 2nd. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: At this point I don't know why I wouldn't be, so, yes, I'll be tying in electronically. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And, Karl. COMMISSIONER FRY: I should be there in person. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Karl, we have room in the hallway, I think. COMMISSIONER FRY: Very good. As long as I'm close. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No, we have room. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. So we will have a meeting on July 2nd. And so July 16th? Mr. Shea? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Ned? June 11, 2020 Page 5 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRYER: Same answer as before, physically or electronically. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. And I'll be here. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Not sure. I don't know. Still looking at my schedule coming up. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Same answer as before for the remainder of the year. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Karl, you said no? COMMISSIONER FRY: July 16th I most likely will be on vacation. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. So we would still have a quorum then. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. August 6th. MR. BELLOWS: I don't think we have to go too much further. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: No? We're good. Well, you have them on here. I'm reading. So we're good -- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: -- to stop now. Okay. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Ray, I have a question. Is July 2nd a certainty? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, it is. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay, thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. There are no minutes to approve. And BCC recaps. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. On June 16th [sic], the Board of County Commissioners heard and approved the -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Probably a different date. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, it was a different date. It was just last Tuesday. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: The 9th? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. And the Board heard the ShadowWood PUD amendment. That was approved 5-0 subject to the Planning Commission recommendation and an additional condition to eliminate one of the access points into Tract E, which was Atkins. That access point was eliminated. The SRA for Hyde Park was also heard by the Board. That was approved 4-1 subject to Planning Commission recommendation other than -- there were two modifications. The applicant eliminated the lifestyle sign deviation or the attempt to reclassify it as a real estate sign. And then they also approved it without the staff recommendations for the affordable housing provisions that were noted as conditions of approval. And that's all that was heard last Tuesday. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh, okay. Okay. Chairman's report, I don't have one. There's nothing on the consent agenda. Ray, you were going to review the public hearing procedures or -- MR. BELLOWS: No, we're fine. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: You're -- MR. BELLOWS: Yes. Now the first item. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: ***Okay. So the first item would be PDI-PL20190000740, Falling Waters. Would everybody that wants to speak on this item please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Disclosures. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No disclosures on this one. But first, when I was part of staff -- this has a long history when I was the Community Development Administrator, so I'm well aware of the history, but I'm going to ask some questions about that. But other than that, I have no ex parte disclosures. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I have nothing. June 11, 2020 Page 6 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Nothing ex parte, just materials from staff. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Nothing. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: I don't recall any. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Staff materials only. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Go ahead. You can go. MR. GALLANDER: Thank you, Madam Chair. My name is Ken Gallander. I'm on -- here on behalf of Mr. Patrick Vanasse who was originally going to be here, but I am in his stead. I'm here on behalf of the owner/applicant Falling Waters Beach Resort Master Association. I do have a brief presentation for you, so I'll proceed with that. The subject property is just east/northeast of the intersection of U.S. 41/Collier Boulevard, and it was a Planned Unit Development that was rezoned to a PUD in 2001 per the ordinance 01-68. It was originally approved for a variety of commercial and multifamily uses. Now, specific to this request, I want to identify that there's existing access points. The primary is off of Collier Boulevard, and there is a restricted emergency access only to U.S. 41, and that's on Mondago Lane. This is the project location map. I don't know if you can see this is the Mondago Lane access point, and the other access point is off Collier Boulevard. So to provide -- to move on, simply the request is to amend the Falling Waters Beach Resort PUD to convert the existing restricted access onto U.S. 41 via Mondago Lane from emergency access only to an emergency access only for ingress and then right-out only for egress. This is the amended master plan identifying the areas that have been amended, the right-out only egress to U.S. 41, right-out only, and then the emergency access only ingress from U.S. 41. Additionally, we needed to amend the language within the ordinance, specifically adding Conditions 4 and 5, ingress from U.S. 41 shall be emergency access only. Number 5, egress to U.S. 41 shall only allow the right-out turning movement. The basis for the request: Over the last, obviously, almost two decades, significant traffic impacts on Collier Boulevard has really impacted the residents and guests' ability to easily access and get out of the development. And so through this, the opportunity to utilize the Mondago Lane egress was identified. We had a neighborhood information meeting. There was no opposition voiced at the meeting. We have satisfied the insubstantial change evaluation criteria. Professional opinion, we are consistent with Growth Management Plan and the LDC. We, obviously, concur with the staff report analysis and recommendation of approval to the Planning Commission. So we respectfully request a motion of approval and be happy to answer any questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I'm going to ask each one of you if you have questions. So, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I'm going to have questions of staff, because I probably -- maybe Mike Sawyer, because I'm just curious about the history of this interconnect. Maybe you know. MR. GALLANDER: I don't know the history behind it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Because when this was first zoned, it was prohibited access even though there was an indication by the plat that it could be. And I'm just curious as to why it wasn't approved years ago as a -- either right-in, right-out, and now it appears that staff is moving forward to allow it when, in fact, it didn't. I believe there was -- it was because of the distance to the intersection. There was some other prohibiting factor, and I don't know if staff has the history of that, but that's what I'm curious of. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Well, we'll wait till the staff. June 11, 2020 Page 7 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, wait till staff. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I don't have any questions of you. Ned. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Just a procedural one. It's my understanding that this would have been a HEX matter. MR. GALLANDER: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRYER: And that the action that we take is not recommendatory to the BCC. It's the action that would be final unless somebody wanted to appeal to the BCC; is that correct? MR. BELLOWS: That is correct. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. That's the only question I had. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'm new, so I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask the question. But how do you ensure that it's only used for emergency in and residential out? The only reason I say that is I was out there, and the gate was constantly wide open. Cars were coming in and going out both directions. So the -- I'm not sure what the purpose is of this. MR. GALLANDER: In terms of the management of the gate, that would be the responsibility of the association. During the NIM they identified that they will ensure that that gate is utilized as appropriate. So we'll have to bring that up with the association. I'll be happy to -- but per their statements at the NIM, that gate is to remain closed and then, for access for emergency vehicles, they have the appropriate means to enter in. MR. KLATZKOW: And we're amending the PUD to reflect that, correct? MR. GALLANDER: Yes. MR. KLATZKOW: So that any violation would be a code violation. That's how we would enforce it. COMMISSIONER FRYER: So there's a gate that is wide up right now? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Well, it was the one time that I went there, and I saw vehicles coming in, making a right turn in and making the right turn out as well -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: So -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: -- routinely. COMMISSIONER FRYER: So the gate will open as a result of sensing a car on the inside or being remote controlled by an emergency vehicle from the outside? MR. GALLANDER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question, then. What's the time frame for making sure that happens after the approval? Are you going to wait until this gets approved by the Board before corrective action is taken? MR. BELLOWS: Joe, for the record, Ray Bellows. The Planning Commission is authorized to approve an insubstantial change. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, okay, for this one, because it's not going to hearing examiner. All right. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No, no comments. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And, Karl, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER FRY: I've got a clarification, Ken, just to make sure I understand completely. I'm looking at a satellite image of Beach Resort Boulevard, which is the ingress and egress point onto Collier Boulevard. So it appears that residents can easily take right out to go north on Collier, but if they want to go south to get down to U.S. 41, they go across, without a light, into a separated northbound road that then turns into a U-turn a little bit further up Collier Boulevard; is that accurate? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes. MR. GALLANDER: That's correct, and that's part of the concerns is the conflict points of an June 11, 2020 Page 8 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) unsignalized -- and the movements. We have known of some accidents at this intersection. A lot of them did indicate during the NIM that they do turn right to make the U-turn to go south, and this just add another opportunity for the residents to utilize an access point. COMMISSIONER FRY: But you have a lot of traffic that is going across three lanes of traffic in order to go north in order to go south. MR. GALLANDER: Can you repeat that? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes, that's right. COMMISSIONER FRY: A lot of traffic crossing (unintelligible) lanes of northbound Collier Boulevard to get -- in an effort to eventually go south. MR. GALLANDER: That's correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: So (unintelligible) of this change would mitigate/reduce that risk of accidents at that intersection. MR. GALLANDER: That is correct, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. If we could have the staff report now? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. Mr. Finn is on his way. MR. FINN: Yes, hello. For the record, I'm Tim Finn, principal planner. The project is compliant with the GMP and the rezoning criteria within the LDC; therefore, staff recommends approval. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Joe, you had a question of staff? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I don't know if Mike Sawyer has the history on this, because I was just curious, when this was first approved, this was prohibited from an entry point and it was due, I believe, to the proximity of the intersection and also the development, I guess, to the south, the shopping center, whatever was going in at that time, and now we're in a position where we're going to approve it. So do you have any -- are you aware of the history? MR. SAWYER: For the record, Mike Sawyer, Transportation Planning. I briefly checked with Trinity also. Obviously, neither one of us were in transportation planning when this was originally approved; however, 41, you know, is the jurisdiction of FDOT -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. SAWYER: -- Number 1. Number 2, this was at a time when 41 wasn't in its current state. It was probably more likely just a two-lane road at that time. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, you're probably -- yep. MR. SAWYER: So there would have been concerns from FDOT for having this open to the public. Certainly having it as an emergency exit or -- exit or ingress certainly wouldn't have been a problem for them for emergency purposes. What we're looking at now is FDOT's taken a second look now because of the improvements that have been made, and the issue is the trips from the development are already on the system, and what this will likely do is make those trips easier to manage. You'll have another ingress point for the residents to get out onto 41. There will not be as many conflicts just using the one single access. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right, okay. Makes sense. And I believe you're right, because that was prior to the widening of 41 all the way down almost to the Fiddler's Creek entrance there. MR. SAWYER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So, yeah, that probably was only maybe a four-lane intersection at that time. MR. SAWYER: At best, quite honestly. And, you know, I was in Zoning when this was, you know, originally discussed a couple of different times. And that's my recollection. But, again, I wasn't in Transportation Planning. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Your fault. MR. SAWYER: Yes, indeed. It always is, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right, thanks. June 11, 2020 Page 9 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. SAWYER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I have no questions. Ned, do you have questions of staff? COMMISSIONER FRYER: No, ma'am. Paul? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark, do you have questions of staff? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl, do you? COMMISSIONER FRY: One quickie. It looks like if you turn right from Mondago Lane onto Tamiami Trail, you're not turning into a merge lane or a ramp-up speed lane. You're turning right into a full-speed lane; is that correct? MR. GALLANDER: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. And then there's a turn lane just beyond that intersection that pulls into the next egress point off of 41. Are there any safety concerns traffic-size in terms of people making that right turn into full-speed traffic with a turn lane that's just where people are trying to cross and get into that turn lane just past that intersection? Are there any safety concerns among staff? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. We have reviewed this with Transportation, and there was no concerns raised by Transportation, and if you want further, we can have Mike come back. Mike's coming back. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. MR. SAWYER: Again, for the record, Mike Sawyer, Transportation Planning. Honestly, in situations like this, it's actually safer to have traffic come out at a 90-degree angle as opposed to an acceleration lane, only because you've got better visibility looking out towards where the traffic is actually coming from. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. Appreciate that. MR. SAWYER: Sure. No problem. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Are there any public speakers on this item? MR. BELLOWS: No registered speakers on this item. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: So no virtual? Is there anybody in here that wanted to speak? I thought -- did you? I thought -- I saw you stand up and get sworn in, so I thought maybe you -- MR. BELLOWS: You can -- either one. MR. BEYRENT: For the record, I'm Garret FX Beyrent. I actually purchased that property for my development corporation many years ago. I purchased it from the Lely Corporation. It was very complicated. And Joe mentioned that he wanted to know the history of the property. It's even -- it would be -- I couldn't do it in three minutes, okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well aware of the -- MR. BEYRENT: The whole thing was very convoluted. It was in the middle of the change to commercial nodes, access. And the only reason I'm here is because I was concerned about the safety issue, because we saw that coming. Nobody realized all the traffic lanes that are out there now coming off of Marco Island. We were only a two-lane road going into Falling Waters Beach Resort. And long and short is, I purchased that other odd piece of property there specifically as another alternate access for safety reasons, because the -- I was -- at that time, Norm Feder was the transportation director, and he was working with Nick Casalanguida, and I was working with George Archibald, and the bottom line is, nobody stays in one place very long. And that's -- basically, it's a safety issue. Those people in that subdivision are all different ages. They have to go out and in, and you gut out to that intersection, and there's like seven lanes across in one direction. It's confusing because it's a lot larger than we ever anticipated it would be. So if it's a safety issue, that's why I was here. I'm concerned about the people getting in and out of the subdivision. Emergency ambulances have got to get in there and get the people out to the hospital down the road, and that's really what I was only interested in is making sure that the project we put June 11, 2020 Page 10 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) together many years ago is still going to be a safe place for people to live. And you need emergency access wherever you can get it, and that's why that oddball five acres was added on the map there. There's no map there. And also, I'm learning how to do this technology thing. I was supposed to be in court, apparently, last week, but it was one of those virtual courtrooms, and I wasn't there. I was getting this mask on, getting some cuts off of my face for Agent Orange. So thank you very much, and I hope I did something. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just curious about the developer who was developing some of the lots directly to the south. Mario owned -- was the developer? MR. BEYRENT: The tractor guy. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Before that, though. MR. BEYRENT: We're trying to work with everything, because it's always going to be an issue of access related to safety, and the safety -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. But there was no issue with the developer then, which is now Tractor -- MR. BEYRENT: No, not that time. My issue was I had an environmental issue. That's why whatever the name of the road is now -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. BEYRENT: -- that was actually a swamp area, and I was having environmental battles figuring out where I could put it to access the people in and out safely without going through a hard -- it's very hard wetland in there. That was the issue. Okay. Is that pretty much it? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yep. MR. BEYRENT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I have a resolution at the appropriate time, or motion. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: It's time. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. I move approval of this PUDI, 20190000740. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I would like to add to that, though, that we impose a time frame for the mechanisms to be put in place by the developer. What I don't want is a continuation of just an open gate for the next year. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll accept that. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So I have no idea what time frame to impose upon it, though, but if the petitioner wants to make a recommendation of when they think they would be able to meet the requirements. I know of another PUD that we allowed for emergency access, and it was -- it's now almost a year and a half later and nothing has been done. Right off of 41. Same thing, so... COMMISSIONER FRYER: I have a suggestion. MR. GALLANDER: I can't speak exactly. I know that they are under the times, too, with contractors trying to get -- they want to have sensors put in. And so, unfortunately, I'm at a little conundrum to know exact points of time. But I'm more than welcome to -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I think Commissioner Schmitt's point is well taken. I think a way of ensuring that this gets done with -- without unnecessary delay would be to say that the gate should be closed immediately and not open until it has been set up with the ingress and egress provisions in the application. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, my only concern there is a safety access, because the emergency vehicles would have a clicker of some sort to bypass a gate. And -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Do they not have it now? Is that why the gate -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I don't know. I don't think they would. Do they have emergency access now? MR. GALLANDER: That's how they get in, yes. They can -- June 11, 2020 Page 11 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So it can be opened automatically. Okay. That answers that question. I think a period of 90 days would be more than sufficient. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Would you rather do it that way or just ask that it closed for egress purposes until -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Either way, that's fine. I think that's probably the preferable solution. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Then, Madam Chair, that's my motion, that it be closed for egress purposes until it can be set up -- until the gate can be closed at all times. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. And you were -- did you second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I'm going to ask each -- COMMISSIONER FRY: Closed for egress purposes or ingress purposes? COMMISSIONER FRYER: No, ingress is only going to be emergency vehicles because the gate's going to be closed, and only fire apparatus and EMS apparatus and police vehicles will have the clicker. MR. GALLANDER: Able to gain -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: So the residents will benefit as soon as the thing's established, and that should be an incentive for the residents to get it established. MR. GALLANDER: So just to clarify -- COMMISSIONER FRY: And by "established" do you mean a sensor that opens the gate when somebody's trying to leave? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: And that is not already in place? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Well, all we know right now is that the gate, when Commissioner Shea drove by, was open, and that's not a situation that we want. COMMISSIONER FRY: Ken, do we know if the gate does already have a sensor so it could be closed now and already be fully operational according to what has been proposed? MR. GALLANDER: My understanding is it should be functioning as it was originally intended. So it is -- egress out should not be a utilized function at this time. And what the intent is is to provide the proper devices, once this is approved, to be able to do that. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. MR. GALLANDER: So, I mean, we have code enforcement procedures, as the County Attorney mentioned. The intent is to create a safe opportunity for the residents and guests to leave the property. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Well, the motion's been made and seconded. I'm going to ask each one -- each commissioner to say either yes or no if you approve this motion. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I approve. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And it's a "yes" for me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. It passes unanimously. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I want to check and see if Patrick's on the line, because I thought Patrick was trying to -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Well, his name's not up there, so... COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: He was trying to link in. I think they were trying to give him June 11, 2020 Page 12 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) instructions on how to do it. No? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Well, he's not there yet. MR. BELLOWS: We'll see if we can work with him, but at the present he's not online. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: ***Okay. So the next item on the agenda is 7-Foodmart. It's CPUD PL20190000683 and -- oh, they are. Hi. We heard this the last meeting in March, so I'm -- MS. HARRELSON: No. MR. BELLOWS: Madam Chair, we need to be sworn in, too. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh. Anybody wishing to speak on this item, could you please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Disclosures. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No, none. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I exchanged email, I think last -- it's been so long. I'm pretty sure I did with you. MS. HARRELSON: February. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Recently, just materials from staff. Frankly, I can't recall back in March. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I know. Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just materials from staff. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark, disclosures? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. I'm trying to figure out how to give you a disclosure, because I don't find this on my packet that was downloaded. The second item on the packet is for an NUA for 92nd Avenue North. Where was this one? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: This is 7-Foodmart. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Well, I know what it is, but I don't have any information on it, so I don't even know what to tell you. I'm trying to figure out -- I'll give you disclosure. I didn't even -- I haven't -- it's not on -- it's not in the packet. The second thing in my packet it says 92nd Avenue North NUA -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. BELLOWS: For the record, this is Ray Bellows. I believe you may have received the packet from an earlier meeting where this was continued from. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah, that would -- that would -- that's where I got my thing from March. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: The packet for when? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: March 19. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Oh, we were supposed to drag that forward from two or three months ago? Oh, well, okay. I'll just go back and pull that up. Okay. I don't -- I wouldn't have any disclosures that I can recall at this time. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Staff materials and conference call with Jessica Harrelson of Davidson Engineering on March 4th and one other participant, but I can't remember the name, on her team. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Ms. Harrelson, did you and I speak? MS. HARRELSON: Yes, we did over the phone. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Then that disclosure. June 11, 2020 Page 13 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Go ahead. I'm sorry. MS. HARRELSON: Good morning. I'm Jessica Harrelson, certified planner with Davidson Engineering here representing the applicants in the 7-Foodmart PUD rezone. I have a brief presentation that I'll run through and then take questions. 7-Foodmart is an existing PUD, and it's located on the east side of Santa Barbara Boulevard just north of Golden Gate Parkway. The existing PUD is just over one-acre in size. The key purpose of the rezone that has been submitted is the request to add 1.09 acres to the 7-Foodmart PUD. This will allow a proposed building expansion and reconfiguration and expansion of the existing parking lot. We are requesting to increase the maximum square feet of gross floor area from 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet. The hatched area here defines the existing PUD boundary. The unhatched areas are the three lots that are being added to the PUD. They are currently zoned RMF-12 and are located within the Santa Barbara commercial overlay district. The intent of this overlay is to provide commercial development within the subject area. Additional changes to the PUD include updating the minimum building setback along the alley -- along the east for the cooler addition only from 15 feet to 12.2 feet. You can see the cooler addition highlighted here in yellow. We are retaining Deviations 1 through 4 from the existing PUD. Deviation No. 5 is being requested to allow a total of 16 parking spaces along the alley for public use. The LDC currently restricts and allows a maximum of 10 spaces to be accessed from the alley for the exclusive use of employees and services vehicles. This will open to the public. Parking for this site is very problematic, so this will just help solve some issues here. Deviation No. 6 has been added requesting to allow a 12-and-a-half-foot encroachment within the 15-foot Type B buffer along the alley. A compensating landscape area will be provided along the same buffer so the required plantings will still be required or provided. This deviation will allow for the cooler addition to remain in its existing location. We have updated the required tree preservation on the site. There's now eight trees that are required to be preserved. We are also requesting to retain the maximum 262 p.m. peak-hour two-way trips within the updated PUD. The previous traffic study that was prepared utilized the ninth edition ITE Manual and land-use code specialty retail center. That land-use code was eliminated within the updated ITE manual. And through coordination with staff, we're using land-use code supermarket, which was deemed most appropriate. And, as you can see, utilizing supermarket at 15,000 square feet generates 189 p.m. peak-hour two-way trips, which is less than what's in the existing PUD. The traffic consultant prepared a memo containing an updated concurrency analysis using the 2019 AUIR. It concludes there is sufficient capacity to support the proposed expansion on the roadway, and he is here today if you have any specific traffic-related questions. We have updated Transportation Commitment No. 1 by requiring a loading space be constructed to accommodate full-size delivery trucks. Typically, only box-size trucks are making deliveries to the site, roughly about 26 feet in length. But on occasion larger trucks are making deliveries. So we simply want to make needed site improvements to keep those larger trucks off the alley when unloading. A miscellaneous developer commitment has been added at the request of staff. Due to the overlapping drainage easement within the 10-foot-wide landscape buffer along Santa Barbara, there could be no vehicular overhang or encroachment. A stormwater commitment has been added at the request of staff also. This just states that any stormwater improvements or updates will be routed or relocated as necessary within new or existing drainage easements. We have added the standard PUD monitoring language. And the PUD master plan has also been updated to address the text changes we've made. We've also added a northbound right-turn lane, which is now warranted for construction. We've extended the sidewalk, relocated water management and the drain field, one additional access into the site from the June 11, 2020 Page 14 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) alley, and then one direct access into the loading bay from the alley. The NIM was held on January 23rd, and there was only one attendee that came. He expressed some issues about delivery trucks running over some grass and some fruit trees. We have coordinated with him. The applicants have replaced the grass, fruit trees, and they've also installed metal reflectors to keep those trucks from continuing to drive on the property. This is a picture that was taken right after the NIM was held just to show you the damage to the grass. This is facing north in the alley. I've coordinated with that property owner back in March and again at the end of May. He's happy, no more issues, and everything's good there. And that concludes my presentation. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Any questions? Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have none. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Just a couple. First of all, there's a refrigeration area that is going to be in about the center of the structure; is that correct, against the alley? MR. HARRISON: I'll show you. It's right behind the building. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yeah. My question is is whether that will generate more noise than is presently experienced at that point. MS. HARRELSON: No. The cooler is about -- no louder than an air conditioning unit, and, actually, the traffic is louder. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. And my second and I believe last question has to do with, again, the alley, and having tractor trailers turning in there. I understand you're putting a mirror in, which should be helpful, but probably -- I mean, it's possible that this could happen again and again and again. And my first thought was why not put a hard barrier in there? MS. HARRELSON: I don't believe the property owner would -- wanted that. He specifically requested the metal reflectors. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. That's all I have. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul, any questions? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yeah, about your buffers, your Deviation No. 2. The Type B buffer exclusive of a 6-foot-high hedge where residential zoning occurs in the north and south perimeter boundaries of the subject property. There are building -- there are people living on those sections now? That's a question. I mean, are there occupied residential facilities on the north and south property lines? MS. HARRELSON: Yes. The new PUD boundary, is that what we're referring to? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. MS. HARRELSON: Yes, there are people residing in those homes. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. So instead of a masonry wall, which would provide them some noise attenuation or visual until the hedge gets built or filled in by opacity, how are you going to protect their compatibility issues that they would have with the additional activity on this commercial site while they're still legally allowed to have residential there and they occupy -- apparently occupy those units? MS. HARRELSON: Well, the deviation is existing now, and we haven't had any issues. I've coordinated with this property owner. He is aware. He came to the NIM, knows what we're doing. Notices went out. Nobody had any complaints about what we're doing. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: The property owner who owns the -- are they rental units or owner occupied; do you know? MS. HARRELSON: I'm not sure. I know the gentleman that came to the NIM that we were coordinating with is the property owner here. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: On both sides? MS. HARRELSON: No, the corner of 22nd and Santa Barbara. June 11, 2020 Page 15 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. What about the other side? MS. HARRELSON: No, I haven't heard from that property owner. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. I'm just going through my notes from back then. The loading space -- loading space to accommodate full-size tractor trailers? MS. HARRELSON: Right. There are, on occasion, larger -- COMMISSIONER STRAIN: How's that going to -- MS. HARRELSON: Sorry. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Larger tractor trailers? MS. HARRELSON: I'm sorry? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: They'd have to come in from one direction, and they'll back into it; is that how it works? MS. HARRELSON: We haven't gone through the full engineering design. We may make it parallel from the alley to accommodate those larger trucks. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: That won't take up any needed parking spaces that aren't already there; is that correct? Are there any parking spaces that have to be -- that are currently there that are going to be used for this loading area? MS. HARRELSON: Right. So I think you're looking at the four spaces on the very south end. Is that what you're referring to? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. MS. HARRELSON: We may convert that to a loading space when it goes to SDP permitting if we can't get the turning radius to work for the larger trucks into the loading bay behind the building that's shown on the plan now. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Since you've prefaced some of this is as a need because of -- I shouldn't say "a need." Previously said parking's been a challenge on the site. I think that was -- I don't know how you stated it. MS. HARRELSON: Right. THE WITNESS: Are you going to be looking to get any administrative parking reductions? MS. HARRELSON: No. We want to maximum parking on the site. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. So -- right. So, when you go through SDP, if all this additional square footage or any of the computations in taking out -- changing loading spaces creates a need for more parking, you're not going to come in for an administrative parking reduction then? MS. HARRELSON: No. No, sir. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: You wouldn't mind that as a stipulation, would you? MS. HARRELSON: No, I would not mind. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. That's what I needed to know. Thank you. That's all the questions I have. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER FRY: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Have the staff report, please. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. We have a virtual staff presentation. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And she needs to be sworn in? MS. GUNDLACH: That's correct. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. GUNDLACH: For the record, I'm Nancy Gundlach, principal planner with the Zoning Division, and staff is recommending approval of the 7-Mart petition as it is consistent with the Growth Management Plan and the Collier County Land Development Code. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for staff? Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have none. June 11, 2020 Page 16 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: No. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? Mark, do you have questions for staff? (No response.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: He's probably on mute. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Well, Karl, do you have questions for staff? COMMISSIONER FRY: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark, are you there? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I'm going to take that as a no. He's off? Okay. Okay. MR. BELLOWS: Well, we do seem to have an issue with losing a participant. Do we need to take a break to reconnect or -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Did he disconnect himself or -- just keep going? MR. BELLOWS: Just keep going. MR. KLATZKOW: Just keep going. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Do we have public speakers on this item? MR. BELLOWS: No registered speakers. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I'll have a resolution when the time is right. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. The public hearing -- whoop. Oh. Mark, do you have any questions for staff? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No. I didn't hear -- I couldn't -- I'm not going to ask them to repeat it. I keep getting cut off. You guys don't even know it, but it goes dead, and I've got to dial all the numbers. There's, like, four numbers to get back in. I didn't hear any of Nancy's thing. The only thing I wanted to ask is the buffer in lieu of the wall. If I'm not mistaken, in one year's time they've got to have opacity up to 80 percent; is that correct? MS. GUNDLACH: That's correct. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: So if a wall was there and it was built, opacity would be instantaneous. So for this period of time, the operation to the north and south with people living there would -- could probably count on a decent opacity up to six feet high but it probably could take up to a year, and that's all I'm just trying to understand. Okay. Thank you. That's all I've got, Karen. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Is everybody all set with the -- no questions, right? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Nothing? Okay. We can close the public hearing and entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I'd make a motion to approve with Chairman Strain's stipulation added. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: What stipulation is that? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'd ask him to restate it, please. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: That the applicant will not be applying for any administrative parking reductions for this project. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. So there's a motion and a second. I'm going to ask each one of you to say yes or no whether you approve or not. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Approve. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And it's a yes for me. June 11, 2020 Page 17 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. It passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay. The next item on the agenda is PL20190002862. There's a setback for a pool. Could everybody -- anybody who wishes to speak on this item, please rise and be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Disclosures. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No disclosures. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Nothing from me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Nothing except materials from staff. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Nothing except materials from staff. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Nothing that I recall other than the same. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Staff materials. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. MR. LOMBARDO: One moment. I need to locate my slide show. Is there a different folder? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, while we're waiting, I have a procedural question I'd like to ask, I guess, of the County Attorney. I assume this would have been a HEX matter? MR. KLATZKOW: I believe so, yes. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER FRYER: In that case, then, is our action final subject to BCC approval or we recommend -- MR. KLATZKOW: Your action's final. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you. MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. I just wanted to clarify, a nonconforming use alteration is similar to a variance in many ways, so you would be a recommending body in this case, and it goes to Board of Zoning Appeals for a final hearing. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you. MR. LOMBARDO: Good morning. My name is Zach Lombardo. I, along with Tony Pires, represent the Spevaceks, who are the owners and applicants for this nonconforming use application. What is leading to this is the enclosure of a lanai. Staff has determined that increases the habitable space of the unit and, therefore, nonconforming use application would need to be applied for because, as you'll see as we go through this, the setback closest to that enclosure is less than the amount currently allowed for by the zoning code. To give you a little bit of background, this is the location of the unit, and we're talking about the east side, which is the blue circle. That's where the enclosure happened. This is in Naples Park, specifically, in Unit No. 4. This is a 1988 structure. Here's -- and all of these things are excerpts from what has already been presented to you. So, for example, this is on Page 15 of Exhibit C that accompanied the staff report. This shows the enclosure of the lanai. As you can see, it doesn't change the dimensions of the structure, and it also does not change the roofline. Here is a recent survey that was done for this process. If we can get in a little closer here, what June 11, 2020 Page 18 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) we're talking about is this corner where it is actually 5.3 feet from the lot line. The actual setback requirements in this area are 7.5 feet currently. The structure, however, is a legal nonconformity. These lots were recorded in the 1950s, and the governing ordinance at the time when the structure was recorded that the -- allowed the setbacks to be five feet at the time. So we are well within that line. This was sent to and specifically addressed by the Building Department when it was approved. The setbacks were approved at five feet. The -- and then the drawing, the setbacks were again approved as permissible. The roofline was also submitted in the initial packet. Again, all of these documents are included in Exhibit C, which you received, and the building permit was issued and the CO was issued. The NUA factors -- this is under 9.03.00 or specifically 9.03.03.B. -- have all been per staff approved, so we can kind of run through those quickly. This is in the staff report. If you turn to Pages 5 and 6, every single one was met with approval. And the primary reason for the first couple of factors, the density is not increased. The roofline is not adjusted. It will not change the building footprint at all. And, in fact, in the later factors it's found that this -- because there's hurricane glass going into the lanai, would actually increase the resiliency of the structure and improve privacy for the surrounding neighbors because as an enclosed structure it will be quieter. It's comparable to the nearby homes in Naples Park. There's a good amount of redevelopment. This is not the structure. This is two doors down. Considerably larger structure than what we're talking about here. So if there's any questions, I can go into that further, but staff is recommending approval, and we concur with that. All the notice provisions were followed. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions? Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have none. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: It seems to me that the neighbors would, indeed, be glad to have this. It doesn't change the footprint at all, and it should make things quieter. Did you consult with -- looks like there's a neighbor to the east and then to the north. Did you talk to both of those? MR. LOMBARDO: Yes. And you have letters of no objection specifically from the neighbor to the east, and then there's a neighbor across the street to the south that has submitted a letter of no objection, and then during the notice period, no other letters were received. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. So a notice was sent to the owner to the north, and he didn't respond? MR. LOMBARDO: Yes. A notice was sent to all units within 500 feet -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yeah, I understand. Thank you. MR. LOMBARDO: -- but specifically have no objection. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul, any questions? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. And staff report, John? MR. KELLY: Good morning. John Kelly, senior planner. Just to correct the record, we did receive a letter of objection; however, it was withdrawn upon explanation of the project. So with that, we were able to establish that the structure was constructed in 1987. They exercised a provision of the then current zoning code to allow a five-foot setback, so that is factual. With that, staff reviewed the petition utilizing the criteria contained within Section 9.03.03.B.5 A June 11, 2020 Page 19 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) through F, and recommends to the Planning Commission that you forward NUA-PL20190002862 to the Board of Zoning Appeals with a recommendation of approval. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for staff, Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have none. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yeah, I have a whole bunch of them for John. John, I'm just kidding. No, I don't have any. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Hey, I could have piled on, too, but -- Naples Park brings a lot of posttraumatic stress. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: John, it was a good writeup. Thank you. MR. KELLY: You're welcome, Mark. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl, any questions? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And John and Ray know what I'm talking about. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I'm sorry, Karl. I didn't hear. COMMISSIONER FRY: I wish I had some, but I don't. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh, thanks. Okay. We'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, we don't have any registered speakers. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see anybody. That's right, I didn't ask. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Of course, Jeff has -- also recalls Naples Park issues. MR. KLATZKOW: It's a nice place to live. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Is there a motion? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I'll make a motion that we approve a positive recommendation to the BZA on this nonconforming use. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Second anyone? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul, okay. And yes or no whether you approve or not. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Approve. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: It's a yes for me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. It passes unanimously. Thank you. COMMISSIONER FRY: Madam Chairman? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah? Madam Chairman. Is that me? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes, it is. I wanted to ask a question of staff, of Ray, perhaps. I don't see him in the room, but if he's around. I'm curious what the progress is on the search for a new HEX. June 11, 2020 Page 20 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It was an item on the Board. I think they have two letters of interest. It sounds like it's going to be a part-time job. Maybe Jeff could fill us in. MR. KLATZKOW: I'm sorry. I just walked in the room. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: On the HEX. MR. KLATZKOW: The Board has chosen a HEX officer. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, they did. Part time? MR. KLATZKOW: Andrew Dickman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, Andrew? MR. KLATZKOW: Uh-huh. I'm sure you know him well. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, yeah. MR. KLATZKOW: It's part time -- well, it's as much time as it takes, I guess. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. But from the letter of interest, is it an actual -- is it a contracted -- MR. KLATZKOW: Yes. He'll be a contracted employee of the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. COMMISSIONER FRY: Do we know when they will start their duties? MR. KLATZKOW: I think Mr. French and Mr. Dickman are working out with the Clerk the final details of the contract, and it should be shortly. COMMISSIONER FRY: Great. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: ***Okay. The next item is Moody boat dock extension, and there's a companion item with that. I think we would take them both at the same time and vote on them separately. MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. So the first would be BDE-PL20190001962, and that's for the boat dock extension, and the next companion item is VA-PL20190002360. Anybody wishing to speak on this item, would you please rise and be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Disclosures, Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No disclosures on this. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Nothing for me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Just materials from staff, but also -- well, I'll do it after we go through this. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just staff materials. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: None that I recall. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Staff materials only. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Go ahead. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, before we start. Again, on the procedure, I take it that the -- on the dock extension, our action is final subject to BCC approval, and on the variance our action is recommendatory to the BZA. Ray? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, on the variance. COMMISSIONER FRYER: On the variance it's recommendatory, yeah. MR. BELLOWS: On the boat dock, you are the approving authority. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Got it. Thank you. COMMISSIONER FRY: Madam Chair. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes. June 11, 2020 Page 21 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRY: I was just curious -- I wanted to ask staff, why in this case are there two actions? Why is there a separate boat dock extension rather than just a variance? Why is it -- MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. There are two petitions before you. They're companion items, technically, because they deal with the same property, but they're two different applications. The boat dock extension application only requires HEX or Collier County Planning Commission approval. Variances could -- could have been heard by the HEX with this and would have been approved by the HEX or ruled upon by the HEX. But if it's not going to the HEX, a variance is required; Planning Commission recommendation and Board of Zoning Appeals approval. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. COMMISSIONER FRYER: And the variance has to do with a setback, right? MR. BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Go ahead. MR. ROGERS: Good morning. For the record, Jeff Rogers with Turrell, Hall & Associates. I'm here in front of you today for a boat dock extension. It's on a boat dock lot that is just south of Bonita Beach Road on the north ends of Collier County in an area that is -- 3rd Street is a -- there's some single-family homes as well as other boat dock lots on it. So, basically, it's a lot that's made for parking your car and getting onto a dock for your boats. We're here today -- basically, this is the lot. Small little -- like I said, it's just a small upland lot. And as you can see on the aerial, there's other docks all along the shoreline that have also gone through the same process that I'm going through here today with you. This is the proposed dock currently right now. As you can see, it's just a five-foot-wide finger dock basically going straight out from the shoreline with two lifts on either side. The dock has been designed to accommodate two vessels up to 38 feet max. As you can see, that's the biggest vessels that they could put there, as well as not protrude out past any other of the existing docks there. We're requesting a 27-foot extension from the allowed 47-foot. This area is, again, a boat dock lot, so setbacks are not -- we're not able to meet the required setbacks, which would be seven-and-a-half feet here in this case because we're less than, you know, 60-foot requirement of that. So there is some history here that staff's going to talk to you about in regards to all the other lots. This particular lot did not go through the variance process approval for all of these lots back in the day. I'm not sure why the owner back then didn't want to do it. But we are here in front of you today, as staff has told you and Ray's told you, to do a BDE for the 27-foot protrusion as well as side-yard setbacks to basically reduce them down to zero, which is also consistent with all the other docks along this shoreline. Here's an aerial view of the shoreline and all the other docks basically extending out the same distance as we are proposing. Myself, I've done at least three or four BDEs for this area. So we are not proposing anything outside of the norm there. So if you guys have any questions, I could touch on the -- whoops, sorry -- on the variances, but we're basically requesting a zero-foot setback requirement. We are providing a minor setback on most of the pilings just so you guys know, so we are not going right to zero, except for on one piling we will be touching the riparian line. Happy to answer any questions you guys might have. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Joe, any questions? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have nothing. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Just an observation. The thing that was most persuasive to me was an image, a visual on Page 519 of 1345 of the materials that shows that the proposed dock extension -- when you look at it in relation to the other dock extensions, it does not extend out any farther. And, as you say, the setbacks are conforming with what the other owners have in place. So based on that visual, I'm very comfortable with it. June 11, 2020 Page 22 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. ROGERS: Sure. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Well, I would just echo Commissioner Fryer's observations. I have no issues with it. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Staff report? MR. KELLY: Good morning, John Kelly, senior planner. To provide a little history on this, the subject lot is one of 23 on the north side of 3rd Street West that was platted with insufficient lot area to accommodate a principal structure. In 1987 the Board of County Commissioners directed the -- what was the community development division to pursue a provisional use authorization to allow those 23 lots to be used as noncommercial boat launch facilities. That is how they became boat dock lots. That was done by PU87-17C, as in Charlie, was presented to the Planning Commission and subsequently approved by means of Resolution 87-260 by the Board of Zoning Appeals. The petitioner presently seeks a 27-foot boat dock extension over the maximum 20 feet allowed for a total protrusion of 47 feet. Staff analysis finds that project satisfies five of five of the primary criteria and four of six of the secondary review criteria. And, therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve BDE-PL20190001962 in accordance with the plan attached to the CCPC resolution as Attachment A with the four conditions noted as Attachment B. With respect to the variance, if I may proceed into the second action here -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes, please. MR. KELLY: -- as the petitioner informed you, there are a number of docks within that area that enjoy that zero side setback, and that was done by V9926, Resolution 2000-51 which was adopted by the BZA, or the Board of Zoning Appeals, on February 8, 2000. That petition was presented on behalf of 11 of 23 of the boat dock lot owners within Block G of the Hickory Shores Unit 3 subdivision and reduced the side-yard setback from 7.5 feet to zero for Lots 4, 5, 9 thru 12, 14, and 17 through 20. Presumably, had the petitioner owned the property at the time, they could have joined in with that zoning action. So staff has analyzed the subject petition, and utilizing the criteria set forth within Section 9.04.03 A through H herewith recommends the Planning Commission forward Petition VA-PL2019000194 -- sorry -- 2360 to the Board of Zoning Appeals with recommendation of approval. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Thank you. Do you have any questions, Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have none. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No questions on either application. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: Could we take this by two motions? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes. Do we have any speakers? MR. BELLOWS: No speakers. MR. KLATZKOW: Sally, you want to run the Board through the two motions? It's just a little wrinkle, that's all. June 11, 2020 Page 23 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MS. ASHKAR: Good morning, Commissioners. Sally Ashkar, Assistant County Attorney, for the record. The first motion you're going to be making is a vote of approval for the boat dock extension with the condition that the Board also adopt the variance. It's going to be conditional on the Board's approval of the variance; otherwise, the boat dock extension is not going to be valid. The second motion you're going to make is a recommendation for the Board to approve the variance, and that's it. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Is there a motion for -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll move approval of the boat dock extension along the lines as just read to us by the Assistant County Attorney. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I'm going to ask you each to respond yes or no in favor or not of the motion. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Approve. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: It's yes from me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. It passes unanimously. The next motion? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I will also move that the variance for setback, and that's 20190002360, be approved as a recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals for their approval. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Recommend approval or support, approve. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Is that a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Whatever. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I'm going to ask you yes or no again. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes from me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Another pass unanimously for the second motion. ***Do you want to keep going, Terri, or do you want to break now? Break now? THE COURT REPORTER: Sure. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. We'll take -- woo, that's going to be -- 15 minutes, five and nine is -- Take away the original number you started with. COMMISSIONER FRY: Carry the three. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: We're going to take a 15-minute break. COMMISSIONER FRYER: 10:35? June 11, 2020 Page 24 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh, okay. There's the 20. Yeah, 10:35. (A brief recess was had from 10:20 a.m. to 10:35 a.m.) MR. BELLOWS: You have a live mic. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Thank you. ***Okay. We're onto -- the next item is the 7-Eleven, and it's PL20180001785. Is everybody in the room for that? Would you all please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter if you wish to speak on this item. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Disclosures. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: For 7-Eleven? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have nothing. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Just materials from staff. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just materials from staff. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? (No response.) COMMISSIONER FRYER: We lost him again. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark, do you have any disclosures? (No response.) COMMISSIONER FRYER: He's probably redialing in. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Staff materials. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And Patrick was on there before. Is he on there now? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Hello. I'm here now. This is Mark. Can you hear me now? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yup, can hear you now. Do you have any disclosures? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: I don't know what's going -- yeah, I keep losing connection. No, I do not, not that I recall. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, if you'd pay your bills, Mark, you know. Come on. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah. They're going to shut it off. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Good point. Good point. COMMISSIONER FRY: Mark, you could also invest in a computer and then join us on Zoom. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: I like to use my toes and fingers. That's as much as I need to count, so... COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, may I ask the County Attorney what our role is in an SPD? MR. KLATZKOW: Looks like here you're making a recommendation. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Can we hear from the petitioner? MR. CORNELISON: Good morning. Craig Cornelison here on behalf of 7-Eleven seeking a recommendation of approval of a site plan with deviations for a 7-Eleven. Basically what we've got is an existing 7-Eleven north of Radio Road, West of Santa Barbara. And we're looking at tearing down the existing building. What it is is kind of an acquisition site for 7-Eleven. It was an old Mobil, kind of one of the small buildings underneath the canopy. And what they want to do is tear that building down and push -- kind of replace the building and push it back. The canopy, basically most of the parking, the existing car wash, pretty much all of the existing infrastructure will remain. So what we're doing is rebuilding a new building. And along with the site plan, we've got several deviations that are related to existing conditions. This site was built, I believe, back in the '90s and approved, and all of the site conditions were -- I June 11, 2020 Page 25 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) guess, were -- under the old code were acceptable, and now, as we look at today's, some of these are -- will require deviations to remain as they are. They're probably in your staff report, but I can go through them real quick. The first one was a deviation for a 10-foot buffer kind of on the -- on the north side. I don't know -- if James is on, he can -- MR. SABO: Madam Chair, this is James Sabo. Is it possible to put the -- have Kevin Summers put the Attachment A and Attachment B up as well as -- MR. CORNELISON: That's the one. MR. SABO: I think those two will work for now. That's Attachment A. Attachment B is the actual site plan. There you go. MR. CORNELISON: So Deviation 1, which is the one circled right there, it's just a small deviation where you can see where the existing curve kind of protrudes out into the landscape buffer, so we're just requesting No. 1, that remain. Number 6, which is right next to it, is the existing canopy. It's in the building setback. We're requesting that remain. Two is a landscape buffer. The -- under the -- what the site was built with what was required a 15-foot landscape buffer, I believe, and now the code says 25. We're requesting that remain as it was. It's already landscaped. The landscaping's established. Number 3 in the new code requires an undulating berm. Again, the landscaping is existing. There's oak trees and things in that. It didn't make sense to us to tear down established landscaping and oak trees to put in a berm, so we're requesting that remain. Same thing with No. 4, I believe it's the same -- it's the tree spacing. It just didn't make sense, again, to tear down established trees that are pretty good-sized to put trees back in just at a little different spacing. Number 5 was sidewalk and other impervious area can't be in the buffer. Again, existing is a car wash that's in the buffer. It was acceptable at the time it was built and now requires a deviation. Six we discussed earlier. It was the one where the canopy intruded into the buffer. And then 7 is pretty much the same thing. We have a 40-foot yard setback, and we're requesting a deviation to do smaller than that for the existing car wash. So pretty much everything that we're requesting is existing conditions. We're not changing anything or trying to ask for anything that's different than what's out there now. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. MR. CORNELISON: And I have a picture to show you, but if I can't then -- if you've got any questions, I can show them to you, but... CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Are there any questions? Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have a question on the site in the aerial, and I noted on Google Maps or one of the other map sites. I'm trying to get -- I guess this is oriented correctly. So it would be to the east. So behind the store there was parking. It looked like kind of haphazard parking of storing vehicles. What -- who owned that or what was that? MR. CORNELISON: It is part of what 7-Eleven owns. It's just dilapidated parking. I mean, you're just kind of parking -- or it's really just pavement that's there now that's -- the striping is all worn off that really no one's using. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But it's just where people park, then. MR. CORNELISON: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So it wasn't any type of storage or anything -- MR. CORNELISON: Nothing like that. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- where they were storing vehicles? MR. CORNELISON: What we're planning on doing is actually removing some of that. The building will go on there, and a lot of that will become landscaping. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Anything is an improvement over what it looks like now. MR. CORNELISON: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. June 11, 2020 Page 26 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have no questions. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh, that's unusual. Okay. Could we have the staff report? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. We have a virtual presentation from James Sabo. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Does he have to be sworn in again? I saw him raise his hand with everybody else, but he has to do it separately, right? MR. BELLOWS: I believe for each petition type, but... CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: You need to be sworn in. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. MR. SABO: Good morning, Commissioners. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Good morning. MR. SABO: James Sabo, principal planner for the county. If Kevin could put up the Prop App 1, it's an aerial, it will help explain. All right. So the parking area directly behind the current Mobil gas station to the west, you can see that the pavement is a different color, and there's a trapezoid-shaped parcel there. That is the entire parcel owned by the applicant. They only -- and only have developed the eastern portion of it. So the proposal is to develop the entire site. So it's Outparcel E and Outparcel E1, so that just explains that. The recommendation from the Zoning Division is a recommendation that the Collier County Planning Commission recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners for the site plan with deviations request PL2018...1785 for the 7-Eleven Mobil Gas. I'll entertain any other questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Joe, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No other questions. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have none. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I have none. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Madam Chair, I consider your last comment a challenge. I have one question. The 15-foot buffer that is now supposed to be a 25-foot buffer, I'm looking at the aerial that's up on the display, and it looks like a very thick tree cover. Does the existing buffer meet the intent of the buffer requirement in terms of opacity and spacing of the specimens and all that? Is it enough, sufficient -- I'm assuming it's sufficient in staff's eyes. MR. SABO: I would say yes. I'm satisfied with it. COMMISSIONER FRY: Well, that is my question. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Thank you. Any public speakers? MR. BELLOWS: No one has registered on this item. June 11, 2020 Page 27 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Is there anybody out there that's not registered that wishes to speak? Okay. (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: We'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion. Anybody? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll make a motion to approve as a recommendation to -- is it the BZA or the BCC? MR. SABO: The BCC in this case. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Recommendation to the BCC of approval of this site plan with deviations. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second. COMMISSIONER FRY: Sorry. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: You have to be faster. Okay. I'm going to ask again yes or no if you're in favor of the motion. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes from me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. It passes unanimously. Thank you. MR. SABO: Thank you very much. COMMISSIONER FRY: Madam Chair? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: It's Karl here. Before our last item I just wanted to welcome Paul Shea to the Planning Commission, and it's very good not to be the most junior member on the commission anymore. So the abuse that I've taken can now roll your way, and for that I'm thankful. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I would like to suggest for consideration by the BCC that Karl Fry's name be placed in the hopper as Hearing Examiner, because I can tell how much he loves these matters. MR. KLATZKOW: I could bring a Wheel of Fortune board with me next time. You could just spin it if you'd like. Or Wheel of Misfortune, depending on how you look at it. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: ***Okay. The next item is PL20180003708. And this is a Growth Management Plan Amendment for Temple Shalom. Anybody wishing to speak on this item, could you please rise and be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Disclosures. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I spoke to Rich Yovanovich about this petition. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. And I spoke to Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Arnold, and I have emails. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I have emails and materials from and meetings with staff and also the public and a telephone conversation with Mr. Arnold. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just county materials. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: I don't recall any. June 11, 2020 Page 28 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Staff materials, a deluge of emails, and a conference call with Rich Yovanovich and Wayne Arnold. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I want to correct the record. It was a conference call for me with Rich and Ray both -- or Wayne, I'm sorry. No, wait. No, it was -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Wayne was not on it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Wayne was not on it. Thank you. He was not. That was for the next petition we carried over, yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Question for the newest -- from the newest member. I've had a deluge of emails, but I didn't respond to them. So don't I need to declare that? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No, those are all part of the public record. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: They're all public record, but we usually say you get emails either way. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: And I was going to say the same thing. My emails have some -- I was told I got -- everything I've got to send to Ray. So Ray gets them all instead of the individual staff members I used to distribute to. And so I don't have any ex parte for those, I believe, because Ray put them all in public record, so -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. Any correspondence sent directly to a commissioner, if you forward it to staff or me, we'll make sure it gets part of the record. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Someone made a nice list of all the -- who did this? MS. FALKNER: I did. Sue Faulkner. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Sue, that's you? MS. FALKNER: Yup, that's me. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Well, that's like your -- MS. FALKNER: Yeah. Because of the volume of the number of correspondence we received, I wanted to try to consolidate it as much as I could and make it easy to look up one of the individual emails or letters. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Nice work. MS. FALKNER: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Rich. MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. Good morning. For the record, Rich Yovanovich on behalf of the petitioner. I want to introduce the project team. It depends on whether you'll want to ask them direct questions. You may hear from all, or you may hear from just a few of us. But with me today are Daryl Sissman, who's the recent president of the Temple Shalom; Jane Schiff is the chairman for the Jewish Federation of Greater Naples; Marc Saperstein is the vice chair and has been our primary contact with the Jewish Federation; me; Wayne Arnold; Michael Herrera is the professional engineer for the project; Jim Banks is our transportation engineer and consultant; Marco Espinar is our environmental consultant; and James Knafo is our architect, if you have questions. This is the transmittal hearing for an approximately 13.5-acre parcel of property that is fronting Pine Ridge Road. It's between Collier Boulevard and Pine Ridge Road. It is the existing site for Temple Shalom and its sanctuary as well as the school and other building facilities. And up on your visualizer is the existing property. You'll have two -- there are two petitions that are related to the land-use entitlements we will be seeking on this property. The first for a Growth Management Plan Amendment to create a subdistrict for the property to allow the existing temple and school to continue in operation but also provide an opportunity for the Jewish Federation to construct a 22,000-square-foot building on Tract 64, when is the current vacant parcel owned by the Temple. So they are coordinating efforts to bring the Jewish Federation to that site, construct a 22,000-square-foot facility. We are also updating the request to allow for 200 children to attend the school that's currently operating. As a way of confession, we learned the original conditional use was approved for 70 students. June 11, 2020 Page 29 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) There was -- there were changes made to the site. Site Development Plan was approved for the building in which the school is located. The Temple identified that there would be more than 70 students there. Unfortunately, nobody at the county or anybody at the Temple understood there was a 70-student limitation, and they've been operating anywhere between 170 to 190 students for many, many years at that site. And when we were going through this process to go ahead and start the Comp Plan Amendment process, we advised that we probably should go ahead and update the PUD -- convert the existing conditional use to a PUD and update the number of students that are allowed. So although it appears we're going from 70 to 200, we are on paper, but in the real world we're pretty close to that 200 right now. So the traffic impacts of that school have already been absorbed onto Pine Ridge Road in the road system, and so it's really not a big deal from a practical standpoint. It's mainly just to correct the paperwork. As I mentioned, the existing zoning on the property is "E" Estates. We're in the Estates mixed-use residential subdistrict. There's been a change over time from when the original conditional use was approved back in 1990. The original request was for the full 13.5 acres; however, when it ultimately got approved, Commissioner Volpe, who brought the motion to approve, basically said, since you're not -- you don't have plans for what you're going to develop on that vacant piece yet, the approval was only for what they knew they were going to build at the time when the intent would be to come back and amend the conditional use when future plans were known. Unfortunately, between when the conditional use was originally approved and where we are today, the Growth Management Plan was changed to now require us to do a Growth Management Plan Amendment to do Phase 2 of the Temple that was always intended to be developed when they had this property. So that's why we're back here in front of you for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for property to allow for the Temple use as well as the Jewish Federation's use on the property. These are the meeting minutes. I'm not going to read them to you, but that's what Commissioner Volpe essentially said at the time. What I want to do is now turn this over to Daryl Sissman to give you an overview of the Temple's operations, then Jane Schiff will follow her to talk about the Jewish Federation, and then Wayne will take you through some of the -- some of the specifics, and then we'll wind up our presentation and be open to any conversations. But what I do want to point out before Daryl comes up is we, the Temple -- and as you know, I always seem to refer to my clients as "we" because I'm personally invested in all the petitions that I bring forward to you. Before we even submitted the Growth Management Plan Amendment, we reached out to our neighbors to explain to them what we were proposing to do on the property and what the operations were going to be. We even made some changes to the original submittal based upon those meetings. We've had that meeting together with a neighborhood information meeting to let people know what we're doing. The Temple's been there for almost 30 years and has been a good neighbor. And with that, I'll introduce Daryl. There you are. Sorry. MS. SISSMAN: Good morning. Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak. As it was mentioned, I am the current president of Temple Shalom. And while I have only been president a few months, I have lived in Collier County and been a member of Temple Shalom for almost 10 years. I strongly support the Federation building on the Temple Shalom campus. Temple Shalom has been a part of the Collier County community for 50 years and in this current site for almost 30. We've enjoyed good relations with both our neighbors and the broader community. Temple Shalom currently has 780 member families. We have -- but we have an award-winning preschool that is highly thought of that is predominantly non-Jewish. Every year we do a day of helping where our members create over 50,000 meals for -- 50,000 meals for Meals of Hope. This year we collected toiletry for foster children for Collier County Public Schools, and we also did school supplies collection and packed them for the Guadalupe Center. June 11, 2020 Page 30 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) During Hurricane Irma, Temple Shalom answered the Red Cross's call to provide a safe environment and afterwards we opened our doors to the neighbors and the broader community for a cooling center, a place to charge their phones, and to take a break from the elements. Temple and Federation has enjoyed a good relationship for almost 20 years. We were on complementary programming and sponsor each other's programs. Having Federation build on our campus not only strengthens our relationship, but it gives us the opportunity for expanded and shared parking and facilities. Again, I cannot tell you how strongly that I and the rest of the lay leadership at Temple Shalom support this product. Thank you. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Quick identity question. MS. SISSMAN: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Sorry. You're the chief lay officer of the congregation? MS. SISSMAN: Yes, yes. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I see. And would you tell me your last name again. MS. SISSMAN: Sissman, S-i-s-s-m-a-n. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you. And you'll be here for further questions, right? MS. SISSMAN: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you. MS. SCHIFF: Good morning still. Thank you for inviting us here today. We've been looking forward to this for many months, all of us have, and it's good to be together. I'm Jane Schiff. I am the board chair for the Jewish Federation of Greater Naples. What is a federation? A federation in our case is we are an umbrella organization similar to the United Way in that we raise money and we give out grants to non-profit organizations; however, we do more than just that. We also do programming. And I'm not -- if you want to see them, we can show you. This is our Connections magazine with all of the different programming that we do all year-round. We do a book festival which has 4,000 people show up over about 15 different sessions of authors coming in to speak to us. This is our impact report of where we give the money and how we give it. This is a special issue, it says right on the top. Normally it's a monthly issue, but because of COVID-19, we moved two months together. We represent -- our members are about 2,500 members, and those 2,500 members come to all sorts of programming. We do programming such as churches would do or fraternal organizations. Canasta, bridge, yoga, book groups, foreign language instruction, discussion groups, documentary films, foreign films, cooking classes, Tai Chi, bridge, a whole bunch of other programs. We offer financial support, some of our grants. Temple Shalom is one of our grantees, and we actually help support some of their religious education that they do. BBYO, which is a community-wide youth group. We also support the Jewish and non-Jewish organizations with our grants, such as the Naples Senior Center and the Holocaust Museum. We give monetary awards to Collier County teachers for anti-bullying and kindness programs that they do. We offer special monetary assistance to special community programs such as Laces of Love and things. We fund and started the Shop with the Sheriff program in Collier County. This program allows needy children from Golden Gate to buy over $100 of presents for Christmas for themselves or for their families. They work with the Sheriff. They go into a Target, and they make a relationship with a sheriff that actually has been proven to be very helpful for those children and the sheriffs. We work with the Catholic/Jewish dialogue, and we work with the Evangelicals on all sorts of nights for Israel and for other programs together of the -- create understanding in the community. We need this building because our programs have completely outgrown the 3,500 square feet we have. We're all over homes and hotels and throughout the county, and we are spending so much money on rent that we figure having our own space would also enhance the community in that we can have space that we would be able to rent for programs, and I'm sure that our consultants will tell you more about that. June 11, 2020 Page 31 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) But we plan to be a good neighbor in terms of having rental space for gatherings up to 400 people. So thank you. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Thank you. MR. ARNOLD: Hi. Good morning. I'm Wayne Arnold with Grady Minor & Associates, professional certified planner. And welcome, Mr. Shea. I haven't had a chance to meet you yet, but looking forward to working with you in the future. So I'll pick up where Jane left off. And the image that's on your screen is -- we called it an activities comparison, and it sort of is the reason that there's a collocate opportunity going on here, because on the left column it's things that the Jewish Federation does, on the right is what the Temple currently does on their site, and the functions that most churches and temples would do in terms of their community outreach and community support. But until you get to the bottom, the two things that don't concur at the Federation site are worship services and the daycare/religious school activities. Now, there's a library-type system where the students can come in and utilize library space for learning, but there's not a school activity there. Those are going to be relegated to the existing improved portions of the site. But it shows how related the activities are that are currently occurring on the site and why collocating them at this location also makes sense. And you heard both Jane and Daryl indicate, you know, obviously, the support and why it's needed in the community. The subdistrict we're creating, it's a fairly short subdistrict change to the Golden Gate Master Plan, because it obviously authorizes the current 302-seat sanctuary facility, increases the childcare to 200 seats as part of this, and then we've identified what is known as Tract 64, which is the westernmost vacant parcel that the Temple owns, would be allowed to have 22,000 square feet of floor area for these, you know, nonchurch, non-preschool-related uses. As Rich mentioned, there's a companion PUD that's tracking with this. You will see this, presuming that you and the Board of County Commissioners agree to transmit this to the State of Florida. The PUD would come back and show you many more of the details. And I'm going to show you in a moment at least the schedule of uses that were proposed and the master plan. Some of those images were in the backup material that were shown at the neighborhood information meeting, so you have seen those, but I'll walk you through those, and we'll talk a little bit more about that. Just the map image that's being changed. To the right in that image you see a small square that represents the subdistrict map we're required to create as part of your Future Land Use Map series. The companion rezoning. And as I'll just -- you know, before I go through the list of uses, I'll build on what Rich said. You know, we did some community outreach early on. We've helped the Federation look at numerous sites around the county and, ultimately, coming together with the Temple made a lot of sense. They had a vacant parcel that was unknown, back when they developed the site, what it would be used for, and they do know today what they would like that to be. So it's timely that we're back before you. We did meet with our most immediate neighbors before we filed for the project, and we did modify our original master plan. We modified the location of our proposed preserve area and our water management areas and the building location to address some of the early comments we heard from those neighbors. The uses, as we've indicated from the start, were going to be to allow the current uses to remain, which were the childcare and the religious facility temple, and then we're adding the civic, social, and fraternal associations type uses by SIC code, another SIC code for religious organizations, and then we have the standard language about any other use that the Hearing Examiner or the BZA may deem to be comparable. So the list of uses proposed are fairly short. We're also including a list that prohibits certain uses. This seems to be something that we're headed toward. But it's one that -- it's not a soup kitchen environment. We're not having a homeless shelter. No offender rehabilitation agencies. It's not a public welfare office. No self-help June 11, 2020 Page 32 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) organizations. And, as Mr. Fryer pointed out yesterday, we're not sure if we really have refugee or refuge services, maybe we need to add both when we get back here for the PUD. So those are the uses we're proposing. Fairly straightforward and I think, obviously, consistent with what you've heard both the Federation and the Temple's mission to be. This is our proposed zoning master plan, and I'll try to walk you through this. So to the right of your screen, the L-shaped building represents the existing temple facility and its educational wing that's to the south. It's labeled preschool on that plan. So they have those existing facilities. There's a series of grass parking and paved parking that serves the existing facility. There's a lot of crosshatching going on here, and I'll just briefly explain what that is. There's an area we call preserves, which you're accustomed to seeing. There's another that's called out as preserve tract that was part of the original Site Development Plan approval because it predated your current preservation standards. So in looking back at the original plans, what was called out as existing native vegetation to retain versus what was landscape buffering, the only real other area on the existing improved portion of this site is an oak hammock that, if you've made a site visit there, it's sort of central to the site. They have a pathway that goes through it. Parking around it. And that area was called out as preserve originally, so we're reflecting that on our master plan. So on the west side of the project, which is known as Tract 64, that's where the Federation would propose to build its up to 22,000-square-foot building, some parking for which, as Jane mentioned, would be an opportunity to share parking between these two facilities. It makes a lot of sense. The Temple, on high holidays, has a demand for parking beyond what they can accommodate today. So that would be parking that could be utilized on those high holiday days when they have high parking demand and for the Federation when they have guest lecturer that's a popular guest lecturer, they have the parking available that would be utilized by the Temple normally for their parking facilities as well. The building area we've shown, it's central to that tract. In fact, it's on the easternmost side of Tract 64, and that gives us the advantage of being able to share parking close to the building. We put our parking field adjacent to Pine Ridge Road. And then the changes that we made most significantly for the most immediate neighbor to the west were we originally had our preserve area wrapping along the southern portion of our site where we now currently show a septic tank on that drawing. And based on comments from our neighbor who enjoyed both the trees that were on the site as well as some proposed benefit that they believe they had during Hurricane Irma from protection for their own residence, we agreed to move our preserve area and work with staff to accommodate a preserve that's on our western boundary, and then we show a dry detention water management area east of that which automatically built in further separation from our neighbor. And then you had some communications from the neighbor, and there were some issues that were raised that, you know, from our perspective, are very detailed site-engineering type issues that we normally don't get into in heavy detail at the time of especially Comprehensive Planning, but even for PUD zoning, but we've gone through an effort to try to address some of those issues. For instance, the water management, you know, that's an issue that we design to criteria that the Water Management District itself imposes through a state rule, and we have to abide by those, and we do commonly on every project. The other issue was the septic tank, and we've gone through iterations to demonstrate that the septic system has been designed according to standard by the state statute, and then Mr. Herrera, our engineer, has also worked with a third-party engineer to also evaluate that system and determine that we have more than adequate room and separation for a septic tank. And so we feel very comfortable and confident that we've designed a system here that will work appropriately. And I think those were some of the primary issues. Jim Banks did our traffic analysis and, yes, we are adding a new access point on the Temple, What the minutes also reflect -- and it was long a question for people until you found the minutes -- the Temple was always designed to have two access points, and even the motion reflects that. So they will June 11, 2020 Page 33 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) now have their second access point located just east of our Tract 64. It's spaced appropriately to be separated from the nearest driveway to the west and separate from the main entrance that will still remain for the Temple proper. But this will give us an opportunity to share facilities, share parking, and have ingress and egress at two locations to help disperse traffic during major events. We've been working with staff. There are probably going to be some design changes to some of the medians, et cetera, along Pine Ridge Road as we move through this process. We've proposed a condition in the PUD that's pending today that reflects having law enforcement control of those intersections during any event that it would exceed 400 people. So normally for the church, if it seats 302 people plus maybe their incidental children that are in the daycare during church, the 400 number was selected for that purpose because they don't typically need and mandated a law enforcement presence for that daily activity. But if we exceed the 400, we would propose that as part of our PUD. We've also been working with James Knafo, the project architect, and he's developed a conceptual rendering of what that building is going to be. It's going to be -- a portion of it would be two-story building which, preliminarily, would be allowing the Federation to have some of its office components upstairs with then downstairs having areas where there would be event space and lecture series space, et cetera, with probably expandable walls, et cetera, to accommodate whatever size crowd or crowds they may have. So in a nutshell, that's what we're proposing. And our team is here and happy to answer any questions you may have. Again, before you is really the Comprehensive Plan Amendment transmittal and whether or not this makes sense to transmit to the State. We and staff obviously feel that it's met the test of -- you know, it makes sense, it's compatible. We've met the criteria for achieving a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and would urge you to support the transmittal to State. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Questions for the petitioner? Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have none right now. Wait for the -- for any public speakers. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have nothing. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: I have several. First of all, I want to compliment Wayne Arnold for doing an excellent job at the NIM. Really, it was a first-class operation. Everyone identified themselves. The applicant's representatives identified themselves. So thank you very much. It is a great assistance to us. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. COMMISSIONER FRYER: And also I want to extend sincere compliments and thanks both to the Federation and the Temple for the highly valued very significant contribution that they make to Collier County and Southwest Florida, and we all appreciate the work that they do. Now, with respect to my comments or questions, most of them, I think, have to do with matters that are most properly going to come before us at the PUD time. But I wanted to -- as I said to Mr. Arnold yesterday, I want to give everybody a heads-up of what my concerns are so that they can be addressed and perhaps also to get a signal from the applicant's representatives to indicate that they would be interested in working towards some kind of a compromise on these issues. I'm not asking for that to be worked out in advance of the PUD but just that they would be open to trying to deal with some of the concerns that I'm going to express. The first one has to do with what I'll call social organization uses and this, again, being a use it's going to come up at PUD time, but to me, that is too broad. And it, I think, would allow for potentially too many attendees coming at times unregulated with respect to weekends, peak p.m.s, weekdays, et cetera and also the nature of the social organization uses. Anything that remotely has to do with church or religious activities I think are entirely proper, but when you get into leasing, you become -- you, the Federation and the Temple, become at least one step removed from controlling the kinds of uses that would be made of that property and one step removed directly or indirectly religious uses. So that's a point of concern to me that I'm going to want to see tightened up. I understand that there is no county sewer available there, and so it would be unreasonable to June 11, 2020 Page 34 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) request, in my judgment at least, the organizations to be on county sewer when the neighbors themselves are relying on septic systems as well. And I understand that the residents along Golden Gate are -- can avail themselves of public water but that I guess if you get north or south of Golden Gate then you'd have to depend upon a well. So there is a concern, you know, about potential contamination of the well. But as you mentioned, that is all highly regulated and is not something that, I don't think, we as a Planning Commission at least now need to worry about. There was an unfortunate word used at the NIM by one of the representatives of the applicant, and that unfortunate word was "monetizing," and I know what the speaker meant, but it suggests an effort on the part of the Federation to perhaps open the door to, let's say, less than 100 percent religious organizations or organizations that might not necessarily put that property to the same kind of use that the Federation itself would or that the Temple would. So that is of concern to me. I also expressed concern yesterday to Mr. Arnold that in my judgment, since this property is surrounded on four sides by single-family residences in the "E" Estates zoning, that 8 p.m. for amplified music is, to me, too late. I think unamplified music -- or unamplified sound, rather, should -- that's one thing, but when you electronically amplify it, it's going to be audible to the neighbors, and I just don't think that's consistent with what our expectations are for -- and I know this is the Urban Estates not the Rural Estates, but still, it's a point of concern for me. And so the special events, there's -- again, this gets back to uses in the PUD. There's talk of occasional special events either hosted by the Federation itself or by a lessee of the Federation, and I'm not sure what "occasional" would mean. I don't know how often that would be. I'd like to see some limitations put on that. The AUIR remaining capacity for 2019 was 853 for Segment 125 for that segment of Golden Gate Parkway, 853, and in Table B of the traffic TIS, it shows that special events could have 891 people attending, and that right there would exceed -- if it happened at p.m. peak would exceed the capacity for that segment. Also, the -- and I'll ask the traffic consultant when he comes up, but just to put all this out on the table right now. Looking at the Federation as an office use, I think, is -- and even though you've adjusted to account for the other potential uses, I'm not sure that that -- that the adjustment that you're proposing is adequate to address the kinds of uses which would be permitted under what you've put in front of us, at least so far. And refuge services. The refuge was used in one place, and that actually, I found out, has a meaning, and it has to do with things like spousal abuse. So maybe what is intended would be to prohibit both of those. And, as I have said before -- and I understand why you specify prohibited uses, because that mollifies the concerns of people. And I know that the ordinance says any use not explicitly provided for is prohibited but, personally, I just prefer to see when you have prohibited uses that the last one listed be "any other use not expressly permitted." Oh, one of the speakers at the NIM took exception to language that -- in one of the exhibits -- is it F? -- that I believe is boilerplate that was furnished by probably the County Attorney's Office, but I don't believe it is apt in this case. It talks about as owners and developers sell off tracts. And I know you were just picking up the boilerplate, but unless there's a substantive reason why that needs to be kept in this situation, I think it misleads, and it misled me at first and it misled the speaker at the NIM. It seems to me that ought to be removed. And the last point that I want to raise is a safety issue that was raised at the NIM by a gentleman who indicated he was a retired Naples firefighter. And 50 miles an hour is the speed limit on Golden Gate Parkway there, and to have people doing a U-turn in order to go back west, this speaker indicated he believed it was a safety issue, so I'd like that to be addressed. And with that, Madam Chair, those are the issues that I have and concerns that I have and would like the applicant to address. MR. ARNOLD: Would you like us to have -- MR. YOVANOVICH: When we come back? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Whenever you wish. June 11, 2020 Page 35 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. ARNOLD: Well, you had specific questions about the traffic. Did you want those to be answered today? Mr. Banks is here. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Only if you're prepared to. My main desire here was to signal the concerns I had so when you come back, you can. If there is anything that you can say such as a willingness on the part of the Federation and the Temple to discuss tightening up or clarifying the limitations on uses without committing, without being specific, I'd like to hear that. MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think we're more than happy to have further dialogue with you and, obviously, go back to talk to the Temple and Federation about how to address your expressed concerns. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I have one question. Probably summarized in one question a lot of the concerns that Ned had is what is the likelihood that all three of the major uses could have a major activity at the same time? Because I'm very worried, having driven through there, with the traffic, the access in and out. And it would be nice to have some information on whether you could have a 400-person activity at the new facility, preschool going on, and a temple activity going on at the same time. Because we're relying heavily on shared parking. Well, that's assumed you're not all having an activity at the same time. MR. ARNOLD: That's absolutely correct, and that is their intent, to make sure that they have a calendar that's retained so that they don't have events that are cross purpose with each other. COMMISSIONER SHEA: A question probably, I don't know, for Ray or Jeff. Is there something that could be put in any kinds of approval to ensure that there's some teeth that they can't schedule three events? MR. KLATZKOW: It's a two-step process. We're amending the Comprehensive Plan now. Mr. Yovanovich and his group will be coming back with a PUD amendment on this, and at that point in time, that's the ordinance that you would put in these so-called teeth that can be enforced by Code Enforcement. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Anything else? COMMISSIONER SHEA: That's it. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Mark, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes, I do. Did you hear that? I can't tell if I'm connected or not. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Hello? Okay. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yeah, you're all right. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes, I do. The language in the Growth Management Plan changed. I have a question about Item 5C. It says, Tract 64 summons [sic] the nonchurch and nonschool uses with a maximum of 22,000 square feet of floor area. The previous paragraph to that, Tract B allowed uses are church and religious organization services and activities: Childcare, preschool center, religious teaching, and related religious philanthropic and community service and events. So if you take out all those that are related to the religious operations and the fact that Mr. Yovanovich said this is Phase 2 of the Temple, Tract 64 can only have nonchurch and nonschool uses. What is Tract 64 actually going to have? What's your intentions so that we make sure it's consistent with the GMP when we come and consider it for the PUD? MR. ARNOLD: Mr. Strain, this is Wayne Arnold, and I would just respond to that by saying we specified the nonreligious, non-preschool to make sure it's understood that we're not migrating to have another sanctuary facility here nor another preschool on the site. That tract is going to be identified as that more philanthropic arm of what the Federation and possibly the Temple do, because they will co-share those facilities over time. And we certainly are happy to -- COMMISSIONER STRAIN: So it's going to be a -- MR. ARNOLD: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you. June 11, 2020 Page 36 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER STRAIN: It's going to be a -- your Description B said related religious philanthropic. So it's going to be somehow tied to the church then, right? MR. ARNOLD: Well, I think largely, as a religious organization would be. I mean, the Temple currently hosts events, for instance, that's not a Jewish event. The Sheriff has held events there. There have been other community events there over time, but that's pretty common with almost any church function in the community. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Well, I just wanted to make sure that whatever you end up proposing in the PUD, assuming everything works out and it's compatible and all that stuff, that it doesn't end up conflicting in some way with the GMP, and that's why I'm raising the question is because C almost seems to contradict B, and you might want to make sure it's clarified in the tighter language in the GMP. It's broad in the GMP, and it should be, so -- but you might want to make sure it's tightened up a little bit to cover everything. MR. ARNOLD: Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: That's all I was trying to get to, Wayne. I don't have any other questions. I do have questions of staff when we get to that point, so... MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl, do you have any questions? COMMISSIONER FRY: Just a few for Mr. Arnold. Wayne, are you adding any square footage to the existing Temple Shalom facility? MR. ARNOLD: We have made provisions at staff's request to put a square footage in our PUD that identifies how large it would be. The Temple's building and preschool wing today are around 45,000 square feet. We've put a number of 5,000 [sic] square feet in there so that if we decided to come back and make some modification or expansion of the Temple's existing facility, we wouldn't be back in here having to do a PUD amendment, per se, for that small expansion. COMMISSIONER FRY: When you say you made a -- 5,000 square feet, you mean 50,000 square feet allowing you to grow by 5,000? MR. ARNOLD: Yes, I'm sorry if I misspoke. Yes, that is the case. COMMISSIONER FRY: In reviewing the NIM, the NIM minutes and the objection letters from Mr. Loewer, the western neighbor -- yeah, the western neighbor, one of his main concerns was the water -- the wastewater generated by food preparation activities. And I just wondered if you could speak to current food preparation, kitchen facilities and uses in the current Temple Shalom facility and also what is planned in the new facility for the Jewish Federation of Greater Naples. MR. ARNOLD: The current facility at the Temple does not have a full commercial-type kitchen. It, like many places, has some warming services, and they don't prepare school meals, for instance, for the children. The Federation building that's proposed will have catering space available. I know they try to do some teaching for cooking, et cetera. Rich, do you have anything to add? MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Fry, it's good to see you. COMMISSIONER FRY: It's good to see you. MR. YOVANOVICH: It's basically -- it's a catering kitchen, so the food already comes prepared, so it's just being warmed up, so it's not a commercial kitchen in the -- I think in the context of what Mr. Loewer was thinking was occurring. He can -- he's here to speak, so -- but, it's not -- it's not a big commercial kitchen. COMMISSIONER FRY: All right. Thank you. Next question: I was reading that the Jewish Federation of Greater Naples is currently above a pet store -- a pet products store at Vanderbilt and Airport, and 3,800 square feet, and now we're proposing a 22,000-square-foot facility, which is about six times what they have currently. I know they are -- you know, they're out of space, but how is the building area of 22,000 square feet arrived at? And I ask that partly because of sensitivity to traffic on a very, you know, challenged segment and several challenged segments of roadway, the traffic generated with that much square footage. June 11, 2020 Page 37 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. ARNOLD: So their current facility, Mr. Fry, is largely their office space for the Federation. They have a small library and some other space where school-aged kids can come and use that as a resource. But currently when they have a guest lecturer that they sponsor or they have a book reading, they have to lease out space like the Hilton or another hotel space or another sanctuary, at the Temple, for instance, to host those events. So this would be an opportunity for them to collocate not only their office space but those other spaces to accommodate the things that they sponsor during the course of their year. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. So they could have it all on one site rather than having to lease? MR. ARNOLD: That is the intent, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Just in terms of basically -- and I know that Jim Banks may speak. But in terms of ingress and egress, you have an existing entrance where you can go right-out, right-in, but you can also exit the Temple Shalom facility and make a left going through a cut in the median; is that correct? MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: And that will remain? MR. ARNOLD: I believe that is to remain, and that would remain, I think, consistent with county access policy until the road gets six-laned in the future, at which point that would go away, and we'd be forced into a right-out and then a U-turn movement somewhere east of that entrance to make a westbound U-turn. COMMISSIONER FRY: Gotcha. And then the second entrance that you've added, I know there was some controversy about where it was located, but that's a right-in, right-out only? MR. ARNOLD: That's correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. All right. That's all I've got. Thank you very much. MR. ARNOLD: Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Are you done? MR. ARNOLD: I think that's our presentation. Like I said, any of our team members are here if there are any questions that arise. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Can we have the staff report now, please. MR. BELLOWS: Yes, we have virtual presentation by Sue Faulkner. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Hi, Sue. You going to have to -- you have to be sworn in. MS. FAULKNER: Good morning. THE COURT REPORTER: I have to swear you in. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. MS. FALKNER: Okay. So staff recommends this project for approval to the Board of County Commissioners in order for them to direct staff to transmit this to the state agencies that are required by law. This is a large-scale GMPA, and that means that this will come through for a second round of public hearings. And so at this time this is the transmittal hearing, and we're asking you to recommend to the BCC that they go ahead and approve for transmittal. I wanted to mention to you and apologize that we had so many late, late correspondence that came into us, but I wanted to make sure that we were able to share those with you, because it was very important to get all of those public comments in to you. And, so, sorry for the last minute on that, but that is the way in which I received them, and I wanted to make sure you had an opportunity to see them. If anybody needs to review any of that at this time, I'm available, and we have a way to pull these up on the monitors if you wanted to look at any of those or anything else related to this project. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Questions for Sue or staff, Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No questions. Thank you. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I have nothing. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: No questions. June 11, 2020 Page 38 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SHEA: No questions. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? Sorry. Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes, I've got at least one of Sue and one of Ray. Sue, the CF districts are not allowed in Golden Gate Estates area of the master plan. Is there a reason this has to be called a CF PUD? MS. FAULKNER: Well, it is the most correct language we knew to use for this project because it truly fits the community facilities with the church uses and religious uses. And to our way of thinking, that meant that that should be a CF PUD, but I'm open to suggestions. Do you -- COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Well, I was -- the only thing is CF -- it says in the Land Development Code, the CF district is limited to properties within the urban mixed-use land-use designation as identified in the Future Land Use Map. Then Section 1.5 of the GMP doesn't list the Golden Gate Estates area as one of these areas designated in the mixed-use section, nor does it show up that way in the FLUE. I just didn't want it to be misleading in the future. And that's kind of like the question I asked of Wayne in regards to what B and C meant. MS. FAULKNER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: If you guys think it's clear, then I won't take it any further. I just thought I'd question it. I thought it was odd that we would use a district designation that isn't allowed there in Estates from what I can tell of the GMP, so -- but if that's -- if everybody's on the same page, I'm not going to hold anything up for that reason. I just wanted to make that point. MS. FAULKNER: Okay. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: And my next question is for Ray. Ray, you know, I know Ned had a lot of specific concerns, but most of them are wrapped up into what we've been doing since 2008 when Susan Murray initiated that memo listing all the things that we need to include when we describe a conditional-use approval or request for approval for churches. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: It would be handy if you took that memo, and it's been revised a little bit since then, and just answered those questions for this facility because it's basically functioning as a church does in other parts of our county. And, in fact, it's not even as big as some of them. So why don't we approach it that way, and that may help with a lot of people's questions that I heard brought up a while ago. Just a recommendation or a suggestion. MR. BELLOWS: Understood, and James Sabo is listening in. He's the principal planner for the PUD that will come. We'll discuss that issue and make sure we cover it. COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Okay. That would be great. Those are the only two things I had. Thank you. MR. BELLOWS: You're welcome. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl, do you have any questions of staff? COMMISSIONER FRY: Just one. I just wanted to understand the pros and cons of grass parking. It was an issue raised at the NIM, and to me it looks like potentially a benefit in that it's not paved. It becomes pervious to allow better rainwater absorption. But I just wanted to ask staff how grass parking is evaluated in terms of positive, negative, neutral, how you look at it. MR. BELLOWS: Yes, we'll have Chris Scott answer that. MR. SCOTT: I haven't been sworn in, so... (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. SCOTT: For the record, Chris Scott, planning manager with Development Review Services. The code does currently allow for grass parking for all kinds of uses, including houses of worship, churches, synagogues. The grass parking spaces would need to be compacted to where they remain dust free and are serviced. There's provisions in the code that staff will monitor so if they become a sandpit that they get brought up to a typical standard. I hope that addressed the question. I'm not sure whose question that was. June 11, 2020 Page 39 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: It was Karl. Does that answer your question? COMMISSIONER FRY: It does. So there's really no concern with grass parking lots as long as they are -- as long as they meet the criteria and are maintained? MR. SCOTT: Yeah, they'd need a stabilized subgrade and are maintained in a dust-free manner. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Thank you. MR. SCOTT: Thank you. That's all I had. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thanks. Okay. Next will be the public speakers. Are there any? They have three minutes to speak. MR. BELLOWS: We have two speakers. They're present today. They're not virtual. Douglas Loewer followed by Beverly Loewer. I hope I got your name right. MR. LOEWER: Yes, you did. I'm a neophyte here, so you'll have to help me through. MR. BELLOWS: Sure. I'll be glad to. MR. LOEWER: This is my wife Bev. She's in the back in a wheelchair. And we live on the westerly side of the project, and -- well, we do not object to the project. We think the Federation would be an advantage to the area. We think that the synagogue and Temple Shalom has been a good neighbor, and hopefully we've been a good neighbor to them. We take an awful lot of their mail up to them. Postman can't seem to get the mailboxes straight. But, anyhow, my wife is going to donate her three or five minutes to me, and I'll curtail a lot of what I wanted to say here. But I wanted to point out that we are for the project. We're not objecting. I guess the biggest problem comes in here is that I'm a professional engineer. I'm registered in six states. Got my first license in 1980. 1983 I became registered in Florida. I also hold licenses as waterworks and wastewater works, superintendent and operator, which means I can do -- operate any facility in Maryland. I also helped write most of the stormwater management code for my area back in the 1980s. And I'm not objecting to what has been put forth as this text amendment today, and I will try to only address text amendment issues today. They're -- obviously, I'm very concerned about the sewage. I compute the sewage as 18,000 gallons a day. Grady Minor does the sewage at 9,000 gallons a day. If these three lots had homes on them, they would have 350 gallons per day of usage or 2,100 gallons per day for all of the lots. So, basically, by approving the sewer that's going here, you're approving, in my opinion, 51 houses to go on these three lots; in their opinion, 25 houses to go on these lots. Now, the reason I'm here talking about that today is that your Statute 163.3177.68.8C [sic] states Future Land Use Map amendments shall be based upon the following, an analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. My well is 275 feet from their -- from where they're proposing to put this sewage in the ground. They are not proposing any kind of package plant or anything of those sorts. And the reason you can tell that is they have -- well, it's gone. They have two spots that they're putting septic fields in. If you're putting a package plant in, you'd have one spot. You're not going to put two package plants in for this sewage. I can guarantee that with only 275 feet, 18,000 gallons is going to contaminate my well. And okay, I'm one -- I could be attached to public water, but from a geohydrology point of view, I'm right in -- my well is right in the river over to the canal, and I have sprinkler systems. When the sprinkler comes on, it draws 20,000 gallons out of the ground, and that puts a big hole for all that sewage to run toward me in. Now, what is approved is a 75-foot minimum dimension between a residential well and a residential septic system. Now, 9,000, 18,000 gallons is far in excess of that. The reason I'm here is to suggest an additional or something to do with -- to the additional text amendment. I think that they can very well come up with a plan for the sewage in which only 2,100 gallons, which is what would have been there if we had six houses, be permitted to go into the groundwater. Twenty-one hundred gallons is -- they're currently using between 6- and 700 because they only have a 1,500-gallon septic tank on what's there, and that would -- it would be in excess of what was June 11, 2020 Page 40 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) permitted. So I would hope that you-all would add an amendment to this text that would rely on them being limited to 2,100 gallons of residential sewage. They can put in a package plant to get there. They can put in gray water things. They can reuse water. They can put it into sprinkler system, but I don't think that anybody in my area deserves to have 51 houses built in that area and put up with that much sewage. There's a lot of ways it can be done, but I would hope that there would be a text amendment to limit it to the six houses that would normally be built there. As a second item, there's a lot of things that aren't shown on their site plan. The site plan doesn't show enough parking. Now, they're going to have -- they say they're going to have mixed parking, but every jurisdiction that I have been to -- and, believe me, I've made thousands and thousands of these presentations up in my area. Shared parking doesn't work. You end up with people out on the road. You end up with people out on the road with big events now. The parking would normally be required at 230 spaces. They've got 110. The sewage they have there would go up at least three times even if it were a septic tank. Probably five times the size. The stormwater that's on the existing properties is not shown on the new property. In fact, where the stormwater -- one of the stormwater ditches is it's no longer shown at all. And the stormwater was approved in 1991. If we go by 2020 standards, there's going to be a lot more stormwater, and there's no provision for it on the existing -- on the existing two lots. The third -- the stormwater on the -- on what's on the new section is nowhere near large enough. So there's -- in accordance with this section of your statute, they just don't have enough land to do what they're trying to do. And to prove that, they have two lots there now for a 300-person assembly area, and they're planning on a 392-person assembly area in the new structure. They have roughly 40,000 square feet of additional building in the existing. They're planning 22,000 square foot on the other side in the new building. There just is not enough room. If they're going to put in a parking garage, plenty of room. But I'm worried about those two items. And I'm not here as an objector. I'm here to try to mold the project into something that makes sense, because if that building fails, somebody's going to be back in here five, 10 years from now asking for that to be split off from the Jewish facility. And the other jurisdictions that I've been in don't permit that. They make sure each project that can be sold off separately can be sold off and not have to come back. Okay. Well, those are my two requests. I think the second one has to do with where they put things. Right now, if they would simply take the assembly area out of the second building, all the numbers would line up with what they have. But there isn't a 400-person assembly area in there. And those are the two items that would have to do with the text revisions. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, I'm going to have a question of the speaker. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Go ahead. Go ahead, Ned. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Sir, thank you for being here and speaking to us. Two questions: First of all, what would be the approximate cost of attaching to the public water to you? MR. LOEWER: Well, public water isn't the only problem. I have a sprinkler system, and if they contaminate my well, I'm going to be putting that contaminated water on my grass, and that's just -- that's just as bad as drinking it. And, no, I have not checked to see what tying into the water would be. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. MR. LOEWER: But it wouldn't only be me. People along the road behind us also have wells, and they don't have the facility of public water. COMMISSIONER FRYER: So the answer is that we don't know. MR. LOEWER: We don't know. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. And then your second -- well, you also make a point about a packaging system. June 11, 2020 Page 41 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. LOEWER: Package plant. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Package plant. Could you please tell me what that is? MR. LOEWER: It's basically a small sewage plant. COMMISSIONER FRYER: How does it work? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Sewage treatment plant. MR. LOEWER: Well, I put one in on a -- I put a -- the largest septic field ever put in Maryland. I installed it, I designed it, and I maintained it. And when I say I installed it, I'm the one on the excavator and the loader pulling the levers. I put a 100,000-gallon package plant on that to service 11,000 gallons a day in sewage. Package plant basically -- the extended the aeration one -- basically just takes the sewage, put it in a tank, and boils water through it, because when you -- you increase the deterioration of the sewage when it's -- when you add water. The sewage comes in with bacteria on it, and when you put it into a plant and you add air to it -- well, you've seen in the yard where a dog does his business, and three weeks later it's white and it's gone. Same thing in the plant, only it happens in a day rather than three weeks because you've added the air. You've added the oxygen; the bacteria acts more quickly. And that's -- there's all kinds of extended aeration plants. There's all kinds of stirrers that you can put on your septic tank. I made suggestions to this effect and was met with "it's not being considered." COMMISSIONER FRYER: All right. I'm going to just ask a follow-up question of you, then. Do you have an estimate of what it would cost the applicants to put in a package plant? MR. LOEWER: Well, a package plant is just one of the points that they could address. They could use their -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Sir, if you don't mind, please answer my question. Do you have an idea of how much it would cost? MR. LOEWER: Not in Florida. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Thank you. That's all the questions I have. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, questions regarding providing water service. There is -- is there water service along that area? And when you're -- MR. LOEWER: There's water service along Pine Ridge Road, but there's not any water service to the roads behind us. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But, typically -- I'm here. If we run water service then, typically, it requires homeowners along that stretch to connect. It's a forced connection. It's typically a forced impact fee unless the Board chooses otherwise. Are you on -- are you on -- MR. LOEWER: I'm on well. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You're on well. MR. LOEWER: But everybody in my neighborhood's on well, and we have the water running right by our front door. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But you're asking them to go on water; is that what I heard you say? MR. LOEWER: No, no. They are on public water. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They're on public water. MR. LOEWER: I'm looking for how they're going to treat the public sewage -- the sewage because there is no public sewage. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. The second thing about sewage. I mean, I hear what you're saying, and you're asking us to put something into the Comp Plan but, typically, at this level we do not deal with designing of a sewage plant or designing of the septic system. That is a permitting issue that the county reviews during the review process. You can object to it during the review process, but it is not our job to impose that kind of requirement during the Comp Plan Amendment process. At least I don't ever really it being -- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. For the record, Ray Bellows. Those issues will be represented in June 11, 2020 Page 42 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) more detail when the PUD comes back. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. MR. BELLOWS: And if you have some general questions now, we have Erik Fey available virtually. MR. LOEWER: Would you permit 51 houses to go on those two, three lots? Because that's what you're doing with the sewage. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, I appreciate your professional opinion. I'm an engineer as well, so I understand -- MR. LOEWER: Even 9,000, which is what they say, is 25 houses. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The third thing you addressed was stormwater runoff. Now, we handle stormwater runoff in this county one of two ways. Either through the -- again, through the permitting and review process or the South Florida Water Management District, which I'm sure you're familiar with. And -- MR. LOEWER: Well, the stormwater I only brought up from the point of view of it -- by the time you added it in -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. MR. LOEWER: -- there was not enough area on the lot. I agree that it's designed by them, but there won't be enough room for everything they're trying to do on this lot. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So -- but I detect we have a dispute between your professional opinion and Grady Minor? MR. LOEWER: So Grady Minor has come right out and told me that they -- that all this stuff will be taken up after this meeting and after it's taken care of, and my point is, if you don't have enough land to start with, that's a problem. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So, in other words, you object to the proposal? MR. LOEWER: No, I don't object to -- I object to the site plan. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MR. LOEWER: I want -- I would like to see the Federation get their building. I would like to see the land be used. I think it's all in the best interest of the community. I just don't know what -- I just -- I'm just not real sure if I want the groundwater to be contaminated -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. MR. LOEWER: -- as part of it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, I think, for the record, you noted such, and that we can deal with that issue, and I would encourage Mark Minor or somebody else from the firm to be here and to address those kind of issues at the PUD process if it comes up during the PUD -- oh, I'm sorry. There he is. We have a representative from the engineering firm here. So I think, for the record, it's noted, but it is really not a matter for this board to consider during the Comp Plan Amendment process. MR. LOEWER: Well, I wasn't going to come until I read this section that said here, because it would appear that by approving the 110-space parking area and not requiring a 230-space parking area, which is what an existing new building by itself would require, that you're giving them a 55 percent reduction in parking. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The parking is on impervious surface, or is it -- MR. LOEWER: If you take the one lot that the Federation is putting their building on, with the -- and you compute the parking on it, it would come up to 230 spaces. What they put is they've done 110 spaces there, and they've said that they're going to somehow work it out with the Temple Shalom area. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MR. LOEWER: And if they have to have 230 spaces, they've got to have a parking garage. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. Well, I don't have any other questions. I mean, we're getting into a debate on site design, and I think -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: This is not the time. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- and this is not the place or time. MR. BELLOWS: And that petition will be coming in the coming months, and we'll be better June 11, 2020 Page 43 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) prepared to answer those questions. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I do appreciate your professional assessment and opinion. I think it's important. MR. LOEWER: Well, I wish that I could have just sat down with them and molded something that worked. MR. KLATZKOW: No. The issue you're having here is that you have objections that are appropriate but not appropriate for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. MR. LOEWER: Sorry. MR. KLATZKOW: The Comprehensive Plan is a very broad, these are the uses you're allowed to do in this district, and then what will happen is the applicant will come back with a more detailed plan, all right, usually it's using a PUD amendment, all right. And in that ordinance, staff gets with the applicant, and that's where these details are ironed out. And so think of it like the Comp Plan is the Constitution, and then our ordinances are like the statutes. And it's the statutes that have the detail that you're looking for. And this will come back to the Planning Commission, and at that time the issues can be addressed. Staff will be able to address their opinion whether it's sufficient. You'll be able to address your opinion, the applicant. You've got objections that we understand. It's just not the right time in the process. That's all. MR. LOEWER: All right. I'd like to close by offering to Grady Minor and the rest -- and Temple Shalom that I'm not objecting to it. I'd like to sit down with them and talk to them so we can reach a middle ground on the design. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Question, can I? Just a question, when is the right time? I share many of the same concerns. And you're really talking about the criteria that somebody decides for that use how much -- how many gallons it's going to develop. When is the time that he would get another opportunity? MR. LOEWER: I met with -- after the neighborhood meeting I went over to -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Sir -- COMMISSIONER FRYER: Sir, let the County Attorney answer the question. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Would you please. You're done now. You've had enough time. Thank you. MR. YOVANOVICH: May I answer the question? And Jeff will correct me if I am wrong. The details that he's asking you for are actually the details that are addressed through the Site Development Plan review process. That's when the hard engineering is actually done for the project. It's not done at the Growth Management Plan stage because, one, we don't know if we have a project. It's really not even done at the PUD stage because still -- we get the general parameters of what we're allowed to ask for in a Site Development Plan, but then when we do the Site Development Plan we go through an extensive engineering review from Collier County staff. We have had -- that's the process that we will go through, and that process is an administrative process, but it doesn't stop Mr. Loewer from interjecting himself in the Site Development Plan review process and giving his professional opinion as to why my professional engineer is wrong. I think what you've gotten a little bit of a flavor of is there is a professional disagreement between Mr. Loewer and Grady Minor as to what the parameters are for designing this sewer treatment system. The numbers he has thrown out to you as 18,000 gallons a day are -- I don't know how to -- I'm not an engineer, but I -- they're wrong. The number is closer to 3,000 gallons per day. He may be talking about the area. There's a 9,000-square-foot area for the drainfield. Maybe that -- I don't even know where he got the 9,000 from, because we've not done an actual submittal to the county. I can assure you that my clients have gone through the analysis of a fit analysis with Grady Minor to determine that the 22,000-square-foot building with the necessary parking, with the necessary water management, with the necessary septic system will, in fact, fit on this property, because we wouldn't be going through this process and spending the kind of money and time to go through this process. June 11, 2020 Page 44 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) We've had discussions with Mr. Loewer. We just don't agree. Honestly, I don't think we ever will agree. We're going to let the county break the tie. And as I said at the neighborhood information meeting, if we're wrong, we will not achieve a 22,000-square-foot building. It will be something smaller. We don't think we're wrong. We'll go through the appropriate review process. But this isn't the date and time. I've never actually designed the engineering at a Comp Plan stage, and I'm pretty sure I've never designed the engineering at a PUD rezone stage either, subject to being corrected by anybody else. But that's the normal process, and that's the process we're asking you to put us through; not make that decision today. MR. KLATZKOW: Well, we can handle some of these issues during the PUD process as well, but clearly it's not -- this is not the time. That's all. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. And some of them are deviations from code that -- based on their fitting. MR. KLATZKOW: I mean, I sort of disagree a little with Rich that everything has to be handled at Site Development. No, we'll handle it in public process. We could put limitations on them, but that will be for the next meeting that we have here, not this meeting. MR. YOVANOVICH: And my guess is we'll be further along in the process and may even have a Site Development Plan in by the time we get back to the PUD stage. I don't know. But we'll be far enough along to answer questions specifically about what's the real number. MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah. It might be a good idea to do them sort of simultaneously. MR. YOVANOVICH: We can do that. And, frankly, I could put my engineer up here to answer every one of those questions, but I don't want to do that. MR. KLATZKOW: This isn't the time and place. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: No. Okay. MR. BELLOWS: We have no other speakers. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, you heard my rebuttal. We hope you'll -- we hope you'll recommend transmittal to the Board of County Commissioners of our proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, and hopefully we'll be back with a MUD to address the comments that we've heard from both Mr. Strain and Mr. Fryer and others during this process as part of the PUD for the property. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. So we'll close the public hearing and entertain a motion for transmittal or not. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll move that we accept the recommendation of staff to recommend to the Board of County Commissioners transmittal to the State of Florida of this GMPA. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I'm going to ask again for a yes or no. COMMISSIONER FRY: What happened to discussion? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oh, okay. Discussion. COMMISSIONER FRY: As a matter of fact, I have a little bit to discuss. I'm curious how many -- I didn't get -- there was no real opportunity prior to ask this, but how many attendees or how many people can visit the site based on the parking? Commissioner Fryer expressed -- or Commissioner Shea, I believe, all three entities having an event at the same time and having a tremendous amount of traffic to the location. I'm just curious how many attendees does the parking support, and could we put a cap on -- CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: We're not at that point now. This is just a transmittal for the Growth Management Plan Amendment, and the PUD and all of that will come back to us. So it's not the time for the -- for that discussion. They said before that they were going to schedule -- there will be scheduling for all three buildings. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. I'm going to ask a yes or no vote for the motion. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. June 11, 2020 Page 45 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: It's a yes from me. Ned? COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Mark? COMMISSIONER STRAIN: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Thank you. It passes unanimously. Thanks. And there's no new business or old business. Is there any public comment? (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And with no public comment, there will be a motion to adjourn. COMMISSIONER FRYER: So moved. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: I'm just going to not ask everybody and just say we're adjourned. ******* There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:07 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ______________________________________ KAREN HOMIAK, ACTING CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on ________, as presented __________ or as corrected _________. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. June 11, 2020 Page 46 of 46 5.A.a Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.1 Item Summary: ***This Agenda Item was continued from April 2, 2020 CCPC Meeting to the August 6, 2020 CCPC Meeting***PL20160000221-A Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners proposing amendment to the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Ordinance 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Maps to add the Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict to the Estates-Commercial District, to allow uses permitted by right and conditional use in the General Commercial (C-4) zoning district with a total maximum intensity of 200,000 square feet of gross floor area, and furthermore recommending transmittal of the amendment to the Florida Department Of Economic Opportunity. The subject property is 20± acres and located on the west side of Immokalee Road, approximately one half mile north of Randall Boulevard, in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Transmittal Hearing) [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Senior – Zoning Name: Marcia R Kendall 07/20/2020 10:56 AM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 07/20/2020 10:56 AM Approved By: Review: Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 07/20/2020 11:19 AM Zoning Anita Jenkins Additional Reviewer Completed 07/21/2020 11:12 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 07/21/2020 4:06 PM Zoning Corby Schmidt Additional Reviewer Completed 07/22/2020 12:21 AM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 07/22/2020 5:15 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/23/2020 11:29 AM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 5.B Packet Pg. 52 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, June 16, 2020 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Edwin Fryer, Chairman Karen Homiak, Vice Chair Karl Fry Joe Schmitt Paul Shea ABSENT: Mark Strain Patrick Dearborn Tom Eastman, Collier County School Board Representative ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Heidi Ashton-Cicko, Managing Assistant County Attorney June 16, 2020 Page 1 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) P R O C E E D I N G S CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Good morning. Welcome to the Collier County Planning Commission meeting of June 16th of 2020. Would you all please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Can we have roll call, please. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Yes, ma'am. Mr. Eastman? (No response.) COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Shea? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes, here. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Fry? COMMISSIONER FRY: Here. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'm here. Chairman Strain? (No response.) COMMISSIONER FRYER: Vice Chair Homiak? CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Here. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Schmitt? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Here. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Mr. Dearborn? (No response.) COMMISSIONER FRYER: Madam Chair, we have a quorum of five. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. Addenda to the agenda, there's a request for a continuation of the boat dock extension. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And they want to continue it till July 16th, and that's the right date? MR. BELLOWS: That's correct. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. So we'll need a motion to continue. COMMISSIONER FRYER: I'll make that motion, and also I have a question. When will the Hearing Examiner be up and running? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. We are working on the contract that will go back before the Board. But the plan is to have the first meetings for the HEX start in August. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Okay. Thank you. I jumped in before there was a second. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you for asking that question, Ned. MR. KLATZKOW: You guys could continue it to the HEX hearings if you wanted. No, I'm serious, if that's what you want to do. They've asked for the continuance. If you want the HEX to hear it, just continue if for that. COMMISSIONER FRYER: What's our August agenda look like? MR. BELLOWS: I'll have to pull it up, but I don't know for sure right now. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: But they don't want to -- they would have to readvertise that. MR. BELLOWS: Yes, they would. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Oh, okay. Well, my motion stands. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: And is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: All those in favor, signify by saying aye. June 16, 2020 Page 2 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Opposed, like sign. (No response.) CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Nobody here representing the petitioner on that, though? No? MR. BELLOWS: They sent in their request. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: They emailed. MR. BELLOWS: I also have an addenda to the agenda. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Yes, go ahead. MR. BELLOWS: Under new business, we'd like to add a discussion item on the update for the COVID policies in dealing with public hearings. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Okay. And then the next addenda is election of officers since Mr. Strain is stepping down as chair. So I'd like to nominate Ned for chair. COMMISSIONER FRY: Second. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Ooh. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIRMAN HOMIAK: Oppose, like sign. Okay. There you go. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, I think. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: You think? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Do you want me to take over at this point, Karen, or do you want to do it? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No, you can do it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You got the helm. "El capitan," you got the helm. It's all yours. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: We just need -- do we have to do the vice chair again? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, that's a good question. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And then the secretary. We have to do the secretary. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, we do definitely need a new secretary. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Are we going to have elections again in October, or do we need to -- MR. BELLOWS: This was just to replace Mark stepping down. So you don't have to do it now, all elections of all officers. You can wait till October. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Is that when we -- is that when we have to do it according to our bylaws or tradition? MR. KLATZKOW: You do it every year. This is the interim, but you're going to need a vice chair now. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Yes. Okay. Well, I nominate Karen. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Karen would still remain vice chair, then, correct? MR. KLATZKOW: Let's just -- June 16, 2020 Page 3 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: -- for certainty -- COMMISSIONER FRY: I'll nominate Karen for vice chair. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Any further nominations? If not, all those in favor of Karen serving as vice chair, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Those opposed? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: Congratulations, Madam Vice. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Gee, thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'd at this point like to nominate Karl Fry to succeed me as secretary. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Any further nominations? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. We've got a new slate of officers. Thank you. Let's see. Any other addenda? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: That's it. Okay. Planning Commission absences? Let's bring that one up to date, if we can. Our next meeting is going to be on the 2nd of July, I believe. Does anybody know that they will not be able to be there -- be here at that time? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Good. Okay. We'll have it. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Is that going to be televised or -- I know there was an issue with them doing -- the opening of the Sports Park or something? Oh, there's Jamie -- Jeremy, I mean. MR. FRANTZ: Yeah. July 2nd will still be televised. It will be a regular meeting for you-all. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER FRY: Jeremy, I'd like to point out that the haircutters are open again. MR. FRANTZ: Are they? Thanks. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I think it looks good that way. COMMISSIONER FRY: I like the look. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I was almost four months. My hair was like down to June 16, 2020 Page 4 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) here. MR. MULHERE: I like the look, too. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Bob, what about your hair? MR. MULHERE: I'm due for a trim. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Approval of the minutes. And I need to be reminded what the dates of those minutes were, please. There are two of them. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Oh, and, you know, I made a mistake, because I forgot the February 20th minutes were already approved on March 5th. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So then we just have the March 5th minutes to approve. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So it's only one set to be approved? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yeah. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So the March 5th minutes have been distributed. Are there any corrections or changes to be made to those? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, I'd entertain a motion to approve. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Make a motion to approve. CHAIMAN FRYER: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Those opposed? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. They pass unanimously. Okay. Chairman's report. I have nothing to say at this time. Karen is the outgoing presider. Do you have anything to say under chairman's report? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No. I just was questioning -- wanted to question the policy for the Zoom meetings and things, but that's going to be on the agenda, so... CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I just have a comment, then. I just want to publicly thank Mark Strain for his service as chair as many years as he served as chair, and I think he's been on this committee almost, what, 18 or 19 years. CHAIMAN FRYER: Almost 20. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So I think public recognition and public thanks should be afforded, and I would like to thank him. CHAIMAN FRYER: I second that, and I would ask for a round of applause on Mark's behalf from everyone. (Applause.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Joe, for bringing that up. COMMISSIONER FRY: Will Mark be at the next meeting? He's not at this meeting. CHAIMAN FRYER: He, I believe, plans to call in for subsequent meetings. The reason for his absence today is a conflict. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. Let's see. Public hearings -- oh, consent agenda. We don't have anything under that. June 16, 2020 Page 5 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) ***So the advertised public meetings. The first is a companion set, the Ventana large-scale Growth Management Plan and PUDZ. That's PL20180002668 and 2669. Let's see. All those wishing to testify in this matter, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Disclosures from the Planning Commission. Let's go in our usual order. Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. You caught me by surprise, Ned. Conference call with Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Mulhere, and other than that, staff materials, et cetera. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: None. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. My disclosures are the same as Commissioner Fry's. Karen? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: My disclosures as well, a conference call with Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Mulhere. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I spoke to Mr. Yovanovich and Mr. Mulhere. CHAIMAN FRYER: Good. I also had a conversation with certain staff members, so I need to add that to my disclosure. COMMISSIONER FRY: I need to add one as well. I spoke to Mr. Zuckerman on the applicant team in the hallway briefly at the last meeting just checking in. He was waiting all day for his item to be heard, and it never was. So I just was checking in with him. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. All right. Let's see. We'll begin with the applicant's presentation. Mr. Mulhere. MR. MULHERE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Bob Mulhere with Hole Montes on behalf of Zuckerman Homes. With me this morning is Ryan Zuckerman, who is the applicant; Brent Addison, who is the civil engineer on the job; Norm Trebilcock, who is our transportation engineer; and Rich Yovanovich, who is our land-use attorney. I think I've got pretty much everything on this PowerPoint. I'll go over some things that at least four of you have seen before, but in deference to Mr. Shea, I wanted to make sure that he got the full picture as well. So this area highlighted in blue is the subject property, 37.62 acres. You recall that it was over 40 acres, but right-of-way was acquired for the widening of Immokalee Road, which brought it down to 37.62. It is within one mile of the urban boundary, and it is presently zoned A. You'll note that to the east the property is all zoned A, but AHMO, which is a mobile home overlay. This is the zoning map. I pretty much just went over all of that. This is the Future Land Use Element. The property falls within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District receiving lands. And you can see that this -- all of this blue area here is receiving. This is -- the urban boundary is right here. The yellow is urban, and there's a mixed-use activity center right here. This exhibit shows you the proximity. The one-mile boundary is right here from the urban boundary. And this is just a slightly different perspective on the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District designations. There are three designations: Receiving, sending, and neutral. Again, this parcel is within the receiving lands. This aerial shows you the subject property and also provides for enough to show some of the surrounding development. For example, here's Heritage Bay DRI right here. This is multifamily development right here along Immokalee Road. It also provides for the streets here, which is -- Sundance borders the property to the south, and Richards Street borders the property to the east. Those are comprised of two matching 30-foot easements; one on the subject property, June 16, 2020 Page 6 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) one on the property to the east. And there is a county, I think, drainage facility for the roadway right here. I presented this at the transmittal hearing. This project was recommended for approval unanimously by the Planning Commission and by a 4-1 vote at the BCC for adoption -- or to transmit and bring back for adoption. And I just point that out because there are relatively few parcels that could be developed. This is Calusa Pines Golf Course, and you can see there is sort of urban style development surrounding that. And so most of this has already been either developed or -- these parcels down here are in a conservation easement. So there are just a few parcels, one adjacent to the subject property, that might, in the future, be developed under the Rural Fringe Mixed Use receiving. So our request started out at 95 units, and we had access through Richards Street. When we went to our NIM, there was concern over the density and concern over using that local roadway to access the property even though we have a 30-foot easement on our property for that purpose. And I'll get to the revised -- which you saw at the transmittal hearing, because we had made those changes to address the comments from the neighborhood information meeting, so... So at your transmittal hearing and at the BCC hearing, we placed some provisions in the proposed GMP amendment that primary access shall be via Immokalee Road. The dwelling units are limited to single-family detached and a maximum of 77 of those, which is 2.04 units per acre. At the BCC there were -- there was at least one change to the language about the acquisition of TDRs. The Board approved language that required the applicant to acquire those -- to enter into a contract to purchase those TDRs from a sending lands property that had not already severed their TDRs. And my understanding of the basis for that was that the Board wished to see those TDRs be purchased from, perhaps, a smaller holder of sending lands as opposed to someone who had a larger development, perhaps a DRI or something, that had a stockpile of DRIs that they had left over from when they entitled their property, because one of the problems is that these smaller sending landowners have not -- you'll have to remember that the purpose of the TDR program, at least in great part, was to re-compensate or compensate sending landowners who had their development rights significantly reduced. And sending lands, before the county adopted the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, you were entitled to one unit per five acres. After they adopted it, you were entitled to one unit per 40, but you could generate TDRs, a maximum of four per five acres, from your sending lands. And so the county is in a -- has been for some time and is still in some process to revisit the economic nature of that transaction, the demand on the receiving side, the demand on the sending side, but that restudy has not gotten through the process to get to the Planning Commission or the Board as of yet and will be coming forward sometime, I think in the future, near future. We argued, and you agreed, that this was a reasonable incentive to develop while still providing a transition to lower density to the east. As I said, we reduced the density to 77 units, 2.04 units per acre. If you look at this slide, under the existing provisions to entitle it at the now maximum one unit per acre, you would be required to acquire 30 TDRs. And under our provision, the -- my client will have to acquire 35 TDRs. So it actually requires him to acquire more TDRs. And because we moved the access to Immokalee Road, we also have to build a turn lane, which was -- has a cost of 250,000. It's just the cost of doing business, but, you know, I just point out that there is a cost associated with that. But there's no problem. We'll come in off of Immokalee Road. I wanted to point out the price that the contract calls for for these TDRs. We have traditionally said the value of a TDR in the marketplace has ranged between 12- and 15,000, but in this case the price per TDR is $19,428. Now, I'm not sure if that's a reflection of the market going June 16, 2020 Page 7 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) up or the availability of those TDRs from parcels that qualified under the Board's restriction, and that's just the price. But it is a little bit higher than we have typically quoted to use. So the price to purchase those TDRs is -- in total is $680,000. And so, again, I point out that obviously you're developing -- you have access to central sewer and water, you have access to an arterial roadway, you're within a mile of the urban boundary, you have development that's very similar to what's proposed around you, but you're going to be competing at a higher cost because of the need to acquire the TDRs. So as I mentioned the NIM was back in -- actually, a little more than a year ago. We had 15 members of the public in attendance, and the major issues were the use of Richards Road, which we are now using Immokalee. The concern over providing adequate buffers around the perimeter of the property, particularly -- particularly where it abuts, you know, other development, not necessarily on Immokalee. But -- and so we agreed at the transmittal and hearings to provide a 25-foot-wide buffer with Type B plantings. Now, Type B plantings are called for in the development order to be opaque within one year. So they're a pretty substantial buffer. I know most of you are familiar, but that's what a Type B landscape buffer is. So it's a Type D in terms of the definition or a type -- adjacent to the road it's a Type D. Some of them are Type A. I think one is a Type B. But the point is, all of those buffers will be 25-foot wide and have Type B planting. So it's kind of a hybrid of a more substantial buffer. And, again, the density was reduced to 77 units. No one spoke in opposition at the transmittal hearings. After the NIM -- I know this is very hard to read, and I will just summarize it for you. My client -- so at the NIM we always have a sign-in sheet, and we ask folks who attend to provide us with their address and their email. Most people do. Some people don't. In this case, there were several husband and wifes in attendance. We emailed those that provided us with the email address after the NIM to let them know of the changes we had made. Well, perhaps that's why no one was here to speak in opposition. We received one letter back that said we're very appreciative of your time and effort, we believe the proposal will be a great benefit, and so on and so forth. So it was a positive response. This exhibit is the master plan. It shows you the access in blue there off Immokalee Road, right-in, right-out. The development tract runs right here, right here, and over here, and the green shows you those perimeter buffers all the way down Richards, Sunset [sic], to the west, and adjacent to Immokalee Road. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Bob, can you go back to that again while it's up. MR. MULHERE: Sure. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I guess that's to the west there. You have a triangle at the end of the road. Is that just going to be an emergency entrance? MR. MULHERE: This -- that's -- I'm glad you raised that. It is going to be an emergency entrance access. It -- or access. It says, stabilized emergency egress; however, I -- in some conversations I had with you -- and I assume this will come up -- that it would be preferred to just make it an emergency access because you never know what might happen in the future. If this road is improved at some point in the future, you could put a gated secondary means of ingress and egress to the project. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: How about the other entrance on the west, then; is that going to be an interconnect? MR. MULHERE: No. There's no interconnection there. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MR. MULHERE: Just some information. The Rural Fringe Mixed Use District requires you to preserve native vegetation that exists on the site at a rate of 40 percent, but not to exceed June 16, 2020 Page 8 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) 25 percent of the site. So if you're 100 percent native vegetation -- we were not, but if you are, you would just multiply that times 25 percent. That would be your native vegetation retention requirement. We are required to provide 9.63 acres, which we are providing. We also, in discussions with certain -- at the time, certain Planning Commission members wanted to see us meet the intent of the larger amount of native preservation that we would have had to provide if it was still a 40-acre site, even though the county acquired several acres for expanding Immokalee Road. And we were able to do that through those perimeter buffers and through an open-space tract, which I'll show you in just a minute. So we -- actually, if you look at our preserve plus the open space and the perimeter buffers, we have 11.86 acres and 25.1 acres of open space -- .18 acres of open space. There is one change I want to call to your attention. While we were getting through COVID and being delayed and -- my client had submitted a subdivision plat to try to stay ahead of the game. Of course, they won't approve it until if and when this gets approved, but staff had a comment that we needed to provide a sidewalk, a 5-foot sidewalk along Richards and Sunset, and I'll go back and just remind you that Sunset is right here, and Richards is right here. So south and east. CHAIMAN FRYER: Sundance? MR. MULHERE: Sundance. Thank you. Thank you. I always say "Sunset." And that's made up of two matching 30-foot easements. So there's a 60-foot-wide private right-of-way on the south on Sundance and a 60-foot right-of-way on the east that makes up Richards. And the county code requires, for these types of developments, a 5-foot-wide sidewalk adjacent to those rights-of-way even though they're private, and even though they really probably will never go anywhere. Maybe they will at some point in the future, I can't say. So you have two options: Build the sidewalk, or the county has a methodology for calculating a payment in lieu, but that payment in lieu is significantly more expensive than building the sidewalk. I mean, significantly. So we are choosing to build the sidewalk. The problem we have, if you look at this cross-section right here, this is showing you the 30-foot easement that's within our property, Richards Street 30-foot easement. That road is a gravel road with 20-foot travel lanes, but those are entirely located within this 30 feet. None of it is on the east 30 feet. That leaves 10 feet for the existing roadside drainage. So we really don't have any opportunity to put that sidewalk within that 30-foot easement. So we discussed with staff putting it within the 25-foot-wide buffer, and they are fine with that. I spoke to Mark Templeton. Because this 25-foot-wide buffer exceeds what we would otherwise be required to have by the LDC in this location -- we would normally have a maximum of a 20-foot buffer -- he was okay with putting a sidewalk within the planting area. And the landscaping will be between the sidewalk and the development. So the folks that use the sidewalk, the folks that live next to us, will still have that landscape buffer to separate our project from the roadway. And so I placed that language into the GMP and RPUD. You can see in red here I added with respect to the landscape buffer, "it may include a 6-foot-wide sidewalk easement to accommodate a 5-foot-wide sidewalk within the east and south perimeter buffers." And that allowed me to just simplify the PUD language. I didn't really have to say north, east, south, west; simply all perimeter buffers will be 25 feet, but a 5-foot sidewalk could be in the south and east. I wanted to point out that 15-foot platted open-space strip, which you see here in green. So that 15-foot-wide open-space strip is located between the rear yard of these lots and the preserve providing for the required setback from the preserve and may also provide for an opportunity, if June 16, 2020 Page 9 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) necessary, to enhance or increase -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: This is all new material that I've not reviewed or been provided any copy or notification that this is coming. So I would recommend that if you do recommend approval of this project, that it be contingent upon my reviewing it and making sure that it reflects what has been represented here and that it's clear and concise. CHAIMAN FRYER: Good point. MR. MULHERE: The sidewalk issue? MS. ASHTON-CICKO: All the stuff you're putting up right now. MR. MULHERE: But there's only -- it all deals with the sidewalk. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Well, correct, but I need to review the language and to make sure it is correct -- MR. MULHERE: I understand. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: -- in what you are stating that it's supposed to mean today. MR. MULHERE: I had coordinated with staff. I apologize if you weren't on those emails. MR. KLATZKOW: We've had this discussion before. Stop. I mean, the process is -- this is the second time you're before the Board. Every time you come back there's always a change. I'm sure there'll be a change between now in the BCC, because that's what you do. Just stop. MR. MULHERE: It wasn't intentional. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have to ask the question, then, why staff has worked this and office counsel was not involved, and why is it on the agenda then? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, that's the staff's responsibility to coordinate with the -- with counsel in regards to these petitions. MR. MULHERE: I'll take the responsibility. Jeff is right. He's mentioned that to us before. I'll take the responsibility. I neglected to copy Heidi, so it's my fault. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: I mean, I'll just point out for the record, based on the exhibit, the 30-foot easement was where the road -- he was telling you that it was existing 30-foot easement where the road is going and the gravel drive and so forth, and then the buffer is 25 feet with the 5-foot sidewalk. But if you look at the exhibit, it's within a right-of-way. So that's my first question. But I can work it out with him subject to -- MR. MULHERE: Okay. MS. ASHTON-CICKO: -- you know, understanding what your intent is when you approve it. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Let's talk about how that would result then with respect -- let's assume a favorable vote subject to the condition of county attorney review and approval -- MR. MULHERE: Yeah. CHAIMAN FRYER: -- if the County Attorney was unable to approve or unable to reach a compromise -- MR. MULHERE: Then we'd have to pay -- MS. ASHTON-CICKO: Right here. You're showing the right-of-way here, and this is where you said the road was going in the existing right-of-way. What's that? MR. MULHERE: Okay. I can explain that. That is the right-of-way to the left. That's an internal right-of-way. If you look at this exhibit right here, see this line right-of-way? That is the internal right-of-way in the project. That's not -- it's not within the 30-foot easement. CHAIMAN FRYER: Well, let me ask -- MR. MULHERE: I can answer your question. June 16, 2020 Page 10 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: Let me ask. MR. MULHERE: We would only have one choice. We would have to pay in lieu. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. But from the -- if we make our approval conditioned upon satisfaction on the part of the County Attorney and the County Attorney does not approve, then is that going to be considered that we disapproved it? MR. MULHERE: Well, no. We either -- well, you can either make your motion that the county approves this or the other option of payment in lieu. CHAIMAN FRYER: County Attorney, would that be satisfactory? Is that a fair substitute for reviewing the materials? MR. KLATZKOW: I'm tired of having this conversation with Mr. Mulhere, all right. The process is you come forward with a completed application. The Planning Commission reviews it. The Board reviews it. It gets transmitted. The State reviews it with comments. It comes back. Comments are addressed, if there are comments. You hear it again. Board hears it again, but that's not how this works with this process. The way this process works is that it comes to you; before it gets to the Board, he makes a couple changes. It goes to the Board. Comes back. Makes some more changes. Comes to you. I don't know. First time I'm hearing of this. We'll work it out, all right, at the end of the day, but there's a certain integrity to the process that's being lost by, oh, by the way, we've got this change or, oh, by the way, we've got that change. And it's just -- it gets tiresome to me, but... CHAIMAN FRYER: Point taken. Then, Jeff, is your office, albeit reluctantly, satisfied that this is an okay approach, or should we continue it? MR. KLATZKOW: No, don't continue it. But sooner or later I'm going to have a conversation with the Board of County Commissioners, and one of these projects is going to be stopped. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. KLATZKOW: All right. It's just, you know, the camel gets his nose in the tent, then the neck and everything else, and the project just changes during the course of the hearing process, and it's just -- it's not the intent of the hearing process. The intent is to have a completed application before you hear it first. CHAIMAN FRYER: And this was always a big point with Mark Strain, too. MR. KLATZKOW: It's fine. We'll take care of it with staff. We'll work it out. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Again, I have to ask the question -- MR. KLATZKOW: It's just tiresome, that's all. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- why the zoning staff -- MR. BELLOWS: I wasn't copied on the email either and -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- did not coordinate with Heidi. MR. BELLOWS: And I don't think they coordinated with Zoning either. MR. MULHERE: I'll have to go back and look. That's okay. It's my responsibility. MR. KLATZKOW: Ray, who's the planner on this? MR. BELLOWS: Tim Finn. MR. KLATZKOW: Did Tim -- you're in the room. Did you see this? MR. FINN: Never heard. MR. KLATZKOW: Okay. So nobody saw this. So this is the first time anybody's seen this. MR. YOVANOVICH: Here's the reality of what happened. As Bob pointed out, we're trying to catch back up for the three months we lost because of the COVID. We submitted the plat to basically hopefully get the PUD approved; next BCC meeting have the plat approved. The plat reviewer caught we have a sidewalk issue. There was a screwup on coordinating with all the necessary people. At the end of the day, we'll either have to build the June 16, 2020 Page 11 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) 5-foot sidewalk as Mr. Mulhere suggested or we'll have to pay in lieu. I apologize on behalf of our petitioner. I apologize that somehow there was a miscommunication within the internal workings of the county staff. I appreciate everybody's flexibility here. But we all are trying to get things back on track for time we lost because we couldn't have any public hearings. I know Jeff's frustrated. Frankly, I'm frustrated because I'm just trying to get this continued to move. Because the reality is, we've spent a lot of money to get where we are today, and we're running out of time based upon our contract. So I'm imploring you to please don't continue this. We need to keep this moving. And we'll either pay in lieu or we'll build the sidewalk as we've just described it subject to Heidi and Jeff's approval that the language works. CHAIMAN FRYER: Is there also an issue on the part of the County Attorney's Office with respect to the specific text, or does the -- MR. YOVANOVICH: We frequently work with Heidi, because there's times with you-all where you direct us to make changes and don't make us come back for the consent. It's not unusual for us to work with Heidi to take care of whatever tweaks, and that condition is fine with us as well. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, here's -- MR. YOVANOVICH: And it's not unusual. MR. KLATZKOW: The issue isn't my working with Rich or Heidi and I, because we wind up coming to an agreement on the language. The issue is having the constant changes of the language throughout the process. That's -- that is -- that is my frustration. CHAIMAN FRYER: And these things are coming to us when they're not yet ready for prime time. MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, you know what, the good news is it was caught, because if we didn't bring the plat forward, we would have gone through this process, and we would have done the payment in lieu. That's the reality of what would have happened. We would have done the payment in lieu, because it would have been caught after the PUD was approved, and we wouldn't have had the ability to put the sidewalk in the buffer. So this was caught because we brought another -- normally a quasi-administrative process forward at the same time. CHAIMAN FRYER: Let me tell you where I am on this, and then I want to hear what the Planning Commission says and also be sure that the County Attorney is okay. MR. MULHERE: I just want to add very quickly. Look, Jeff's right. I should have coordinated. This just came up in the last five or seven days. There's no excuse. I was trying to get the issue resolved with staff. I sent an email to Mark Templeton and Tim Finn, and Mark sent me an email back explaining the problem. I coordinated with him. I simply neglected to show that change, prior to this hearing, to Heidi. CHAIMAN FRYER: Understood. Let me -- let me get out on the table where I think I would like to be on this and see if the Planning Commission agrees. It sounds to me as though there's a high degree of comfort that the County Attorney's Office and the applicant will come to an agreement on all open issues. But just to be sure that this doesn't happen again, I'm going to propose that our -- that if we do vote to approve this, that it be conditional -- that our approval be conditional upon you getting that worked out such that the result would be if you don't that would be considered a disapproval. Does anybody on the Planning Commission have a feeling about any of that? MR. YOVANOVICH: Mr. Fryer, may I suggest one modification to that? CHAIMAN FRYER: Yes. MR. YOVANOVICH: If we can't reach an agreement on the language with the County Attorney, that we -- instead of your being a disapproval of the project, you require us to do the June 16, 2020 Page 12 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) payment in lieu. That -- because that's already in the code. So all we're asking is a mechanism to build the sidewalk on our property instead of in the road right-of-way that's reserved. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Jeff, is that going to be acceptable to you? MR. KLATZKOW: Yeah, that's fine. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Then that's what we'll do. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm fine, yeah. COMMISSIONER FRY: That works. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Good. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'm fine. CHAIMAN FRYER: Please continue, Mr. Mulhere. MR. MULHERE: I certainly wouldn't want to take this beating on purpose. So I -- you know, mea culpa, mea culpa. I don't even know where I was. CHAIMAN FRYER: You were apologizing. MR. MULHERE: Thank you. Here's another change, but hopefully I think that Heidi is aware of this one. The trip cap -- the trip cap reads 97, and when we reduced the number of units from 95 to 77, the trip cap went down to 79, and staff asked us to change that. CHAIMAN FRYER: That was more than a typo, then? MR. MULHERE: I believe that, oddly enough, the 97 was the previous trip cap number, and even though they seem like they're interchanged, 79 is the current trip cap number. It's a reduction. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. MULHERE: And staff asked us to make sure that we changed that. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. MULHERE: So, in conclusion, we believe that the requested overlay makes sense. It's needed to generate reasonable market interest in developing the sending lands, and acquiring these TDRs will compensate sending landowners for the loss of the value. It's not precedential because anybody else that wants to do this has to come in through that same process of more than a year of public hearings. And that concludes my presentation. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Are there questions from the Planning Commission for the applicant, starting with Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes, thanks. Hey, Bob. MR. MULHERE: Hi. COMMISSIONER FRY: Bob, just to paraphrase the county commissioners, the BCC's request, was -- it sounds like they are hoping that the TDRs are acquired to basically restrict development on new lands that were not already protected. So they're really trying to make sure that some new territory is protected from development? MR. MULHERE: Yes. Yes. I mean, that's the outcome. I think the basis for that -- and this is just my opinion, having heard the Board discussion, is that they wanted to be sure that the TDRs were severed from lands that hadn't previously severed the TDRs. So, yes, you do get the result of additional lands being protected through that. MR. YOVANOVICH: Not exactly. What they wanted us to do was either sever them from new lands or sever the third and the fourth, which is the cleanup -- MR. MULHERE: Right. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- and the transmittal credit to the environmental agencies. They wanted to further the goal of environmental protection through either new lands having the first June 16, 2020 Page 13 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) couple of TDRs taken off or the third and fourth TDR being taken off the lands that already had the first two severed. So that was the intent. COMMISSIONER FRY: Gotcha. Thank you. MR. MULHERE: And I did work with Heidi on that language. COMMISSIONER FRY: What is the state on the TDRs? You put a price in there, 19,000 and such. Are they required? Are they reserved? Where do they stand right now? MR. MULHERE: Well, they're under contract. COMMISSIONER FRY: Under contract contingent on approval? MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Can you go back to your slide on the TDRs? MR. MULHERE: Sure. COMMISSIONER FRY: So what is the total plus-or-minus 1.8 million at the bottom? MR. MULHERE: That is -- COMMISSIONER FRY: Oh, that's just adding those. I missed -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: So 850,000 for mitigation? MR. MULHERE: Yes. And that's just the cost of doing business. You have to mitigate; that's the cost. I just wanted to point out that those are typical costs. The atypical costs in development in this case is the TDRs. COMMISSIONER FRY: For those of us that aren't experts on the TDR program or this -- you've got two scenarios up there. Under GMP currently you have 30 TDRs required and now -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: And now you double the density. You're at one unit -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- for 30 TDRs, now you're at 30.04 for 35 TDRs. MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: Just explain in laymen's terms why it's not double. MR. MULHERE: Because there's a bonus provision in the GMP amendment. For every TDR you buy, you get one bonus development unit. And so that's how it works out. If you add -- you got seven or eight base on the property at one per five, and if you acquire 35 TDRs, you'll get 35 additional units. That's 70, plus the seven basis is 77. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. This question I'm not sure if this is for staff, and maybe it's inappropriate timing. But I'm curious at what points and under what circumstances do you substitute an asphalt bike path for a sidewalk? And is that something that is considered in this, you know, which would be better, because a bike path is better for biking. It doesn't have unevenness as the sidewalk panels -- the concrete panels change elevation. It also is softer if you're running. And I'm just curious if that is something that is considered by the county. Mike, that is service. MR. SAWYER: That certainly is. I appreciate that. Mike Sawyer, Transportation Planning. When it comes to multiuse paths, the definition that we've got is a 12-foot asphalt path. Multiuse, that's why you need the additional width. When you do that, you're able to reduce the sidewalk on the opposite side of the roadway to five feet instead of six. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. But in this case this -- the only requirement is a 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk. MR. SAWYER: Correct, because these are more -- you know, these are local roads. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. June 16, 2020 Page 14 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. SAWYER: Actually, they're more rural roads -- COMMISSIONER FRY: Got it. MR. SAWYER: -- in this case. COMMISSIONER FRY: All right. Thanks, Mike. Appreciate it. CHAIMAN FRYER: Anything else, Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: No, I'm good. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Bob -- and I know it's part of the PUD, but I'll ask it now. You talked about mitigation. Listed species, there are no listed species, but it did identify the bonneted bat, so you're impacted by USA Fish and Wildlife, I believe, for South Florida. There's an ongoing consolidated study so -- for all of South Florida for U.S. Fish and Wildlife. But also are you -- you said that you're in the secondary zone for panthers -- panther habitat. Will you still be assessed PHUs for this -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- panther habitat units, so there will be a payment as well? MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Is that part of the 1.8 million? Because I know PHUs are pretty spendy. MR. MULHERE: Estimated, yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. But other than -- MR. MULHERE: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Other than that, no other listed species and, of course, getting into jurisdictional wetlands, I mean, you haven't -- have you gone that far, seeking JD, and -- MR. MULHERE: We're close to receiving our permit. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, you are. MR. MULHERE: ERP. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And Section 44 of the -- MR. MULHERE: And Corps. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- and the Army Corps? MR. MULHERE: And the Corp permit, yes. Fish and Wildlife has signed off on it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Fish and Wildlife has signed off. That's the typically long pole in the tent, quite honestly. I have questions of staff when staff comes forward then. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you, Joe. Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No. CHAIMAN FRYER: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Probably a really dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyways because I need to understand what's going on better. If nothing happens, you can develop at one unit per acre. MR. MULHERE: No, even to develop at one -- if nothing happens -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Well, you still need 30 -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But you wouldn't need the change that you're applying for. MR. MULHERE: Yes, except I would add to that, at least it's our position, and I think it's an accurate position, that the cost of developing exceeds the benefit, the return at one unit per acre. June 16, 2020 Page 15 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) It's just not going to happen. So the sending land owners are not going to get compensated, because we're not going to buy the TDRs, and the property's not going to get developed at one unit per acre. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But you're basically asking us to allow you to double the density? MR. YOVANOVICH: Actually -- actually -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: However you get there. MR. YOVANOVICH: Actually, under the current Comprehensive Plan language, the minimum acreage you need to get to one unit per acre is 40 acres, and we don't have 40 acres. We only have 37 acres. And staff has taken the position that the fact that we lost a little over -- it's 47 acres and change. The acreage we lost to the right-of-way acquisition we're not entitled to go under the current Comprehensive Planning language. MR. KLATZKOW: Which we did pay for. You keep saying "we lost it." MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, actually, Jeff, I've got the appraisal here. The taking occurred prior to the adoption of the Rural Fringe Mixed Use program. It was being discussed. So there was compensation given for the inability to participate in the program. So we're going through the Growth Management Plan Amendment process to do two things: One, be eligible to even get to the one unit per acre. And, you're right, then double that to two units per acre. The reason we're asking you to do that is if you look at the history of the TDR program in Collier County, it has worked great for the big landowners both on the receiving side and on the sending side. For the smaller infill parcels such as this and the smaller sending land parcels, it has not worked at all because most of the remaining sending land parcels are in the 20-acre or less category, and it's very difficult to put enough of those 20-acre or five-acre or 10-acre sending land parcels together to get enough TDRs to actually do a project. So what Ryan actually did -- I could go to a sending land bank, if you will -- there are -- there are bankers out here who have severed the TDRs. You could probably pay 10- to 14,000 for those already-severed TDRs. As you've seen Ryan, because the intent of the program was to further stimulate the sending land property owner compensation process, is paying about 19,000. So he's paying at a premium for the TDRs that he's acquiring in exchange for that bonus TDR. So it's not totally free, and it's furthering the TDR sending land process. And I know I've made this analogy earlier or discussion point earlier but, obviously, Mr. Shea, you weren't here for that and haven't been here for the whole Rural Fringe Mixed Use District program that's been around for about 20 years, and it's been, frankly -- depending on who you are, it's been floundering for the sending landowners as well as the receiving landowners. And I think the Board agreed and the Planning Commission agreed that on this smaller parcels it made sense to tinker with the program to try to further stimulate the acquisition of TDRs, and that's what we're hopefully -- we're doing, and I know it's more expensive than going to somebody who already owns the TDRs. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. MULHERE: I did have an exhibit here which, if I can -- it shows you -- so this exhibit right here has the two options that my client has for acquiring the necessary number. So this is sending lands, and you can see that required an aggregation of parcels. There's two options there. One option is 78 acres in total to preserve through sending. COMMISSIONER FRY: Now, the TDRs, there are four types of TDRs per property, correct? MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: So -- MR. MULHERE: Well, up to -- June 16, 2020 Page 16 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRY: So what exact restrictions are there on those 70-some acres? MR. MULHERE: Well, so I'll just go over real quickly how you acquire TDRs. There's a base TDR which you get -- first of all, there's -- well, there's a base TDR. You get one base TDR per five acres of sending lands. You also get an early entry TDR, which isn't really an early entry anymore because it's -- program's 19 years old, I think, or 18, but it's still available, an early entry TDR, so that's two of the four. And then there are a possibility of two additional TDRs. One is an environmental restoration TDR, maintenance and restoration. So you have to go into those sending lands and clean them of exotics, and then they have to be maintained in that condition, and then the final positive TDR which, really, is very difficult to get, is to -- you get another bonus if you donate or -- presumably donate, but give the land to a conservation entity. So, Collier County, perhaps, through Conservation Collier, the State of Florida, whatever the case may be. Whatever that conservation entity may be, you can get another bonus. So it's very difficult. And as Rich said, these smaller landowners have a five-acre parcel that they can build a house on. And the TDRs that they can get are probably at most three, not four, because you're not going to find somebody to take that five acres in isolation, by itself. And then you have to pay the money to clear the exotics off of the land. And so at the market rate that we have seen -- and even at the market rate that my client is paying, you know, the most that you would probably get in a return is $60,000, 50- to 60,000 minus the cost to clear the exotics, and the cost to go through the process with the county to sever those TDRs. There's not a perceived value out there. There's just not a perceived value in that. So by, you know, aggregating these parcels, it's easier for somebody to do the exotic removal on a larger group of parcels and let -- and there's a cost savings in an economy of scale there. Whether or not there'll ever be an opportunity to donate or give those lands to a conservation entity remains to be seen. So two or three units per acre is about the most that you're going to -- per five acres is about the most you're going to get out of sending lands. COMMISSIONER FRY: Bottom line, this is 78 acres -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- that are going to be cleared of nonnative vegetation -- MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- and restricted from development. MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Paul, other questions? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Well, go back to the dumb questions. MR. MULHERE: Okay. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So just so I understand, if we approve this, will we have twice the density on this development piece of land -- developed piece of land than the surrounding land around it? MR. MULHERE: Yes. Right now those lands, the maximum that they could do outside of a village is one unit per acre. This parcel would be developed at two units per acre. Single-family detached. COMMISSIONER SHEA: And we're doing that just so it's more economical for you to develop it? MR. YOVANOVICH: Not only for us -- the answer to your question is yes, because if you don't have enough units to recover your cost, as we've shown you, between mitigation and the turn lane and the TDRs, let alone the on-site costs, you can't make a project work at 37 units. It's just -- the math just doesn't work, and it further stimulates the TDR program. So the tradeoff is, June 16, 2020 Page 17 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) you'll get lands into the TDR program that you previously didn't have, yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: That's all I have. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Just to clarify on that, just so you understand, you're correct, but also it is an opportunity for those who own property in sending lands to be compensated for the loss of the development rights that they had, because now they can sell those TDRs. That's how the whole program was set up, and that's part of the process. So, yes, it's an advantage to the developer but also is an advantage to the landowner who based -- well, 20 years ago, the Rural Land Stewardship Program, when it restricted development on environmentally sensitive lands, now that property owner can get some compensation for loss of the developments when they transfer the development rights and certainly get paid for that. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But it doesn't benefit the people that are already there under the current growth scenario. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I don't understand. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Well, the neighbors, they all moved in thinking they were going to have X number of units per acre in the neighborhood, and now you're changing it. MR. YOVANOVICH: But most of these people have owned there prior to the Rural Fringe Mixed Use program even coming into existence. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. MR. YOVANOVICH: So there was a change -- again, the original layout, basically, if you developed Collier County one mile east of Collier Boulevard, that was all the rural lands. Everything else was urban except for Golden Gate Estates. The original development pattern 20-something years ago would have been one unit per five acres of everything east of Collier Boulevard. There was -- you go back to the environmental challenge that was waged against the Comprehensive Plan. A new program came about to come up with a way to preserve those environmentally sensitive lands. In the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, that was sending lands. In the Rural Lands Stewardship Program, that was Stewardship Sending Areas. So you had these two concepts of acquiring and taking away development rights to preserve and then transfer that development over to receiving lands in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District and then Stewardship Receiving Areas in the Rural Lands Stewardship Area. So there was a fundamental change to the program that was basically environmentally based, and with this project we're right on Collier -- I'm sorry -- on Immokalee Road, and your transportation impacts for the extra 40 units, or whatever the math is, are easily accommodated. And, yes, there's a change, and at the NIM the primary concerns were Richards Road, and I think we've addressed those primary -- those concerns. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The follow-up in your question, it's not necessarily factual or not necessarily the facts in regards to the Rural Land Stewardship Program, when those lands were designated receiving -- and that was part of the Comprehensive Plan. Very laborious process. I was part of the staff when -- in fact, it was my division that actually shepherded that thing through. But when that was approved and the Comprehensive Plan was changed, those folks may or may not know it, but at that time the expectation is no longer one unit per five acres because it's now a receiving land. So for all intent and purposes, the receiving lands, yes, a neighbor could say I thought, but 20 years ago when it was approved, it -- that is no longer the basis, because now it can be -- with the TDR program, it can be developed at greater than one unit per five acres or one unit per four. MR. MULHERE: I just wanted to add, Mr. Shea, that I made this argument at the transmittal hearings and, you know, I maybe perhaps should have gone back and spent a little more June 16, 2020 Page 18 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) time on this item here at the adoption hearing. But if you look at the slide that's on there, we made the argument, or I made the argument, that this is a transitional density from the urban area to the lands further to the east, and that is not new in Collier County. So south of, I think, basically, Davis, the urban area transitions into something called the Urban Residential Fringe. And this, where I'm pointing to you right there, it's similar to the transition Urban Residential Fringe. That area allows a density of 1.5 units per acre as a transition but can be increased to 2.5 units per acre with TDRs. Further to the east of that one mile, you're back down into the rural lands. And that is where the TDRs have been consumed the most is along the Collier Boulevard corridor because of central sewer and water, arterial roadway access. So, really, we made the argument this is a very similar situation. And there are very few parcels situated in that area that might ask for the same thing. And, you know, staff is doing a restudy. Perhaps they'll consider that. CHAIMAN FRYER: Other questions, Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I have another stupid question. CHAIMAN FRYER: Nothing's stupid. You go right ahead. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So if this was 42 acres, would we be here right now? MR. MULHERE: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So it would be the same issue. So this 40 acres isn't causing a lot of problem? MR. MULHERE: Yes. We would still be here because of the increasing the density. If we had 40 -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. MR. MULHERE: -- or greater acres -- and I will point out that typically the county recognizes nonconformities created by a taking. Even if it's an acquisition, there are policies where they recognize the impacts of that, and you're allowed to go forward and ask for what you otherwise would be allowed to go forward. And I have those policies here, if you -- you know, I can go over them, but... CHAIMAN FRYER: What else, Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I'm done. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. This had come before the rest of us at transmittal, and in the lead-up to transmittal and in the hearing itself, I had all my concerns basically addressed. But some of the ones that you have raised were initially of concern to me as well, and so those were not stupid questions. The one thing that remains that I think perhaps ought to be brought out and explained, the land immediately to the east has a mobile home overlay. MR. MULHERE: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: So -- and you and I talked about this, Bob, in our recent phone conversation. But it seemed to me that if mobile homes started appearing there -- as far as I can tell, there are none now -- it would be a transition of greater density to the east going less density to the west, which is sort of an anomaly. MR. MULHERE: I guess I'd be remiss if I didn't point out you're still only allowed one unit per five acres to the east even with mobile homes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay, good point. Thank you. MR. MULHERE: I'd like to say yes, but I know that that's not the case. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. I did not know that. Thank you. Okay. And I didn't have any other concerns at this point. So if there's nothing further from the applicant, we'll ask for staff's presentation. June 16, 2020 Page 19 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. BELLOWS: Would you like to start with the Growth Management Plan Amendment or the PUD? CHAIMAN FRYER: We'll start with the GMPA. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: GMP. MR. BELLOWS: Okay. Then virtually we have Corby Schmidt participating. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Yes. Good morning, Commissioners. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: He needs to be sworn in. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: All right. Thank you. Staff continues to not recommend approval of this. We did not recommend -- recommend approval of this proposal at transmittal. We did have an alternative recommendation. Although the Planning Commission did support it, the county board supported it on a mixed vote, we will continue not to support with a recommendation for approval, and I'll tell you why: This hole in the doughnut, as Mr. Weeks used to refer to it, does not provide any kind of transition from one kind of density to another. Neighbors to both sides live on one -- one unit per five acres. Although what may be allowed in this area and almost a mile away, as Mr. Mulhere described, may be different, and because to one side an overlay for mobile homes may make one side or another different, there's no transition being provided by this property. Also, this provides -- if approved, this overlay that acts as a subdistrict provides a unique opportunity for the property owner. It doesn't provide any other similar opportunities to properties or landowners in receiving lands. This kind of density is out of character with the receiving lands in which the site is located. And keep in mind the comparisons that are being made, the two units per acre, is a net-to-gross comparison. The number of units being proposed here, the 77 units actually being built on, about 12-and-a-half acres. So your density is six units per acre. Now, that kind of density is, when compared with the neighboring areas, much more dense. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have questions. CHAIMAN FRYER: Go ahead, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Corby, I think it's -- that was sort of a disingenuous comparison, because all developments are based on gross acreage and counting all preserves. So to just say this is only developed in those certain areas is incorrect. What is the basis for that statement? I mean, it -- I understand exactly what you said, but it's not a factual statement. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Well, it's factual because some of the ideas that they'll be presenting for the Planned Unit Development in the layout, they talk about a cluster development, and the density of the planned development, the neighbors are hoping and will see something that is buffered enough, secluded enough so that this high density being proposed won't impact them. And simply to point out that it's higher density than being discussed. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But all density is based on the overall acreage, is it not? It's 37 acres. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Understood. But you -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So you -- basically, I -- I'm annoyed at the staff position right now. What you just stated almost sounds like you're creating new rules. And what is the basis for the rules? Can you -- let's go back to the rural fringe. The rural fringe was designed to do what? To transition development from the urban area to the rural area; is that correct? MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And part of that Rural Fringe Mixed Use District -- I'm looking in this room, and I think there's probably maybe five of us who were around back then, six. June 16, 2020 Page 20 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) Even Anita, but she was on the dark side. But the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District -- and I'm not petitioning for this. I'm just trying to understand staff's position. It was to allow for a transition, but it was also to allow, as I stated to Paul, to allow to compensate landowners who were denied development because their lands were identified as significantly -- well, what do you want to call it? It was environmental sensitivity, and it was sending lands, so they could not be developed. And I don't understand that the -- could you explain to me how this violates the Rural Land Stewardship Program because it is an opportunity -- a small parcel. And Mr. Mulhere stated, it's not 100 acres. It's not a large parcel. But it was -- it is to allow for a development and to allow a program which has been frankly waffling for almost 20 years, but to allow for a program to compensate owners in sending lands to be compensated for the opportunity they were denied and for development and to focus development into receiving areas. Does this not do that? MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Oh, it does do that. In fact, we're not saying that it doesn't. What we're doing is making a recommendation that's more in line with the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District. To keep -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And what rules are -- what are the -- give me the -- what defends this as far -- from staffing as far as the rules? Is this just a rule because Corby thinks it's a good idea, or is there a basis for this recommendation? MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: It has nothing to do with me personally, Mr. Schmitt. The commissioners will have to understand that the permissions allowed by the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, when this property was reduced from something above 40 acres to something below 40 acres, our recommendations include recognizing that diminished acreage and returning the rights as if it were now full size so that I can participate in -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So, basically, staff's recommendation is to keep this at one dwelling unit per acre rather than the requested two? MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: That's correct, so that they can have the total of 37 units for the property, not the proposed 77. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And at that recommendation, how many TDRs are we talking about then? None, correct? MR. YOVANOVICH: Thirty, 30 versus 35. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thirty versus 35. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: That was part of Mr. Mulhere's comparison. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. I’ll reserve the right to ask more questions, but I'll pass. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: When do I get to ask Mr. Schmitt some questions? CHAIMAN FRYER: How about rebuttal? MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm going to ask him questions. Is he going to be available during rebuttal? CHAIMAN FRYER: Corby, will you be around during rebuttal? MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: I'm present for that. COMMISSIONER FRY: Mr. Chair, may I ask Corby a question; is this an appropriate time? CHAIMAN FRYER: Of course, yeah. COMMISSIONER FRY: Corby, on the staff report, Page 3 of your staff report, there is another objection to it. It says, with this revision, the development -- it's the change to single-family detached residences. And it says, with this revision, the development would no longer meet the intent of FLUE Policy 7.4 which encourages new developments to provide walkable communities with a blend of densities, common open spaces, civic facilities, and a range June 16, 2020 Page 21 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) of housing prices and types. It sounds very much like the language that we focused on with the RLSA, with the villages. And I'm just curious, does that apply here? This is a much smaller parcel where those opportunities would be limited -- of limited use because it's just not that much acreage. So just curious the background on that statement. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: In their transmittal proposal, there was more mix of residential, and late in the proposal, I believe, during your hearing, it was cut back to single-family residential only, and the point being made by staff in the report here is that now they've limited themselves. That policy where things are encouraged, not required, is that they've limited themselves and no longer offer those opportunities as they could have. So Policy 7.4, they no longer offer those opportunities for the mix of housing that they did in the beginning. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. Final question. And there was -- it's language between maximum building height and zoned building height. They've asked for a zoned building height of 35 feet and an actual maximum building height of 42 feet. There is mention of the surrounding communities such as Heritage Bay, Calusa Pines as having a max building height of 35 feet. And I just wanted to clarify, will this be taller than those surrounding communities, or it is -- in fact, do they all have a zoned building height of 35 feet with an actual building height that can be higher than that? CHAIMAN FRYER: I think it's the latter. I think it's 35/42. MR. YOVANOVICH: It's actually 35 for your zoned, and there is no max for your actual. COMMISSIONER FRY: In the other developments. MR. YOVANOVICH: In the other developments. I mean, I don't know about Heritage Bay, but -- COMMISSIONER FRY: And yours is 35 zoned, 42 -- MR. YOVANOVICH: Forty-two actual. The other standard zoning districts don't define an actual height. They only define a zoned height. COMMISSIONER FRY: So you are no higher and possibly lower. MR. YOVANOVICH: Lower on an actual basis, yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. That's all I have. CHAIMAN FRYER: Other questions for staff? Comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: I have one. Ordinarily I like to defer to staff for doing the hard work and for putting in the expertise that you put in. The reason I'm inclined to, perhaps, be a little less rigid, if you will, in this case is because of the location. And in particular, am I correct that if affordable housing was added to this mix, you could get greater density? I guess I'm asking Corby. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: The affordable housing program works in a way where the -- it's an option at this location, and it's not being chosen by this developer. CHAIMAN FRYER: Oh, I understand. I'm just trying to -- you know, looking at it from the viewpoint of the developer who has to, you know, get a certain return on the investment, and also from the standpoint of what the residents -- surrounding neighbors would want or not want and the character of what is being proposed in relation to the character on either of the -- any of the four sides, it seems to me that what is being proposed is more in keeping with the character of this than if a developer had come in wanting greater density than the two -- two-plus that is being proposed if they had an affordable housing component. And I'm just trying to identify -- you know, what if -- I mean, if we disapprove this and then a developer came in with a high-rise with affordable housing and much higher density, how would -- how would the surrounding neighbors feel in relation to compatibility and in relation to transitionness, transitionality? And -- you can take it as a question, or it's just a rhetorical question, Corby. Whatever you want to do. June 16, 2020 Page 22 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Well, they may feel very differently. I will take it rhetorically. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Fair enough. All right. Are there any other questions or comments at this time of staff? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Rich, do you want to do your rebuttal now or wait until we see if we have public? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: There's staff report. MR. YOVANOVICH: You still need staff on the PUD. CHAIMAN FRYER: On the PUD. You're right. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. MR. YOVANOVICH: Let me get out of Tim's way. MR. FINN: Yes. Hello. For the record, I'm Tim Finn, principal planner. Staff recommends approval of the PUD rezone petition subject to the large-scale Growth Management Plan Amendment petition, approval contingent upon County Attorney review of the new sidewalk information that was presented today. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. And then if the County Attorney's Office and the applicant can't reach an agreement, then the alternate is going to be payment in lieu; is that correct? MR. FINN: Yes, that's correct. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. Any questions of the Planning Commission from Tim? Karl? No. Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. CHAIMAN FRYER: Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I might have a question for the previous. What does "staff approval" mean? Is that the individual planners? I mean, you get diversified opinion because you have water and sewer says okay, this group says okay, that group says okay. So is this the individual person's opinion that -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Let me take a crack at that -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah. CHAIMAN FRYER: -- and then to the extent that I don't get it right, it can be corrected. But, basically, we've got two things we're going to be voting on: The Growth Management Plan Amendment, which is Corby's bailiwick, and then a PUDZ, an RPUDZ, which comes from Tim and that branch of Planning and Zoning. It's not really inconsistent for the two branches to have differing opinions. I think what Tim is saying is provided that we and the Board of County Commissioners approve the GMPA, then the PUDZ be -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: No, I understand that. I understand all that. I'm just saying, who is staff? Is it a -- MR. BELLOWS: For the record -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: -- consensus of staff, or is it one person that decides this? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager. Each petition type has a review staff involved, and it's a team of eight to 12 individuals, depending on what type of petition it is. They all review the project for consistency for their jurisdictional responsibility, and they provide comments to the project manager or principal planner in this case. In regards to the Growth Management Plan Amendment, they respond back to Corby as the head coordinator, and June 16, 2020 Page 23 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) he prepares a team review response in his staff report, and Tim will do the -- has done the same for the zoning staff and involved in reviewing the zoning application. Now, there are going to be instances where staff may not support a Growth Management Plan Amendment but from a zoning standpoint the staff is not objecting to that, but we will not recommend approval with -- and we can't without the Growth Management Plan Amendment, so we always throw that caveat in, this is subject to the Growth Management Plan Amendment. All zoning has to be found consistent with the Growth Management Plan, and we have correspondence indicating that should the Growth Management Plan be approved, then staff, in its entirety, will support the rezone. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Again, I understand that. What I don't understand is when you say "staff recommending approval" -- MR. BELLOWS: Staff is the team that's reviewing the project, so... COMMISSIONER SHEA: Do they vote? I mean -- MR. BELLOWS: No. They send comments to the planner, and he incorporates them. They work out those issues with the applicant the best they can, and hopefully we all come to a consensus and agreement. MR. KLATZKOW: The purpose -- MR. BELLOWS: Where we can't, we outline that in the staff report. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But it's a consensus of the team? MR. KLATZKOW: It's not a consensus. The purpose of staff is to ensure that the petition is compliant with the LDC. So it's a -- it's sort of like a checkoff box. So they'll go through the different departments. Yes, it meets the LDC, yes -- no, this does not meet code. At that point in time, they'll get back to the applicant, changes are made. Now it meets code. So it's just a checkoff box. And so it gets to you, staff is saying, yes, they've checked all the boxes; the application before you is consistent with the LDC. That's what they're really saying. COMMISSIONER FRY: May I add some context for Paul, my -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Please, go ahead. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- next most junior commissioner. So having been in your seat a year and a half ago, I had the same questions. And your questions, to me, have been excellent and right on point. I look at staff -- and this is just so it can be corrected. I'm putting it out there for everyone so it can be corrected. I look at staff's job to dot the I's and cross the T's, make sure the application meets the criteria of the Growth Management Plan and the Land Development Code. Their mission -- I think the line is drawn where it gets to subjective determinations. So in this case they see the management plan calls for a max density of one unit per acre, but they're asking for two. So now you have a subjective decision. I see justification for them saying we recommend denial because it does not meet what they have to work with. They have to work with the plan. Subjective is for us to look at that. And in this case, you know -- and I will say this: On apartment complexes, we walk in and we're told -- every apartment complex applies for 300 units minimum, and we're told that's the minimum economically viable size of an apartment complex. So we up here have to decide, not really knowing, myself personally, is that accurate or not? So here we're told they'd have to buy 30 TDRs to put in one unit per acre. For an extra five TDRs, they could put in double that and make it much more economically feasible. We have to decide if that subjective decision is within what makes sense for this location. And so, I mean, I just -- I think your questions are right along the lines of the difficulty of our job up here is the subjective side of things. MR. KLATZKOW: Staff are administrators. You're policymakers, all right. Under the statute, you're our local planning agency, and you're responsible for the Comprehensive Plan. The June 16, 2020 Page 24 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) Comprehensive Plan is primarily general overlies [sic] policy planning document. But the staff is checking boxes, and your job is to make recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for policy changes. CHAIMAN FRYER: I think all well said but certainly good questions. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. COMMISSIONER FRY: I wish mine had been that good when I first started. I wish they were that good now. CHAIMAN FRYER: Tim, were you finished? MR. FINN: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Ray, is anybody from staff going to make a presentation? MR. BELLOWS: We're here to answer questions. So if you have transportation questions or some other questions, we'll -- we have staff here. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. COMMISSIONER FRY: One question. CHAIMAN FRYER: Go ahead, Karl. COMMISSIONER FRY: Ray -- I believe I asked this question when this came through the first time, so I ask it partly for Paul's benefit. But Bob alluded to the TDR program, and I think part of the -- part of what was discussed was that for -- in the past it's worked well when one entity owned both the sending and the receiving part of the transaction, but it hasn't worked very well when they didn't, and this is one of the cases where it doesn't -- that is not the case. And so this, in a way, is almost a pilot of if we approve this, it gives the TDR program a chance to work integrating the smaller landowners. The BCC went a step further and said, hey, we want you to go and get these not from -- not from the banks, but from the other smaller landowners. Can you please speak to the TDR history and how this does play into that? MR. BELLOWS: Well, I think, personally, from a zoning standpoint, this is a very good program, and it really is intended to help protect those environmentally sensitive areas by not taking property -- and not taking property rights for those if we tried to restrict their rights. So this is a way for property owners in sensitive areas to sell off some development rights through this TDR process and direct that to sites that are more suitable for that type of development. From a zoning standpoint, its location off an arterial road, Immokalee Road, it makes it a more suitable site for a higher density, in my opinion. But it still may have some consistency problems with the GMP, and I think that's where we're seeing some disagreement or -- and it's not unusual for that to happen. If the Planning Commission feels that there's merit in the process, you can support their GMP and the rezone. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'll wait until Rich gets through with his rebuttal, so -- and then I'll make some comments. CHAIMAN FRYER: Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'm good. CHAIMAN FRYER: Paul, anything more? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No thanks. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. I don't have anything at this time. Looking at the clock, we usually take a 10:30 court reporter break, although it's really a break for everyone. Terri, what are your thoughts? Should we do it before rebuttal or -- THE COURT REPORTER: We can finish. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Finish, okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Are there any public speakers? June 16, 2020 Page 25 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: I was going to ask for that right now, yeah. Are there any register speakers? MR. BELLOWS: No one has registered on this item. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Any member of the public here who would like to be heard on this matter? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, we'll take it right to rebuttal. Go ahead, Rich. MR. YOVANOVICH: I feel like I have to repeat just a little bit of kind of the history of why we're here, and part of it's in response to some comments that Mr. Schmidt made -- Corby Schmidt made -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thank you. MR. YOVANOVICH: -- in his staff report. I think it was about four years ago the restudy was initiated for the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District area because tweaks to the program needed to be made because it's not working. Your staff wrote a white paper that initially recommended increasing the density for properties like this to two units per acre. That was their original recommendation for this type of piece of property. One of the things that Mr. Schmidt said was he was concerned that we weren't going broad enough with the application of this change because it was unique and just to our project and didn't assure a transition. That's what the restudy was supposed to do, and if you were here about a year ago when we were here the first time on the transmittal, we said we can't continue to wait for staff to finish their restudy, so we're bringing forward this proposed amendment. And, frankly, it can be a case study to see if it does stimulate some additional acquisition of TDRs from these other sending-land parcels. So that's what we came forward to do, because we couldn't continue to wait on a study that's four years in the making and, frankly, doesn't look like it's going to get changed anytime soon. He made some comments about compatibility and how this would blend in. That is -- if you -- as you get more experienced with seeing the staff reports, you're going to see Comprehensive Planning staff usually say they leave the compatibility determination to your zoning staff to review. Your zoning staff is recommending approval of the PUD, and one of the things they're saying is our proposed PUD is compatible with what is around us based upon the buffers that we're providing, the type of density we're providing. And then there's a couple of things that -- and I'm glad that Mr. Schmitt, who's in the room Mr. Schmitt brought up this issue of all of a sudden Corby decides to jump to a net-density calculation for this project when we don't do that in Collier County, and he didn't provide you the net densities for any other projects in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District to see if our net density, when you take out the lakes and you take out all this other area, is out of line or not, because when you look at the La Morada project, which is our neighbor, which is the north portion of Calusa Pines, and you look at all the density and units that were taken off the golf course properties and the preserves related to the golf course properties and you apply a net density to that project, my guess is it's going to be equal to or greater than what our net density is on this project. So I thought -- and I appreciate Mr. Schmitt bringing that out, that that was an unfair and unusual and, candidly, an improper staff comment based upon our analysis. And I just want -- I just wanted to get that on the record because I just -- I'm used to -- we're used to certain type of staff comments in response to our petition, but I can't anticipate changing the rules of analysis from a Comprehensive Planning staff. We have worked very hard with our neighbors. And the other comment about the diversity of types of housing, we changed to detached single-family housing in response to our neighbors and, candidly, in response to comments from the Planning Commission and the Board of June 16, 2020 Page 26 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) County Commissioner to come back, which we promised we would do at this stage in the PUD, limit ourselves to single-family detached housing. So to criticize us for that, I think, is not proper. And to characterize our approval from the Board of County Commissioners of the transmittal as a mixed approval -- it was 4-1. That's what the law requires at adoption, 4-1. It wasn't 3-2. It wasn't 2-3. It was 4-1, the number you would expect to get adoption to occur. So I don't think he accurately characterized how we came out of the Board of County Commissioners at our transmittal hearing. CHAIMAN FRYER: Before you move on and with the greatest respect which you know I have for you -- MR. YOVANOVICH: I'm almost done. CHAIMAN FRYER: -- Mr. Yovanovich -- I'm not on the time. But to the extent that any rehabilitation of Corby might be necessary or desirable, I just want to say I think he does an excellent job for us, and I'm always glad when he stands up to say things that maybe are not going to be received in a popular fashion. And, of course, you had every right to rebut that, and you've rebutted it. Personally, I think effectively so. But I just want -- I want the record to show that I personally think Corby does a great job. MR. YOVANOVICH: And I'm personally fine when Corby and I don't see eye to eye. I just want to make sure that we are doing an apples-to-apples comparison when we're presenting our position on our -- CHAIMAN FRYER: And I think you made that point, and so did Commissioner Schmitt. MR. YOVANOVICH: With that, we are asking that you adopt the subdistrict as we've proposed it with the modifications that were made between the -- you last saw it at the transmittal hearing in response to county commissioner comments and your comments at that transmittal hearing, so not follow your staff's recommendation on that, and we request that you transmit recommendation of approval on the Growth Management Plan Amendment and you also recommend approval of the PUD that's in front of you that is consistent with your staff's recommendation with the caveat on the sidewalk -- CHAIMAN FRYER: You said transmit. You mean adoption? MR. YOVANOVICH: Well, transmit a recommendation of adoption. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. YOVANOVICH: Sorry. Thank you. For the Growth Management Plan Amendment, and then you make a recommendation of approval for the PUD. And we are here to answer any -- I do want to make one other point for the record, and I think Mr. Shea was getting at that. When you look at the staff report for the Comp Plan amendment, you'll notice that the only staff members not recommending approval of what we were proposing was your Comprehensive Planning staff, because your environmental staff said we were fine. Your transportation staff said we were fine. It was just Corby and his supervisors who said we were not fine. So I think that should be considered as well in your analysis of the review. Most of the team did not see issues with what we were proposing for the Comprehensive Plan amendment. And with that, we're available to answer any questions you may have. CHAIMAN FRYER: Are there any questions of the applicant? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Discussion. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. Let's close the public section of this hearing, and then we'll have discussion. Joe, do you want to go first? June 16, 2020 Page 27 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Just a little history. And I'm going to look to Bob to make sure I give the right dates. I think, what, 1997 the state issued the consent order? Was it '97? '98? MR. MULHERE: '99. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: '99. Issued a consent order, for those on the Board that weren't around here at that time but the consent order was to prevent Collier County from urban sprawl and building units -- developments of greater than one unit per five acres. I believe there was a -- Twin Eagles was sort of the straw to break the camel's back. And there's a long history on that. But regardless, not the time to describe how it was approved. But be that as it may, they issued the order at great expense, this county, and probably over a period of two years, developed both the Rural Fringe Mixed Used amendments and the -- MR. MULHERE: Rural Land Stewardship. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Rural Land Stewardship, thank you. Both were programs that were designed to focus development in non-environmentally sensitive areas and to prevent sprawl and development in what are deemed sensitive and environmental areas. Of course, to do that, the TDR process was set up, and the TDR process was set up to compensate the loss of value of the landowner who thought at some time they were going to be able to develop their property, which became then a sending area so, therefore, they were prohibited from development. With all that said, it was a long process. It was approved. And, yes, after 18, 19 years, we went through the restudy. Still going through the restudy. There's been -- I don't recall anything coming forward yet, an amendment, if I'm not -- MR. MULHERE: No. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Nothing yet. MR. MULHERE: There's been a couple of workshops. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Workshops, yeah. They had workshops. They've had over two years of workshops because of the tweaks. But all that in history, this may not be the best development, but it is a development, 37 acres. It is a development that I see was part of why this program was developed, and that was to focus development in areas of less sensitive -- environmentally sensitive areas and, of course, to compensate any property owner for the loss of development rights on their property, and this is a way to compensate them for that because of the purchasing of the TDRs. So based on that brief history, I don't believe that two units an acre is oppressive, and I think based on the vote that we had the last time this came forward, I would -- I support the petition, and I would recommend approval based on the provisions that were stated. I would recommend approval for both the Comp Plan amendment and the PUD amendment based on the stipulation in regards to the sidewalk and the language being approved by the County Attorney's Office. CHAIMAN FRYER: Probably we should do this separately? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes, we have to do it separately. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So you want to start with a motion? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Make a motion that we approve the Comp Plan amendment for adoption and forward it to the Board of County Commissioners for their review and approval. CHAIMAN FRYER: With the County Attorney -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: With the County Attorney reviewing the language, the stipulation that the petitioner and the County Attorney reach an agreement; otherwise, the petitioner would pay in lieu of for the sidewalk in regards to the development of sidewalk. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. That's a motion on the GMP. June 16, 2020 Page 28 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The GMP. Payment in lieu of, yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER FRY: Second. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'm confused. In the GMP you're doing the sidewalk? MR. MULHERE: Both. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Both. The GMP [sic] is in the sidewalk as well. COMMISSIONER FRY: Second. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any further discussion? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes, sir. CHAIMAN FRYER: Please, Karl. COMMISSIONER FRY: I definitely struggled with this one when it came through the first time, and I think it's important that people understand why we approve something that I think staff's recommendation -- I concur with what you said, Ned. I would ask staff, do not become a rubber stamp. Speak your mind. Let us know. We need that input. Whether it's unpopular or you take a beating, I would just ask you to keep doing what you're doing. It's important to us. This is technically, I think, not in the spot where it justifies the two units per acre density, and that's why staff has recommended denial. So in struggling with this, I look at the fact that this is two miles east of 951, and in some cases the LDC and GMP don't really match what is in reality. And I think in this case that applies. Two miles east of 951 is not way out east. Now, it's a pretty urban area. There are lots of big developments around there. So from that respect, I don't think 2.0 is an unreasonable density. And also I think a very important point is that the TDR program, by all rights and measures, fails except for large landowners that own both sides of the equation, and this is a chance to let that program work. Spending a lot of money, preserving 78 -- 70-plus acres in more environmentally sensitive lands. And so I think we're always in a position of tradeoffs here. So for those reasons, I plan to support the amendment and the PUD. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. I'm going to jump in, if I may, and cap on to both the comments of Commissioner Fry and Commissioner Schmitt. Karl, I think you're absolutely right that we need to encourage staff to always speak their minds, and sometimes it would be unpopular, but it's very, very helpful to us. And please continue to do what you're doing. And, Commissioner Schmitt, Joe, I think, as you said, four years of sitting around on this RFMUD study and white papers is just awfully long. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: To me it's unacceptable. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. And I think we have to take definitive action, and that's why I'm going to vote to approve. Karen, did you have anything you wanted to say? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nope. CHAIMAN FRYER: No? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just appreciate the comments of the other commissioners for the new guy. I typically support staff on things. And I want to echo what Ned said is that we don't want staff to start rubber stamping things because they're going to try to guess how we're -- I want to know what they're thinking. Obviously, I was leaning more towards staff until we got into more of the history and the bigger picture discussion. So at this point I would support it as well. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So what's before us now is action on the GMPA. There being no further discussion, it's been moved and seconded that it be approved. We don't have any voting people on the phone, so we don't have to poll, I don't think. June 16, 2020 Page 29 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) All those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Those opposed? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously. All right. Now, we need action on the PUDZ. COMMISSIONER FRY: ***Move approval on forwarding for adoption of the -- oh, I guess there's not adoption on a PUD. Just approval. MR. BELLOWS: Just forwarding to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSIONER FRY: Forwarding to the Board of County Commissioners. CHAIMAN FRYER: With a recommendation. COMMISSIONER FRY: Recommendation of approval based on review by the County Attorney's Office, and payment in lieu if they're not able to come to terms on the sidewalk. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. It's been moved and seconded. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor -- this is on the PUD -- please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any opposition? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Again, carries unanimously. Thank you very much, all. MR. YOVANOVICH: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. All right. We've gone a little late here on a break, so we'll take a -- it's 10:41. Let's take -- is 10 minutes enough, Terri? THE COURT REPORTER: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. We'll take a 10-minute break. We'll be back here at 10:51. Thank you. (A brief recess was had from 10:41 a.m. to 10:51 a.m.) MR. BELLOWS: You have a live mic. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So Tahiti has been continued. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIMAN FRYER: ***And that's going to take us to Yahl Mulching, which is also a companion item consisting of a CU, a conditional use, and then a small-scale GMPA. And the CU is CU-PL20190000948, and the small-scale amendment is PL20190002052. So bear with me one moment. All right. All those wishing to testify in this matter, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Public speakers as well need to stand. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Everybody got sworn in who wants to speak; good. June 16, 2020 Page 30 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) All right. Disclosures from the Planning Commission. Why don't we start with you this time, Paul. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I have none. CHAIMAN FRYER: None other than materials from staff. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Nothing. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Nothing. COMMISSIONER FRY: Staff materials. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. We'll begin with the applicant's presentation. Go ahead, sir. MR. WRIGHT: Good morning, Commissioners, Mr. Chairman. I'm Jeff Wright with the Henderson Franklin law firm here on behalf of the applicant in today's hearing. With me I have our team: Jeff Ekis, the general manager of Yahl Mulching; Jim Golden and Bruno Ferraro with Grove Scientific and Engineering; and Michael Schmidt with Air Burners, Incorporated. We're here seeking your recommendation of approval for two things: Number 1, an amendment to the GMP, the Comp Plan, to allow an air curtain incinerator at this location; Number 2, an amendment to an existing conditional use to allow the air curtain incinerator to operate on the site. The site's been around for a long time. Since '91 they're excavating, and since '98 they've been mulching and recycling. It's currently approved for mulching, recycling, and as a collection and transfer site for resource recovery. In summary, seeking your recommendation of approval to allow the ACI as part of the existing operation. We've reviewed the staff reports, and we agree with their recommendations of approval. There are several conditions attached to the proposed resolution and ordinance in the case of the GMP, but the conditions are attached to the resolution, and several of those conditions were prompted by the neighbors, concerns at the neighborhood information meeting and other communications. There are, in all, about 20 conditions attached to this, seven that would be attached to the instant resolution for the conditional use, and an additional 13 that are included by reference to the prior conditional uses. As I mentioned, we have a team. Jim Golden will provide the bulk of the testimony relating to the requests; Bruno Ferraro will present testimony relating to air quality and other benefits of this unique technology, how it will work on site, required training, operation, and maintenance of the ACI; and Mike Schmidt will present information on the ACI and its proven record as clean, safe, efficient technology. I don't intend to call Mr. Ekis with Yahl Mulching, but he is here, and he's happy to answer any, really, operational questions that you might have. And our experts have all been recognized in similar proceedings, and we respectfully request that you recognize them today as experts in their respective fields. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Without objection. MR. WRIGHT: Okay. And today we'll make our presentation via PowerPoint. I know you guys have been stacking your agendas, and we appreciate you accommodating us on your schedule today. At this time, I'll turn it over to Jim Golden, thank you. MR. GOLDEN: Good morning, commissioners. Good to be here today. My name is Jim Golden with Grove Scientific and Engineering in Orlando, Florida; been working in solid waste management industry for about 30 years now in Florida, and here today to present the Yahl Mulching and recycling presentation. So here you see before you an aerial photo of the area. The site plan is highlighted in yellow. It's about 29 acres. It's immediately adjacent to -- your Collier County Landfill is to the June 16, 2020 Page 31 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) west of it. There are many conservation areas to the -- also to the west and the south and the east, and then there's rural residential to the north and east, the one unit per five acres, and so we believe it's very well located and suited for the area considering the surrounding land uses. I just wanted to go over the history. Mr. Wright touched on it some, but that this site has been operating for 22 years now, and mostly mulching and recycling of wood debris, clean screen wood debris, horticultural recycling, and it was under the sawmills category because the county at that time had really no place for recycling facility in their code or their Growth Management Plan. So that's why it says sawmills there. But really -- so it's been processing wood for a long time. And now, in 2010, they got approval, a conditional use to expand the 29 acres for construction and demolition debris recycling, and I'm going to show you where that's located on the site. They also have an FDEP permit as a solid waste facility for recycling C&D and recycling wood waste. This is a zoom-in of the current site plan set up. You can see that almost half the property is under conservation use. You see large green areas to the south and east of the active portions of the site. The construction demolition debris recycling is kind of the south central portion of the site. And the area of concern that we're permitting or requesting petition adoption is in the top northeast corner, the three acres. And I'll go to the next slide and zoom in a little bit more. But that's the northeastern or the upper right-hand corner of this site. So you can see there's a lot of green space around it. Large buffer areas. I just couldn't see the cursor. Oh, sorry. Okay, there it is. Can you all see the cursor, too, if I'm moving it? Okay. Thank you. I was looking at the wrong slide there. So this is the area of primary concern, the northeast or the upper right-hand corner, the horticultural recycling area. This is a zoom-in of the northern portion of the site. It just fits better in the slide this way, and the horticultural recycling area is in this upper northeast corner. The proposed location of the air curtain incinerator is right in the central portion of this area. Surrounding it are water sources, which is important. We know that fire concerns, or fire prevention concerns, we heard those from the public, and these green -- there's a water truck, wells, standpipes, which is like hydrants and sprinklers surrounding this horticultural area. We also have agreed to add a 6-foot-high berm, soil berm along the eastern portion of the site of the three-acre area, and additional Type C buffering, a landscape buffering, and also the green -- those green screen fences. That's going to be covered around the whole northern portion of the site primarily, though, along this northern portion of the three acres, and then the eastern portion of the three acres. So -- and also shown on here, the setbacks from the residential areas, that it's -- this says 300 acres. That's a setback from the Florida Forest Service, but that's really for open burning. We are actually about 500 feet from any local residence that's in the rural residential areas to the north and east of us. COMMISSIONER FRY: Do you mean the structure? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, the air curtain incinerator. The boundary of the site is about maybe 250 feet away from the nearest residence, yes, sir. This is the zoning map. We think we're very well located. We're surrounded by agricultural lands. You can see your Collier County Landfill here, this large parcel to the west of us. Here's the 29 acres. It's been approved at that size. And we're not asking for expansion of the 29 acres. So we think it's very well suited and compatible with the surrounding land uses. I'd like to introduce Bruno Ferraro, our Grove Scientific air curtain incinerator operator expert. MR. FERRARO: Good morning, everyone. My name is Bruno Ferraro. I am an air June 16, 2020 Page 32 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) quality engineer with Grove Scientific and Engineering. Been in this business for about 40 years. Probably have done greater than 50 air curtain incinerator projects around the country and hundreds of other types of incinerators in 49 states and three territories. So the Air Burners -- and I've done all types of manufacturers. And this tends to be one of the more superior devices on the market. It is heavily used by the divisions of forestry all over the country. USDA uses them. Many private industries and many, many landfills are using air curtain incinerators as a primary tool specifically for hurricane debris disposal; very, very important tool in that -- in that industry. What makes Air Burners unique is its engineering design. It is well designed. It's designed so that the air curtain is directed in such a way that it maximizes the amount of time that smoke is actually contained inside of the burner. Once it comes up to temperature, which is typically about 30 minutes, air curtain incinerators will operate just about smokeless. You won't know they're running from the road. They're not loud. They don't really have a definitive plume, though you'll see some photos and some videos. But the whole idea behind an air curtain incinerator is to avoid and substitute open burning of vegetative waste. And this is a very clean way of -- a very clean alternative. The US EPA has designated air curtain incinerators as a minor source of air pollution. That's a very, very important distinction. The State of Florida has adopted that and has written into its own rules a set of specific parameters that air curtain incinerators must adhere to so that they're consistent from county to county, city to city, and throughout the state of Florida. And the Air Burners is a C-327 [sic] which, as proposed, meets all of those criteria. So it's very important to understand that it is a tool to be used along with mulching and soil separation and other technologies when dealing with a large amount of biomass, especially during hurricane response. So they'll separate out the soil, use that as a beneficial material. There's certain things that are not conducive to mulching. So a lot of that, stumps and things like that, will end up being burned in an air curtain incinerator. Once the air curtain incinerator is regulated by the State of Florida under the air pollution rules, it takes it away from the Division of Forestry. The Division of Forestry says, yes, if you've got a refractory lined air curtain incinerator that operates in accordance with the State of Florida laws, we no longer regulate them. We'll give you a burn permit. You burn according to your schedule. The State of Florida air pollution rules basically say sunup to sundown. We usually operate sometime during the middle of that. Their only setback requirement, once you have a refractory lined incinerator, is 50 feet, and we meet those setbacks by a considerable amount. The refractory lined incinerator really does contain the heat and the smoke. Not to say that you don't get additional plume breakage. When you load the incinerator -- every time you load it, you're going to get sparks and stuff into the air. The three-acre site that I've been to where they're planning on installing their air curtain incinerator is very conducive to this operation. It really fits what needs to be done for a good operating air curtain incinerator. It's safe. It's going to be managed properly with training, which the manufacturer supplies in detail, as do we. When we do the air permitting, we typically train the operators on how to comply with all the rules of the State of Florida. Recommended wind speeds, that's a judgment call. Typically we don't ever operate these when the gusts are running 15 to 20 miles an hour. There's no rule that says when you should do it. We recommend, if it starts blowing 15 miles an hour, you should stop charging the machine. If it hits 20, just let it run. Stop charging it. You're done. So air facility operations, 6:30 in the morning to 5:00 p.m., but it's my understanding they don't actually run trucks until after school buses are done, somewhere around 7:30, quarter to 8:00. June 16, 2020 Page 33 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) But the air curtain incinerator typically will start up somewhere in the morning and shut down sometime in the afternoon. It will remain hot all through the night. Just make sure you understand that. Once -- you don't shut these things off. Once it's hot, it will remain hot. The next day they don't even need any other fuel other than throw logs on top of the old ashes, and it will start on fire again once you turn the fan on. You'll find these things are very quiet. It's only a little 40-horsepower motor that runs this thing, or 85-horsepower motor that runs this thing. So it's not a very loud machine at all. You don't load them constantly. You're loading them 20 times an hour, 15 times an hour depending on how much material you have for the day. The refractory box itself is designed to contain the heat. And it's really a rapid way of reducing volume of land-clearing debris or hurricane material. This is a picture of the C-327 [sic]. I've got a little video. (A video was played as follow:) "Air curtain burners control the harmful smoke --" MR. FERRARO: Whoops. I just wanted to pause it for a second here. (A video was played as follow:) "Air curtain burners control the harmful smoke --" MR. FERRARO: So in this picture -- and I'll use the cursor -- this is an open burn. We were doing a comparison between 10 tons of open burning material versus 10 tons of material loaded into the air curtain incinerator. And you can see the difference. This air curtain incinerator is actually running right now, and I'll go ahead and -- (A video was played as follows:) -- "and open pile burning, as you see on the left. By contrast our portable firebox Model S-327 in full separation is to right. See that bit of smoke rising up as wood waste is loaded inside? That's because the air curtain has been broken. But then notice how quickly the smoke stops." MR. FERRARO: I was present at this -- at this demonstration. It was actually -- we were actually conducting a compliance test. The State of Florida requires annual testing of the air curtain incinerator to make sure it meets the rules of the State of Florida. It's about a three-and-a-half to four-hour test, and you have to demonstrate annually that you're in compliance with the rules of the state. Here's another good slide. And what you're seeing is 20 tons of open burning to the background, and in the foreground you have two air curtain incinerators, each with about 10 tons of waste in them. And you can see the difference between the air curtain burning versus the open burning. This is where the critical nature of these come into play, especially when dealing with hurricane debris. At this point, I'm actually going to turn over to Michael Schmidt. He can represent his equipment and answer any other questions you might have about the equipment, and I'll be around later to discuss more about air quality if anybody has any questions. MR. MICHAEL SCHMIDT: Good morning, everyone. My name is Mike Schmidt. I'm the North American sales manager to Air Burners. We actually manufacture in Palm City, Florida. For the last 25 years, we've been shipping the fireboxes all over the world. Thousands of fire boxes all over the world. Hundreds of fire boxes all over the United States. Probably more than 50 percent of our machines go to government facilities. With this picture -- it's a great picture. It was done by -- the test was Environment Canada at the BC Hydro Dam [sic]. And this was a study that was done -- one of the many studies that were done through the years. This one is a -- they burn 48 hours -- open burn 48 hours, and that smoke -- and that plume June 16, 2020 Page 34 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) of smoke went through the valleys for 48 hours. They burned 20 tons of wood waste. On this side you see that there are two 327 fireboxes. Each firebox burns around 10 tons an hour. In one hour, they were able to reduce and get rid of that wood waste, provide an end solution, with little to no smoke. So open burning, 48 hours of smoke going through the valleys. In the firebox, you're able to get rid of all the wood waste in one hour with little to no smoke. The primary purpose of our machine is controlling particulate matter, smoke, black carbon. It's an air pollution control device. It's proven technology. It's well tested in the U.S. and other countries. There are tests -- there have been many tests over the past 15 years with EPA. I'd like to mention that we are one of 40 companies in the history of the United States that EPA has partnered up with. Very proud of that. And when EPA tested our machines all over from Hurricane Sandy, Hurricane Katrina, and many other tests throughout the United States and all over the world, EPA concluded that this is the cleanest way to get rid of wood waste compared to grinding, composting, and, of course, open burning. So wood waste is an issue throughout the United States, throughout the world, and which is the reason that we get calls four or five times a day of people not being able to get rid of wood waste. When -- with those calls, some of the best sales reps for us are fire marshals. So fire marshals all across the United States are saying you can't have this wood waste sitting here. You can't have this pile of chips sitting here. And this goes from municipalities to private facilities. And the fire marshal will come in and say that you need to get rid of it. And it's a very costly process for government agencies, for private facilities. You know, and then also air-quality state representatives. Air-quality state representatives, again, some of our best sales reps saying that you're not allowed to open burn, that you -- you know, there's certain areas that you have to have very clean emissions, and so they recommend -- they can't request, but they recommend an air curtain burner. So I receive the calls on the opposite end, and I was told they were told by either air quality or the fire marshal or -- that there are regulations that the air curtain burner can and should be used. We are on FEMA's website. FEMA website, we're the best available technology when it comes to cleanup of wood waste. You know, the Department of Defense, Department of Energy, as I mentioned, US EPA, USDA, many projects with USDA throughout the United States starting with ports and all throughout different parts of the states and the U.S. Forest Service. So that CRADA agreement that we had with EPA, we are currently under a CRADA agreement. A CRADA agreement is a Cooperative Research Agreement Development Act. We are current with a CRADA agreement with the U.S. Forest Service. So working with them to deploy fireboxes all over the United States throughout the forest and leaving biochar behind. And biochar is a very natural product that the U.S. Forest Service wants all over the forest after they're done burning their wood waste. Thank you very much. MR. GOLDEN: Hello again. We are taking -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Say your name, sir. MR. GOLDEN: Jim Golden with Grove Scientific and Engineering. Okay. You're going to hear that we had a neighborhood information meeting. Of course, every project like this should. And one of the primary concerns from the neighbors was fire prevention and fire danger of this unit. We heard that there was some devastating wildfires in this area about three or four years back. And so, you know, they're very concerned. And so we're taking fire prevention very, very seriously for this project. Bruno and I talked about it, though, and over our past 20 years -- I mean, 20 years, we've worked on about 20 sites with air curtain incinerators. They're not aware of any fire that they've June 16, 2020 Page 35 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) ever caused. They're a contained unit, and they do a great job of containing the fire in the box. Their only -- also, like Bruno mentioned, we'll be training the operators to operate these safely. Make sure they don't, you know, overfill it and things like that, you know. So, they will have -- an operations plan is going to be part of our permit. It's actually part of the approval, the conditional use. That adds a whole section on fire prevention. So they'll be trained. We'll also only burn clean wood and -- because we're not going to burn any solid waste, no fencing, no pressure treated wood, no painted wood. So this is only clean wood. That's going to be in our DEP permit also. What we also have on site is many sources of water. Like I pointed out before in the site plan, we have a water truck. We have standpipes. We've a large 16-inch draft well that the fire department had installed on site. We also had a recent inspection from the fire -- Naples fire district that the site has passed because of these water sources. We'll continue training for fire prevention. Again, we won't be burning when the wind is gusty or over 15, 20 miles an hour, and there's going to be a constant operator on this site. It's not going to be able to walk away and just let it burn on its own. There will be a constant operator during the whole time it's operating, either in a piece of equipment or on the ground observing the ACI operation. We also have a video camera on this area and so, you know, the office personnel will be monitoring that for any issues that could come up during the operation. So, again, we're taking fire prevention very seriously, and we think we have a great plan in place to prevent any fires. But we don't know of any fires that have been caused by these machines in Florida. We want to go over quickly the neighborhood information meeting. We had a good attendance. I see many of the attendees here today, so that's great. They're part of the process. And their concerns were about some of the operations of the current C&D recycling. The piles were too high. You could see them from the road. The road was kind of dangerous because of the trucks were going fast sometimes. And then, of course, the air pollution concerns and fire prevention concerns. And some air pollution concerns from some individuals, especially Dr. Soubelet, I think, to the east of the site about a thousand feet, I think he has a daughter with respiratory issues. So we took it on ourselves to say we're not going to burn if the wind is from the west, and even though, you know, very, very little smoke is generated, we just won't burn when the wind would be blowing in his direction. So that's a condition of our conditional use. We're going to have a weather station on site and a windsock. And so it's going to be very obvious if the wind's from the west, which is very rare, really. The prevailing winds are from the east/southeast here at the Naples area. So going to be blowing mostly towards the landfill side. But if it ever blows from the west, we will not burn that day. Also, there's other voluntary conditions that we've agreed to do. Repair of -- originally the Yahls paved the roadway. That's a private road. They paved the road into that area, and they've agreed to maintain that road, Washburn Avenue. They added "slow down" signs on the road. We say we're going to put a sign on the road every day that we're operating so the neighborhood knows that; operating the ACI, that is. And also other voluntary conditions like, let's say, we reduce the C&D height -- they've actually bought a power screen to process the C&D more quickly, so that lowered the piles there of the C&D so not so visible from the road. And we also are offering the use of the ACI to Collier County in a -- if there's any kind of a hurricane relief to burn wood after a hurricane. They would be -- I was in Orlando at three or four different landfills after Hurricane Charley came through there, and the ACIs did a great job of reducing -- allowing us to clear the roadways and clear the landfills of that wood waste very, very quickly, like Mr. Schmidt June 16, 2020 Page 36 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) mentioned. Okay. I want to go over this quickly a little bit that this presents the Growth Management Plan proposed language, at least part of it. We worked with Corby to design this; Corby of your staff. The first part of this photograph really describes the existing 29-acre site, so this site actually has already a modification to the growth -- or amendment to the Growth Management Plan, and here we're proposing to add the air curtain incinerator as an accessory use only on the 3-acre portion of this land. It's very specific. So it could only be operated on the 3-acre portion that I've shown you on the site plan. Finally, why should you recommend approval of these petitions? One, both your Zoning and Planning staff and Comprehensive Planning staff recommend approval in their staff reports. We're accepting their recommended conditions of approval. We're consistent with the Future Land Use Element; transportation, conservation, and coastal management elements of your Growth Management Plan. It's an allowable accessory use in the agricultural sending lands, whatever all those mixed-use titles are, but it's an allowable use as your staff has supported. Your staff and we agree that it's compatible with the adjacent Collier County Landfill, agricultural lands, and rural residential uses that are adjacent to the site, and we believe that we have added many voluntary conditions that address the neighborhood concerns, and that it will not be a fire hazard and it will not be an air pollution source that's significant to the area. So, again, thank you for your time, and we think we've met the criteria for recommendation of approval of these amendments to the Board. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Do you have further presentations from the applicant? MR. WRIGHT: Just a closing comment or two. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. MR. WRIGHT: That is our last witness, and that does -- excuse me. Pardon me. As I said, that concludes our presentation. We believe this is a logical evolution to this site given the history. It's a green technology that, as you've heard, provides a demonstrable public benefit to the people of Collier County. We've met the requirements for approval. Staff agrees on both petitions, and we respectfully request your recommendation of approval. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Questions from the Planning Commission? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, I have. CHAIMAN FRYER: Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'm not sure who -- Jeff, who's going to answer this. But we talked about -- I'm concerned about the quality plan. It was stated that -- is there somebody going to be segregating the various products to make sure that what was stated would not go in the burner, like pretreated lumber, some of the other types of things? There's -- is there a foreman on site, or who's on site? And what's the process -- is there some kind of a segregation, a process to separate those things that should not go in versus what's going to go in? MR. WRIGHT: Yes, there is, and they will have a manager on site during operating hours. And what's unique, I think, about this project, is one of our conditions make reference to an operating manual, and that operating manual is in your backup. I believe it starts at Packet Page 425. But it's 20 pages of detailed procedures that are specific to this project and the uses that are on the property. So with that, I'll turn it over to Jim, because he has a little bit more of an understanding of the operational aspects. MR. GOLDEN: Thank you, Jeff. Yes, sir, Mr. Schmitt. There will be trained spotters. These are FDEP approved trained spotters on site, before they even come, you know, onto the site to operate. So there'll be trained June 16, 2020 Page 37 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) spotters. They'll be trained in how to recognize pressure treated wood, painted wood, construction and demolition debris, you know, things that can't go in the burner. So -- and those will be segregated out or put in reject containers. So those will not be fed in. So they'll have to be trained operators, and those -- training is updated every three years. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Where does the material come from? Is that coming from construction sites, or is it -- is it material that can't go to the landfill? Where -- MR. GOLDEN: Well, it's landscaping debris, land clearing debris. So this is all mostly trees and wood waste. It's not like dimensional lumbar. Likely, that dimensional lumbar would go into recycling and be chipped up for mulch. It's more valuable that way. So it's clean wood. I mean, the dimensional lumber is. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Other question: Very familiar with air curtains. I'm retired army engineer, and so I'm very familiar with hurricane recovery and the whole process. But, typically, when we set up an air curtain, Army Corps of Engineers on a site, but typically we always had to have -- the contractor always had to set up some kind of monitoring system for an EPA to monitor smoke and other type of air quality. Is that required in this site? Is there any type of EPA requirement? I know you have to get a Florida license, but is there an EPA requirement as far as measuring for air quality? MR. GOLDEN: There is not an EPA requirement, but Florida is -- has been promulgated to run the air program for the EPA in Florida. So they work under, you know -- Florida's air-quality rules have been approved by EPA. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MR. GOLDEN: Meets their rules. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But there's no -- but there's not a monitoring system. MR. GOLDEN: No monitoring system, but it's an annual test that they have to show that they're not creating smoke above the very minor levels that they have. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: In my experience, it's typically these things have been set up temporarily in areas, especially during hurricane recovery, for debris reduction. And I just recalled having -- the contractors having to set up separate monitoring -- air-quality monitoring instruments to at least to monitor. Not required. MR. GOLDEN: That's not required. Once you get your FDEP permit, like that long test that Bruno was talking about. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So once it's set up, then you call, and the EPA comes and actually validates? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, sir, before they're allowed to operate fully. So there's a construction permit, and then they get tested, then there's the operation permit they get. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Last question. In regards to enforcement of all of the stipulations and procedures, Ray, I have to assume that it's Code Enforcement. If there was any issues, it would be Code Enforcement? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But if the residents were concerned about smoke or other types of things, I mean, typically you would have to call Code Enforcement. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, you're correct. If the wind was blowing in the direction inconsistent with the condition, then that would be a code violation, and we could investigate. Unfortunately, by the time they get out there, the wind may have shifted again. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. On the -- well, in regard to that -- and I'm just trying to figure out how to phrase this, because I'm concerned about the neighbors. But I can't just say that they can meander on site to see what's going on, because that's a safety issue and everything else. If a neighbor wanted to see what was going on, would they go to the office there June 16, 2020 Page 38 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) at the -- and, say, can I see how things are going? Can I -- I'd like to see exactly what's going on after six months this thing's -- the machine is in and working? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, sir. The operator, Mr. Jeff Ekis, he's been very open to offering tours of the site, and I'm sure he'll be the same way when this is in operation. So we'd be glad to -- whoever comes on site, wants to observe the operation. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And, Jeff, that probably -- the greatest concern is in the -- because of the public perception, an openness to allow the public to see what was going on and to, I guess, dispel myths or rumors or everything else going on, so they could see what is actually going on. Because, you know, we had a time for years that -- the smell and everything else that was coming from the landfill. That's long now since gone, but you recall those days. It's probably 20 years ago and -- 18, 20 years ago when there was an issue with the landfill. And you're in the same vicinity. I just want to -- be a food fight. No, that's the landfill doing that. That's not us. MR. GOLDEN: We tried to set up another active -- a tour of an active facility with air curtain incinerator and just couldn't get it done in time for these hearings, so -- but I'm sure Mr. Ekis would be glad to invite, you know, any of the neighbors on site even before it's fully approved to operate. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Why is this so much better than just a large drum debris reduction? I know they're noisy. They're dusty. They're debris reduction, but typically you have water, other types of measures you can take to reduce the dust and noise. But is this -- is this a preferred method over the large drum reduction -- debris reduction type systems? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, we believe so. Of course, we have two other experts on this more than myself, but it's the air curtain -- it's the air curtain, that plenum of air. It's like a hurricane force air that seals off the top of the container not allowing any smoke or particulates to leave the container. So, you know, that's really the whole key to it. And that makes a hurricane inside the box. It really heats up the wood and just -- you know, just destroys it quickly. So I'm not sure what -- the drum destructor you're talking about. Sprays water in? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. Some of the large debris reductions are typically a drum or some other type of grinder -- MR. GOLDEN: Oh, the grinder type. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- a grinder that reduces debris and grinds it rather than you burning it. MR. GOLDEN: Well, that really just makes smaller pieces out of the wood, so you just have mulch, then, that you have to get rid of. And there's so many mulch piles around, if you've heard of some catching on fire, but -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, yeah. There's one this morning. MR. GOLDEN: Yeah. You can't get rid of it, so this is a way to get rid of the wood debris. Because mulch, unless you color it and it's a perfect type of wood, it's really -- you don't really have a market for it, unfortunately, just because Florida has so much wood waste. And so -- also the drum grinders are very loud, much louder than this. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. MR. GOLDEN: And throw out some dust, you know. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They do. MR. GOLDEN: So the owners have preferred not to mulch. I mean, they're approved to mulch, but they haven't mulched in a while, so we see that this would be their primary way to get rid of the excessive wood waste. But they'll probably still make mulch and sell it when they have some good wood to do it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. That's all I have. Thanks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Joe. June 16, 2020 Page 39 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) Any other Planning Commissioners? Go ahead, please, Paul. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just some general information. Just on the C&D site, are you crushing and screening the concrete? I know it's not -- it tells me what's going on in the air around there besides this. MR. GOLDEN: Yeah, I can answer that. They segregate it from the C&D loads as it comes in, big chunks of concrete, and they wait, say, for, like, every quarter they'll bring in a concrete crusher. They're approved to do that under their conditional-use permit. So they do, but it's only about every three, four months that they bring in the crusher. COMMISSIONER SHEA: The air permit, does it go with the unit or does it go with the site? You're providing a new unit, right, for this site? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, yes. That's what we believe. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Provided an air permit from the State for another unit. I'm assuming -- in your package, I'm assuming, to show similar requirements. MR. GOLDEN: Yes, just as an example. COMMISSIONER SHEA: You don't have an air permit yet. That process would happen after you obtained our approval, I guess? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, yes. And, Bruno, does it go with the site? MR. FERRARO: Site specific. MR. GOLDEN: Site specific. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah, I would think it would be. Are you bringing in any additional material that isn't brought to the site now as a result of having this new unit? MR. GOLDEN: No, sir. COMMISSIONER SHEA: That's all I have. CHAIMAN FRYER: Karen, did you have anything? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I just have -- in your letter to Nancy, I think it was, you said you'd be open to adding sprinklers in the north and east of that area. That might be helpful to -- MR. GOLDEN: Yes, they would. We'd be open to that. It's not in our site plan right now, but we could have sprinklers along that eastern boundary and the northern boundary, so -- and they could run periodically during the day during the operation of the ACI. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: That might be helpful if -- you're still going to be -- there's still going to be movement with the bucket loader or whatever you're loading with back and forth, so there'll be dust. MR. GOLDEN: Uh-huh. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: All day long. MR. GOLDEN: Uh-huh, some. But, you know, we haven't had complaints off site that we know of. But, yes, we'd be open to that, and that could be added as a condition of our conditional use. MR. FERRARO: An air permit will require watering of those yards to prevent -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Sir, you need to be at the microphone if you're going to talk. We can also use this middle mic, can't we? MR. FERRARO: Thank you. I apologize. To answer your question -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. MR. FERRARO: Your concern was the dust generated by the front-end loader or the bucket moving on the site? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yeah. I see there's sprinklers on the southern end. MR. FERRARO: Excellent question. In the permit application, we actually have to put in a method of preventing fugitive dust on the roadways to include speed limit 10 miles an hour, June 16, 2020 Page 40 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) watering the yard when it's dry. That's actually a specific condition within the State of Florida air-quality permit. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Okay. MR. FERRARO: So it is a requirement. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Okay. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any other? Karl, please. COMMISSIONER FRY: Building on some of the questions from the other commissioners on the logistics, I'm just trying to get my hands around them. It sounds like an amazing technology. But I'm just curious, my impression was that horticultural waste/landscape waste all went to the landfill. So I guess I'm curious. This is a private facility. Where does this come from? I'm not quite sure I understand. MR. WRIGHT: Maybe Jeff Ekis could have the -- COMMISSIONER FRY: Is this wood waste that's been separated from the horticultural waste at the landfill and is then brought over to this facility? MR. WRIGHT: Jeff runs the show here. I'm going to have him respond to your question. Thank you, Commissioner. CHAIMAN FRYER: Sir, you had been sworn in? MR. WRIGHT: Yes, he has. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yes? Okay. Thank you. MR. EKIS: Hi. Good afternoon, Commissioners. CHAIMAN FRYER: Name, please. MR. EKIS: Jeff Ekis. So to answer your question, yes, all the residential landscaping companies do bring their material to our facility. They do have options to take it to other facilities within Collier County and the landfill as well if they'd like. COMMISSIONER FRY: So you are the recipient of the county's horticultural waste, is what you're saying? MR. EKIS: Part of it, yes. They don't necessarily have to bring it to us. There's other options that they can use but, yes, they do bring material to our facility that's yard waste. COMMISSIONER FRY: And then you separate through a process. And I don't know if it's hand or through equipment. You separate the wood waste or the clean wood from all of that debris, and that's what would go into the ACI? MR. EKIS: Correct. So with the permitting, yes, we would have to separate it out. You know, if there's bags or trash cans or anything that's not actually green waste, yes, it would have to be separated and then redesignated to a different part of the facility and disposed of properly. COMMISSIONER FRY: So are you processing wood waste currently at this facility? MR. EKIS: No, we currently are not. COMMISSIONER FRY: Oh, this is a new -- a new service and a new use. What was happening to the wood waste prior to now, prior to this going in? MR. EKIS: So prior to this, it was actually getting backhauled out. So the material would come in, and the material was getting backhauled out of the facility. COMMISSIONER FRY: Do you know where it went; what happened to it then? MR. EKIS: Yes. It used to go to John Barry's facility off of Immokalee Road. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. So this will be the first time where we have an air curtain incinerator in Collier County to help process wood waste? MR. EKIS: Correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. What happens to the smoke? I mean, it's -- I mean, it's very intriguing. You send a curtain of air over it, and the smoke is contained within. But doesn't the smoke have to go somewhere, or is it absorbed into the burning? June 16, 2020 Page 41 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. EKIS: And that's a question that Bruno could answer you as far as the air-quality control goes. I'm not the expert on that. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Thank you. MR. FERRARO: Excellent question. So -- and I teach combustion to incinerator operators. So this is Combustion 101. There's three things that control smoke: time, temperature, and turbulence. Those are the three items that you need to reduce the amount of smoke. If you looked at the open burning pile, all it has is temperature. It does not have turbulence, wind blowing onto it, or residence time, the amount of time needed to go to complete combustion. So the whole purpose of an air curtain incinerator, it's got one purpose and one purpose only, and that is to increase turbulence and residence time. By doing so, you increase temperature. So typical open burn will run about 900 to 1,000 degrees depending on where you are in that fire. In the very center of that fire, it will be much hotter than that, but it quickly cools as it goes out; hence the reason for all the smoke. An air curtain incinerator, you're forcing 100-mile-an-hour wind consistent across that whole box at the correct angle. And if you remember that one slide, you saw the circulating air. That's the turbulence part. And it also keeps that smoke particle inside that chamber exposed to very high temperatures, 13-, 14-, 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit for a certain amount of time necessary to go from smoke to carbon dioxide. So what you're doing is you're actually completing the combustion chemical process by increasing turbulence and time and temperature inside that box. COMMISSIONER FRY: Taking the smoke out of the equation? MR. FERRARO: Burning the smoke. Smoke is fuel. COMMISSIONER FRY: Burning the smoke. MR. FERRARO: When you see a diesel truck blowing black carbon out its tailpipe, that's unburned fuel. That's exactly what it is -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER FRY: Absolutely. CHAIMAN FRYER: Sorry. I apologize. May I? Because I was going to ask the same question with regard to -- and I'm certainly not a scientist, but I seem to remember something about conservation of matter that, you know, nothing ever dissipates or goes away. It just can change its form. And are you saying that smoke can become 100 percent carbon dioxide, CO2? MR. FERRARO: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: So there are no other byproducts? MR. FERRARO: No, there is. Ash. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. So the ash would stay in the ACI? MR. FERRARO: That's correct. CHAIMAN FRYER: And the CO2 would go into the environment. MR. FERRARO: CO2, carbon monoxide, other gaseous pollutants are part of that mixture, because there's nothing perfect in this world. You could take fuel, which is carbon, okay? There's only a few things that burn: carbon, sulfur, hydrogen, and phosphorus. Those are the only four elements that actually will sustain combustion that we know of. Other things burn, but -- so anything with carbon in it wants to go to CO2, okay, wants to turn into carbon dioxide. And the hotter you burn that piece of carbon, the quicker it goes to carbon dioxide. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. How much CO will go into the atmosphere? MR. FERRARO: It's considered a minor source of CO. It is probably a percentage, a small percentage of the total gaseous pollutants. CHAIMAN FRYER: Can you give us an educated estimate? MR. FERRARO: Yeah. So you'll -- when we do a permit for this type of source, it will be somewhere around 40 tons a year of particulate matter and about one or two tons a year of June 16, 2020 Page 42 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) carbon monoxide. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. FERRARO: Just to put it in perspective. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. Karl, go ahead. COMMISSIONER FRY: So the ash that was mentioned is what you had called biochar? MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER FRY: And what happens to that? You mentioned that Forestry Service likes to spread it. MR. FERRARO: Good question. COMMISSIONER FRY: For what reason? MR. FERRARO: What we do with it and what we recommend our clients do with it, if you recall in the beginning of my presentation, I said there's several things that are used for an overall wood waste management system. Chipping is one of them. Separating out the soil so that you have a commodity; you have topsoil that you can sell. Composting is another element in the toolbox. And then an air curtain incinerator. We take the ash from the air curtain incinerator, which is classified as clean, beneficial material by the EPA and by the State of Florida, take that and mix it with the topsoil, you make a soil amendment. It's an excellent fertilizer for that soil. So now they have a product, topsoil, with ash added to it that it's very beneficial for all kinds of horticultural uses. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. I think you're the appropriate person for the next question also. MR. FERRARO: Okay. COMMISSIONER FRY: So in terms of logistics and how it impacts the neighbors, you know, I think noise, obviously, is a concern, the smoke's a concern, as we talked about. It is fired up in the morning -- and it was mentioned that it stays hot all night. But it's fired up in the morning, and it takes 30 minutes to get to the full temperature. Has it been preloaded with material when you fire it up? MR. FERRARO: So in the beginning of the week, they'll end -- they'll start with a clean air curtain box. The box will be emptied. The ash will be taken out. They'll load it up with material -- day one. This is day one. They'll load it up with a mixture of brush and logs. They'll add diesel fuel or kerosene; light it on fire. That's the longest time is the first day of the week to get the machine going. Once -- and the 30 minutes is actually a rule written into the air permit. You must be up to temperature and reducing your emissions within that 30-minute period. And we typically take about 15 minutes, 20 minutes at the most to get a C-327 really fired up. So we have no trouble meeting the air pollution regulations for the quantity of smoke during startup or during the next operating sequence. The next day -- well, they'll stop -- say they stopped loading 3:30, 4:00 in the afternoon -- COMMISSIONER FRY: Not to interrupt, but it runs all day long and they're continuously loading as it burns? MR. FERRARO: That is correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. MR. FERRARO: Slowly. And as the trainer -- I do the actual training of the operators. I always train my operators to operate an air curtain incinerator to meet requirements of the permit, not to burn wood waste. Wood waste is your goal, but your primary focus as an operator is to operate the air curtain incinerator in compliance with your state permit. That's what I teach them to do, okay. At the end of the day, this box is going to be hot. It's got -- it's been running eight hours. June 16, 2020 Page 43 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) You're going to have 10 tons of logs in there. All the little stuff's going to be gone. Now you're going to have that log that's persistent, just like having -- in a recreational campfire. You know, it's that big log that's always going. Well, it's going to remain hot, and you're going to keep that fan running to burn the -- you know, burn it down. The next morning, day two, you won't need any fuel to start that fire. If you've got a good base of logs in there, you add wood waste on top of it, it will catch on fire in no time, and your startup is 10 minutes, 15 minutes at the most. With a good operator, he can have that thing -- or she can have that thing running in 10 minutes. COMMISSIONER FRY: How much louder is it for the startup period, and how much more smoke is generated during the startup period? MR. FERRARO: Well, the sound is low throughout the whole thing, because all you have -- you have a fan running. And you can hear it. I'm deaf, but you can hear it. But it's not a very loud -- and the engine's only an 85-horsepower tractor motor. It's not a -- it's not a thousand horsepower motor that you use on a mulch machine or on a crusher, okay. So, typically, they'll use a grappling hook to just feed the logs in. It's -- and I'm not sure how they're going to do it here, whether they're going to have a stationary grappling hook or if they'll use a bucket truck to do it. That device is probably the noisiest of the whole thing. So you don't have any noise difference between startup and normal routine. It's low. There's no -- no OSHA requirements for sound protection up against the machine. It meets 85 decibels, okay. The other question -- part of your question is how much smoke? So the EPA -- and EPA wrote these rules, and the State of Florida adopted them. EPA says, you will have 35 percent opacity over 30 minutes average, and that's the amount of allowable smoke you can have. After that you're down to 10 percent opacity, okay. So the difference between 35 and 10 is your difference. The reality is, it takes us about 15 minutes to get down close to 10 percent opacity. So we're usually in compliance with the routine running after 15, 20, 25 minutes, and then after that, I train the operators to recognize when they've got enough material in there and they stop. And once they burn that material down, they'll start adding it slowly. And as you get further during the day, the fire gets hotter and hotter and hotter to a point where it can really start consuming quite a bit of wood. And we use eight to 10 tons an hour as a reasonable number. COMMISSIONER FRY: And then if you're a neighbor -- and I think the nearest neighbor's structure was about 500 feet from the ACI -- at 85 decibels -- and it mentioned it was only 60 decibels at the border, I believe, but what are they likely to hear, if anything, at that distance? MR. FERRARO: They'll hear the trucks. COMMISSIONER FRY: They'll hear the trucks. So the ACI will not be any louder than what they're already hearing at this point? MR. FERRARO: No, sir. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. MR. FERRARO: In fact, you won't really know it's running until you get up to it. COMMISSIONER FRY: Is there a flexibility in where the ACI's placed? MR. FERRARO: Well, it's got to be inside that three acres. And you want to have a road around it so you can -- it's really a fire protection road. So they have an area around it to be able to access it safely, and then the piles will be around -- you know, at some distance from there. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. MR. FERRARO: So I would say where it's located that three-acre area is ideal, because it is separated from everything else. It is in its own area. It could be monitored, managed, and dealt with safely. June 16, 2020 Page 44 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRY: Initially, in looking at the site plan, I thought, well, why don't they put it farther away from the residences, but it doesn't sound like, with the noise and all the activity around it, it's actually more efficient, and it makes no difference to the neighbors that it's located somewhat centrally in that area. MR. FERRARO: Yeah. I don't think they'll -- in fact, from the road, you won't know it's running unless you know it's running. You'll see heat waves. That will be your biggest indicator as to whether it's running or not. When I come up to a site and I look at an air curtain incinerator, the first thing I look for is the heat waves. That tells me whether it's running or not, not the noise. COMMISSIONER FRY: Got it. Thank you very much. MR. FERRARO: You're very welcome. CHAIMAN FRYER: I'd like to follow up on Commissioner Fry's question, if I may -- MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir. CHAIMAN FRYER: -- because it's the same question I have. You've come to us with a plan to put this on the 3-acre site that is the north -- northeast corner of your parcel. There's another one that's also labeled horticultural recycling area that's right in the center. And it would seem to me that that would be preferable to the neighbors. Was that site given consideration? MR. FERRARO: I'm not qualified to answer that question. That would be a Jim Golden question. CHAIMAN FRYER: Come on up, sir. And I think you can use this center mic, too, so that we don't have to -- COMMISSIONER FRY: Should we put a site plan up on the screen? CHAIMAN FRYER: We have it here. What I'm talking about is to the southwest of the current site. It's right in the center of your property, and it's also called horticultural recycling area, just like your 3-acre is called. And that would be further distant from the homeowner who has a daughter with respiratory problems. MR. GOLDEN: Yes, sir, Commissioner Fryer. That area that's labeled horticultural recycling in the center of the site is kind of a leftover label from some of the original horticultural recycling labels when this whole site was wood recycling. That, right now, it's kind of a contained area. It doesn't have as much room around it to allow, you know, fire equipment access. It's basically used to store recycled materials from the construction and demolition debris area. So it's not really available for this use, and also we wanted to have this use where he is currently recycling the wood waste in that northeastern corner, so that's -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Let me be sure I understand what you're saying. You're saying that from a fire safety standpoint it's better located in the northeast? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, sir, just because we have a lot -- we can have greater setbacks from the wood piles, and also we just have more room in that area, so we can have greater setbacks from the perimeter, so -- and, also, any occupied structure, the air curtain incinerator, is supposed -- well, at least by the Florida Forest Service, which they don't regulate these units, but they like to have 300 feet from any occupied building. So we meet that setback at the location we're proposing. CHAIMAN FRYER: Including an occupied building that you own? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, right. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. I understand now. Thank you. COMMISSIONER FRY: And, Ned, there is a -- the site plan that I have on my screen is Page 840 of the package, and I believe that area in the center is entitled "recycled materials" on the site plan that I'm referring to. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah, I saw that. There's some discrepancy. COMMISSIONER FRY: There were quite a few site plans and at least six versions of the operating plan in our packet. June 16, 2020 Page 45 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: I understand now. COMMISSIONER SHEA: At least. COMMISSIONER FRY: At least six. CHAIMAN FRYER: I get it now. Any other questions from the Planning Commission? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just informational-type questions. You mentioned the opacity. You showed the video at the beginning of an open burn and this unit. What's the opacity on an open burn? MR. FERRARO: So the opacity of the open burn runs about 85 percent. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. MR. FERRARO: And I did -- I was there during the demonstration. COMMISSIONER SHEA: No, that's all -- I was just looking for -- I didn't want to get sidetracked. MR. FERRARO: Eighty-five percent versus five percent. COMMISSIONER SHEA: But you also said that -- I thought I heard you say that the fan runs 24 hours -- you keep the curtain operable at night, which means the fan's running at night. MR. FERRARO: You should, yes. And that -- you don't always run the fan at night. There's -- if it's going to go down and you're not smoking anymore, that fan can be shut off. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. MR. FERRARO: And I can let Michael Schmidt talk a little bit more about that. But, typically, once -- if it's not going to smoke anymore, it's not going to smoke with or without the fan on at that point. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. That's all I have. CHAIMAN FRYER: I had a number of questions, and perhaps half of them have been answered, but I probably have, with the dialogue that might be required, perhaps another 30 minutes. So I want to ask the Planning Commission if we should take a break now and come back and continue this or run till 12:30. COMMISSIONER FRY: 12:30 is fine with me, but by your command. CHAIMAN FRYER: Others? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's fine, but we still have another -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- item after this. CHAIMAN FRYER: We do. That's not really a time-certain. It's not earlier than, so... What about, Karen; are you -- COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'm fine. It doesn't matter to me. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. Well, we'll continue. And in some cases I'll ask, perhaps, for a more lengthy answer, but there's nothing wrong with a short answer either, which would enable us to dispatch through this material. Let's see. First of all, there was a reference to fires in Florida, that there -- that ACIs have not caused fires in Florida. Is that the Air Burners’ company statistics, or is that -- you can tell us as experts that there have been no fires? MR. GOLDEN: I think you're referring to my statement, Mr. Fryer. That's just my personal experience from the many projects that Mr. Ferraro and myself have worked on across Florida that, you know, we're in touch with these facilities, because they have to be tested annually. We continue to train these facilities' operators. So that was just our personal knowledge. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. So, I mean, we can't -- we can't take that, then, as a certainty, but you don't have any knowledge -- MR. GOLDEN: No, we're not saying that we can concretely say there's no site that has had a fire caused, but we're not aware of -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. June 16, 2020 Page 46 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. GOLDEN: But we work on many of the sites across the state. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Then a question for the representative of Air Burners company who also made a statement about the absence of fires. Are you -- is your statement based upon knowledge of your company or knowledge of ACIs generally in Florida? And I'll say it again, but this middle microphone can also be used, and it might speed things up. Go ahead. MR. MICHAEL SCHMIDT: Great question. And so this is something that, I guess, through the years that I really just constantly hear, including an email that was sent out, I guess, that was kind of against the unit where, in the email that was sent out from a possible gentleman running for office, you know, he mentioned a bunch of fires. And I thought it was kind of ironic how all the fires that he mentioned that he pulled out, local fires, are all mulch fires. Mulch fires, stump dumps, things of that nature -- and this is what USDA works with and air quality works with all over the United States, but a majority of the fires that you're going to find that they're going to be all public information that have been inside of a newspaper, they're all from mulch fires and spontaneous combustion. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. Well, let me see if I can ask that question again and be sure that we're saying the same thing. Are you saying that your company has -- that products manufactured by your company have caused no fires in the state of Florida? MR. MICHAEL SCHMIDT: Not to my knowledge. CHAIMAN FRYER: And how about in the United States? MR. MICHAEL SCHMIDT: One at a pallet company. CHAIMAN FRYER: One at a pallet company? MR. MICHAEL SCHMIDT: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And how long have you been in business? MR. MICHAEL SCHMIDT: Twenty-three years. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you very much. Let's see. This is a -- I'm not sure who would be best; perhaps the representative from Grove. How much water is available at the site? I heard you mention a well, but I assume you're also storing water, and I'd like to get a better idea. MR. WRIGHT: I believe Mr. Golden's checking with the site manager. CHAIMAN FRYER: Oh, okay. MR. GOLDEN: We have not, to my knowledge, done a flow test on the well or the standpipes. You know, that hasn't been -- usually when you go to build a new structure or something, you need flow testing information on the hydrants. But we do have 2-inch standpipes on either side of the ACI area, 16-inch well, which you could probably pump a thousand gallons a minute out of if you had a big truck on it, and another -- I think a 4-inch well, but that supplies the site irrigation system and things like that, so... CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So you don't have any water that is being stored in containers? MR. GOLDEN: No, sir, other than the water truck is a 500-gallon water truck. So it's available. It's a container. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. So you get 500 gallons out of the water truck, and then you're estimating that you could get a thousand gallons a minute out of the well? MR. GOLDEN: With a pumper truck, fire truck on that well, yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. That brings me to my next question. How proximate to your location is the nearest pumper truck? MR. GOLDEN: Oh, let's see. I'm not aware of where the closest Naples -- Greater June 16, 2020 Page 47 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) Naples Fire Department is, but -- I don't know that answer. CHAIMAN FRYER: I think it may be about four miles. MR. GOLDEN: Okay. CHAIMAN FRYER: But you can get 500 gallons on the fire immediately while they're responding? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, sir, we could. We could also smother the fire with -- there's plenty of soil on site to smother the fire with heavy equipment. So it's not just water available. It's -- you know, many times a waste fire you want to smother with soil. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. That answers that question. Then it was mentioned, I think the citation was to the EPA, that ACI is a minor -- has been classified as a minor generator of pollution only. Do I have that correct? MR. FERRARO: You're correct. That's a -- it's a minor source of air pollution. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. What are the other categories? MR. FERRARO: Either minor, major, or PSD. So major is anything over 100 tons. Prevention of significant deterioration, PSD, is your power plants and your big chemical plants greater than 250 tons. CHAIMAN FRYER: And so how many tons -- what's the cutoff point for minor? MR. FERRARO: One hundred, 99. CHAIMAN FRYER: Ninety-nine, okay. MR. FERRARO: We're down around 40. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. MR. FERRARO: Half of the minor. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. You made reference to the -- that you would stop charging the ACI when the wind is 15 to 20 miles an hour. Could we just say 15? MR. FERRARO: The short answer is yes, but wind gusts and blows and comes and goes, and it may be 15 miles an hour for a few minutes and then it goes down to five. If you know from a weather perspective -- and we do a lot of modeling -- the wind's typically five to 10 miles an hour out of the southeast. It becomes greater in the afternoon, especially during the stormy times. During those times, typically we'll tell an operator stop running, you know, you don't want to get struck by lightning and things like that. CHAIMAN FRYER: Well, could we say 15 miles an hour for X duration of time? MR. FERRARO: It needs to have a duration, because if it's gusting to 15 and goes back down to 12, you can't stop the machine. CHAIMAN FRYER: As an expert, what would you recommend would be a reasonable duration of time? MR. FERRARO: I would say 15 to 20 minutes, but I would also say between 15 and 20 miles an hour. I don't think you can really just put a cutoff on weather like that. You know, if it goes to 17 miles an hour, am I now in code violation? It's -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Well, if it goes 17 miles per hour for longer than 20 minutes -- MR. FERRARO: Well, then you should stop operating. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. MR. FERRARO: Absolutely. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So can we say 15 miles an hour for 20 minutes? MR. FERRARO: That's up to the operator. I say yeah, there's no -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. COMMISSIONER FRY: Am I the only one that does not understand -- know exactly what you mean by "charging"? MR. FERRARO: Charging means actually loading waste into the air curtain incinerator. That's charging. So you could stop charging, but you're never going to shut the machine off, so June 16, 2020 Page 48 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) you understand that. It's going to continue running. You can't just stop the fire, okay. You don't want to stop the fire. You don't want to put dirt on it, because that causes smoke and things like that. You want it contained inside that rectangle. COMMISSIONER FRY: Ned, while you're getting your next question queued -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- you talked about running the air all night long. Does that mean the diesel motor is running 24 hours a day? MR. FERRARO: Yeah. It's -- COMMISSIONER FRY: So the only difference is whether you're charging wood -- dropping wood into it? MR. FERRARO: That's correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. CHAIMAN FRYER: Good point. All right. The question about how many people are on site, let's say, overnight -- and I think, having encouraged people to use the center mic, I need to -- there's a caveat that you need to come around. That's a one-way street you just went down. Sorry. MR. EKIS: I apologize. CHAIMAN FRYER: No problem. MR. EKIS: As far as personnel on site overnight, we don't. We don't have anybody on site overnight. I do have two employees that were -- one is within 10 minutes of the site, and the other one is at about 20 minutes from the site. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. What technology would you be using? You mentioned a camera, but if the -- does the -- what technology are you using to notify you of the existence of a fire? MR. EKIS: So right now I am in contact with the IT department to find out if there is a motion detector or some kind of heat simulator camera that would notify us -- notify me, you know, through my cell phone/smart phone that there is an issue so I can alert the proper authorities if I have to. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Is the gentleman from Grove -- sir, are you aware of any high technology that could be used to obviate the need of someone's physical presence overnight? MR. FERRARO: Out of probably 20 facilities we have running in Florida, all of them operate the same way. They leave at night; come back in the morning. They have no monitoring on it, to the best of my knowledge. CHAIMAN FRYER: In your opinion as an expert, is that advisable? MR. FERRARO: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: It is? MR. FERRARO: I have not had a fire caused by one of our customers. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Let's see. And someone mentioned that there -- there are in the hundreds of ACIs, different manufacturers, in use in the country; is that -- no? MR. FERRARO: No. There's hundreds around the country. There's only a handful of actual manufacturers. CHAIMAN FRYER: That wasn't my question. My question is, how many ACIs are there around the country? And I think the answer was in the hundreds. Okay. That's -- MR. MICHAEL SCHMIDT: Agreed. Hundreds all over the United States. Thousands all over the world. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. All right. In the materials that we were provided and also in the testimony today, it was mentioned that during the startup phase, the ACI produces little or no smoke. Can that be quantified a little better? MR. FERRARO: During the startup phase, there is smoke. It's after the startup phase June 16, 2020 Page 49 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) that the smoke goes way. CHAIMAN FRYER: Is there a measurement of smoke? MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir. It's called opacity. And they're limited to 35 percent opacity average over 30 minutes. That's what the federal rule and the state rule adopted. And after that it goes down to 10 percent opacity. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And that -- so that's a rule for ACIs -- MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir. CHAIMAN FRYER: -- as a result of federal and state government? MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay, thank you. Greater Naples Fire District is, of course, your provider. Have you had sufficient contact or significant contact with them, or did they permit for this? Who have you worked with over there? MR. FERRARO: The short answer is they don't permit this. This is a State of Florida permit, and I don't know what you've done with your local fire department. CHAIMAN FRYER: There was a reference, so I'd like to know just a little bit more about that. MR. EKIS: So we have -- I've had the fire department out there. They've seen the site. The only recommendation that they made to me was to put ladders on the side of the piles. But that was really the only other thing that they'd mentioned. And they did ask me to get the 16-inch well tested, which we did, and that was really their only requirements from me, from us, on the site. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. Thank you. Let's see. I guess my sense of things is -- I'm not a scientific person, but I'm getting an adequate level of comfort that at this point in the development or the evolution of this technology, that it would be reasonable for us to approve it recognizing that there are risks, but the technology has evolved to a point where it's reasonable to approve. Again, as an expert, maybe the gentleman from Grove -- it doesn't matter to me. But is it your opinion as an expert that the technology has evolved to a point that it would be reasonable for a group of planners like us to approve this? MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir. CHAIMAN FRYER: And you say that without hesitation? MR. FERRARO: No hesitation at all. I've been involved in many of these projects. This particular device is one of the best on the market, in my opinion, because of its quality of construction and its quality of engineering design, and it's gone through so much testing; air-quality testing, mechanical testing, performance testing by all these different agencies, and it works as advertised. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. The expression "demolition" -- or "construction and demolition" has been used. I understand that that would not be incinerated. MR. FERRARO: That's correct. Clean wood waste. CHAIMAN FRYER: Clean wood waste. And you mentioned probably not wood -- wood that had formed the infrastructure of a dwelling or a structure of some kind. MR. FERRARO: No, sir. It's not allowed by rule. CHAIMAN FRYER: I see. Okay. So it's largely going to be trees and vegetation. MR. FERRARO: Yes, sir, trees. In fact, a lot of soft vegetation should be composted, and that's part of that toolbox that we talked about: Compost, chipping, air curtain incinerator, and screening soil. That makes up the whole toolbox of a horticultural recycling facility. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. The ash that was referred to, is that -- is that marketable output of the process? MR. FERRARO: Once it's put into the soil, it makes an excellent soil amendment. So it makes the soil even more marketable. June 16, 2020 Page 50 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. I'm curious, will that be a product that will be vended by the applicant? MR. EKIS: That's a possibility. That's a product that we could look at in the near future, yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And I can see from the point of view of logic, and also there was reference in the material, that right now the business that you operate you have stuff coming in and stuff going out. So it would seem to me that this is going to reduce the number of trucks servicing your site by some number; would that be correct? MR. EKIS: Yes, that is correct. CHAIMAN FRYER: So it would reduce the traffic somewhat? MR. EKIS: Correct. We wouldn't be backhauling the material out. Everything would be self-contained within the facility. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And I saw a reference that the storage pile on site will be reduced in size. MR. EKIS: Correct. CHAIMAN FRYER: Is that part of the ordinance? Is that part of the conditions? MR. EKIS: As far as the C&D goes? CHAIMAN FRYER: No. As far as the conditional use and the GMPA that you're asking for. We've got, what, 21 conditions. Is -- the site of the storage pile, is that limited in what will be the ordinance or one of its exhibits? MR. GOLDEN: Yes, sir. It was in the original 2010/11 ordinance where the C&D piles are limited in height, yes, sir. CHAIMAN FRYER: Had they somehow gone above the limit? MR. GOLDEN: I don't know that for sure, but they've reduced whatever height it was that the neighbors had a concern with. CHAIMAN FRYER: So it's now in compliance? Is it just barely in compliance, or is it in -- MR. GOLDEN: Can you answer that, Jeff? MR. EKIS: It's in compliance to the best of our knowledge, yes. And, like I said, bringing on the other piece of equipment helped us greatly reduce the pile, and it continues to help us reduce the pile there. MR. KLATZKOW: You may want to ask staff that question, Commissioner. CHAIMAN FRYER: I'm sorry? MR. KLATZKOW: You may want to ask staff that question. CHAIMAN FRYER: Good point. MR. WRIGHT: Commissioner, Jeff Wright again, for the record. I'm looking at the conditions of approval for the C&D operation component of the site. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. MR. WRIGHT: And Condition No. 4 clearly states the maximum height of piles for C&D material waste waiting to be recycled shall be 10 feet. So, obviously, it's been brought to his attention. I thought that they had already been reduced somewhat, but we'll make sure to abide by that condition. CHAIMAN FRYER: Good. Thank you very much. How close to the planned Collier County sports complex is this facility as the crow flies? As the smoke flows? MR. WRIGHT: I don't want to misquote, but I think it's within a mile or two. 951 is not too far from the site, and it's a good reference marker for where that sports facility's going to be. But I'm not [sic] exactly how far it is from Yahl Mulching to the new sports complex. I would say a mile or two. June 16, 2020 Page 51 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And I think the last question I have has to do with the -- what was it referred to -- the working plan that Grove prepared, the 20-page document. Is that explicitly a condition or an attachment to the ordinance that imposes conditions and regulations and prohibitions? MR. WRIGHT: Yes, sir, it is. The condition that staff has included in the proposed conditional use resolution is Condition No. 4. -- no, I'm sorry -- Condition No. 3 where is says very clearly the property owner shall abide by the, quote, startup, shutdown, and operation plan for yard trash processing facility and air curtain incinerator dated August 19th and attached as Exhibit C-1. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And that, as I recall, was the exact name of the document, was it not? MR. WRIGHT: Yes, it is. CHAIMAN FRYER: I think those are all the questions I have. Karl, please. COMMISSIONER FRY: Follow-up to your question about the C&D piles. You mentioned a new piece of equipment. It's an 1,800 power screen to help reduce the height of those piles. Can you explain what that is? MR. EKIS: So, basically, the power screener is a device that we'll use on the yard waste pile as well to get some of the soil out of there, so basically a huge screener, and what that screener does is it helps us separate faster or more effectively the material coming through our process facility. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any other questions of the applicant? Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Question. Would you have a problem with the condition that you have to come up with some way of getting emergency notification when no one's there that something might be out of control? Because it just seems to me, no matter what the experts say, Murphy's always around and we have a very dry area, a very difficult fire season. You know, hopefully it won't be too burdensome on you. I'd think you'd want to know also, but some way of either getting to the fire department or yourself an early notice that something's gone awry on the site. Would you have a problem with a condition like that? MR. EKIS: Absolutely not. I think the more information that's out there -- or, you know, if something was to come up, you know, I think we should notify everyone, you know, what's going on, what happened, what's take placing. Absolutely. CHAIMAN FRYER: Just to be sure we understand -- and I really have the same request that Commissioner Shea is asking, for basically a fire alarm to be installed there. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: You don't have a problem with that? MR. EKIS: No, no. Absolutely not. COMMISSIONER SHEA: He’s just not sure what it looks like yet. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. No, that's fair enough. Okay. Good. Thank you for bringing that up. Any other questions or comments for the applicant? COMMISSIONER FRY: One final question for the applicant from me. I got the impression from some of the conditions that you've agreed to that there were some -- possibly some ongoing issues that the neighbors have had for a period of time and that those are being addressed now. I think there are a few people here in the public that are looking to speak. But I guess my question would be, what are we likely to hear from them and -- we will hear from them, I know. But what would you -- I think one question here is, have you been a good neighbor to the residents? Have you honored your commitments to the neighboring residents? And I would June 16, 2020 Page 52 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) just -- would you speak to that in advance before we hear from the public? MR. EKIS: Yeah. And one of the questions that did come up was, you know, I haven't -- we haven't been a good neighbor since we've been there. I've asked them to elaborate on those comments. And, you know, the prior history to the facility, I'm not sure. Obviously, we've taken -- new ownership took over in February of 2019, and I've worked hand in hand with the ownership there, and their biggest thing is, you know, make sure we are good neighbors. That came with, one, paving of the road, which is a privately maintained road. We took that full responsibility. We did it ourself. We didn't ask for help from anyone. It's just something that we figured we would do to be a good neighbor. You know, I've put up some road signs. You know, we've done some green fencing. We've actually purchased a pretty expensive piece of machinery, the power screener, in order to reduce those piles quickly and faster to reduce the visibility so it wasn't more noticeable when they were on their way home. So we've taken a lot of their considerations, absolutely. Because at the end of the day, they live there. That's their residence, and we're a business. But, you know, we want to be, you know, good neighbors. We want to be partners with the residents there. We're not looking to disrupt their livelihood. You know, we want to work with them. And, you know, with the ACI, it's just another piece of technology we can do to, you know, reduce some of the things that we do there and also use it off site if we need to for any kind of government facilities or agencies or anything like that. But, yeah, I mean, at the end of the day, they do address some concerns. I've tried to answer them. I've tried to reach out to as many of them as I possibly could. And I know the biggest thing is, you know, will it cause a fire or it will cause a fire. And, you know, obviously, with the testimony here from some of the experts, you know, we are able to get a -- hopefully a clear picture of what this machine can do in reference to how we're going to use it on our facility. And, you know, I've -- even one of the neighbors that lives directly east of me, he had no problem with it. You know, he just said, you know, that's fine, I don't have an issue with it. But I've also told him, too, the neighbor directly east of me, you know, if there's ever an issue, come ask me, come talk to me. I do want to be an open-door, you know, facility. If someone wants to come in within six months and see what we're doing or how the operation runs, by all means, I'm not going to turn anyone away. I've had some of the neighbors come in, set up meetings with me to talk to me, and I've addressed their questions and concerns. So as far as the facility goes, I mean, it's an open door. I mean, I'll make time to speak with them, address their concerns. Because like I say, at the end of the day, they have to live there and we, obviously, want to be good neighbors as well and not try to disrupt their livelihoods. MR. KLATZKOW: Are you willing to put that as a condition of approval? MR. EKIS: As far as? MR. KLATZKOW: Having public access on certain times, concern days? MR. EKIS: Yeah. I mean, absolutely. I mean, I have no problem with that. CHAIMAN FRYER: Good. Thank you. COMMISSIONER FRY: So it would be your -- it would be your statement that some of the potential issues the neighbors have had with the facility were prior to your arrival and that you've done your best to address many of those concerns since you took over. MR. EKIS: Correct. That is correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Net net, what kind of difference will this make for your neighbors? It sounds like from Ned's questions, which I've appreciated, you might -- it might reduce the truck traffic. Because less will be leaving the site, it will be taken care of. But now you've got some burning going on and a little bit of smoke and some carbon monoxide and things. Net net, what kind of a difference do you think this would make for the neighbors in the area? June 16, 2020 Page 53 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. EKIS: Well, one, I hope they don't even know it's running. I hope it's just, you know, business as usual for us. But I don't want to disrupt anything. So, I mean, as far as that goes, I guess it would just -- you know, just an added feature that we're going to have, but I don't want to do any disruption. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any other questions from the Planning Commission? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, I want to raise this for our consideration. Ray, do we have registered speakers? MR. BELLOWS: Yes, we have five speakers. CHAIMAN FRYER: Five speakers. Okay. I would not like to make the speakers have to come back after lunch. How long is the staff presentation? MR. BELLOWS: It would be very short. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, why don't we do that, and then we'll go to the -- if it's all right with the Commission, we'll hear from the public. And then we'll take a break perhaps -- well, let's shoot for 1:00. Does that sound right? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay, great. COMMISSIONER FRY: To start lunch at 1:00? CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. Is that okay with the court reporter? THE COURT REPORTER: (Nods head.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Good. Staff? MR. BELLOWS: Do you want to start with the Comprehensive Planning item or the conditional use? CHAIMAN FRYER: Well, they were listed in the CU, GMPA order, but it seems to me it makes more sense to start with the GMPA. MR. BELLOWS: And that's Corby Schmidt. Shall we start with Nancy then? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, let's do. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. GUNDLACH: Good afternoon, Commissioners. For the record, this is Nancy Gundlach, principal planner with the Zoning Division. And today we are recommending approval of the conditional use for Yahl Mulching subject, of course, to the approval of the Growth Management Plan Amendment. And, as stated earlier, we do have seven conditions of approval if you'd like for me to read through them. They are contained in the staff report as well as in the conditional-use resolution. And if you have any questions of staff, it would be our pleasure to answer your questions today. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Does anyone need to have those seven conditions read? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Nancy. MR. BELLOWS: I also have -- or a public -- or a speaker from -- representing the Collier County solid waste and landfill, Kari Hodgson, who would like to speak with the Planning Commission. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. I didn't ask whether any planning commissioner had questions of staff on this. Do they? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. June 16, 2020 Page 54 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SHEA: No. COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes, one quick. I just noticed that in the packet was the 2008 AUIR. CHAIMAN FRYER: I noticed that, too. COMMISSIONER FRY: And I don't think traffic is a material issue here; at least it sounds like it was reduced truck traffic if anything. But is that -- why was it not looked at versus the 2019 AUIR? CHAIMAN FRYER: I had the very same question and came to the conclusion that it was irrelevant because it was going to reduce traffic, but I -- COMMISSIONER FRY: That's great. I'd love to hear that. CHAIMAN FRYER: I spotted that, too. MS. GUNDLACH: That's a great question for transportation staff. Are the present? MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. Mike's on his way. COMMISSIONER SHEA: He's on his way. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Yeah, Mike, you can use the middle. And feel free to be brief. MR. SAWYER: My apologies. I'll do that next time. For the record, Mike Sawyer, Transportation Planning. The reason that the TIS was not updated is that, basically, from a transportation standpoint, this is the addition of a machine for the facility and does not substantively impact transportation because of it. We have no ITE code for a machine like this. There's no identification that we can put on it from a transportation standpoint. That's why we relied on the previous approved TIS for the project. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Any questions for Mike? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. SAWYER: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. Let's go with the public speakers. MR. BELLOWS: Kari with the county. CHAIMAN FRYER: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Please go ahead, yeah. MS. HODGSDON: Commissioners, for the record, Kari Hodgson, director of Solid Waste Management, and I do need to be sworn in. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. HODGSDON: Good afternoon, Commissioners. First I'd like to address briefly someone's question about the -- where the source of the yard material comes from that the neighboring business would be manufacturing or processing. The landfill is responsible for all of the curbside collected yard waste. So anything that is commercial yard waste is a competitive industry in Collier County. So any business is welcome to go to Yahl Mulching for their processing. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But they could still pay to dump at the landfill, can't they? MS. HODGSDON: They can if they'd like. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. So it's a choice. MS. HODGSDON: Yep, yep, absolutely. Commissioners, I'd like to bring to the attention, for the record, the landfill is approximately 200 acres of decomposing waste that generates a combustible gas, predominately methane. The landfill contains 200 wells that extract this flammable gas to an on-site power plant. The power plant is located 1,900 feet west from the proposed location of the ACI, contains five cat combustion engines that convert that combustible gas to electrical that powers approximately 3,500 hundred homes in Collier County. June 16, 2020 Page 55 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) In part of the board -- I'm sorry -- the Board-approved integrated solid waste plan and solid waste in Collier County, we do promote recycling. We do promote reduction of -- source reduction as well. This is a volume reduction technique. Yahl Mulching, last year their recycling of the yard materials contributed 5 percent towards our recycling numbers trying to reach the Florida mandated 75 percent goal by 2020. So we would lose that 5 percent of that number if the yard waste was now turned into ash. And I'd like the record to also state that the ACI and its clean technology is compared to open burning, which does not occur currently at this site. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. CHAIMAN FRYER: Are you taking a position on this application? MS. HODGSDON: We have the position of anything that imposes more of a fire risk to the landfill gas-to-energy plant is something that we are not proponents of in solid waste. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER FRY: Do you feel that 1,900 feet away that this single ACI unit would comprise a fire -- an additional fire risk to the landfill? MS. HODGSDON: It would introduce flames where flames do not exist; however, I've never seen one in operation, to answer that factually. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Other questions or comments for this witness? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, thank you so much. MS. HODGSDON: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Now we'll go to public speakers. Ray. MR. BELLOWS: Would you want to hear from Corby? CHAIMAN FRYER: If he's available. Yeah. MR. BELLOWS: He was sworn. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. There he is. Hi, Corby. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Good afternoon. If I may, to answer one of your questions from earlier, your fire station, Station 72, is located on Beck Boulevard about three miles to the west. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yes, thank you. Approximately. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: And then -- approximately, thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. 75 is pretty close too, isn't it? MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: It is, about the same distance, but a different direction. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay, thank you. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Now, staff has no counter recommendation. We do recommend approval and no changes to the language. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you, Corby. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: We also note that there are also additional conditions probably being recommended, but none affect the GMP. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Any questions or comments for Mr. Schmidt? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not. Thank you, Corby. MR. CORBY SCHMIDT: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. Now, can we go to speakers? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. Sarah Spector. To be followed by Kelly Yahl. MS. SPECTOR: Good afternoon. Sarah Spector with Roetzel & Andress. I'm actually speaking on four fairly substantial property owners within the area, so I wanted to request June 16, 2020 Page 56 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) additional time as a representative. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any objection? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. We'll give you 10 minutes. MS. SPECTOR: Thank you. I don't think I'll take that long, but thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Will you identify your clients? MS. SPECTOR: I'm going to right now, yes. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. MS. SPECTOR: I do represent Janie and Michael Yag and Shore Acres Farm, LLC, the owners of 1170, 1180, 1220, and 1243 Keane Avenue, together with two adjacent parcels with no street address; American Farms, LLC, owner of 1450, 1484, and 1620 Keane Avenue, together with 10 adjacent parcels with no street address; Steinmann Farms, LLC, owner of 1340 Keane Avenue, together with three adjacent parcels with no street address; and Hideout Golf Club, owner of 2830 and 3025 Brantley Boulevard. These owners were not provided with notice of the neighborhood information meeting because they are outside of the 1,000-feet notification zone, but they're no less affected by this request. As the crow flies, the southernmost point of these properties is roughly 1.5 miles away from the property that is subject of the conditional use and Growth Management Plan requests. My clients are extremely troubled by the request being made, especially in an area that is extremely prone to wildfires, each which, at the very least, threatens property damage and irreparable harm to the businesses conducted there. Some recent fires have, in fact, caused significant damage to my clients' property. The startup, shutdown, and operating plan for a yard trash processing facility and air curtain incinerator included with the application contains several concerning statements. While the materials are to be screened so that only 100 percent wood waste and 100 percent clean lumber is loaded into the incinerator, the plan only requires that the screeners make reasonable efforts to separate materials that do not fit this description. Additionally, once all material has been reduced to ash, it is removed from the incinerator and used as a soil amendment to be sold as topsoil; however, the plan in bold, capital letters provides: "Do not remove hot embers, as this can start a fire." Finally, the plan requires the operator to obtain required approvals from the Greater Naples Fire District, but it is our understanding in speaking to them prior to this hearing, that neither the fire chief nor the fire marshal have been consulted with respect to this specific proposal. In addition to the operating plan, Mr. Ferraro, during his presentation, remarked that sparks would be present at the time of loading, and as you have also recognized, the incinerator will remain hot all throughout the night. The approval of a device without fire district input that could cause devastating damage if not properly operated is very concerning. The environmental advantages associated with the air curtain incinerator over grinding or open burning are rendered meaningless when properties and businesses are destroyed. The proposed conditional use is not appropriate for this area, and it's simply not compatible with the surrounding properties or those in the general vicinity that could be severely impacted by additional fires. In addition with the concerns relative to the danger posed by the air curtain incinerator is the fact that the Land Development Code does not support the request. The application, as originally filed, sought approval of a conditional use to allow for use of an air curtain incinerator in the agricultural zoning district. The section of the LDC allows for collection and transfer sites for resource recovery as a conditional use, which is the conditional use that is already approved for this June 16, 2020 Page 57 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) site. It does not specifically allow for use of an incinerator at a collection and transfer site for resource recovery or as a conditional use in the agricultural zoning district. In reality, it is more akin to processing than collection and transfer. The staff report, as originally drafted, similarly classified the request as one for conditional-use approval. It has since been amended to provide that the request is for an accessory use, the air curtain incinerator, to an already approved conditional use, the collection and transfer site, for resource recovery, with the same provisions of the LDC being cited. There's no provision of the LDC that allows for approval of an accessory use to a conditional use. Without an LDC provision on point, it is inappropriate to apply the cite for approval of a conditional use where it is not actually a conditional use being requested; however, that is the criteria staff has used in recommending approval of the request. There are two additional points worth mentioning. Incinerators are only permitted as a consequential use in the zoning public-use district. As a reminder, this property is zoned agricultural, and no rezoning request has been submitted. Additionally, the Collier County Solid Waste Disposal and Resource Recovery Act, which is found in Chapter 258-26 of the LDC, allows for the use of incinerators in conjunction with solid waste disposal sites provided that they are county sites or sites operated by a licensee or franchisee of the county. Staff has confirmed that Yahl -- that the Yahl facility does not fit within either of these categories. Accordingly, even if it were appropriate to seek approval of an accessory use to a conditional use, the ACI should not be approved so long as the facility is a private provider on land in the agricultural zoning district. Finally, though asserted during the presentation, the request is not consistent with the Growth Management Plan. The applicant has requested a Growth Management Plan Amendment as well as given that the Growth Management Plan currently expressly prohibits incinerators in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District sending lands. It specifically provides that this shall not be interpreted to allow for the establishment of -- or expansion of facilities for landfilling, dry filling, incinerating, or other method of on-site solid waste disposals. The proposal is to simply remove reference to incinerating, but it would seem improper to do so given that the LDC allows incinerators in so few places. Based on the foregoing, we would respectfully request that you recommend denial of this request. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Go ahead, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. Please, don't -- MS. SPECTOR: Okay. Sorry. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have some questions. I just want -- you stated, and I just want to make sure I heard what you said. The auxiliary -- no, what did you say? MS. SPECTOR: Accessory. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Accessory use, you said, is not -- it should not relate it to the conditional use. It's not allowed. An accessory use is not allowed to a conditional use; is that what you just stated? MS. SPECTOR: There's nothing in the code that contemplates it that -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I didn't think so. I had to state that correctly in my brain. But accessory use to a conditional use, right. MS. SPECTOR: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, the only way to really do that, then, would be through some kind of a zoning process with a PUD or some other type of zoning. MS. SPECTOR: Correct. June 16, 2020 Page 58 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Jeff, you'll have time to respond. CHAIMAN FRYER: I have a few questions also, but before I ask them, do any other Planning Commissioners? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Spector. First of all, if the language were changed from "reasonable business efforts" to "best business efforts," would you see that as an improvement? MS. SPECTOR: No. CHAIMAN FRYER: No? All right. Have you been in contact with the Greater Naples Fire protection district? MS. SPECTOR: I have not personally. My client did speak with them yesterday to confirm. Oh, I'm sorry, the American Farms. One of the owners of American Farms spoke with them. CHAIMAN FRYER: And what was learned in that meeting? MS. SPECTOR: That they were concerned that they had not been consulted and they would want additional input into the request. CHAIMAN FRYER: Are they -- are you telling us that they now are opposing it? MS. SPECTOR: I cannot speak for them. I'm just relaying the conversation to you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Have you met with any representatives of the applicant? MS. SPECTOR: I have not. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. We have asked for, and I think received as concessions from the applicant, several additional conditions such as the addition of sprinklers, which seems to me is a major concession: The wind blowing 15 miles an hour for 20 minutes, no charging; they're going to put a fire alarm in there; public access is going to be allowed during reasonable business hours; and then staff has seven conditions. You're not satisfied with this? MS. SPECTOR: Well, it is concerning that they're not going to have anybody monitoring overnight. I don't -- with someone 10 minutes, 20 minutes I think -- I think 20 minutes away is what was stated. That's a significant amount of time for someone to respond. But even aside from the fact, I don't know how this request can be approved under the current Land Development Code provisions. CHAIRMAN FRYER: If there were a requirement that there be someone physically present on site, would you still be opposed? MS. SPECTOR: My clients would not like to see an incinerator at this -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. That's all the questions I have. Anybody else have questions for Ms. Spector? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MS. SPECTOR: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Next public speaker. MR. BELLOWS: Kelly Yahl. MS. YAHL: Good morning. Good afternoon. My name is Kelly Yahl. I live at 2221 Washburn Avenue. I don't have prepared statements. I live directly across the street from the mulch yard. I heard earlier reference to some fires that gave us some concerns three or four years ago. It wasn't three or four years ago; it was three or four weeks ago. We were under a mandatory evacuation order for four days because of a fire that started eight miles away from us. CHAIMAN FRYER: Excuse me. Did I understand you to say that your last name is Yahl, Y-a-h-l? June 16, 2020 Page 59 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MS. YAHL: It is. CHAIMAN FRYER: What is your relationship to the applicant? MS. YAHL: I have no relationship to the current owner. The previous owner was my sister-in-law. CHAIMAN FRYER: I see. Okay. Please proceed. Thank you. MS. YAHL: Now I lost my train of thought. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Sorry. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Fire. MS. YAHL: We were under a mandatory evacuation order for four days for a fire that started eight miles away. That's how fast these things move. If you don't have somebody monitoring a fire overnight, I don't care how close they are; you're not going to stop anything too soon. And the comparison between open burning and the air curtain burning that was presented extensively is irrelevant because there is no open burning currently going on on that facility. You're producing a flame, like the lady from the landfill mentioned, where none currently exists. When you introduce that, you introduce risk. I've read the operator's manual for this particular unit. I don't have it with me; I'm sorry. But as an operator, it lists very specific clothing that you have to wear within 100 feet of the incinerator because, I quote, embers can fly up to 100 feet from the incinerator when they are being loaded, okay. If an ember can fly, a fire can start. And it not starting depends on proper operation of this incinerator. While I will admit that the current owners have made improvements on that property that weren't taking place before they owned, there has been no significant reduction in the construction -- in the C&D pile. It's still higher than the building, and they were dumping more there today. The trucks -- somebody said something about the trucks don't come in until after the school buses. I don't know where they're getting that from, because I've had to pass on the wrong side of the road with trucks lined up on the wrong side of the road waiting to get in the facility. And that brings me to our last point. That is our exit. That's our only exit. If a fire starts there, and you've got people in there, nobody's getting out because there's nowhere else to go. So I think it's foolish to even consider burning anything in that spot, air incinerator or otherwise. And I'm asking you to vote no on this proposal. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Next registered speaker, please. MR. BELLOWS: Ricardo Soubelet -- Soubelet. MR. RICARDO SOUBELET: Good morning, Commissioners. Well, today I come to you -- CHAIMAN FRYER: State your name, sir. MR. RICARDO SOUBELET: Sorry. Ricardo Soubelet. I live -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Spell the last name. MR. RICARDO SOUBELET: S-o-u-b-e-l-e-t. I live in 2112 Washburn Avenue. It's the property not adjacent to Yahl's but the one right next to it, so the next neighbors. Come here today to petition against the establishment of the air curtain and the Yahl Mulching. A couple of points that I wanted to review. The health hazards that this proposes as a pollution in the air. My sister is -- as was mentioned was the person with respiratory issues. She has cerebral palsy, and so this, obviously, proposing a big concern to my family. Well, one of the points that Commissioner Schmitt -- his very first concern was that sorting June 16, 2020 Page 60 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) out all these woods that are coming in from landscaping. We don't know if they have -- are covered with insecticide, pesticides, all these things that the sorters are going to be able to sort out. Well, I think it's something that's an invisible thing that we're not looking at, and these are things that we're going to be burning. We're loading the -- well, they are loading the burner 20 times an hour, and every time it's loaded, it's going to break the curtain, and we're going to be releasing smoke into the air; smoke and pollution. As the presenter said in his presentation, even though the incinerator might be located in the middle of the facility, there is no cover on the machine. At night, I think it was a little bit shady with the presentation when they said that it might be on or it might not be on at night. And so I was wondering that if at one night there is a gust of wind when the machine isn't on, we can have ashes flying in the area. So that's a concern that we have. What else? Well, another thing that I had, while I was listening to everything is, they stated they there had to be 500 feet from any actual residential building. Well, just to give you an idea, the dimensions are 600 by 300. The neighbors very next door are located in the middle of the property, so I think 500 feet is a skewed number, so I'd like some more clarification on that. Well, that's it. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. RICARDO SOUBELET: Thank you for your time. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Our fourth speaker, Ray? MR. BELLOWS: Richard Soubelet. CHAIMAN FRYER: He just spoke. MR. BELLOWS: That's his brother [sic]. CHAIMAN FRYER: Oh, sorry. DR. RICHARD SOUBELET: Yeah, it was my son. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. Go ahead. DR. RICHARD SOUBELET: Just to clarify the measures that we are from the northeast corner, the measures, we are 300 feet, and we, in between, have a neighbor who is close, at least, say, 200 feet from the structural corner of where they're going to put the machine. So they are a lot less than 500 feet. They say also the bus is not coming -- my little girl come at 1:00 p.m. in the middle of the process with the school bus. And I hear the terms "slowly operate," "little smoke," "not very loud." So it comes to me as a doctor -- I'm retired right now. When one patient tells me that I'm a little pregnant, I'd say, okay, you are or you are not. So we're going to have smoke, we are going to have a machine loud, and these things is going to change our environment 100 percent. That's all. Thank you very much. We are against. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. MR. BELLOWS: The last speaker is Shannon Crawford. MS. CRAWFORD: My name is Shannon Crawford. I don't have prepared statements, but I have lived -- live at 2002 Crawford Avenue. I've lived there -- I first moved there 35 years ago. Yahls have been my neighbors all that time. Yahl Mulching is not Yahl Mulching anymore. They kept the name, but it's not a neighborhood-run business. I like to open up my windows in the morning. Like the fresh air. I like the smell of the fresh air. I have five acres. Everyone living out there has at least five acres. It takes a lot time out in the yard doing yardwork there. I'm outside. I love living there. I have always loved living there, and I think this is going to significantly impact my quality of life, and I -- I resent that, June 16, 2020 Page 61 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) and I don't want you to allow it. I think it's a fire hazard. We just had -- we had, actually, upstairs -- I didn't see -- we had people from south of 75, because this affects us and it affects them. The last times we had fires in 2017 and just a few weeks ago, the fires jumped 75. So it doesn't really matter, like, where it originates, because it jumps. And the facility abuts 75 at around Mile Marker 99. You have huge county infrastructure. You mentioned the Sports Parks. I mean, that is a huge investment infrastructure. We have the landfill there. That is -- that is -- Google landfill fires. Do you want to get scared? You know, seriously. Do you really want to take that chance? You talk about less truck traffic. If they burn 10 to 20 tons an hour, trust me, they're there to make money. They're going to burn, and there's going to have to be a lot of trucks coming in in order to feed that machine. I'm sorry. I'm hungry, too, so I don't do well when I'm hungry. I wished I'd eaten a bigger breakfast. So -- let me see. My air quality, my standard of living, my sister's, you know, who lives next to me -- well, you know, in that neighborhood -- next is 660 feet away. In all of our -- you know, we live there. We work in our yards. We open our windows. We want fresh air. The landfill situation has been very well resolved. I mean, they are not an issue at all anymore. I went through that, and I went through that where I step out on my deck at night and it's like, whoa, go back inside. I don't want that. We all are old enough to know what a wet ashtray smells like. Seriously. I mean, it's going to be one great big wet ashtray, and I don't want to smell it. And it's not safe. And there's too much valuable infrastructure that is at risk. Every time, 20 times an hour, they're going to be breaking that and particulates and hot embers -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Can you wrap it up, please, ma'am. MS. CRAWFORD: -- could escape all of those, so yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. MS. CRAWFORD: I do better on a full stomach. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Have a good lunch. MS. CRAWFORD: Yes, I'm asking you to deny it, by the way. CHAIMAN FRYER: We gathered. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: We gathered that. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. That's all the registered speakers we have? MR. BELLOWS: Correct. CHAIMAN FRYER: Anybody else in the room who hasn't registered wish to speak on this matter? MS. SKUFCA: I do, please. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Please come forward. And I take it you have not yet been sworn in. MS. SKUFCA: I have not. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. We'll take care of that. (The speaker was duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) MS. SKUFCA: My name is Candy Skufca. I am the owner of Panthers Walk RV Resort on the south side of 75. We have had to evacuate twice in three years, and the last evacuation came at 10:30 at night. Imagine having to get 100 homes evacuated in hours. You don't know how far away the fire is. The fire did jump 75 the next day, and it was very scary sitting outside of my business and my home waiting to see it burn away. In 2017, that March 7th fire, was at Mile Marker 98, and we were evacuated at 11:00 in the morning. By 2:00 in the afternoon, I was sitting outside across the street from the toll booth waiting as I heard "boom, boom, boom," thinking that the propane tanks were blowing up. The June 16, 2020 Page 62 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) fire was raging across the property, and I was crying because I thought I lost my home and my business. They move fast. The reason I'm telling you this is because we have a lot more people to think about than just the north side of 75. You have Forest Glen. You have the horse barns. You have Picayune Strand. We have all of the people down the buff that have just built their new homes, the ones on Bentley that have built their homes, and we have Club Naples RV Resort. So please consider all of our residents on the south side, our time to be able to evacuate in the middle of the night if it has to be, and we really don't want this to be there. Thank you very much for your time. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Any other member of the public wish to speak? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, what I propose to the Planning Commission is that we recess for lunch to return at 2:00 and then allow for rebuttal and questions and see if we can't wrap this matter up, and then after that we'll turn to the golf course. Does that sound reasonable? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Then that's what we'll do. Stand in recess till 2:00. (A brief recess was had from 12:56 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to reconvene, and we had completed public speakers. So I believe the next thing would be for rebuttal. MR. WRIGHT: Good afternoon, Commissioners, Jeff Wright again. I wanted to point something out that -- Corby Schmitt, I'm not sure that he ever got his testimony on the record this morning. CHAIMAN FRYER: He did. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: He did. MR. WRIGHT: He did? Okay. It was brought to my attention. CHAIMAN FRYER: You know, Jeff, perhaps -- based upon a conversation I had with Ray before lunch, in order for you to have a full opportunity of rebuttal, maybe we need to turn this back to staff and see if staff's recommendation has changed. MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. The presentation provided by Kari -- I can't remember her name now. CHAIMAN FRYER: Hodgson. MR. BELLOWS: Hodgson -- I think raised a lot of concerns that staff hadn't evaluated as part of the review of the conditional use or the Growth Management Plan Amendment. While the concern of the proximity to the energy-to-gas is definitely an issue that needs to be addressed, one is, do we recommend denial as staff, or can there be conditions of approval -- additional conditions of approval to ensure that the gas-to-energy facility is adequately protected? And in my conversations with Jamie French between -- in the break, during the break, he had indicated that, because this will require a Site Development Plan approval for this intensification of this site, we do additional fire prevention reviews on this particular site that could look at that safety aspect in regards to the gas to energy. So while I'm not prepared to say we're changing to recommendation of denial, I'm saying we need to look at additional safeguards. MR. KLATZKOW: Did you need a continuance on this item so you can look at that? MR. BELLOWS: That might be advisable. MR. KLATZKOW: Is that your recommendation? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Anything from the Planning Commission on the recommendation for a continuance? And we'll -- Jeff, we'll give you a chance to talk. June 16, 2020 Page 63 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. I guess I'd also -- it didn't sound like the fire department had been consulted and brought into this equation either. MR. BELLOWS: Well, staff has fire reviewers on the team, but not the District, so maybe we should do that as well. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. That was my recommendation. I would prefer that the applicant contact the North Naples Fire District or -- is it -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Greater. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Greater Naples Fire District, thank you -- because I certainly think it's -- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- of very much importance that we hear what they have to say -- MR. BELLOWS: It definitely is. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- because I mean, if -- I was going to have a discussion, but if we're going to recommend to continue, then I think, frankly, from my position, that is the best approach right now for the applicant. MR. BELLOWS: I agree. CHAIMAN FRYER: I'd like to ask that we ask Greater Naples to send an official to testify before us if and when this comes back, because it is very, very important. Other comments before we ask Mr. Wright to speak? COMMISSIONER FRY: Just that I think the fire aspect of it, the risk of fire, which was raised, I think eloquently, by the neighbors and how fire sensitive an area this is, you know, I feel a great sense of responsibility to only approve this if we are very much assured of fire safety and every precaution's been taken and that they -- that those risks are mitigated or eliminated. I don't know if they can totally be eliminated -- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- but definitely would like to see that addressed. MR. BELLOWS: Definitely, and we can clarify some of the issues raised by the public in our re-submittal. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. KLATZKOW: And, Jeff, you may want to get what the current trip count is. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. That's a good idea, current trip count, AUIR. Mr. Wright? MR. WRIGHT: Yes, thank you. I understand the prudent approach, and I don't have any problem with it. I did have a chance to talk to Solid Waste, because it was a surprise to me that they showed up, because they were at the pre-application meeting and didn't express any concerns all the way through, and they showed up at the last minute. So I said, what gives? What exactly? And she basically -- I don't want to put words in my mouth -- in her mouth, but she said, you're a competitor. So I just would ask that as we go along -- CHAIMAN FRYER: I didn't hear what you said, Jeff. MR. WRIGHT: You're a competitor of ours. CHAIMAN FRYER: Oh. MR. WRIGHT: And so, I mean, I obviously didn't cross-examine her, but we also had Sarah Spector getting up here listing a number of entities. And I'm not sure that she's been registered properly for. But we don't know who they are or where they are. And I suspect that those are also competitors. So I wanted to get that on the record. It's probably going to linger with this case as it moves along. So -- but we don't have any problem with your request. We'll get in touch with the June 16, 2020 Page 64 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) fire district and Solid Waste and make sure we're good. CHAIMAN FRYER: Perfect. Good. Entertain a motion then. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, I just want to add to the staff. When this comes back, what I would like from the staff -- probably going to have to coordinate with the folks -- well, the landfill, basically, Public Utilities -- MR. BELLOWS: Yep. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- for the history in this county, for this history, the long-standing history that this county was not going to ever allow for open burning or any type of burning. So there's a long history of that at the landfill, and I would like to hear some of -- some of that background as well. MR. BELLOWS: Okay. Make sure I understand where -- you want as part of the backup information additional research as to open fire permits? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, open burning -- MR. BELLOWS: Open burning. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- that this county many, many years has never approved any type of incineration type -- incinerator or any other type of device at the landfill -- MR. BELLOWS: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- because of the public concern. COMMISSIONER FRY: Well, the quote that I heard was that incinerators are specifically prohibited except in, quote, public-use areas. MR. BELLOWS: Well, our zoning code lists that as a permitted use in the -- in the public-use zoning district, and it doesn't list it as a conditional use in the ag district or in the zoning overlay. But staff's opinion is that the activities that are currently occurring on site, the resource recycling, this is an additional intensification activity of that process. So we're not seeking a conditional use for an incinerator. We're expanding the role of that type of facility to include that. We felt that, rightly so, that that should go through a public hearing process and not just deem it an accessory use permitted by right. So we wanted to make sure it came through a public hearing process to deal with it as an expanded activity to a resource recovery recycling facility. COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any other questions or, perhaps, a motion? Oh, should it be indefinite continuance or continuance? MR. BELLOWS: It's up to the applicant, but I think staff would need more time than just the four-week continuance. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Ray, also the issues that were raised regarding the accessory uses, conditional use, all those other kind of uses -- MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, that kind of was my last answer, but we can put that into a supplemental staff report how we came to the decision that this was an expansion of the activities on the site. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. CHAIMAN FRYER: Paul? COMMISSIONER SHEA: That was my question. I wanted to hear the rebuttal that we would have as staff to the first speaker. Obviously, there's two sides to everything, but it made it sound like we were actually going through the wrong process, at least in her opinion. MR. BELLOWS: Yeah. If we were dealing with it as a permitted use, it's not allowed. It would have to be a rezone. But if we're dealing with it as an additional activity that's allowed as part of a resource recycling facility, it was my opinion that it could be requested for that. Obviously, she has a different opinion. June 16, 2020 Page 65 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: There are two companion items that are before us right now, the CU and the small-scale GMPA. I'd entertain a motion to continue -- MR. KLATZKOW: Just before that, just to save the applicant the readvertising -- MR. BELLOWS: Just go to four weeks? MR. KLATZKOW: Well, I'm just -- do we have -- my calendar has a meeting on July 16th; is that correct? MR. BELLOWS: Correct. MR. KLATZKOW: Do you want to just continue it to then? If for some reason you need more time, we can re-continue it; otherwise, he has to advertise again. MR. BELLOWS: That would be fair. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Is there a motion to that effect? COMMISSIONER FRY: So moved. CHAIMAN FRYER: Second? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Second. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we continue both of these items to the 16th? MR. KLATZKOW: July 16th. CHAIMAN FRYER: July 16th meeting. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any opposed? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: Carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wright. ***All right. Are we ready for the golf course? That had been not to be heard until -- not to be heard before 1:00 p.m., but we're at 2:10 p.m., so I guess -- I assume everybody's ready to go on that? MR. FRANTZ: We are. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. FRANTZ: Jeremy Frantz, for the record. CHAIMAN FRYER: Let me just call this. This is -- this is an LDC amendment to the -- to the -- what's it called -- something facility? I'm blocking on the word. Community facility provisions of the LDC to provide for unlimited seating and an extension of hours of operation to midnight, and it is PL20190002545. And we don't -- we don't need to swear in witnesses, do we, or do we? MR. FRANTZ: No, we don't. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And we don't need to make disclosures, or do we? MR. FRANTZ: You do not. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. So please proceed. MR. FRANTZ: Jeremy Frantz, for the record. I'm just going to be brief and mention that, you know, you-all have seen this amendment. Back in December it went to the Board briefly, and they asked for you-all to rereview. June 16, 2020 Page 66 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) We've got a few additional staff members that are going to actually make the presentation for this amendment, so I'm going to turn it over to them now. The first is Geoff Willig with the County Manager's Office. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. MR. WILLIG: Good afternoon, Commissioners. CHAIMAN FRYER: In the interest of time, why don't we alternate between mics, and so the lady's who's cleaning one won't hold up someone speaking from the other one. MR. WILLIG: Sure. And I'm going to pull up this presentation as well. Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Geoff Willig, project manager for the Golden Gate Golf Course redevelopment piece. As Jeremy mentioned, you saw this item in December, and then it went to the -- it went to the Board of County Commissioners, and the County Commissioners had asked us to bring this back to you-all to -- once we had selected a partner. If I could invite Commissioner Saunders up to the mic to say a few words about this project. CHAIMAN FRYER: We'd be honored, Mr. Chairman. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you very much. And just for the record, Burt Saunders, and I do have my mask, but I feel pretty comfortable right here. I want to thank all of you for your service. These are difficult times, and I really appreciate your effort. When I ran for the County Commission -- and I'll be very quick as well. When I ran for the County Commission, one of my goals was to pay a lot of attention to the Golden Gate City area. I felt that that was a community -- 25,000 people live there -- it really didn't get much attention for many, many years. And so we created an Economic Development Zone so tax dollars raised in that community over and above the 2014 base will stay in that community. We have a new road program that's being put together to make Golden Gate Parkway a pedestrian and bicycle-friendly thoroughfare, give it more of a community feel. We acquired the water and sewer service there. Golden Gate City had some of the most expensive water and sewer rates in the state. They got a 30 percent reduction just by the county acquiring their system. And we are working on an overlay zoning district that you'll see that deals with the whole commercial corridor there, which also includes this particular area. One of the things that -- and a couple of you may remember this, but going back to 1983/'84 when I was the county attorney, big issue was, can we get golf in Collier County? And, of course, that fell apart, and now we're some 30 years, 35 years later, and we're still talking about how can we get a community golf course in this county. We have four commissioners, including myself, that have steadfastly said we're not going to spend county money to build a golf course and operate a golf course, but we were able to purchase this property recognizing that it was the last large parcel of property in the urban area that we could reserve for open space and for future generations. Now, we have the ClubCorp proposal where they will build the golf course using their money. They will operate this golf course as a first-class golf course. This will not be a rundown community golf course. It will be a first-class operation. In order for them to make that capital investment -- and they'll explain what that is. For them to make capital investment, they have to have some revenue source to offset the losses that they will experience at this community golf course where Collier County residents will have a deeply discounted price to play golf. How do they do that? Well, they have the BigShots facility. I have visited their BigShots facility. It is extraordinarily well run, and they will explain all of that. But in order for that to be June 16, 2020 Page 67 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) cost effective, they have to have a really nice restaurant operation going on there, a good food and beverage operation. The current PUD limits restaurants to 150 seats. We all know that that's not an economically viable alternative for this type of a facility. So that's number one; we need to get the number of seats increased. Number 2, hours of operation. I think the PUD calls for everything to be shut down by 10:00 p.m. Well, that's not going to work either, and they'll explain what their hours of operation will be. The issue becomes noise and light. Those are really the only two issues. Noise will not be a problem because of where this is located and the way it's situated on the parcel that will be dedicated for that. Lighting, as you all know, with new technology, will be directed only onto their parcel. That will not be a problem. There'll be sufficient buffering to prevent any negative neighborhood impacts. And the project is placed on this parcel in a way to minimize any potential impacts. I will say this is the one and only opportunity that we'll have for a long time to have community golf in this county. The economic situation with the coronavirus certainly will make the County Commission going forward very, very cautious, and we already have four commissioners that have said we're not going to spend county money on this type of facility. So this is the one and only opportunity for that. Plus I think this will be an incredibly positive economic benefit for that part of Collier County. So I'm urging you to consider an affirmative vote on those two issues. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you, Chairman Saunders. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: If there are any questions, I'll be here. MR. WILLIG: As the Commissioner stated, the LDC currently allows for 150 seats by right. This was only asking for 200 seats, or increasing that to 200 seats, and increasing the hours of operation from 10:00 to midnight. Really, it comes down to, why is this necessary? Well, in order for us to go through this process and in order for, as the Commissioner said, BigShots to be able to -- or ClubCorp/BigShots to come in and develop this property, we need to have those things now so we can move forward in advance. We could -- as was mentioned in December, we could go through the PUD process; however, that would add a significant amount of time to developing this property, probably six to 12 months of additional time before we could get this property moving again and provide golf, as the Commissioner said, to the community. So that's really the reason that we are asking for this -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Mr. Willig, would you mind if I interrupted you just to get a couple of points of clarification? MR. WILLIG: Sure. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. First of all, did you -- did I hear you say that instead of an unlimited number of additional seats, it's going to go from 150 to 200? MR. WILLIG: Yes, that's correct. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And let's see. The second thing, with respect to the PUD, I understand that the Board of County Commissioners -- I'm not sure where we are -- well, come to us first, of course -- that there would be a PUD for affordable housing; is that the plan, or essential services personnel? MR. WILLIG: Can you repeat that? Sorry. I was looking at a note. CHAIMAN FRYER: The central core of this parcel would -- is it planned that it would become affordable housing or essential services personnel housing? MR. WILLIG: Let me throw this on the visualizer. Are we not -- MR. BELLOWS: It's not working. June 16, 2020 Page 68 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. WILLIG: Never mind. At the Board meeting last week we had a -- when we had the housing piece on the agenda there, we had included a draft plan that showed we've done a fit study that has golf courses around -- or golf holes around the Par 1 community in the middle, surrounding that community and along the edge. We've allocated the southernmost portion of the golf course, which is along 951 almost to the canal, as the area for the housing piece, the essential services housing, and then to the north -- northwest and straight north part of the property would be left aside for the potential VA nursing home facility. CHAIMAN FRYER: I got it. And so this is going to be coming back to us in the form of a PUD, or at least those two pieces? MR. WILLIG: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. MR. WILLIG: No, that's all right. So, anyway, I have three individuals from ClubCorp here. I've got Randall Cousins, Jeremy Parish, and Devin -- Birch, that's it. I knew it was nothing simple. They're here to speak in regards to the BigShots facility, and I have a presentation that they can run through as well. So, Randall. CHAIRMAN FRYER: You can use the middle mic. It's been cleaned. MR. WILLIG: You can just tell me to advance, I'll advance. MR. COUSINS: Good afternoon. My name is Randall Cousins, and I'm with ClubCorp and BigShots. And, again, I'll just echo, thank you for your time and your consideration in this. And thank you to staff who's been a very helpful group for us to work with as we've been working with this project over the last months. So this deck is actually a derivative presentation of what we presented in this room back in February, and it's really meant to give you some context and some overview of why we're here and why we're excited about this project. And so what we had originally presented was the combination of ClubCorp, which is a 60-year-old golf management and ownership company, with BigShots Golf, which is a new concept which we, ClubCorp, acquired in late 2018, and Golden Gate Golf Course. So to do that, I'll give you a little bit of overview of ClubCorp. We operate in three distinct integrated divisions. One is with private golf and country clubs. We have more than 170 golf clubs across the country, and then we also have business and sports and alumni clubs which are -- think of dining clubs at the top of office towers and then stadium clubs, for instance, in Bailor, University of Texas, Texas Tech things like that. So we have a very strong pedigree both in golf as well as in hospitality and food and beverage, which we think really gives us a unique position to service a community like this with a concept like BigShots Golf. So that's our third division, and we acquired it in late 2018. The goal was really to bring people to golf who had never swung a golf club before. It is -- it is most cynical [sic]. It is a restaurant with a driving range attached to it where you can come in and play a digitally enhanced golf game where you hit a ball that's tracked with a Doppler radar technology and overlaid into a digital environment. So it's extremely accessible to the nongolfer. And we think Golden Gate presents a very unique opportunity to marry that high-tech experience with low-barriered entry, for someone to come to a golf course and then immediately get onto green grass golf very quickly if they so want to. So ClubCorp, as I said, we're a leading owner/operator of private golf and country clubs all across North America. We have a portfolio of more than 200 properties in 27 states, including District of Columbia as well as two foreign countries, in Mexico and in Canada. June 16, 2020 Page 69 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) We have iconic clubs such as Firestone Country Club, Mission Hills, Indian Wells, and the Woodlands Country Club in Houston if you're familiar with those. We regularly host events with the PGA Tour, the LPGA, and the Champions tour. So we think we have a very strong background when it comes to golf. Just to give you a little bit of overview, as I said, it's a 60-year-old company. We were founded in 1957 by the Dedman family in Dallas, Texas, and their goal at the time was to really take golf, which had been a not-for-profit endeavor -- typically clubs were owned by members -- and to step in and say that these could be run professionally to really bring standards around the hospitality and the food and beverage, and then to really open up golf for everyone, allow anyone to be members as opposed to, you know, a very select group in these markets. And so that very first acquisition of Brookhaven Country Club in 1957 is really what started our company. In 2006, the Dedmans sold to KSL Private Equity out of Denver. In 2013, we were then taken public under MYCC. And then in 2017, we were acquired by certain funds of Apollo Management, taken private again. And at that time the mandate was really that we needed to do something different. At that time we had been public for quite a while. We told our story to the analysts on Wall Street, and they understood we were a membership company. We were focused on golf, but how are we -- and what were we doing to grow the game of golf and bring people in as new members? And so when we looked at the marketplace of opportunity, that's how we found BigShots. With the ability to bring people who'd never swung a golf club into a facility where they could, with very low effort -- all you have to do is show up with a credit card. We provide clubs. You can hit the ball. We are hopeful to turn those people into ClubCorp members very quickly. So BigShots Golf, as I've alluded to, is a high-tech golf entertainment concept. It features indoor/outdoor seating, a bar area, a patio, private event spaces. It's really meant to be a central focal point of a community where families can come play games, where the seven-year-old who's never swung a golf club before can beat his grandfather who's a scratch golfer and plays every weekend. Really, the goal is to be welcoming and accessible to everyone who'd like to swing a golf club. There's one store that's open right now in Vero Beach which was opened in late 2018. We have six additional sites that we're working on, including two that are under construction, one in Fort Worth, Texas, and one in Springfield, Mississippi, and we're hoping to get under construction with this project here in Naples pretty quickly as well. So, as I said, we really want this to be accessible. We believe that BigShots needs to be a place for fun for families to come together, create memorable experiences and for the community to be able to use these private event meeting spaces and these patios where they can come and have a good meal, play a fun game of golf and, you know, that it can really be a central point of the community. As I said, it's a high-performance golf technology. It's tracked with Doppler radar, and so every golf shot is tracked. So even if you dribble it off the end of the second floor, that shot will be relayed into our game. You can still score points with it. So even if you're terrible at golf, like I am, you can still get points, and it's still a pretty good time. And then what we do best, this really is how BigShots is going to rely on the expertise of ClubCorp and rely on that 60 years of expertise in food and beverage hospitality and in running the golf. We think that we -- when you combine technology along with those family-driven experiences in these communities, you really have something special. Again, with the ball tracking -- oh, and what I didn't mention is we have a live play features which allows for the bays to play competitively against each other or against other facilities. So we'd love to see tournaments between the BigShots at Golden Gate and the BigShots June 16, 2020 Page 70 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) at Vero Beach, and we'll see who the better golfers are. We also have a very extensive library of practice modes and games. So some of the games are virtual golf courses where you can take shots, overlay them on an existing true golf course and play golf that way. One of them is called Knockout, which includes targets that you can hit balls at that correspond with, basically, colored greens that you can see out on the field in front of you but then correspond to the game. And as you hit those targets, you accrue points. Another one is called Islands, which is a target green game, if you're familiar with those kind of games. And then another one is called Pinball, which is if you dribble the ball off the second floor, it will bounce around just like a pinball machine and score lots of points and give that nongolfer an edge. So, ultimately, we think that this is a -- sits at the intersection of a hospitality, food and beverage, and a golf experience, and we really think that by bringing state-of-the-art technology from a tracking perspective and an elevated food and beverage experience, that it's really going to be a "one plus one equals five" kind of scenario where -- this is where people are going to want to be, want to spend a lot of time, and we're going to be a central part of this community as well. So what we had proposed was to take the existing 18-hole Golden Gate Golf Course and transition it into something smaller, into a 12-hole course, and incorporate portions of the existing layout in a way that allows for the BigShots facility to serve as the clubhouse. So rounds could start in that parking lot and then return on those two six-hole loops. What we had proposed was a reduced, heavily discounted greens fees to the existing residents with published pricing for nonresidents, and then preferred access and partnership with the First Tee here in town which, if you're not familiar with that organization, takes basically at-risk and underprivileged youth and introduces them to the game of golf while delivering life lessons in discipline. And so we would do that by giving them access to both the golf course and to the BigShots on some sort of preferred basis. And then, obviously, by redesigning from 18 to 12 holes, that frees up land for some of these alternative uses that have been identified and proposed by staff. The BigShots golf facility, which I'll walk you through pictures here momentarily, includes -- it's two stories. It includes 60 hitting bays, which are about 14 feet wide. It includes more than 200 televisions; more than 200 food and beverage seats; a high-tech design. It has a very unique design; 160-foot net poles that ring the driving range so that we can capture all of those -- the people who can hit a golf ball very far, it will capture those balls; includes private dining on the first floor; flexible private event space and a secondary dining space on the second floor; food and beverage service in the bays; and then patio and a nine-hole putting course in the front of the building. So this was one of the proposed layouts that we had evaluated back in February. We've continued to iterate on these designs but, as you can see, this takes the current 18-hole layout and was one of the proposed 12-hole alternatives. We're still continuing to work through this with our consultant. So this is, by no means, final. This is an exterior shot of the building. And so what you can take away from this is we're using natural finishes on the exterior. It is a two-story design with a sunshade structure in the front, and then that putting course, a turf putting course in the front, which we use for overflow and the wait is where we expect a lot of people to hang out. This is an interior shot of the second floor looking out towards the bays, so you can see that there's a food and beverage area, lots of televisions. This will be a great place to come and watch any sports game. And then some sort of flexible area. We have foosball tables in this rendering but, you know, we've thought about potentially bocce ball or ping pong or something like that. Again, an exterior shot looking at the front. You can see that shade structure as we try to mitigate this Florida sun off of that southernmost edge of the building. June 16, 2020 Page 71 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) This is an overview of sitting in the bay. So this is a picture of the Vero Beach facility which we think is, at least from this perspective, is going to look very similar to what we've proposed for Golden Gate. And so what you can see is these have very comfortable seating. They're spaced to bring your own clubs or to rent clubs when you arrive. There's an automatic ball dispenser. So, you know, just wave your club in front of it, and it will spit out a ball for you. There's a gaming terminal, which is a touchscreen which I've had it described as -- just like visiting for bowling. So this is where you would input your player names, where you would select your game. You could set up a competition between bays. And then there are two TVs, basically, for each bay where you can adjust to a specific channel, if you want to watch tennis and somebody else is watching baseball, and then climate adjusted, which I was told we do need heaters here for January, which I was thinking we would just need misters. But something so that we can help to mitigate some of the outdoor temperature because this is -- you now, it is a three-walled building, so we will be outside. These are some shots of our games. So you can see Pinball, Knockout, and Islands there along the left-hand side, and these are games that we continue to iterate on. We continue to invest our technology and like to bring new games to bear. The top right is a picture of Vero Beach. This is an interior shot of the Bunker restaurant that the owner there has built, and then in the bottom right you can see we have some much better golfers than I who are obviously celebrating a pretty good shot. These are, again, some exterior shots at the Vero Beach location. So this is -- to give you an idea of scale, what we've proposed is 60 bays and two stories. This is 30 bays and two stories, so basically half the size. And the first -- the top left shot is a shot down the T line, so you can see all the ball dispensers and the safety nets so that people -- you know, so that we have some safety there. And then you can see the bays in the top right, an exterior shot of some of the signage in the bottom left, and then a shot of the putting green on the bottom right. Again, some additional shots of both the restaurants and the bays at night for Vero Beach, and then a closeup of some of the technology and of the games. So with that, that concludes my portion of the presentation. Happy for any of your questions. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Are there questions? Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have some questions, but some kind of more related to zoning. But you -- let me just ask about -- you have a project in Fort Worth. Very familiar with it. Champion Circle. MR. COUSINS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Haven't been there in about -- probably last time about March. Has it started coming out of the ground yet? MR. COUSINS: It has, yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. Now, you took over part of the golf course there, and they re-routed the holes, but they still have 18 holes. MR. COUSINS: They do. I will say -- so that store is with one of our territory holders, a franchisee -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. COUSINS: -- which is with O'Reilly Hospitality Management. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They own the hotel. MR. COUSINS: They own the hotel and the golf course and the BigShots project. So our role there is a little bit arm's length but, yes, sir, that's correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, okay. Is the venue there an accessory use to the golf course or is it a principal use and was it -- so how was it zoned in Fort Worth? June 16, 2020 Page 72 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. BIRCH: Accessory to the golf course. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It was deemed an accessory to the golf course? MR. BIRCH: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Because I tried to look that up yesterday and I couldn't find it. CHAIMAN FRYER: We're going to need speakers coming to the microphone. MR. BIRCH: Sorry. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So if you don't know, bring the other speaker up. If he knows, I'm going to ask him. Because I'm very interested in -- I got to -- I just want to really understand this which comes first, the chicken or the egg type of thing, because I look at this -- and I'm a big fan of golf, so make sure you understand that. And I'd love to see this facility in Collier County, but I'm trying to understand, which -- how these are treated, because I -- we see this more as an entertainment center than a golf course, and it's currently zoned golf course. So I don't understand how I can put an entertainment center into an area -- I have no problem with the LDC amendment. The language can be -- it's generic as far as the restaurant or whatever else. We can discuss that. But somehow I'm -- again, got this picture that if we approve the LDC amendment, it automatically green flags this for the development? MR. WILLIG: So to answer your question, in order to get the golf course portion underway -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. MR. WILLIG: -- they have to have the BigShots facility there, and it's a companion -- they're companions. So we're going to bring back the lease agreement with BigShots and ClubCorp to the Board in September, and in order for them to operate the BigShots facility, they also have to operate the golf course. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I look at BigShots like a bowling alley. It's an entertainment center. It's not -- it's not a driving range or a practice range at a golf course. I know you all think it is, but it is not. And I've played a lot of golf all over the world. But -- it's an entertainment center. Could I build a bowling alley on that site today? MR. WILLIG: No. That would not be an accessory use to a golf course. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So this is an entertainment center. So how is this allowed and not a bowling alley? MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows. I think what it boils down to is if you look under the permitted uses in the golf course zoning district, it doesn't say anything about driving ranges. Why is that? It's because it's deemed to be an accessory use to a golf course. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, it's a driving -- it's a practice range. Let's be clear. A driving range is basically -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- a practice area for the golf course. MR. BELLOWS: A driving range is specifically listed as a conditional use. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MR. BELLOWS: In the GC zoning district, it's not listed at all as a permitted or as a conditional use, because driving ranges are historically an accessory activity to a golf course. Same with pitch and put and putting greens and the like. Restaurants are allowed in the golf course, clubhouses, same with pro shops. All those are allowed in there. What isn't specified is how big, other than the square footage of a restaurant, or what accessory activities the restaurant can have. A lot of restaurants have similar arcade-like things. I understand your point taken together, and if it wasn't associated with an existing golf course, it would be deemed something else, and we would go through the appropriate zoning process. June 16, 2020 Page 73 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) But since there is an existing golf course that this will be a part of, I think a case could be made that it is accessory to those golf course activities. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Was there a zoning verification letter for this determination? MR. BELLOWS: No. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So there was nothing requested for this -- MR. BELLOWS: I think there was some discussions amongst staff, but I don't think we did an official letter of that kind. MR. KLATZKOW: It's my understanding that staff's interpretation is that this is accessory and that no zoning action will be needed. MR. BELLOWS: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But most -- we'll call it what it is, a driving range or a practice area. Most golf courses do not have -- after dark they're not out there practicing. This is going to be -- how high are the fences around that? 50 feet? 40 feet? Must be. MR. COUSINS: One hundred sixty feet. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: One-hundred-sixty foot, the poles. And certainly under flood lights, so it's going to be well lit for nighttime use, which is probably going to be the most important. And I'm trying to think -- a year ago we went through a pretty exhaustive review of the Land Development Code to create codes that would control the redevelopment of golf courses. This is -- is this at all impacted by any of those LDC amendments? MR. BELLOWS: Well, we do -- out of that process, we developed the intent to convert golf courses. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. So this is not deemed any type of conversion then? MR. BELLOWS: This part of it. There's part of a greater whole of other changes occurring that will come back as part of the PUD, and that will require, before the PUD is submitted, the intent-to-convert process be followed. There are other aspects to this development than just BigShots. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So to go back to the -- staff believes this is an accessory use to the golf course. If the language is approved, it green lights for this to go. There's no other PUD process or any other type of instrument coming back to the Planning Commission or to the Board? MR. BELLOWS: There will be a PUD, but it's not incorporating BigShots. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. How many 12-hole golf courses are there in the world? MR. COUSINS: I can certainly get you that answer. I don't know off the top of my head. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Are you going to -- is there going to be two sixes? MR. COUSINS: That's what we proposed initially. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Well, see if you can find out how many 12-hole golf courses. I could probably guess. None. It's either nine or 18. (Simultaneous crosstalk.) MR. COUSINS: There are several, yeah. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: They're starting to change them now. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, I just -- I just got the sense that this is somehow -- I'll put it on the record: Because the county is doing this, we're trying to go around the rules to try and allow the county to build this. If I were a private investor trying to do this, what would I have to do to get this built? Probably go through a PUD process. But somehow I feel the county is doing this through the county staff, amending the LDC, and allowing this June 16, 2020 Page 74 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) structure to go in. Have there been any public hearings on -- public meetings as far as advising the folks in Golden Gate? Are they receptive to this? I haven't heard any opposition. MR. WILLIG: In terms of public meetings, there was one held before the December meeting with you guys, and I know the Commissioner's been to several community meetings as well. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I apologize for being so blunt, but I just really want to know these answers and put them on the record. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We had a community meeting at the Pars Condominium. There were probably 200 people there. By the time we were finished, people were coming up saying this sounds great for that community. I don't know if there's anybody in the audience that's opposed to this. My understanding is there may be a couple, but the vast majority of the people -- I've been to Golden Gate Civic Association meetings, several of them, where the Pars folks have been there. Everyone is -- as far as I can tell, is supportive of this because of the potential impact on that overall community. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, that's great. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: There's been plenty -- there's been a lot of public meetings on it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So BigShots is going to come in, build the facility, and redo the golf course? MR. COUSINS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So who's the current architect of the golf course? I don't remember. That goes back, hell, to the Gene Sorenson days or something. I mean, that goes back. MR. WILLIG: Yeah. I don't remember the name. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, you won't even have -- you'll have to lose the name of the current architect, the golf course. I mean, that will be gone. MR. COUSINS: That's right. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So it will basically be redesigned in BigShots? MR. WILLIG: And as Randall mentioned, they're trying to incorporate the elements that are already existing, because it just makes sense to use what's there and use what they can in that re-map of the golf course as well. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: The gentleman that's familiar with the Fort Worth site, if he wants to come up, because I'm going to ask him just another question just so folks understand. And state your name for the record. MR. BIRCH: Hello. I'm Devin Birch. I'm with Austin Engineering, and I'm also the lead civil engineer for all the BigShots sites across the country, with the exception of Vero, which I wasn't involved with on that one. But I was not in attendance at some of the -- at all of the city meetings for Fort Worth, but I do know with certainty that we did not go through any sort of rezoning process or special use. We did have to overcome some ordinance restrictions from the standpoint of the height of the netting for that particular zoning that they wanted us to come through. If I remember right, that was the only thing. And a lighting -- there was a corridor, a pretty substantial highway there that had a lighting corridor that we had to meet. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, 35. MR. BIRCH: And we're able to do that now with all of the lighting technology LED-wise and all the controls that are available remotely to be able to really hone that lighting in on right where we want it and not create a nuisance to the neighborhood, so -- we're right next to apartments June 16, 2020 Page 75 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) there. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I was just going to -- that was my question. I mean, you've got to be 50 feet -- MR. BIRCH: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- from five-story apartment buildings. How many -- I mean, there's -- MR. BIRCH: There's a bunch of units, and they're still building them there. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: They're still building them. Oh, yeah. I haven't been -- I guess I haven't been there since March, I think. MR. BIRCH: So you have -- the steel is all up there, and the range is substantially completed. The netting and poles are up now. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You're able to direct light? MR. BIRCH: Very precisely, yeah. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, it's not going to flood that apartment complex? MR. BIRCH: No. I mean, and we -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I mean, I'm thinking about the same thing here. MR. BIRCH: We can meet the ordinances that you have in place now, you know, from a standpoint of light spill, cutoff structures, this -- the LED technology that's, you know, available now is just incredible from a standpoint of control. So, yeah, I'm very confident that we'll be a great neighbor to the community. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I'll reserve to hear other questions. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Mr. Willig, you want to continue? MR. WILLIG: And I also wanted to make this other point that when you guys heard this in December, we hadn't yet selected ClubCorp/BigShots to be our partners. So at that point in time, it was kind of ambiguous of what this would look like. But now with having BigShots and ClubCorp on our team, we have a more definite -- as you can see with this rendering, it's actually fairly close to the draft plan that we have worked together with Davidson to put together on a site fit plan, so -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can I ask, since he's back up? CHAIMAN FRYER: Of course. By all means. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just informational. Apollo, the ultimate money behind this, are they the private-equity Apollo or is -- MR. COUSINS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So what's their long-range plan in terms of ownership of ClubCorp? MR. COUSINS: They have not -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: They usually don't hang around too long. MR. COUSINS: Yeah. They have not shared that with me in specifics, but obviously they're very enthusiastic about BigShots and, you know, the goal is to build several of these stores. So we think that this really transforms ClubCorp and expands its offering. So very important to them. CHAIMAN FRYER: Anything else? COMMISSIONER SHEA: No. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any other questions at this time? Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Sorry, Karen. You're next. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Where will all these bays be facing? MR. COUSINS: North/northeast. MR. WILLIG: Yeah, I'll zoom in on this -- oops. Hopefully zoom in on the graphic here. Like I said, the draft fit plan that we've worked with Davidson Engineering, it's pretty close June 16, 2020 Page 76 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) to this alignment. Based on ClubCorp and BigShots' requirements, they have to face a certain direction. And, currently, where the mouse cursor is here is where the hitting bays are, and they would be facing going north; north/northeast. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Other way around, okay. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And there's going to be 60 of them? MR. COUSINS: Yes, ma'am. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Sixty or 30? MR. WILLIG: Sixty. MR. COUSINS: Sixty total. So it's two stories; 30 each story. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: And this is part of the extended hours, or is the restaurant somewhere else? MR. WILLIG: The restaurant would be the southern portion of that building behind the hitting bays. And so the extended hours would result in the driving range as well as the restaurant being able to operate till midnight. CHAIMAN FRYER: Anything else, Karen? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: No. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Thanks. So I thought the name TopGolf came up at one point also. Is that a competitor? MR. COUSINS: TopGolf is a competitor. COMMISSIONER FRY: What are the differences between TopGolf and BigShots? MR. COUSINS: We think they're numerous. We would say from a facilities standpoint, our facility is smaller. We are two stories and 60 bays. TopGolf, several of their facilities are three stories and 103 bays, so much larger from a footprint standpoint. We use a different type of tracking technology. TopGolf uses an RFID chip inside of a golf ball which hits very differently. We use a standard golf ball. So for the golfers who are looking to practice, they can come hit real golf balls on a driving range. And then we really believe that one of our central tent poles is on the food and beverage and the hospitality experience. And so we've emphasized a very elevated food and beverage menu. So we think this is going to be a place that a lot of people are going to be excited to come have dinner and maybe never pick up a golf club, which we think is a differentiator between our competitors. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Thank you. So you had mentioned over 200 properties that you own or operate. Out of the golf courses, what percentage do you own versus operate? MR. COUSINS: We have management agreements -- it's less than 20 right now that we're managing. I want to say it's 17. So the vast majority we own outright. COMMISSIONER FRY: But in this case, you would be operating this golf course; it's still owned by Collier County. MR. WILLIG: That's correct. MR. COUSINS: Correct. We would lease the land. COMMISSIONER FRY: You would lease the land. And then -- so what is the relative skin in the game of you versus the county? Are you paying for the construction of the BigShots -- MR. COUSINS: That's right. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- facility and for the renovation of the golf course and the maintenance and operation of the golf course? MR. COUSINS: Correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. And the county is basically just providing the land and approving the project? June 16, 2020 Page 77 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. WILLIG: That's correct. And in order for them to have the BigShots, they have to operate the golf course. COMMISSIONER FRY: Gotcha. So that's kind of a big question. Building on what Joe mentioned about 12-hole golf courses. I grew up a golfer, and I'm just curious, how does -- how does ClubCorp view the golf course, a 12-hole golf course, whether it's two sixes or one 12, in this equation? Is it a loss leader in order to be subsidized by the revenue from the BigShots facility, or is it a possible revenue source for you? MR. COUSINS: We have it modeled as a revenue and a bottom-line contributor. So the interesting thing is, is there's still a bit of a philosophical debate on, with 12 holes, whether it's two six-hole loops, whether it's a nine-hole plus a three-hole practice facility. You know, nine-hole would be nice, because then at least you could record a handicap off of it. So there's still -- we've engaged several architects to help us think through this. So I certainly won't speak for the experts, but we -- our wheelhouse, ClubCorp's wheelhouse, is in the golf. So the new part of this for us is in the BigShots piece. You know, we have expertise with food and beverage and with the hospitality. We think this is going to be the high-tech clubhouse of the future for these kind of golf clubs. Where we evaluated other BigShots across the country, this one is unique aside for an opportunity we're looking at at Firestone Country Club where we're doing something similar where there's a golf course tied to the existing driving range that we're talking about converting to a BigShots. And so this -- we think that this kind of an application, there can be an opportunity for many more of these, so we're very excited about it. COMMISSIONER FRY: That's an interesting twist with a nine-hole and then a three-hole practice course. That actually sounds intriguing to me. So it was mentioned early on that this would be a top-notch or, you know, very nice golf course rather than just a normal kind of public course. What kind of renovations and improvements are you planning and are you committing to regarding the golf course? MR. COUSINS: I'm not really prepared to discuss that. I will just say that we are engaging with some very well-known, prestigious designers and architects in order to evaluate all those options. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. So it's working with the designer, redesigning the course, and then incorporating that design. MR. COUSINS: That's right. COMMISSIONER FRY: And then maintaining that design. Okay. How consistent are BigShots in terms of -- if you go from one to the next to the next in terms of the design and the amenities that are provided? MR. COUSINS: The hope is that they become very consistent. Right now it is not. So Vero Beach was built prior to our involvement with BigShots Golf. And so their building is -- I would say it's materially different than what we've proposed for this site. It is a much smaller footprint. It's only 30 bays. It is two stories. But from the renders, you know, we have -- this is a much larger building. It's basically twice the size. What they're building at Fort Worth and in Springfield, which is under construction right now, is similar. I'd say it's 85 percent of what we've proposed here. But in terms of our pipeline of ClubCorp owned and operated stores, we intend for them all to look materially similar to what we proposed here. COMMISSIONER FRY: Moving toward that? MR. COUSINS: Correct. COMMISSIONER FRY: You mentioned the putting range in the front. You mentioned the term "turf," and I didn't -- is that AstroTurf or is it natural -- is it a putting green natural grass or is it -- MR. COUSINS: It is not natural grass. It is artificial turf. June 16, 2020 Page 78 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRY: AstroTurf. And so it's really not a -- where you pay like you would go to a miniature golf course and play. It's more of just a practice area where you go and kill time waiting for your -- MR. COUSINS: We think it could be both. We think it can be used as an overflow, for instance, when the building is on a wait. If people show up and it's an hour-and-a-half wait to get into a bay, then there's an opportunity to use that as a way to keep them engaged and in the building while they wait for that bay to free up. In times when the building is not busy, you know, we may charge to be able to use that putting experience, and then we think it can be a great practice facility, for instance, with our partnership with First Tee where they want to come and be able to use that as well. So a little bit of everything. COMMISSIONER FRY: So not with windmills and -- MR. COUSINS: Not windmills, no. King Kong will not be in our front lawn. COMMISSIONER FRY: Or like real putting? MR. COUSINS: Real putting, that's right. COMMISSIONER FRY: Real putting situations with angles and elevations and that kind of thing. MR. COUSINS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER FRY: With slight curves to the putts and things. MR. COUSINS: Yes, that's the intent. COMMISSIONER FRY: Will there be a clubhouse? You mentioned that the BigShots facility would serve as the clubhouse or where you would start your golf -- your actual golf experience. Is that just inside the lobby of the BigShots, or is it a separate building that would be a clubhouse? MR. COUSINS: No. We intend to use the BigShots building as the starting point for the golf. COMMISSIONER FRY: So everybody comes into that BigShots facility? MR. COUSINS: That's right. So they would check in in the lobby and start their game of golf from -- COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. Final question. So you've got three walls and a giant open wall out under this golf course. You know, weather here gets a little bit intense in the summer, not so much in the wintertime. But you mentioned, you know, we have thunderstorms and -- how do you keep it comfortable? Do you have special technology to keep it comfortable and kind of shield the people in the bays from what's happening outside? MR. COUSINS: Yeah. So there is a fairly significant overhang to -- COMMISSIONER FRY: I was thinking an air curtain type of a technology would be helpful. MR. COUSINS: That might be helpful. MR. WILLIG: That might affect the ball flight. MR. COUSINS: I can blame the air curtain when I do poorly. It's certainly something we could consider. It's not something that we had baked into the plan just yet. COMMISSIONER FRY: So you just really -- you're just running the air conditioner and just -- but you know you're getting a mix of -- MR. COUSINS: Yeah. And we're evaluating misters and blowers into the bays to try and -- to help with the temperature at well. MR. BIRCH: That's why north facing is important. MR. COUSINS: Yeah. That's a good point. It's one of the reasons why facing the direction that we are is so important, the north to northeast, because that helps manage the direct sunlight into those bays. June 16, 2020 Page 79 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) COMMISSIONER FRY: Thank you. Appreciate it. CHAIMAN FRYER: Any other questions? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SHEA: More information. You say you're leasing it. Does that mean the county gets a payment from you? MR. COUSINS: Yes, sir. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. I probably couldn't ask you what that is, right? MR. WILLIG: That's to be determined. We're currently in negotiations on the lease agreement, and we'll be bringing that back to the Board in September. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: This board or the BCC? MR. WILLIG: BCC. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Karen, did you have something? COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: So this is -- this -- these bays would be a regular driving range during the day and video games at night -- MR. COUSINS: It could be either. So you can just hit balls without engaging any of the games at any time, or you can access the games and use the Doppler technology for tracking at any time. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Oh, okay. COMMISSIONER FRY: Is that a different price? MR. COUSINS: No, sir. COMMISSIONER FRY: You rent the bay? MR. COUSINS: Rent the bay, and then it's your prerogative whether you want to use the technology. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: A driving range. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Yeah. COMMISSIONER FRY: Do you pay by the bay or by the person within the bay? MR. COUSINS: By the bay. CHAIMAN FRYER: All right. Go ahead, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And it's probably Commissioner Saunders. He may know. But I -- the members -- are they members? The current membership of the golf course, or are they -- I would call them the diehard patrons that go there, are they in favor of this? I would think they would be. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Again, this is my assessment of the meetings, and that is that the general public out there is supportive of this, the golfers are supportive of this. We had those meetings at the Pars Condominium. They were the diehard golfers; they were supportive of this. And, you know, the issue of 12 holes came up, and if you Google 12-hole golf courses, the first thing you see on your search will be a Jack Nicholas championship 12-hole golf course. So they do exist. And what I've been told is that with millennials not wanting to play all day, play 18 holes, that this is actually kind of a wave of the future. But this will be a very nicely-run course. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Another option would be, like, two nines where you have two different T boxes or sets when you play if you want to play 18. I'm just thinking for maintaining a handicap. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's all being designed now. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I can't think of anything else. It's -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Are you finished, Joe? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. June 16, 2020 Page 80 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Chairman Saunders, if I may follow up a little bit. When this was in front of us last, there were 57 people who were saying, yeah, we want a golf course, but we don't want all of this entertainment, et cetera, because of things like noise and light and possibly also traffic issues. You're an expert on what the people of the Third District want. And I take it, at large, they're in favor -- your assessment would be they're in favor of this. My question is: Do you have the same level of confidence with respect to the immediate neighbors -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: -- that they're in favor of it? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Because that's one of the reasons why we had the public meeting at the Pars Condominium, because those are the people that are most directly affected by all of this. And like I said, there were about 200 people there. And at first there was a lot of concern about noise and light. By the time we were finished, people were coming up afterwards saying, you know, this sounds really great. I haven't gotten any emails opposed to this. I don't think there's anybody here opposed to it. Now, when this came up the first time, that was my bad. I wanted to move this along because I thought ClubCorp, or whoever we came up with, that was going to be our one shot at getting golf in this county, and I moved that forward more quickly than I should have because we didn't have a ClubCorp on board, we didn't have an engineering firm on board, and we hadn't gone through a significant amount of public input. We had all of that, and I think I can say with some confidence -- and I'm sure I'll get emails if I'm wrong -- that the general public out there is very supportive of this project. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Ray, did -- is it fair to say that all the neighbors were adequately noticed of this meeting? Was something posted, perhaps or -- MR. BELLOWS: Well, LDCs are advertised, and I'll let Jeremy explain exactly the full extent. CHAIMAN FRYER: Was there signage? MR. FRANTZ: LDC amendments just get an advertisement in the newspaper. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. Well, I must say, I didn't get any emails recently about this either. And so I think my inclination is is to -- well, let me ask this question first. Are there any registered speakers? MR. BELLOWS: No, no one has registered. CHAIMAN FRYER: Is anybody going to want to speak when the time comes? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I have one more question. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. Please go ahead, Joe. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You mentioned this -- this is -- or course the county purchased it. The county taxpayers, essentially, purchased it. But there was something about the county residents, that there would be a different rate for county residents. Is that what we -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. The way this would be structured, as far as I know at this point, one of the conditions is that county residents have to have a deeply discounted rate, so this truly will be a course that county residents can afford to play on, so yes. And the County Commission will be in charge of approving those rates. So they'll have to be very consistent with what rates are charged in other community-owned and operated golf course. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Well, I'm sure the ClubCorp relayed what it costs to maintain a golf course. It's not cheap. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Absolutely. And I will tell you, one of the things that I June 16, 2020 Page 81 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) think makes this really attractive is the connection with First Tee. ClubCorp didn't go through an explanation of their relationship with First Tee on a national basis, but this will be a really nice facility for young potential golfers to come in and learn all the things that First Tee teaches, plus there will be actually a meeting facility where they could actually meet indoors and, as was indicated, they'll have that putting green. So this will be a really nice addition to that First Tee operation that's been very successful out at that golf course. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you, Chairman. Any other questions or comments? COMMISSIONER FRY: Commissioner Saunders, I'm sorry, you're almost -- over here. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I haven't touched anything yet, so... COMMISSIONER FRY: Just wondering. So it was an 18-hole golf course that was purchased by the county. Has the conclusion been reached that it's not viable or nobody would come in and operate it at a net neutral or financial neutral position for the county or -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: The County Commission, on numerous occasions, since I've been on the board, has taken up the issue of whether we would open up a golf course and run it as a county golf course. The vote has always been 4-1. Commissioner Fiala has always said I want an 18-hole golf course; it's been a 4-1 vote. That was before the pandemic. Now our economic situation is a whole lot worse than it was, you know, six months or a year ago. That's why I say this is our first and really best chance of having that kind of a golf course. I think the community has come to accept the fact that it's not going to be 18 holes because we have to have some other facilities. The work force housing is going to be a great project. That's a partnership with the -- MR. WILLIG: Rural Neighborhoods. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. There's three different partners, and the Moorings is putting in money, the Foundation is putting in money. Their contribution is $10 million to that housing project. So it's a great public/private partnership. That was the reason why we purchased that land. It wasn't because we wanted to have a golf course. We purchased that land because we knew that there were going to be some very important public facilities that would be needed in that area. Going to a 12-hole golf course gives us that ability to do some very important things in that community. COMMISSIONER FRY: So is it your opinion, then, that this plan overall lets us keep golf in some capacity n that site where otherwise it might not have been possible at all? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That is absolutely the case, without question. CHAIMAN FRYER: Anything else, Karl? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Commissioner, one more thing. I'm sorry. And I know it's not part of what we're being asked to consider today, but could you tell us a little bit more about the affordable housing. For instance, how will it measure up with respect to what teachers and EMTs and firefighters and sheriff's deputies -- COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I'll give you sort of my best guess at this point. We have the county putting in the land, which reduces the cost. We have $10 million going in through philanthropy which, obviously, will be a very significant contribution to that. We think that the cost will be about 50 to 60 percent of market. So if you're renting a two-bedroom apartment, we're probably talking about maybe $1,000 month, maybe a little bit less. If it's three bedrooms, maybe 1,200 instead of 1,800. A very substantial reduction to what the market is. Now, these units will be deed restricted so that only firefighters, police officers, schoolteachers, nurses, certain defined essential service personnel will be able to rent those units. June 16, 2020 Page 82 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) So, for example, a firefighter comes in and rents the unit, and let's say that 12 months later that firefighter is no longer a firefighter, well, he can't renew the lease because it's going to be deed restricted to a certain class of people. Interestingly enough, they've made it clear that they don't want county employees in there unless they happen to be firefighters, EMS, and -- CHAIMAN FRYER: And the deed restrictions are in perpetuity. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That's correct; yes. COMMISSIONER SHEA: How many units are there? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: We're looking at 400 and maybe a few more, but 400, and that's going to be in that very southern eastern corner along 951, and so they'll be designed so there will be no impact on the neighbors as well. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. Anybody else have questions for the chairman? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yeah. The north -- the northwest corner which has golf holes on it currently, is that where a VA -- potential VA facility might go? COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Yeah. That would be the northeast. COMMISSIONER FRY: Isn't this in the northeast -- (Simultaneous crosstalk.) COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: That whole northeastern quadrant there. COMMISSIONER FRY: So there's still room for -- okay. MR. WILLIG: This portion right here or this portion right here. Either one of those are viable options. COMMISSIONER FRY: Okay. So we could have the possibility of affordable housing and a VA facility and the golf course and the -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So when I go to the VA, I have a short walk for a beer and golf. Okay, thank you. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: I will tell you with full disclosure, the federal government may be getting out of the nursing home business. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: And so there are other types of veterans facilities. There are veterans daycare facilities. So my goal would be to have some kind of a veterans services facility there. It may not be a nursing home. CHAIMAN FRYER: Sounds good. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Anything else for the chairman? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Anything else from staff? MR. KLATZKOW: No, sir. CHAIMAN FRYER: I guess it's time, then, for us to close the public portion of this, public speaking portion of this, and have our discussion. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Well -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm sorry. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I have a -- on the wording of the -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Please go ahead. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: On the wording. CHAIMAN FRYER: Go right ahead. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: I'm just -- what is it -- on your draft under the Conditional Use C-1, regarding the language, outside the Golden Gate City Economic Development Zone. That's not in the -- that's not -- does that apply to every golf course now in Collier County? MR. FRANTZ: Jeremy Frantz, for the record. Let me pull up that language on the June 16, 2020 Page 83 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) screen, and we can walk through that. So there's two sections that we're making a change to. Here we're in the accessory uses section. It's exempting the Golden Gate City Economic Development Zone. That's the Economic Development Zone that Commissioner Saunders referenced earlier from -- we're exempting them from the hours of operation and the seating capacity there. In the conditional uses section, it was basically saying anything above that restriction in the accessory uses section would go through commercial -- sorry, conditional use -- the conditional-use process. So here we're just stating that you only have to go through the CU process if you're outside of the Economic Development Zone. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, that's right. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Oh, okay. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Are we ready to close the public speaking portion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Consider it closed. Who would like to make comments or start the discussion up here at the daises? Go ahead, Paul. No? COMMISSIONER SHEA: I don't have anything. CHAIMAN FRYER: You don't? Okay. Karl? COMMISSIONER FRY: Was that -- are those -- that tiny bit of language is the only thing that we're voting on -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. COMMISSIONER FRY: -- today? MR. FRANTZ: That's right. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I -- based on staff's position that this is deemed a -- accessory to the golf course, because this does open the door, so when I -- MR. BELLOWS: That was a concern of staff as well. We weighed that as an issue. But being tied and linked together with the golf course made it clear that it was accessory. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm going to ask the mover -- I believe -- I think it's your intent, rather than what was before us, also the limitation of 200 seating as opposed to unlimited seating. Was that your intent? COMMISSIONER FRY: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. And the second also. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second. Was 200 -- I mean, 200's a -- that's a pretty good -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Well, when the material was sent out to us, it was unlimited. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Unlimited. I second. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. COMMISSIONER FRY: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. CHAIMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIMAN FRYER: It carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. COMMISSIONER SAUNDERS: Thank you. MR. FRANTZ: And you've made your motion already, but I just want to put on your June 16, 2020 Page 84 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) screen what that change looks like. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. Good. Good. MR. FRANTZ: We're removing that "shall not apply" and it shall be limited to 200 seats there. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Thank you, all. ***Now, the next item is new business and, Ray, I think you have something. MR. BELLOWS: Yes. We were going to have a discussion on the -- how we proceed future -- in the future with our public hearings, and, Jeremy, are you -- MR. FRANTZ: Sure. So the executive order that -- the allowance for a quorum to be found when commissioners are attending virtually, that expires on June 30th. So, you know, for your-all benefit, after June 30th, really, your next meeting, we'll need our quorum to be here in person. Based on your previous discussions of attendance, we do anticipate a quorum, so it shouldn't cause a problem for you-all. CHAIMAN FRYER: Do we -- has there been any inquiry of or statement made by the Governor that perhaps would be extended or -- MR. KLATZKOW: We don't know. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We don't know? MR. KLATZKOW: We don't know. MR. FRANTZ: I'm not sure. It doesn't prevent us from continuing to hold these meetings virtually for members of the public, so we'll continue to make it available for people to make public comments to register to public speak -- to speak virtually, but in terms of getting a quorum from you-all, we'll need that to be here. CHAIMAN FRYER: Be physical. Okay. Here's a -- well, a question I have here then. Let's say that a Planning Commissioner can attend electronically but not physically. We don't need that person for a quorum. Can that person still attend electronically? MR. FRANTZ: They can still attend electronically. I think that it may require a majority of you-all to indicate that allowance for the participation to occur virtually. It doesn't -- it's not a part of the calculation towards quorum, though. CHAIMAN FRYER: Is that right? MR. KLATZKOW: We put together a set of rules based on the Governor's orders. When the Governor's orders expire, the rules expire. I was speaking with Len Golden Price. Her thought process is to go back to the Board and see what the Board wants to do after the eventual expiration of the rules. So to answer your question, I have no idea, but we are working on it. CHAIMAN FRYER: My concern -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: To be determined. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah, my concern has to do with Commissioner Strain who -- MR. KLATZKOW: No. We're very -- we're very cognizant that especially some of our other boards have older people on them who are in the vulnerable class. We're very cognizant of that. And as long as we can get a quorum physically present, I think we'll be fine. But, again, ultimately, that's a Board determination. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. FRANTZ: And from a staff perspective, some of our future CCPC meetings have already or within, like, the next couple of days are going to be noticed, and we have been including those in those notifications that they can be held virtually. So at least for those first couple, we'll continue to make the virtual participation available. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Very good. COMMISSIONER FRY: Jeremy, what if more than five of us show up here in person; does the social distancing -- June 16, 2020 Page 85 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) MR. FRANTZ: We'll continue to -- COMMISSIONER FRY: -- guidelines, do they change June 30th? MR. FRANTZ: We'll try and maintain social distancing as long as we're still doing that and trying to, you know, look at the situation now. We'll probably come back with a little bit different layout if we have all of the Planning Commission in the building. CHAIMAN FRYER: The number would be six as opposed to seven, but it will still would be a little bit more crowded up here. MR. FRANTZ: We do have six voting members, and we also have Tom Eastman, a nonvoting member. CHAIMAN FRYER: Oh, that's right. Yeah. So it would be seven people sitting up here. COMMISSIONER FRY: We have seven. CHAIMAN FRYER: And Commissioner Strain dialing in. COMMISSIONER FRY: Seven plus Tom, Mr. Eastman, correct? CHAIMAN FRYER: Well, Commissioner Strain is not going to be showing up physically. He's made that clear. COMMISSIONER FRY: Oh, physically. CHAIMAN FRYER: Physically. But I want to be -- I mean, I'm hoping that he's going to be able to continue. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: He said he's not going to show up until the ban is lifted. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yeah. MR. FRANTZ: We'll have a plan in place for, you know, any eventuality of whether everyone's coming or just some people are not. CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Well, I hope it has people in Commissioner Strain's position in mind. We don't want to lose his participation. MR. KLATZKOW: We could always do this at Horseshoe if that becomes an issue. There's more room there. CHAIMAN FRYER: Got it. All right. Anything else under new business? MR. BELLOWS: Yes. We have our department head. CHAIMAN FRYER: Mr. Cohen. MR. COHEN: Yes. CHAIMAN FRYER: Welcome. MR. COHEN: Thank you. I just wanted to make an announcement that, for the Commission, that I've appointed Anita Jenkins to be the interim planning director, and it was effective Monday. So this is her second day. As you know, Anita has enjoyed a career in both public and private sector working for Regional Planning Council, MPO, as well as being a planning director for a consulting firm. So I have not worked with you often, but I'm looking forward to working with you as you support her in her new role. It's an exciting time. We have changes on the Commission and we've got an interim director. So we've got a lot of things that we're thinking about being able to move forward on, and I look forward to it. That was it. Thank you. CHAIMAN FRYER: Thank you, Mr. Cohen. And congratulations, Anita, and we look forward to working with you. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Our condolences, Anita. CHAIMAN FRYER: Yes, depending upon how you look at it. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It was much easier staying in Immokalee and doing the -- CHAIMAN FRYER: Ray, anything else under new? MR. BELLOWS: That's it. June 16, 2020 Page 86 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) CHAIMAN FRYER: Okay. Any old business? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. I think I know the answer to this one already, but is there any public comment that someone would like to make that doesn't concern an item we had on the agenda? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Seeing no hands raised, I'll assume that there is no public comment. And without objection, I'm going to declare the meeting adjourned. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So noted. Approved. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And we're out of here. ******* There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 3:16 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION _____________________________________ EDWIN FRYER, CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on ________, as presented _________ or as corrected __________. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF U.S. LEGAL SUPPORT, INC., BY TERRI LEWIS, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC. June 16, 2020 Page 87 of 87 5.B.a Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: 06-16-20 CCPC Meeting Minutes (12801 : June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes) 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.6 Item Summary: PL20190002553-A Resolution of the Collier County Planning Commission for an insubstantial change to Ordinance Number 16-03, the Rockedge Planned Unit Development by revising the Master Plan to relocate and reconfigure the recreational area tract, the residential tract, the water management lake tracts, the internal roadway network, and the future bicycle and pedestrian interconnection; and by removing a development standard related to providing a wall on the southern boundary of the recreational tract. The property is located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Sabal Palm Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 106.44+/- acres. [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal – Zoning Name: Nancy Gundlach 05/06/2020 9:59 AM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 05/06/2020 9:59 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/09/2020 11:34 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 07/10/2020 2:13 PM Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 07/13/2020 10:28 AM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 07/14/2020 5:25 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/20/2020 2:35 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 9.A.1 Packet Pg. 140 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS 2018 CYCLE 1 (FULL SCALE) AMENDMENTS [TRANSMITTAL HEARING ] Project/Petition: PL20160000221/CP-2018-4 CCPC: August 20, 2020 (continued from April 2, 2020) BCC: September 22, 2020 9.A.1.a Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: 00_CCPC COVER (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) TABLE OF CONTENTS 2018 Cycle 1 GMP (Full Scale) Amendment PL20160000221/CP-2018-4 CCPC August 20, 2020 (moved from April 2, 2020) 1) TAB: Transmittal Staff Report DOCUMENT: CCPC Staff Report: 2) TAB: Resolution DOCUMENT: Transmittal Resolution with Exhibit “A” text (and/or maps): 3) TAB: Project PL20160000221/ DOCUMENT: Petition/Application Petition CP-2018-4 4) TAB: Legal Advertisement DOCUMENT: CCPC Advertisement 9.A.1.b Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: 00_Table of Contents (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 1 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, ZONING DIVISION COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: August 6, 2020 SUBJECT: PETITION CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221, GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] ELEMENT: RURAL GOLDEN GATE ESTATES SUB-ELEMENT OF THE GOLDEN GATE AREA MASTER PLAN APPLICANTS/OWNERS/AGENTS: BCHD Partners I, LLC 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, Florida 34105 D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Noel J. Davies, Attorney Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P. A. Quarles & Brady, LLP 3800 Via Del Rey 1395 Panther Lane, Suite 300 Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Naples, Florida 34109 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property comprises approximately 20.00 acres and is located between 4th Street NE and Immokalee Road, immediately west of Orange Tree Boulevard. The property has approximately 180 feet of frontage on 4th Street NE, and 990 feet of frontage on Immokalee Road. The property lies within the Rural Estates Planning Community, in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 27 East. REQUESTED ACTION: This petition seeks to establish a new Subdistrict in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element text, and Rural Golden Gate Estates Future Land Use Map and Map Series of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) by: 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 2 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict 1) Amending Policy 1.1.4 Estates ‒ Commercial District to add the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict name where District and Subdistrict designations are identified, 2) Amending the Estates – Commercial District to add the new Subdistrict provisions, 3) Adding the title of the new Subdistrict map to the itemized Future Land Use Map Series listing, and 4) Amending the Future Land Use Map to depict the new Subdistrict, adding a new Future Land Use Map Series inset map that depicts the new Subdistrict. The Subdistrict language proposed by this amendment is found in Resolution Exhibit “A”. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The petition is proposed to allow for new commercial development, up to a maximum of 200,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Existing Conditions: Subject Property: The 20-acre subject property is zoned E, Estates district and undeveloped. The current Future Land Use designation is Estates ‒ Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict, and allows single-family residential development; parks, recreation and open space uses; institutional uses, e.g., churches and places of worship, group housing, nursing homes, social and fraternal organizations, public and private schools; a va riety of agricultural uses; and essential services. Surrounding Lands: North: Immediately north of the subject property is zoned E, Estates district. Properties north along the 4th Street NE frontage are developed residentially, while properties north along the Immokalee Rd. frontage are undeveloped. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the north is the Residential Estates Subdistrict. East: Immediately east of the subject property, across Immokalee Rd. (a 6-lane divided arterial roadway) is zoned MPUD for the Orange Tree Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development, and developing as a mixed-use community. Further east, land is zoned Orange Blossom Ranch MPUD, developing with a residential community. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the east is Agricultural/Rural ‒ Rural Settlement Area District. South: Immediately south of the subject property is zoned E, Estates. Properties south along the 4th Street NE frontage are developed residentially, while properties south along the Immokalee Rd. frontage are undeveloped. Beyond these individual residential properties, lies a ±45 acre parcel (the “Randall Curve” property), which was being held by the County for public uses, is pending sale into private ownership. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the south is the Residential Estates Subdistrict. Further south, across Immokalee Rd., land is zoned MPUD for the Orange Tree Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development, and developing as a commercial component of the mixed -use community. West: Immediately west of the subject property, across 4th Street NE (a 2-lane undivided roadway) properties are zoned E, Estates district, and developed residentially. Then further 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 3 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict west, land is zoned E, Estates, and contains parcels is land characterized by single -family residences and residential lots. These E-zoned parcels are within the Golden Gate Estates subdivision. The Future Land Use designation for these land areas to the west is the Residential Estates Subdistrict. In summary, the current zoning, and existing and planned land uses, in the area immediately surrounding the Subdistrict property are primarily suburban- and estate-type residences or residential lots in all directions. IDENTIFICATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE PERTINENT REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS AND PLAN AMENDMENTS ARE NOTED IN CHAPTER 163, F.S., SPECIFICALLY SECTIONS 163.3177(6)(A) 2. AND 8.: Considerations required for the adoption of a comprehensive plan amendment are listed below. 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. It is incumbent upon the petitioner to provide appropriate and relevant data and analysis to address the statutory requirements for a Plan amendment, then present and defend, as necessary, that data and analysis. 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 4 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict BACKGROUND, CONSIDERATIONS AND ANALYSIS: This report addresses the minimum amount of [commercial] land needed to accommodate anticipated growth based on projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. This is accomplished through the analysis of the subject property and the surrounding area that includes inventorying the supply of existing commercially-developed and potential commercially- developable land, determining population growth, estimating the amount of commercial development that population will demand, and determining whether the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP) allocates a sufficient amount of commercial land to accommodate growth. Goal 3 directs the County “to provide for limited commercial services and conditional uses for purposes of serving the rural needs of Golden Gate Estates residents, shortening vehicular trips, and preserving rural character.” Objective 3.2 of the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element further directs the County “to provide for new commercial development within Neighborhood Centers and other Commercial Land Use Designations .” These “other commercial land use designations” are addressed in Policy 3.2.1, whic h identifies a Randall Blvd. and Oil Well Rd. Corridor Study, [May 2019]. This corridor study has not recommended that future land uses be changed to commercial designations in this area, but are targeted further south, near Randall Road and Wilson Boulevard. Commercial Analysis Commercial Development: Characteristics of the area immediately surrounding the subject property do not reveal a trend toward commercial development. Existing and planned land uses in the area are primarily suburban- and estate-type residences or residential lots in all directions, except to the east within the Orange Tree PUD. Within four miles from the subject property, commercial development is evident, including the following approved projects: ♦ Orange Blossom Ranch commercial component (200,000 sq. ft./44.0 ac.) [±2.0 miles east at Oil Well Rd.] (200,000 sq. ft. developable) ♦ Orange Tree commercial component (332,000 sq. ft./33.3 ac.) [immediately east at the Immokalee Rd. – Orange Tree Blvd. intersection] (53,342 sq. ft. developed – 278,658 sq. ft. developable) ♦ Randall Boulevard Center (21,000 sq. ft./5.15 ac.) [±0.65 mile south at the Immokalee Rd. – Randall Blvd. intersection] (3,350 sq. ft. developed – 17,650 sq. ft. developable) ♦ Mir-Mar (20,000 sq. ft./2.38 ac.) [±0.66 mile south at the Immokalee Rd. – Randall Blvd. intersection] (19,000 sq. ft. developed – 1,000 sq. ft. developable) ♦ Wilson Boulevard Center (42,000 sq. ft.) [±4.0 road miles south at the Wilson Blvd. – Golden Gate Blvd. intersection] (41,038 sq. ft. developed) ♦ Heritage Bay PUD/DRI commercial component (230,000 sq. ft./73.5 ac.) [±2.0 miles east] (179,086 sq. ft. developed – 50,914 sq. ft. developable) ♦ Estates Shopping Center (150,000 sq. ft./40 ac.) [±4.0 road miles south at the Wilson Blvd. – Golden Gate Blvd. intersection] (150,000 sq. ft. developable) These sites, generally located within the 15-minute drive-time market area currently provide more than 1.05 Million sq. ft. and 289 acres of commercial use opportunities in the [Urban Land Institute 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 5 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict (ULI)-defined] Neighborhood Center, Community Center, and Regional Center development categories. The amount of existing and zoned commercial space found within a 15-minute drive time of the proposed Subdistrict exceeds these 1,053,993 sq. ft. on 289.71 acres, as revealed by the market analysis evaluated below. Generally, commercial development can be categorized as strip commercial, neighborhood commercial, community commercial, regional commercial, and so forth, based upon shopping center size, commercial uses, and population/area served. Based on specific studies and/or demographic data for an area, such as population, income, household size, percentage of income spent on retail goods, etc., an analyst is able to estimate supportable commercial square feet for different commercial intensities for that geography by shopping center type. The petitioner characterizes development proposed for this Subdistrict as a community shopping center. The community shopping center is larger than a neighborhood center with neither a traditional department store nor the trade area of a regional shopping center. The Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) calculates drive times and explains, in general, community centers have a drive time [market] area of 10 to 20 minutes depending on the size [given 192,700 sq. ft. average total floor space & 177,328 sq. ft. median floor space]. General Visual Comparison: For a general idea of what 200,000 square feet of commercial may look like, the Brookhollow shopping center shown in the artist rendering is a close comparison on 24- acres. This is not an illustration of the applicant’s site design but shows an example of the current market trend easily recognizable throughout our own community. In Collier County, the Courthouse Shadows property is similar in the 20 acre size to the applicant’s property, and provides for 165,000 square feet of commercial and 300 multi- family units. Petitioner’s Retail Market Analysis: The firm of Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. conducted a Commercial Needs Analysis, updated to August 27, 2019 independently analyzing market conditions for this petition (Exhibit “V.D.rev2”). 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 6 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict This analysis provides context for assessing a specific selection of goods and services’ requirements of the emerging population within the market area identified. The Analysis provided the following data and analysis: Section 2, Population Growth Around Subject Property This section provided an overview of population growth (utilizing 2018 figures) and applied a multiplier to estimate and forecast populations on which to base the remainder of the Analysis. The Analysis identified a 15- minute drive time as its market area for this medium- size community shopping center. This 15-minute drive time area is delineated in this figure, copied from the Analysis. For our evaluation, the Collier Interactive Growth Model (CIGM) was utilized. It estimates a 69,120 population for the market area in 2020, and projects 90,699 people in 2030, and 104,405 in 2040. Section 3.1, Market Area Demand Countywide population figures were then apportioned to the 15-minute drive time market area to represent any additional commercial demand for this location. This calculation yielded a demand of 17.27 sq. ft. of commercial space per capita. The demand analysis suggested the market area can support 1,051,502 sq. ft. of all commercial needs in this market area at this time; 1,455,977 sq. ft. of commercial needs in this market area by 2030; and, 1,084,609 sq. ft. of commercial needs in this market area by 2040. The CIGM was again utilized, and population and commercial demand projections through 2040 supported the need for additional community commercial uses in the market area. The community commercial demand for the market area is approximately 137,340 sq. ft. in 2020, approximately 193,190 sq. ft. in 2030, and approximately 322,810 sq. ft. in 2040. Section 3.2, Market Area Supply The applicant’s Needs Analysis inventoried 725,404 sq. ft. of existing commercial development (on 114.54 ac.) of developed “competing commercial parcels” located in the market area. The Needs Analysis inventoried (approximately 701,050 sq. ft. of undeveloped commercial) on 110.69 acres of undeveloped “competing parcels” located in the market area. The supply analysis suggests no less than 1,426,454 sq. ft. of developed and undeveloped commercial space is available in the market area. The CIGM identifies a supply of 1,691,857 sq. ft. developed and undeveloped commercial space available in the market area. 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 7 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict Section 3.3, Supply – Demand Analysis This section applied a diminishing allocation ratio, allowing the market to properly function in the sale, usage and allocation of land over time. This suggests the growing market area can support the additional commercial uses (1,626,454 total sq. ft.) in this market by 2040. Staff Assessment of Petitioner’s Retail Market Analysis The analysis provided in the Needs Analysis is an objective population-based demand methodology and suspends our reliance on evaluating certain types of businesses to demonstrate need. Not all commercial uses allowed in the C-4, General Commercial zoning district – by right and by Conditional Use, as proposed – were analyzed however, and not all uses analyzed were demonstrated to have supportable demand. The intensities of C-4 commercial uses and activities allowing for the outside storage of merchandise, such as automobile sales, rental and leasing, marine vessel and recreational vehicle (RV) dealers, and the renting and leasing of equipment; mini- and self-storage warehousing; hotels and motels; and, certain entertainment and recreational attractions are disparate with low density single-family residential areas. These disparities, if allowed by this Subdistrict, introduce incompatibilities between potentially non-complimentary land uses that may not be overcome in rezoning. This uncertainty leads staff to consider a lower commercial intensity for the Subdistrict overall, and to defer review of any Conditional Use proposed. The uses shown to be appropriately suited to “community commercial” centers are: apparel and accessory stores, auto and home supply stores, building cleaning and maintenance services, cable and other pay television services including communications towers up to specified height, subject to section 5.05.09, carwashes provided that carwashes abutting resident ial zoning districts shall be subject to section 5.05.11 of this code, computer and computer software stores, dance studios, schools and halls, indoor, department stores, disinfecting and pest control services, eating and drinking establishments excluding bottle clubs. all establishments engaged in the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption are subject to the locational requirements of section 5.05.01, electrical and electronic repair shops, food stores, general merchandise stores, hardware stores, home furniture and furnishings stores, household appliance stores, medical and dental laboratories, musical instrument stores, nursing and professional care facilities, paint stores, personal services, miscellaneous, radio, television and consumer electronics stores, repair services - miscellaneous (except agricultural equipment repair, awning repair, beer pump coil cleaning and repair, blacksmith shops, catch basin, septic tank and cesspool cleaning, industrial truck repair, machinery cleani ng, repair of service station equipment, boiler cleaning, tinsmithing, tractor repair), research, development and testing services, retail – miscellaneous, telephone communications including communications towers up to specified height, subject to section 5.05.09, veterinary services, excluding outside kenneling, and watch, clock and jewelry repair. The County’s CIGM provides for an average 8,878 sq. ft. of commercial floor space/acre in community commercial centers. This amounts to a lower commercial intensity (than is proposed) of approximately 178,000 sq. ft. of overall commercial floor space. Additionally, the intensities of the commercial uses themselves, only where shown to be appropriately suited to “community commercial” centers, and approved by the companion Planned Unit Development rezone will be supported. 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 8 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The subject property is located in a County wellfield protection zone (as illustrated by applicant’s Exhibit “V.F.2”). This “W-4 Zone” underlies the land area between two nearby, fully protected wells/wellfields: one located approximately 1.25 miles to the southwest of the subject property near 24th Avenue NW and Wilson Blvd. [protecting the Collier County Utilities Golden Gate Wellfield], and another located less than a mile to the northeast of the subject property near Oil Well Rd. (CR 858) and Grove Drive [protecting the Orangetree Wellfield]. An Environmental Report, dated September 2019, prepared by Peninsula Engineering was submitted with this petition (Exhibit “V.C”). Environmental review specialists with Collier County’s Development Review Division, Environmental Planning Section reviewed these documents and provided the following comments: Natural vegetation areas consist primarily of slash pine, cypress, and cabbage palm communities. The acreage of native vegetation on site will be field verified by staff during review of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) or Conditional Use (CU) for the project. The proposed GMP amendment has no effect on the requirements of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the GMP. Native vegetation on site will be retained in accordance with the requirements of CCME Policy 6.1.1 and section 3.05.07 of the LDC. TRAFFIC CAPACITY/TRAFFIC CIRCULATION IMPACT ANALYSIS, INCLUDING TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION: Trebilcock Consulting Solutions submitted a Traffic Impact Statement, updated to 9/06/2019 (unlabeled exhibit). The project’s area of influence was determined to be Immokalee Road north (east) and south (west) of the project at the Orange Tree Boulevard intersection. The analysis studied: • Immokalee Rd., from Collier Blvd. (west) to north of Oil Well Rd. (east); • Wilson Blvd., south of Immokalee Rd.; • Oil Well Rd., from east of Immokalee Rd.; • Randall Blvd., from Immokalee Rd. to Everglades Blvd.; and, those roadways with lesser anticipated trip distribution: ▪ 4th Street NE, north of Immokalee Rd. ▪ 8th St. NE, south of Randall Blvd. ▪ Orange Tree Blvd., east of Immokalee Rd.; Fully 100% of traffic accessing the property comes from Immokalee Rd. (40% southbound /westbound; 50% northbound/eastbound), and 10% crossing east/west at Orange Tree Blvd.). Based on the traffic impact analysis, the proposed commercial project is a significant traffic generator for the roadway network at this location. The proposed commercial project would generate 9,632 daily gross new trips (2-way) and 908 PM Peak Hour gross new trips routed through a single, full-movement access point, located at Orange Tree Blvd., and [un-evaluated] limited access onto 4th Street NE. Adverse conditions are attributable to the potential for commercial traffic impacting residential areas. 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 9 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict Policy 3.2.1 of the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element also identifies a Randall Blvd. and Oil Well Rd. Corridor Study, after which, an Immokalee Rd./Randall Blvd. Planning Study will evaluate the future land uses along Immokalee Rd. and may propose changes to future land uses. The transportation study is moving forward and anticipated to be implemented in phases . PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACTS: Application materials submitted include a Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis, updated to August 29, 2019 (Exhibit “V.E”), along with a Public Facilities Map. No issues or concerns are identified regarding impacts on potable water, wastewater management, solid waste, drainage, park and recreational facilities, schools, or EMS and fire control services. • Potable Water System: The subject project lies in the Collier County Water -Sewer District’s Regional Water Service Area and development will be served by Collier County Public Utilities. The proposed Subdistrict will have no impact on the potable water system since the level of service (LOS) standard is based on population and no residential units are proposed in this Subdistrict. • Wastewater Treatment System: The subject project currently lies outside the service area of a wastewater reclamation facility. The property, however, lies adjacent to the Collier County Water-Sewer District’s Northeast Sub-Regional (former Orangetree) Wastewater Service Area, presently undergoing design-build-construction of a 1.5 MGD interim treatment plant and associated pipelines, due to be complete in 2021. When wastewater treatment facilities are complete and service become available, development can be served by Collier County Public Utilities. The proposed Subdistrict will have no impact on the wastewater treatment system since the level of service (LOS) standard is based on population and no res idential units are proposed in this Subdistrict. • Solid Waste Collection and Disposal: The solid waste disposal service provider is Collier County Solid Waste Management. The average daily disposal rate for the commercial project is estimated at 1,000 lbs. per day, with an estimated annual disposal of 365,000 lbs., or 182.5 tons. The 2019 AUIR recognizes that the County has approximately 42 years (2061) of remaining landfill capacity, but will reach its additional permitted capacity by or before 2051. • Stormwater Management System: The 2019 AUIR does not identify any stormwater management improvement projects in the vicinity of the subject property. Future development will comply with the SFWMD and/or Collier County rules and regulations that assure controlled accommodation of stormwater events by both on-site and off-site improvements. • Park and Recreational Facilities: No impact on the demand for park facilities result from the proposed Subdistrict that allows only non-residential development. • Schools: No impact on the demand for public school facilities result from the proposed Subdistrict that allows only non-residential development. • Fire & Rescue, Emergency Medical (EMS), and Sheriff’s Services: • Fire protection and response services are provided by the North Collier Fire & Rescue District, with District Station 10 (located at 13240 Immokalee Rd.) located approximately three-quarters of a mile (0.75) from the site. • Emergency Medical services are provided by the Collier County Bureau of Emergency Services, with EMS Station 10 (located at 14756 Immokalee Rd.) located within one-half mile (0.40) from the site. 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 10 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict • Protection services are provided by the Collier County Sherriff’s Office, with District 4 Substation (located at 14750 Immokalee Rd.) located within one-half mile (0.40) from the site. The proposed commercial development is anticipated to have no significant impacts on these emergency services. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) required by LDC Section 10.03.05.F was [duly advertised, noticed and] held on Monday, February 24, 2020, 5:30 p.m. at Greater Naples Fire Rescue District Station 71, 100 13th St. SW, Naples. Approximately eight people other than the application team and County staff attended ‒ and heard the following information: The agent representing this petition (D. Wayne Arnold) introduced other members of the application team present, and transportation planner, Norm Trebilcock (of Trebilcock Consulting). He also introduced staff Planner representing Collier County ‒ Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner and project coordinator for the GMP amendment petition. Mr. Arnold identified the subject property’s location, fronting on 4th Street NE, and on Immokalee Rd. at the Orange Tree Blvd. intersection. He described the proposed commercial development of 200,000 sq. ft. of C-4 intensity, both by- right and conditional use, commercial uses, that the new Subdistrict would allow. Neighbors pointed out that existing residential uses characterized this area, along with future plans for Estates agricultural, residential and conditional uses. They asked how this proposal would be good for the area? Mr. Arnold explained how the traffic volume on Immokalee Rd., along with a signalized intersection at Orange Tree Blvd. makes this a good location for commercial development. Many of those present objected to allowing commercial traffic onto 4th Street NE, as this is a quiet street with only residences and residential traffic. They emphasized the impacts that commercial businesses and traffic would have on their homes, especially where the narrow, westerly portion of the property would be most adversely impacted by traffic and noise. They asked the developers to consider alternatives, such as restricting or limiting commercial development and commercial traffic on westerly portion of the property. The information meeting was completed by 6:10 p.m. The applicant transcribed the full proceedings of this meeting, and that transcript, along with their PowerPoint presentation and presentation notes have been copied and are on record. [Synopsis prepared by C. Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner] 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 11 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: The reviews and analyses of this petition provide the following findings and conclusions: • The 20-acre subject property is zoned E, Estates and undeveloped. • The infrastructure needed to serve the development can be provided without related levels of service or concurrency concerns. • The proposed commercial project is a significant traffic generator for the roadway network at this location. Adverse conditions are attributable to the potential for commercial traffic impacting residential areas. • The proposed Subdistrict will have no impact on the potable water or wastewater treatment systems since the level of service (LOS) standards are based on population and no residential units are proposed in this Subdistrict. • The property, along with much of the surrounding area, is currently designated in the Rural Golden Gate Estates Sub-Element for residential development ‒ as well as for uses generally allowed throughout the Estates designated area, which allows single-family residential development; parks, recreation and open space uses; institutional uses, e.g., churches and places of worship, group housing, nursing homes, social and fraternal organizations, public and private schools; a variety of agricultural uses; and essential services. This petition introduces new commercial development, uses and activities to a location where commercial development is not now planned. • Sites generally located within the market area currently provide more than 1.05 Million sq. ft. and 289 acres of commercial use opportunities. Approximately 132 of these commercial acres are undeveloped. • Not all commercial uses allowed in the C-4, General Commercial zoning district – by right and by Conditional Use, as proposed – were analyzed and not all uses analyzed were demonstrated to have supportable demand. • Need for the amount of commercial floor space and the full range of commercial development contemplated by this amendment have not been demonstrated. The lower commercial intensity of 178,000 sq. ft. of overall commercial floor space has been found to have supportable demand. • Speakers present at the Neighborhood Information Meeting objected to allowing commercial traffic onto 4th Street NE, as this is a quiet street with only residences and residential traffic. They emphasized the impacts that commercial businesses and traffic would have on their homes, especially where the narrow, westerly portion of the property would be most adversely impacted by traffic and noise. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: A copy of this Staff Report was provided to the Office of the County Attorney and has been approved as to form and legality. The criteria for growth management plan amendments and land use map amendments are in Sections 163.3177(6)(a)2. and 8., Florida Statutes. This staff report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on July 23, 2020. [HFAC] 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 12 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the County Planning Commission forward Petition CP-2018-4 /PL20160000221, to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity with the following modifications ‒ to limit commercial uses to those “community commercial” uses for which supportable demand has been demonstrated by the petitioner’s data and analysis, protect nearby residents and residential areas from impacts commercial traffic, and for proper code language, format, clarity, etc. ‒ as depicted below: Note: Words underlined are added, words struck through are deleted – as proposed by petitioner; words double underlined are added, words double struck through are deleted – as proposed by staff. Italicized text within brackets is explanatory only – not to be adopted. B. Estates – Commercial District [Page 16] *** *** *** *** *** text break *** *** *** *** *** 3. Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict This Subdistrict is approximately twenty (20)± acres in size and is located on the west side of Immokalee Road, north of Randall Boulevard and south of Oil Well Road, as depicted on the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict Map. The purpose of this Subdistrict is The Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict is intended to provide a variety of retail and office land uses. Development within the Subdistrict shall be subject to the following: a. All development within this Subdistrict The subdistrict shall be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). b. The rezone Ordinance must include standards for a common architectural theme as well as development standards and buffers to insure compatibility with surrounding properties. c. Allowable uses shall be limited to those: ▪ Uses permitted by right and by conditional use in the C-4, Commercial General C- 3, Commercial Intermediate zoning district, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41; ▪ Veterinary services, excluding outside kenneling, SIC 0742; ▪ Cable and other pay television services including communications towers up to specified height, subject to section 5.05.09, SIC 3663; ▪ Telephone communications including communications towers up to specified height, subject to section 5.05.09, SIC 4813; ▪ Paint stores, SIC 5231; ▪ Hardware stores, SIC 5251; ▪ General merchandise stores, SIC 5311 – 5399; ▪ Food stores, SIC 5411 – 5499; ▪ Auto and home supply stores, SIC 5531; ▪ Apparel and accessory stores (no adult oriented sales), SIC 5611 – 5699; ▪ Computer and computer software stores, SIC 5734; 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Agenda Item 9. ‒ 13 ‒ CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Establishing the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict ▪ Home furniture and furnishings stores, SIC 5712 – 5739; ▪ Eating and drinking establishments excluding bottle clubs. All establishments engaged in the retail sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premise consumption are subject to the locational requirements of section 5.05.01, SIC 5812, 5813; ▪ Personal services, miscellaneous, SIC 7211 – 7299; ▪ Disinfecting and pest control services, SIC 7342; ▪ Building cleaning and maintenance services, SIC 7349, others; ▪ Electrical and electronic repair shops, SIC 7378, 7622, 7629; ▪ Carwashes provided that carwashes abutting residential zoning districts shall be subject to section 5.05.11 of this code, SIC 7542; ▪ Watch, clock and jewelry repair SIC 7631; ▪ Repair services - miscellaneous (except agricultural equipment repair, awning repair, beer pump coil cleaning and repair, blacksmith shops, catch basin, septic tank and cesspool cleaning, industrial truck repair, machinery cleaning, repair of service station equipment, boiler cleaning, tinsmithing, tractor repair), SIC 7623, 7699; ▪ Dance studios, schools and halls, indoor, SIC 7911; ▪ Medical and dental laboratories, SIC 8071, 8072; ▪ Nursing and professional care facilities, SIC 8051, 8052, 8059; ▪ Research, development and testing services, retail – miscellaneous, SIC 8732, 8734; The rezone Ordinance shall limit these uses further to insure compatibility with surrounding properties. d. Development is limited up to a maximum intensity of 200,000 178,000 square feet of gross floor area. e. The westerly portion of this subdistrict (a.k.a. north 180 ft. of Tract 116, GGE Unit 22) shall only be utilized for employee and emergency vehicle access only, native preservation and buffer areas. PETITION No.: CP-2018-4 / PL20160000221 Staff Report for the August 6, 2020, CCPC meeting. NOTE: This petition has been tentatively scheduled for the October 27, 2020, BCC meeting. G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\Comp Planning GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2018 Cycles & Smalls\2018 Cycle 2 - frm Cycle 1\CP-18-4 GGAMP Immok - Ests\CCPC\CP-18-4 Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_REV 2.5 FNL.docx 9.A.1.c Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: 01_Immok-Estates Stff Rprt_CP-18-4_REV 2.6_FNL (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: 02_Resolution - 030220(1) (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: 02_Resolution - 030220(1) (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: 02_Resolution - 030220(1) (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: 02_Resolution - 030220(1) (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: 02_Resolution - 030220(1) (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.d Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: 02_Resolution - 030220(1) (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Application and Supporting Documents April 2, 2020 CCPC Hearing 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 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 23, 2018 (revised May 25, 2018, August 29, 2019) Mr. David Weeks Principal Planner 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 Growth Management Plan Amendment Application Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Dear Mr. Weeks: A Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) application for properties located at the north of Randall Boulevard on the western side of Immokalee Road is being submitted for review. This application proposes to create a new Subdistrict in the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to permit general commercial uses. The amendment will proved for a maximum of 200,000 square feet of commercial uses to be permitted within the entirety of the 20± acre subdistrict. The proposed amendment reflects the market demand for additional commercial development in this portion of Golden Gate Estates. A market analysis has been prepared demonstrating market demand for the proposed commercial component. The GMPA is supported with a soon to be submitted companion PUD rezone, which establishes the specific development standards for the commercial uses and provides a conceptual PUD Master Plan. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP c: David Genson GradyMinor File 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 1 APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATOIN NUMBER PL20160000221 DATE RECEIVED______________________________ PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE March 1, 2016 DATE SUFFICIENT ______________________________________________________________________ This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Comprehensive Planning Department, Suite 400, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252-2400 (Fax 239-252-2946). The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97 -431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant David Genson Company BCHD Partners I LLC__________________________________________________________ Address 2600 Golden Gate Parkway City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34105 Phone Number 239-262-2600 Fax Number _______________________________ B. Name of Agent * D. Wayne Arnold, AICP  THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. Address 3800 Via Del Rey City Bonita Springs State Florida Zip Code 34134 Phone Number ____________________ Fax Number ___________________________ C. Name of Owner (s) of Record BCHD Partners I LLC_________________________________________ Address 2600 Golden Gate Parkway City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34105 Phone Number 239-262-2600 Fax Number ______________________________ D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Please see Exhibit I-D II. Disclosure of Interest Information: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 2 Name and Address Percentage of Ownership __________________________________________ _________________________ _________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock Please see Exhibit II _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ Date of Contract: __________________ 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 3 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 (04/2019, 02/2016 and 03/1987) leased ( ):________Term of lease______yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option:______________ and date option terminates: ______________, or anticipated closing: _______________________. H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of intere st form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Please see Exhibit III.A _________________________________________________________________________________ B. GENERAL LOCATION Subject property is located on the west side of Immokalee Road approximately one half mile north of Randall Boulevard. _________________________________________________________________________________ C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Rural Estates D. TAZ 400 E. SIZE IN ACRES 20± acres F. ZONING E, Estates G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN Residential and undeveloped H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Estates Designation, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: _______ Housing Element _______ Recreation/Open Space _______ Traffic Circulation Sub-Element _______ Mass Transit Sub-Element _______ Aviation Sub-Element _______ Potable Water Sub-Element _______ Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element _______ NGWAR Sub-Element _______ Solid Waste Sub-Element _______ Drainage Sub-Element _______ Capital Improvement Element _______ CCME Element _______ Future Land Use Element __ X___ Golden Gate Master Plan _______ Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) iv, 4, 44 and 46 OF THE Golden Gate Area Master Plan ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike-through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: _________________________________________________________________________ Please See Exhibit IV.B. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 4 _________________________________________________________________________ C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Estates Designation, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict TO Estates Designation, Commercial District, Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) ________________________________________________________________________________ Golden Gate Area Future Land Use Map – See Exhibit IV.D. No page numbers are listed on the maps within the map series E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: ________________________________________ Create Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict inset map – See Exhibit IV.E. _ No page numbers are listed on maps within the map series________________________ V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I”=400’. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit V.A Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI’s, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit V.A Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit V.A Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Exhibit V.B Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit V.C Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN “A” ABOVE. N.A. Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.).Identify historic and/or archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference 9J-11.006, F.A.C. and Collier County’s Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 5 1. INSERT “Y” FOR YES OR “N” FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: N Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)(5), F.A.C.). IF so, identify area located in ACSC. N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.a, F.A.C.) N/N Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? (Reference 9J-11.006(1)(a)7.b, F.A.C.) Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. Y, ** Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? (Reference Rule 9J-5.006(5) F.A.C.). If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. (Reference Rule 9J-11.007, F.A.C.) ** Please see Market Study prepared by Russ Weyer E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Exhibit V.E. Potable Water Exhibit V.E. Sanitary Sewer *** Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS Immokalee Road *** Please see Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, P.A. Exhibit V.E. Drainage Exhibit V.E. Solid Waste Exhibit V.E. Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exhibit V.E. Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3. Exhibit V.E. Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 6 F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: Exhibit V.F1 Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). Exhibit V.F2 Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N.A. Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N.A. Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N.A. High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Provided $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) N.A. $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Provided Proof of ownership (copy of deed) Provided Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) Submitted Electronically 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * If you have held a pre-application meeting and paid the pre-application fee of $250.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre-application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising c osts. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1”=400’ or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 171Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Statutory Criteria for Plan Amendments August 29, 2019 Page 1 of 3 Chapter 163 Criteria-rev2.docx The applicant is proposing to create a new commercial sub-district within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan in order to permit a full range of uses inclusive of permitted and conditional uses of the C-4, General Commercial zoning district. The 20+/- acre parcel is located adjacent to the 6-lane segment of Immokalee Road. Across Immokalee Road is commercially designated tract within the Orange Tree PUD. The property is located directly across from the signalized Orange Tree Boulevard access to the Orange Tree Community. The property is not well suited for low-density residential uses, which is the only use presently permitted on the site. The applicant has commissioned a market analysis, which concludes that there is demand for additional general commercial land uses within the trade area of the site. Wellfield Proximity: Entirety of the Orange Tree community is within the same wellfield, known as the Orangetree Wellfield, proximity to the wellfield does not preclude commercial development. The proposal to expand the Collier County Water/Sewer District boundary to include the subject parcel is beneficial to water quality, as well and septic tanks would no longer be utilized on the site in favor of public potable water and sewer service. Under Chapter 163 F.S., local governments are authorized to adopt and amend their comprehensive plans. Staff has requested that the applicant address three sections from Chapter 163. Chapter 163.3167 Scope of act.— (9) Each local government shall address in its comprehensive plan, as enumerated in this chapter, the water supply sources necessary to meet and achieve the existing and projected water use demand for the established planning period, considering the applicable plan developed pursuant to s. 373.709. This paragraph requires local governments to address water supply planning as a component of the comprehensive planning process. For the subject application, the property owner intends to petition Collier County to expand the Water/Sewer District service area to include this property. Both water and sewer services are located in the Orange Tree community immediately across Immokalee Road from the subject parcel. The County has recently acquired the Orange Tree Utility, and is evaluating the existing service area and future needs of the area. Chapter 163.3177 (6) (a) 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Statutory Criteria for Plan Amendments August 29, 2019 Page 2 of 3 Chapter 163 Criteria-rev2.docx c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. The subject plan amendment as proposed is supported by data and analysis and a study of the market conditions in the vicinity of the property, which indicate that additional supply of commercial acreage is supportable for existing and anticipated populations based on adopted professional methodologies. Further, the Immokalee Road corridors carries tens of thousands of vehicles per day. This location is ideal to capture trips already on the network to service the demands for retail goods. The applicant has also prepared a full traff ic impact analysis, which indicates that there are no capacity or operational issues associated with the proposed plan amendment. An environmental assessment has also been completed and the professional opinion of the biologist is that there are no protected flora of consequence, and no protected fauna, inhabiting the site; the site contains approximately 0.4 acres of disturbed cypress wetland; and there are no significant or rare vegetative communities located on site . The undeveloped land is located at the intersection of a signalized intersection. The applicant contends that the character of this undeveloped property is unlike other nearby properties given the access to a signalized intersection and location on a 6-lane arterial roadway. This statutory chapter also references the need to modify plans to address antiquated subdivisions. Golden Gate Estates is an antiquated large lot subdivision, which has promoted urban sprawl without sufficient commercial opportunities located on the perimeter of the community to address the demands of the growing population. Chapter 163.3177 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Statutory Criteria for Plan Amendments August 29, 2019 Page 3 of 3 Chapter 163 Criteria-rev2.docx The applicant intends for the site to be serviced by urban services at the time of development. The intent is to request an expansion of the Collier County Water/Sewer District for access to potable water and sewer services. The property is suitable for the proposed commercial uses given the proximity to a 6-lane arterial roadway, access to a traffic signal, and the potential to capture vehicle trips already on the high volume roadway. The 20-acre parcel is adequately sized to accommodate the demand for services in the area. 163.3184 Process for adoption of comprehensive plan or plan amendment. This Section of statute outlines the process and authority for the agency review of plan amendments. The applicant understands that regional and state reviewing agencies will be responsible for review of any transmitted comprehensive plan amendment per the requirements of Chapter 163.3184 F.S. The applicant’s experts are of the opinion that there are no regional or state impacts associated with the application. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Exhibit I.D Professional Consultants March 3, 2020 Page 1 of 1 IR15PUD Exhibit ID 03-03-2020.docx Planning/Project Management: D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239.947.1144 239.947.0375 fax warnold@gradyminor.com Noel J. Davies Quarles & Brady LLP 1395 Panther Lane, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34109-7874 Office 239-434-4937 Noel.Davies@quarles.com Transportation: Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PE Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 239-566-9551 ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Market Analysis: Russ Weyer President Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. 707 Orchid Drive, Suite 100 Naples, FL 34102 239-269-1341 Rweyer@ree-i.com 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 176Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Exhibit III.A Legal Description December 4, 2019 Page 1 of 1 IR15PUD Exhibit IIIA-rev3.docx Parcel 1: (Parcel ID: 37698360002) The North 180 feet of Tract No. 116, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, Unit No. 22, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 7, Pages 83-84, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Parcel 2: (Parcel ID: 37698440003) Tract 118, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, Unit No. 22, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 7, Pages 83-84, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, LESS that portion taken for road right of way pursuant to Order of Taking recorded in O.R. Book 3111, Page 500, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, more particularly described as follows: A Portion of Tract 118, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, Unit No. 22, according to the plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 84, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northeasterly corner of said Tract 118; thence South 01°30’15” East, for a distance of 172.46 feet to a point on a circular curve, concave Westerly, whose radius point bears South 88°32’50” West, a distance of 2,814.93 feet therefrom; thence run Southerly, along the arc of said curve to the right, having a radius of 2,814.93 feet, through a central angle of 03°12’32”, subtended by a chord of 157.83 feet at a bearing of South 00°09’06” West, for an arc length of 157.65 feet to the end of said curve, and the Southeasterly corner of said Tract 118; thence North 89°40’50” West, along the Southerly Boundary of said Tract 118, for a distance of 50.10 feet to a point on a circular curve, concave Westerly, whose radius point bears North 87°51’02” West, a distance of 2,769.79 feet therefrom; thence run Northerly, along the arc of said curve to the left, having a radius of 2,769.79 feet, through a central angle of 03°38’39”, subtended by a chord of 176.14 feet at a bearing of North 00°19’38” East, for an arc length of 176.17 feet to the end of said curve; thence North 01°30’15” West, for a distance of 153.94 feet; thence South 89°40’50” East, along the Northerly Boundary of said Tract 118, for a distance of 49.00 feet, to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Parcel 3: (Parcel ID: 37698480005) All of Tract 119, GOLDEN GATE ESTATES, Unit No. 22, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 7, Pages 83-84, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, LESS the Easterly 49.00 feet taken for road right of way pursuant to Order of Taking recorded in O.R. Book 3111, Page 500, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Parcel 4: (Parcel ID: 37698520004) Tract 120, Golden Gate Estates Unit No. 22, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 7, pages 83 and 84, of the Public Records of Collier County, Florida, Less the Easterly 49.00 feet as described in that certain Order of Taking recorded in Official Records Book 3111, page 485 and Stipulated Final Judgment recorded in Official Records Book 3431, page 993. Consisting of 20 acres, more or less. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Exhibit IV.B Amendment Language December 6, 2019 Page 1 of 1 IR15PUD Exhibit IVB-rev3.docx Policy 1.1.2: The ESTATES Future Land Use Designation shall include Future Land Use Districts and Subdistricts for: *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** B. ESTATES – COMMERCIAL DISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** B. Estates – Commercial District [beginning page 30] *** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** *** 8. Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict This Subdistrict is approximately 20± acres in size and is located on the west side of Immokalee Road, north of Randall Boulevard and south of Oil Well Road. The Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict is intended to provide a variety of retail and office land uses. Development within the Subdistrict shall be subject to the following: a. The subdistrict shall be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). b. The rezone Ordinance must include standards for a common architectural theme as well as development standards and buffers to insure compatibility with surrounding properties. c. Allowable uses shall be limited to those permitted by right and by conditional uses in the C-4, Commercial General zoning district, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. d. Development is limited to a maximum intensity of 200,000 square feet of gross floor area. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) EXHIBIT IV.D. PROPOSED GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP SITE IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT = 20± ACRES 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 0 400'200' 11x17 SCALE: 1" = 400' GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 68%-(&73523(57<“$&5(6 EXISTING ZONING:E, ESTATES EXISTING FLUE:ESTATES, MIXED USE DISTRICT EXISTING USE:UNDEVELOPED ADJACENT PROPERTY NORTH ZONING:E, ESTATES USE:RESIDENTIAL AND UNDEVELOPED SOUTH ZONING:E, ESTATES USE:RESIDENTIAL AND UNDEVELOPED EAST ZONING:ORANGE TREE MPUD USE:ROW, RESIDENTIAL AND UNDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL WEST ZONING:E, ESTATES USE:RESIDENTIAL SUBJECT PROPERTY 300 FOOT RADIUS ZONED: E USE: RESIDENTIAL OIL WELL ROAD ZONED: E USE: UNDEVELOPED ZONED: E USE: RESIDENTIAL ZONED: E USE: RESIDENTIAL AND UNDEVELOPED ZONED: E USE: UNDEVELOPED IMMOKALEE ROADRANDALL BOULEVARD4TH ST NEZONED: ORANGE TREE MPUD USE: RESIDENTIAL ZONED: ORANGE TREE MPUD USE: ROW AND UNDEVELOPED COMMERCIAL 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) EXHIBIT V.B. EXISTING GOLDEN GATE AREA FUTURE LAND USE MAP SITE ESTATES DESIGNATION, MIXED USE DISTRICT, RESIDENTIAL ESTATES SUBDISTRICT = 20± ACRES 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD - ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY - UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA PREPARED BY: PENINSULA ENGINEERING 2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY NAPLES, FL 34105 SEPTEMBER 2019 _ 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 2 BRUCE LAYMAN, CE, PWS 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 3 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 3 2. PROJECT METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................... 3 2.1. Listed Wildlife Survey .................................................................................................................... 3 2.2. Listed Plant Survey ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.3. Habitat/Wetland Mapping ............................................................................................................ 4 3. SURVEY RESULTS ................................................................................................................................... 5 3.1. Listed Wildlife Species Observed/Identified On Site ..................................................................... 5 3.2. Listed Wildlife Species Not Observed On-Site But With Potential to Occur On Site ................... 5 3.3. Listed Plant Species Observed On Site .......................................................................................... 7 3.4. Habitat/Wetland Mapping ............................................................................................................ 7 4. SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 7 5. REFERENCES CITED ................................................................................................................................ 8 TABLES Table 1 - Listed Species and Vegetation Survey Details. ............................................................................. 10 Table 2 - Listed Plant and Wildlife Species Observed. ................................................................................ 10 Table 3 - Non-listed Wildlife Species Observed .......................................................................................... 11 Table 4 - Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Faunal Species .......................... 11 Table 5 - Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Floral Species .......................... 12 Table 6 - Existing Vegetative Associations and Land Uses ........................................................................ 12 APPENDICES Appendix A - Existing Vegetation Association & Land Use Descriptions FIGURES Figure 1 – Existing Conditions 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 4 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports 1. INTRODUCTION Peninsula Engineering (PE) entered into an agreement with BCHD Partners I LLC (BCHD) to provide environmental services associated with a 19-acre parcel known as the Immokalee Road–Estates Commercial Subdistrict parcel. The Project Site is located in Section 22; Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. The parcel is bordered on the north and south by undeveloped land, on the east Immokalee Road and high-density residential development, and on the west by estate-style residential development. The site is almost entirely forested, contains low to moderate exotic vegetation coverage, and historical hydrology has been adversely affected by regional development. This protected species survey was conducted, and the results summarized herein, to support local, state, and federal environmental permitting. 2. PROJECT METHODOLOGY Bruce Layman, Ecologist with PE, conducted a listed species survey consistent with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission standards on the subject property during September 2018. The dates, times and weather conditions are summarized in Table 1. Due to the passage of 12 months, the survey was updated in September 2019 to determine whether site conditions remained consistent with those observed in September 2018. The following information describes the methodologies employed: 2.1. Listed Wildlife Survey Prior to conducting the listed species surveys, color aerial imagery and FLUCCS mapping from prior environmental reconnaissance were reviewed to anticipate which habitats may be present. Additionally, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s (FWC) Wildlife Occurrence (WildObs) data base was queried to identify documented listed plant and wildlife occurrences within a 5-mile radius of the project site. The 2013 FWC data base, updated in 2017, showed no listed species occurrence records within 5 miles of the project. Additionally, the FWC Florida panther telemetry data base, through 2014, showed no panther telemetry points within 1 mile of the project. Various publications and databases were also reviewed to identify listed plant and wildlife species that are regionally present and that could occur and those habitat types. Based on the habitat types identified on site, and the noted data sources, a preliminary list of state and federal listed flora and fauna that could occur on the project site was generated to help focus survey effort. FWC’s Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species (FWC, 2016) was used to determine the “listed” state and federal status designation of wildlife species. The field survey consisted of one ecologist performing east/west parallel meandering pedestrian transects spaced approximately 50 to 120 feet on center based on habitat type and visibility limits. These transects are illustrated on Figure 1 entitled Existing Conditions. Additional wandering transects were conducted on successive days, and during the species survey update, to augment survey coverage and increase the opportunity to observe wildlife. Wandering transects are not shown. The field observer was equipped with a compass, GPS, color aerial, wildlife and plant identification books, binoculars, and a field notebook. During pedestrian transects, the ecologist periodically stopped, looked for wildlife, signs of wildlife, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. Due to habitats present and likelihood of occurrence (not to the exclusion of other potential listed species), the ecologist specifically surveyed for the potential presence of 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 5 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports the Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), and trees containing cavities that could have been potentially created by the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) or could be used by the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus; FBB) for roosting. Given the nature of the parcel, the ecologist is anticipated to have directly observed greater than 70% of the parcel. If observed, the approximate location of observed listed wildlife species and their numbers were mapped on an aerial and recorded in a field notebook. The locations of fixed resources, such as gopher tortoise burrows or cavity trees were recorded using hand-held GPS and flagged with high-visibility survey ribbon. Non-listed wildlife species were recorded daily. 2.2. Listed Plant Survey Over the course of conducting surveys for listed wildlife, the PE ecologist searched for plants listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture (FDA) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). These agencies have categorized the various plant species based upon their relative abundance in natural communities. Those categorizations include “Endangered”, “Threatened”, and “Commercially Exploited”. The protection afforded plants listed solely by FDA entails restrictions on harvesting or destroying plants found on private lands of another, or public lands, without permission and/or a permit from FDA. Unless the sale of plants is involved, there are no restrictions for landowners to impact such plants. These provisions are found in Section 581.185, FDA under State law. 2.3. Habitat/Wetland Mapping The habitat and wetland survey included the preparation of a Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) map delineating the major vegetation communities, land forms, preliminary state/federal wetland limits, and land uses present on the project site. A FLUCCS Map for the project site is provided as Figure 1 entitled Existing Conditions. The methods and class descriptions found in the FLUCCS manual (FDOT, 1999) were followed when delineating and assigning areas to an appropriate FLUCCS category (class) or “codes”. Plant communities and preliminary wetland limits were mapped using the standard state and federal wetland delineation methodologies and direct field observations and aerial photo interpretation. Color aerial photos were plotted at 1” = 50’ scale and were used in the field to map the vegetative communities on the site. An important factor in mapping vegetative associations and local habitats is the invasion by the exotic plant species, such as melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). Four levels of exotic density are typically recognized. Code modifiers may be appended to the base FLUCCS code to indicate the approximate density of exotic vegetation in the canopy or understory, as follows: E0 = Exotics <10% E1 = Exotics 10-24% E2 = Exotics 25-49% E3 = Exotics 50-75% E4 = Exotics 75<% 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 6 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports 3. SURVEY RESULTS 3.1. Listed Wildlife Species Observed/Identified On Site No state-listed or federally-listed wildlife species were observed on site during the 2018 listed species survey. Observations made during the September 2019 listed species survey update reflect that site conditions had not changed from those observed in 2018. Therefore, findings of the 2018 survey remain consistent with present site conditions. The project site contained no US Fish and Wildlife Service-designated listed species critical habitat. All non-listed wildlife species, either directly observed or audibly detected on site, are listed in Table 3. Signs observed in the field (scat, clawed trees), photographic eyewitness accounts of an adult bear on adjacent property from neighbors, and direct on-site observation of a juvenile bear, confirm that bears (Ursus americanus floridanus) occasionally occur on site. Though the black bear is no longer listed as protected, the FWC is likely to suggest conservation measures, during the state Environmental Resource Permitting Process, to protect the species. 3.2. Listed Wildlife Species Not Observed But With Potential to Occur On Site The following is a discussion of listed wildlife species that were not observed during either survey, but which are considered to have potential to occur due to the presence of suitable habitat, confirmed sightings in the region, or the parcel’s being located within the consultation area for a given species. Species with greater than zero potential to occur on site are summarized in Table 4. The parcel falls within the consultation areas of both the Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens coerulescens) and the snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis). Since the parcel does not contain habitat that is reasonably suitable for use by either species, these are not considered potential users of the site. The gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) is listed as Threatened by the FWC and it is not listed by FWS. Given the presence of pine flatwoods on site, this species was considered to be potentially present. No signs of the species (i.e., burrows, scat) were observed during the listed species survey and they are no longer considered a candidate to occur on site. The Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia; BCFS) is listed as Threatened by FWC and its distribution is believed to be limited to an area south of the Caloosahatchee River and west to the Everglades. The BCFS is usually associated with FLUCCS codes 411, 621, and 624 and prefers habitats with open park-like mid-story and groundcover strata. Such areas on site are small and isolated. Since site conditions are not conducive to use by this species and no evidence of the BCFS (i.e., direct sightings, nests, day beds, etc.) was observed on site during the survey, it is anticipated that the potential for this species to occur on site is near zero. Due to the presence of on-site wetlands, a suite of listed wading birds could potentially use the site to forage. It includes the wood stork (Mycteria americana), roseate spoonbill (Platalea ajaja), and reddish egret (Egretta rufescens). These species could opportunistically forage in the wetland; however, the existing density of midstory and groundcover vegetation make it less likely. No wading bird rookeries were observed on site, nor are any known to be on adjacent properties. The site falls within the core foraging area (18.6 miles) of at least three (3) wood stork 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 7 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports colonies. The red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis; RCW) is listed as Endangered by FWS and the project site is located on the periphery of the FWS consultation area for this species. No RCW cavity trees were observed on site during the listed species survey, nor were any RCW vocalizations detected. Though the slash pine trees could be used for foraging if an RCW clan was regionally present, RCW clans typically require hundreds of contiguous acres of pine forest for foraging and nesting. With the nearest RCW occurrence record being 7 – 9 miles southwest of the project site in proximity to City Gate (per the FWC RCW occurrence data base), it appears that there is little reasonable potential for the RCW to use the pine flatwood habitat present on site. The Florida panther (Felis concolor coryi) is listed as Endangered by FWS and the site falls within Secondary panther habitat. Per the FWC data base, a single panther telemetry point was located 0.2 miles north of the project site in 2014. It was associated with a 2.5-year-old male that subsequently died that year several miles to the south of unknown causes. Except for this dispersing male, the void of panther telemetry points within one mile of the project, and the closest four points ranging between 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 miles of the project (in 1995, 1998, and 2002, respectively), suggests that the project site is not likely part of a panther travel corridor or an active home range for any collared individuals. The Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus; FBB) is listed as Endangered by FWS and the site falls within the FWS consultation area for this species. There is relatively little known about the life-history needs of the species; however, it has been suggested in the literature that roosts may be a limiting resource for this bat. As such, the ecologist specifically searched for trees with cavities that could potentially be used as roosts by the FBB. The site contained numerous pines that had recently died, presumably due to stress resulting from Hurricane Irma and subsequent beetle infestation. However, few contained woodpecker cavities and the cavities that were present were either shallow or of small diameter and none exhibited signs of use by bats such as smudging or the presence of guano. Therefore, lacking sufficient cavity size and signs of use, it appears unlikely that the observed cavities are used by the FBB for roosting. No other tree cavities were observed on site. Given that the FBB is known to travel great distances to forage, and given the proximity of the site to large forested areas to the north that may contain natural roosts, it is assumed that FBB’s roosting regionally would have the potential to commute or forage over the parcel. The Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi) is listed as Endangered by FWS. Indigo snakes inhabit pine forests, hardwood hammocks, scrub and other uplands. They also rely heavily on a variety of wetland habitats for feeding and temperature regulation needs. Though none were observed on site, it is typically assumed by FWS that there is potential for this species to be present. Adhering to the FWS standard Eastern Indigo Snake Protection Precautions may be proposed as a means to successfully navigate the federal permitting process. Though the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) is not state or federally listed, it is protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. No eagle nest was observed on site. Per the FWC Eagle Nest Locator website, https://public.myfwc.com/FWRI/EagleNests/ nestlocator.aspx), the nearest known eagle nest (nest CO045) is located approximately 3.5 miles northeast of the parcel. The site is located well beyond the protection zones of that nest. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 8 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports 3.3. Listed Plant Species Observed On Site Three (3) species of listed plants (per the FDA list) were observed on site during the field survey. The species observed were the stiff-leafed wild pine (Tillandsia fasciculata), Northern needleleaf (Tillandsia balbisiana), and the butterfly orchid (Encyclia tampensis). Wild pine was relatively abundant; however, the butterfly orchid was limited to a single small plant. They were typically located on pine and cypress trees. No plant species listed by FWS were observed during the field surveys. The listed plant species observed, and their state and federal listing status, are provided in Table 2. 3.4. Habitat/Wetland Mapping Natural areas of the project site are comprised primarily of pine flatwood, cypress, and pine- cypress-cabbage palm communities. All three communities on site, totaling 19.38 acres, fit Collier County’s definition of native habitat. The FLUCCS code for each community along with a brief description and acreage are provided in Table 6 and a detailed description of each FLUCCS code is provided in Appendix A. Historic on-site hydrology appears to be adversely affected as a result of surrounding development. Based upon current field conditions, and application of state and federal wetland delineation methodologies, it is estimated that there are approximately 2.96 acres of jurisdictional wetlands on site. This area, mapped as FLUCCS 621-Cypress on the Existing Conditions figure, has not been verified by either the South Florida Water Management District or the U.S. Corps of Engineers. Verification will take place during environmental permit review. 4. SUMMARY Observations made during the September 2019 listed species survey update reflect that site conditions had not changed from those observed in 2018. Therefore, findings of the 2018 survey remain consistent with present site conditions. Results of both surveys reflect a lack of state or federally listed wildlife and a lack of federally- listed plant species. The protection afforded the FDA-listed stiff-leaved wild pine, Northern needleleaf, and butterfly orchid observed on site entails restrictions on harvesting or destroying plants found on private lands of another, or public lands, without permission and/or a permit from FDA. There are no restrictions for landowners unless the sale of plants is involved. It will likely be assumed by FWS during the federal permitting process that there is potential for the Eastern indigo snake to occur on site. Similarly, based upon current FWS procedure, it will also likely be assumed by FWS that the project may affect the bonneted bat since the project is over 5 acres in size and more than one acre of bonneted bat habitat will be adversely affected. Adhering to the FWS standard Eastern Indigo Snake Protection Precautions, and providing project-specific data documenting the lack of on-site bonneted bat roosting activity, are likely to sufficiently address FWS’ concerns in order to successfully navigate the federal permitting process. Though not listed by either FWC or FWS, the black bear may come up as a point of discussion during the state Environmental Resource Permitting process. Measures to educate the end user of the land, and protection of the bear during and after construction, are likely to be addressed at that time. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 9 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports This assessment anticipates that there are approximately 2.96 acres of state and federal jurisdictional wetlands on site. The wetlands will have to be addressed during the state environmental permitting process, and they may be addressed in the federal Section 404 process if impacts are proposed to these areas. 5. REFERENCES CITED Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Third Edition. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2013. Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species, Official List. Tallahassee, Florida. Weaver, R.E. and P.J. Anderson. 2010. Notes on Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Plants. Contribution No. 38, 5th edition. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 10 P:\Active_Projects\P-HLST-006\002_ACOE_SFWMD_Permitting\Design_Permit\Submittals\SFWMD TABLES 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 11 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports Table 1: Listed Species and Vegetation Survey Details Ecologist Date Time of Day Weather Field Hours Bruce Layman 9/12/18 7:45 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. 76°, partly cloudy, wind 0 mph 5.75 Bruce Layman 9/13/18 7:15 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 78°, partly cloudy, wind 0 mph 2.75 Bruce Layman 9/14/18 7:15 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. 74°, partly cloudy, wind 0 mph 2.75 Bruce Layman 9/17/18 4:00 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. 94°, partly cloudy, wind 0 mph 2.50 Bruce Layman 9/19/18 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. 92°, clear, wind 0 mph 2.00 Bruce Layman 9/05/19 8:00 a.m. – 2:30 p.m. 77°, clear, wind 0 mph 6.50 Total Hours 22.25 Table 2: Listed Plant and Wildlife Species Observed Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Where Observed By FLUCCS FWC Status FWS Status FDA Status PLANTS Stiff-leaved wild-pine Tillandsia fasciculata 411, 624D, 621 N/A NL E Butterfly orchid Encyclia tamepensis 411 N/A NL CE Northern needleleaf Tillandsia balbisiana 624D N/A NL T WILDLIFE Florida black bear* Ursus americanus floridanus 411, 624D, 621 NL NL N/A FDA = Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FWS = United States Fish & Wildlife Service CE = Commercially Exploited T = Threatened E = Endangered NL = Not Listed N/A = Not Applicable * = Not listed by FWC or FWS, but protection measures typical 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 12 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports Table 3: Non-listed Wildlife Species Observed Common Name Scientific Name BIRDS Northern cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis Blue-gray gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea Red-bellied woodpecker Centurus carolinus Blue jay Cyanocitta cristata Mourning dove Zenaida macroura Barred owl Strix varia AMPHIBIANS & REPTILES Cuban anole Anolis s. sagrei Southern black racer Coluber constrictor Water moccasin Agkistrodon piscivorus MAMMALS Nine-banded armadillo* Dasypus novemcinctus Eastern gray squirrel Sciurus carolinensis Florida black bear* Ursus americanus floridanus Eastern cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus * Species not directly observed. Signs of species presence observed (e.g., burrow, tracks, scat, remains, etc.) Table 4: Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Faunal Species Common Name Scientific Name Status (FWC/FWS) Estimated Occurrence* Habitat by FLUCCS Probable Possible Unlikely BIRDS Listed wading birds various X 621 Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis E/E X 411 Bald eagle** Haliaeetus leucocephalus NL X 411, 621, 624 MAMMALS Florida panther Felis concolor coryi E/E X 411, 621, 624 Big Cypress fox squirrel Sciurus niger avicennia T/NL X 411, 621, 624 Florida bonneted bat Eumops floridanus E/E X 411, 621, 624 REPTILES Eastern indigo snake Drymarchon corais couperi T/T X 411, 621, 624 FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service FDA = Food and Drug Administration SSC = Species of Special Concern T = Threatened E = Endangered C = Commercially Exploited NL = Not listed * Probable Occurrence = >50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Possible Occurrence = <50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Unlikely Occurrence = <5% estimated chance of occurrence on site. ** There is potential for an eagle to construct a nest on site at a later date, though the probability is low. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 13 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports Table 5: Estimated Probability of Occurrence of Non-Observed Listed Floral Species Common Name Scientific Name Status (FDA/FWS) Estimated Occurrence* Habitat by FLUCCS Probable Possible Unlikely Giant wild pine Tillandsia utriculata E/NL X 621, 624D FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FWS = United States Fish and Wildlife Service FDA = Food and Drug Administration SSC = Species of Special Concern T = Threatened E = Endangered C = Commercially Exploited NL = Not listed * Probable Occurrence = >50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Possible Occurrence = <50% estimated chance of occurrence on site. Unlikely Occurrence = <5% estimated chance of occurrence on site. ** There is potential for an eagle to construct a nest on site at a later date, though the probability is low. Table 6: Existing Vegetative Associations and Land Uses FLUCCS CODE FLUCCS DESCRIPTION East Parcel Acres 411 Pine Flatwoods, Palmetto understory 9.39 621 Cypress 2.96 624D Pine-Cypress-Cabbage Palm, Disturbed 7.03 814 Roads and Highways 0.20 TOTAL 19.58 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 14 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports APPENDIX A Existing Vegetative Association & Land Use Descriptions 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 15 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports Existing Vegetative Association & Land Use Detailed Descriptions Pine Flatwoods – Palmetto Understory (FLUCCS 411) – This community is dominated in the canopy by slash pine (Pinus elliotti), with a minor component of cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) and cypress (Taxodium distichum). The midstory includes live oak (Quercus virginiana), dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), and stunted cypress. Saw palmetto (Serenoa repens) is scattered and represents a dominant species in the groundcover. Other species include beautyberry (Callicarpa americana), Caesarweed (Urena lobata), love vine (Cassytha filiformis), and bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum). Vines are locally abundant and include muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia), poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), and cat briar (Smilax rotundifolia). Cypress, Exotics <10% (FLUCCS 621E0) - This community is dominated in the canopy by cypress, with red maple (Acer rubrum), cabbage palms, and melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia) as subdominants. The midstory is relatively open and includes red maple, cocoplum (Chrysobalanus icaco), strangler fig (Ficus aurea), max myrtle (Morella cerifera), and dahoon holly. Groundcover is dominated by locally-abundant swamp fern (Blechnum serrulatum) with pockets of maidencane (Panicum hemitomon) and beak-rush (Rhynchospora microcarpa). Pine – Cypress – Cabbage Palm, Disturbed (FLUCCS 624D) - This community is dominated in the canopy by slash pine, cabbage palm, ear-leaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), and minor cypress. The midstory ranges from relatively open to dense with slash pine, earleaf acacia, cocoplum, cypress, and laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia) dominating. Groundcover includes Caesarweed, cocoplum, beautyberry, swamp fern and chain fern (Woodwardia spp.). Vines are locally abundant and include muscadine grape and cat briar. Roads and Highways (FLUCCS 814) – This represents the maintained shoulder and paved surface of 4th Street NE, a 2-lane unstriped residential roadway. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 16 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports FIGURE 1 Existing Conditions 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 17 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) IMMOKALEE ROAD-ESTATES COMMERCIAL SUBDISTRICT LISTED SPECIES SURVEY -UPDATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 17 P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) COMMERCIAL NEEDS ANALYSIS FOR SUBJECT PROPERTY AT 13301-13699 IMMOKALEE ROAD COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA August 27, 2019 Prepared for BCHD Partners I LLC 2600 Golden Gate Parkway Naples, FL 34105 Prepared by Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. Suite 100 707 Orchid Drive Naples, Florida 34102 (239) 269-1341 Ree-i.com 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 1 Background BCHD Partners I LLC (“Client”) is submitting a Collier County Growth Management Plan (“GMP”) amendment to change the zoning on four parcels totaling 19.58 +/- acres located at 13301-13699 Immokalee Road across from the Orange Tree subdivision and approximately a half mile south of Oil Well Road and ¾ miles north of Randall Boulevard in Collier County, Florida. The property is located within the Estates Designation, Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Sub-District and is currently zoned E, Estates. The Client is seeking to change the Future Land Use Element (“FLUM”) to Estates Designation, Commercial District, Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Sub-District. The Client is interested in developing the property as a C-4 Commercial site including 200,000 square feet of various uses as permitted in the C-4 designation (“Subject Property”). The Client has retained Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. (“Consultant”) to prepare a Commercial Needs Analysis to determine the potential for developing the various C-4 uses on the Subject Site as required by the Collier County Future Land Use Element (“FLUE”). The FLUE requires a commercial needs analysis (”Study”) with the submittal of a commercial rezone within a Mixed-Use Activity Center. The proposed Sub district is not located within an Activity Center. Therefore, Collier County staff has requested a commercial needs analysis. The Consultant is well-versed in preparing real estate needs analysis and market studies especially in the Southwest Florida marketplace. This Study is comprised of four parts; the site assessment, population growth around the subject property, the market supply and demand analysis, and conclusions. 1.0 Site Assessment 1.1 Subject Property Attributes The Subject Property is located on the west side of Immokalee Road, across from the Orange Tree subdivision and approximately a half mile south of Oil Well Road and ¾ miles north of Randall Boulevard, in Section 22 – Township 48 – Range 72. An aerial locator photo in Figure 1.1.1 is followed by a summary of the Subject Property’s legal, location, zoning, and land use attributes obtained from the Collier County Property Appraiser website. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 2 Figure 1.1.1 Source: Q. Grady Minor 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 3 Parcel 1 Parcel 2 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 4 Parcel 3 Parcel 4 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 5 1.2 Location Analysis The Subject Property’s strategic location allows reasonable access to the site and provides for an ideal location for commercial activities. As noted above, the Subject Property is strategically located to accommodate the proposed C-4 commercial use. The commercial offerings will have high visibility to Immokalee Road. Figure 1.1.1 previously shows the location of the property. 2.0 Population Growth Around Subject Property 2.1 Overview of Florida Population Florida is currently the nation’s fourth most populous state, home to an estimated 19.1 million people according to the Census Bureau. By the year 2030, Florida’s population is projected to total 23.6 million people according to the medium range series from the University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research. This represents an increase of 245,000 per year. Florida’s population growth is depicted in Figure 2.1.1 below. This shows the latest projections of growth by county for the year 2030. As you can see, the most heavily populated counties in Florida are Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties in Southeast Florida; Hillsborough and Pinellas counties in the Tampa metro market; Orange County in Central Florida, and Duval County in the Jacksonville metro area. Figure 2.1.1 Source: University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research 0 90 18045 Miles ² Florida Counties Population Projections 2030 100,000 or less 100,001 - 250,000 250,001 - 500,000 500,001 - 1,000,000 1,000,001 + 2030 Population Projections by County 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 6 2.2 Overview of Collier County Population Growth. Currently, there are an estimated 373,000 people living year-round in Collier County. Since the 2000 Census, the County’s population has increased by nearly 45%, the equivalent of 115,074 new residents as shown in Figure 2.2.1 below. Looking ahead, the County will continue to gain new residents at a rate greater than that of the state of Florida. By the year 2045, the population of Collier County is projected to total 569,322 residents. This is a projected annual growth rate of just over 2% from 2015 to 2040 compared to Florida’s annual growth rate of 1.08% during the same time period. Figure 2.2.1 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section Population growth in Collier County is primarily due to the in-migration of the ongoing arrival of baby boomer retirees. The number of baby boomers reaching retirement age peaks in 2020. (Rest of page left intentionally blank) Countywide Total Population Growth 2000 2010 2014 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Permanent Population Estimates and Forecasts 257,926 322,653 340,293 347,002 383,166 416,607 446,284 484,017 524,939 569,322 5-year Percent Increase 7.55% 10.42% 8.73% 7.12% 8.45% 8.45% 8.45% 2.14%= Average Annual Growth Rate between 2015 and 2045 8.45% = Average 5-Year Growth between 2010 and 2030 to forecast 2035-2045 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section June 14, 2018 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 7 2.3 15-Minute Drive Time Demographic Detail The Urban Land Institute (“ULI”) defines commercial shopping centers in three categories. The categories are neighborhood, community and regional. Those categories are characterized by drive times and size in square feet as shown in Table 2.2.1 below. Table 2.2.1 Neighborhood Up to 10-Minute Drive Time = <100,000 Sqft Community 20-30 Minute Drive Time = 100,000 to 300,000 Sqft Regional 30-Minute and over Drive Time = >300,000 Sqft Source: Urban Land Institute, Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, 2008 The Subject Property proposed development plan would categorize it as a medium size Community Center. ULI defines Community Centers in their 2008 Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers as follows: “The community shopping center is a larger than a neighborhood center but with neither a traditional department store nor the trade area of a regional shopping center. It includes traditional community shopping centers, power centers, town centers, lifestyle centers, and outlet/off-price centers that meet these criteria. The average total floor space (GLA and all other floor area) of the community centers in this study is about 192,700 square feet; the median is about 177,328 square feet with 80 percent of the centers between 376,200 and 109,195 square feet in size.” Drive time areas are calculated by Environmental Systems Research Institute (“ESRI”). The ESRI Business Analyst program calculates drive times by actual street networks and posted speed limits. In general, Neighborhood Centers have a drive time area of up to 10 minutes, Community Centers have a drive time area of 10 to 20 minutes depending on the size and Regional Centers have a drive time area of 30 minutes and over depending on the size. Since the Subject Property is proposed for 150,000 square feet of commercial space, it falls within the Community Center category and the supply/demand analysis will be performed on a 15-minute drive time market area since its size falls in the middle of the Community Center category. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 8 Figure 2.4.1 below depicts the 15-minute drive time area from the Subject Property. Figure 2.4.1 15-Minute Drive Time from Subject Property Source: ESRI ArcGIS Business Analyst Mapping System 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9 The following table shows the U.S. Census demographic profile of the population that lives within the 15-minute drive time of the subject site. Table 2.4.1 Source: ESRI and U.S. Census Bureau 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 10 In order to determine commercial demand coming from the 15-minute drive time market area, it is important to determine the ratio between the overall County population and the population in the 15-minute drive time market area. In 2010, the population in the 15-minute drive time market area was 41,495, which was 12.86% of the County population. That percent increased to 14.38% of the County population in 2015. That one and a half percent increase is an indication of the growth potential in the Northeast Naples area due to the large percentage of undeveloped land and the potential for population growth in that area versus the land constrained developed areas of the County. The Consultant conservatively estimates that the Northeast Naples percentage of County population will continue to increase along with the southeast and east County regions due to developable land availability. Therefore, the Consultant used a 1.5% increased growth factor for the future 15-minute drive time area population percentage of the overall County population as shown in Table 2.4.2 below. Table 2.4.2 15-Minute Drive Time Population Forecast Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section 3.0 MARKET ANALYSIS 3.1 Market Area Demand The most reliable indicator of commercial market demand in the County is to determine the amount of commercial square footage built in the County then divide that total amount by the County population to arrive at square feet per capita (person) in the existing market. Historical commercial development in relation to population growth encompasses all aspects of land development over time including geography, economic fluctuations and various commercial uses as they relate to market demographics. Collier County in particular has shown a propensity for commercial development to follow residential development as the primary economic drivers are tourism, agriculture and real estate construction. The limited economic diversification fuels residential development, which then supports commercial development as peoples moving into the County require goods and services. Therefore, the commercial square feet per capita measure takes into account all of the factors previously mentioned. Year 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Collier County GMD Population Forecast 322,653 347,002 --- --- --- --- --- --- 15-Minute Market Area Census Population 41,495 49,924 --- --- --- --- --- --- Share 12.86% 14.39% 15.89% 17.39% 18.89% 20.39% 21.89% 23.39% Collier County GMD Population Forecast 383,166 416,607 446,284 484,017 524,939 569,322 15-Minute Market Area Census Population 60,874 72,436 84,291 98,678 114,895 133,149 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 11 The Consultant utilized the 2014 commercial inventory spreadsheets by planning area as provided by the Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section (“CCCPS”) to determine the total amount of commercial square footage built in the County as of 2014. Acreage not built upon was not used in this calculation. In order to make an accurate calculation, the Consultant then used the 2014 Collier County population from the CCCPS to match the supply data and calculate the commercial square footage per capita in the County. The Commercial square foot demand per capita in Collier County is 78.22 as shown in Table 3.1.1 on the next page. Table 3.1.1 Collier County 2014 Planning Area Square Feet Immokalee Area 2,355,554 Marco Island 158,081 Central Naples 2,732,949 Corkscrew 70,748 East Naples 4,244,976 Golden Gate 1,574,301 North Naples 9,726,289 Royal Fakapalm 522,764 Rural Estates 452,781 South Naples 2,277,828 Urban Estates 2,500,631 26,616,902 2015 Population 340,293 (October 1st Fiscal Year) Demand in Square Feet: 78.22 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section To further refine the demand numbers for the Subject Property’s particular market area, the Consultant used the 2014 commercial inventory spreadsheet for the Rural Estate and Urban Estates Planning Areas that are covered by the Subject Property’s drive time area. The drive time area is located within approximately 80% of the Rural Estates and 20% of the Urban Estates. The Consultant then took 80% of the Rural Estates existing commercial square footage and 20% of the Urban Estates square footage, added them together and divided by the drive time population thus yielding a demand of 17.27 square feet of commercial space per capita as shown in Table 3.1.2 on the next page. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 12 Table 3.1.2 Collier County Planning Area 2014 Sq. Ft. Percent Drive Time Sq. Ft. Rural Estates 452,781 80.00% 362,225 Urban Estates 2,500,631 20.00% 500,126 862,351 2015 Drive Time Area Population: 49,924 Per Capita Commercial Square Feet Demand: 17.27 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section and U.S. Census Bureau With the 15-minute drive time market area estimated population and the commercial demand in square-feet per capita determined, the Consultant calculated the estimated commercial square footage demand for the 15-minute drive time market area through the year 2045 as shown in Table 3.1.3 below. Table 3.1.3 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 County Population 381,722 412,522 439,159 474,376 512,418 553,509 15-Minute Drive Time Population 60,874 72,436 84,291 98,678 114,895 133,149 Demand Square Feet Per Capita 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 17.27 Commercial Square Feet Demand 1,051,502 1,251,215 1,455,977 1,704,486 1,984,609 2,299,916 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section and the Consultant 3.2 Market Area Supply The next step in the commercial needs analysis is to determine the amount of existing and potential competing commercial square footage in the 15-minumte drive time market area. The Consultant performed a three-part process in the ARCgis desktop program to determine both the existing and potential competing commercial parcels that would be used in the analysis. The first step in the process is to join all of the Collier County Property Appraiser data with the ARCgis program. The second step is to join the 15-minute drive time market area overlay shape file with the Property Appraiser data. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 13 The final step is to join the Excel commercial inventory data obtained from Collier County Comprehensive Planning Staff with the 15-minute drive time market area. This last step required joining the Rural Estates Planning Area and Urban Estates Planning Area Inventory spreadsheets with the 15-minute drive time market area since the drive time area encompassed portions of the two planning areas. All of the commercial parcels included or excluded within the 15-minute drive time market area are shown in Appendix Tables A through D at the end of this analysis. The Consultant then used a floor area ratio (“FAR”) that consists of using all of the commercial square footage built in the drive time market area and dividing that by the developed acreage to obtain an average square footage per acre FAR that is indicative of the true market area supply being developed to meet the commercial demand being generated from the drive time market area. Table 3.2.1 below indicates the total amount of existing and potential commercial square feet in the 15-minute drive time market area. Table 3.2.1 Parcels Acres Square Feet FAR Developed Commercial 33 114.54 725,404 6,333 Undeveloped Commercial 33 110.69 701,063 6,333 Totals 66 225.23 1,426,467 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, Collier County Property Appraiser and ESRI ARCgis mapping system 3.3 Supply – Demand Analysis The final step in the Commercial Needs Analysis is to put the supply and demand calculations together in order to determine the oversupply or undersupply of commercial space in the 15-minute drive time area both with the current existing and potential commercial square footage and with the proposed project acreage being included in the supply totals. Table 3.3.1 on the next page shows that calculation. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 14 Table 3.3.1 Retail Demand (sq. ft.) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Demand Per GMD Commercial Inventory & Population 1,051,502 1,251,215 1,455,977 1,704,486 1,984,609 2,299,916 Retail Supply Developed 725,404 725,404 725,404 725,404 725,404 725,404 Vacant 701,050 701,050 701,050 701,050 701,050 701,050 === === === === === === Total Supply 1,426,454 1,426,454 1,426,454 1,426,454 1,426,454 1,426,454 Allocation Ratio 1.36 1.14 0.98 0.84 0.72 0.62 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ARCgis mapping system and the Consultant Adding the proposed 200.000 square feet of commercial space proposed for the Subject Property is shown in Table 3.3.2 below. Table 3.3.2 Retail Demand (sq. ft.) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Demand Per GMD Commercial Inventory & Population 997,661 1,131,602 1,261,563 1,424,186 1,604,778 1,805,176 Retail Supply Developed 925,404 925,404 925,404 925,404 925,404 925,404 Vacant 701,050 701,050 701,050 701,050 701,050 701,050 === === === === === === Total Supply 1,626,454 1,626,454 1,626,454 1,626,454 1,626,454 1,626,454 Allocation Ratio 1.55 1.30 1.12 0.95 0.82 0.71 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ARCgis mapping system and the Consultant The future demand generally looks out to the Comprehensive Plan’s horizon year, which is currently either 2025 to 2040 depending on the jurisdiction’s comprehensive plan and growth management plan horizon year requirements. In Collier County’s case, the Comprehensive Plan’s horizon year is 2025.However, since the County is fast approaching the year 2020, the horizon year will quickly become 2030 to match the County’s 10-year planning horizon. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 15 It is at this point of the analysis that has caused an anomaly in determining a true economic supply and demand result. On the supply side, it is relatively easy to determine the amount of existing and approved supply from the property appraiser data. The difficulty lies in the vacant non-approved potential lands. Collier County Staff requires the Applicant to take all of those lands that have a commercial overlay on them and include them as supply by putting a floor area ratio figure to the acreage. The issue becomes apparent when all of the lands that are not in the existing or approved category are included in the particular land use analysis. By putting all of the potential lands in the supply category, the assumption is that all of that land would be developed as that particular land use overlay and nothing else. The flaw in that representation is all of those vacant approved parcels and parcels designated by the FLUM as having the potential to be developed as one use, which could be a non-competing or some other commercial use. The same parcels are also counted as competing supply when a commercial needs analysis is performed for another commercial use. Essentially, they are double counted in both analyses when they will actually be developed as the market demand dictates. A general economic principal states that all markets are efficient and that supply for the most part is generated as demand dictates. It is a rare situation where supply generates demand. The allocation ratio measures the amount of additional acreage required in relation to the directly utilized acreage to assure proper market functioning in the sale, usage and allocation of land. The additional acreage is required in order to maintain market level pricing and to account for the likelihood that certain lands will not be placed on the market for sale during the forecast horizon or may be subject to future environmental or other constraints. Thus, the lands allocated in the FLUM should be considerably greater than those that will actually be used or developed. Again, basic economic principals have shown that markets are efficient in terms of supply and demand and the ultimate lack of available commercial choices creates an impediment to the market functioning properly. One must also consider that not all of the office/commercial designation in the future land use map will be developed as such since the owners of those properties will only develop the land with uses that respond to market demand. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 16 The increased acres will maintain flexibility within the comprehensive plan, keep prices reasonable by not constraining land supply, and compensate for lands which may be unavailable for sale or subject to environmental or other development constraints. Growth management practices have suggested that the greater the time horizon of the comprehensive plan, the greater the allocation ratio needed to maintain flexibility of the comprehensive plan. Other factors that influence the residential acreage allocation ratio are the nature and speed of the developing area and the area’s general exposure to growth trends in the market. The Consultant believes that to ensure proper flexibility in the comprehensive plan of a rapidly growing county like Collier, a commercial allocation ratio in the range of 1.25 to 1.5 is necessary to maintain planning flexibility and to account for the double counting of land uses. History has shown that the former Florida Department of Community Affairs (“DCA”) (Currently the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity) (“DEO”) recommended an allocation ratio of 1.25 in the horizon year of a comprehensive plan yet it had seen and approved allocation ratios in the 1.8 to 2.4 range and in some cases even larger allocation ratios for longer forecast horizons. Otherwise, if allocation ratios are not used in the analysis, then an appropriate breakdown of the potential lands between the various land use types needs to be undertaken in order to more accurately analyze the need for a comprehensive land use change. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 4.1 The Consultant used all of the data and analysis in the previous sections to determine the total supply and demand for commercial space in the Subject Property’s market area from 2020 through 2045. The results show that the addition of the Subject Property to the Collier County commercial inventory will not adversely affect the balance of commercial supply in the 15-minute drive time area. The Allocation Ratio is 1.30 in the Collier County Comprehensive Plan 2025 horizon year with the addition of the Subject Property and is just above the recommended 1.25 allocation ratio as suggested by the former Florida DCA now Florida DEO. If the horizon year is extended to 2030 which will happen in two years, the allocation ratio is 1.12, below the State’s recommended and accepted 1.25 allocation ratio and also below the constricting 1.15 ratio the County has used as a measuring stick. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 17 The future commercial supply could possibly include a portion of the square footage from the proposed Rural Lands West town. That commercial square footage is in flux as to its location and amount so since the commercial location is not determined, the amount of acreage and square footage that would fall within the drive time area could not be calculated and used in this analysis. Another point to consider is that as this area develops, the population will increase significantly as other areas of the County reach full development and therefore the supply will need to be increased to reach the overriding demand from this growth. This area will rapidly trend toward the County-wide per capita square foot demand of 78.22 square feet. If the 78.22 square feet per capita calculation is used in this analysis, then the allocation ratio would be 0.25 in the horizon year of 2025. That is also economically unfeasible. The Consultant believes that the square foot per capita figure will increase in time over the building out of the rural estates and urban estates and come closer to the county wide average rather than remain straight line. Therefore, the allocation ratio will come closer to the County prescribed 1.15 in the horizon year of 2025. Finally, while the total existing and potential commercial supply exceeds the demand, the potential supply makes up just under 50% of the total future supply in the 15-minute drive time area. Markets are efficient and the future supply will be developed as the market grows and diversifies. However, the future supply will be exhausted as it related to future demand just after 2030 so it is imperative that the future of the commercial supply in this 15-minute drive time market area needs to increase to accommodate the future demand. (Rest of page left intentionally blank) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 18 APPENDICIES 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 19 Appendix Table A – 15-Minute Drive Time Developed Competing Commercial Parcels FID ACRES_GIS O_NAME1 LUSEDOR_D BLDG SQFT 4293 1.05 CAMERON PARTNERS LLC Store (One Story) 6,215 13603 3.56 BLEND-ALL HOTEL DEV INC ET AL Store (One Story) 14,308 13663 23.75 WAL-MART STORES EAST LP Store (One Story) 204,181 85110 1.50 CITY MATTRESS OF FL INC Store (One Story) 11,465 87621 1.89 CVS 75479 FL L L C Store (One Story) 13,157 119041 3.83 WALGREEN CO Store (One Story) 14,232 119403 2.65 7-ELEVEN INCS LLC Store (One Story) 7,793 121753 1.33 URIKA OIL INC Store (One Story) 3,448 122756 1.23 NATIONAL RETAIL PROPERTIES LP Store (One Story) 3,620 118713 2.73 LAND 850.034 TRUST Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 1,450 118717 1.64 LAND TRUST 850.038 Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 1,454 118719 2.81 850.032 LAND TRUST Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 1,248 118720 2.34 850.026 LAND TRUST Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 1,290 118723 2.34 850.031 LAND TRUST Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 1,581 118724 1.17 850.027 LAND TRUST Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 1,363 118727 1.14 LAND TRUST 850.045 Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 1,167 118795 2.81 850.33 LAND TRUST Mixed Use - Store/Office (with SFR) 2,678 85098 8.20 BRENTWOOD LAND PARTNERS LLC Community Shopping Center 84,344 85100 14.61 TARGET CORPORATION T-2063 Community Shopping Center 175,337 87623 4.86 CAMERON PARTNERS LLC Community Shopping Center 31,382 119113 5.29 CARLISLE WILSON PLAZA LLC Community Shopping Center 35,856 121719 2.50 PAC OF COLLIER INC Community Shopping Center 20,356 1664 0.46 TEJERINA, GABRIEL A=& BETTY One Story Office 3,460 13185 0.28 GRACE-KELLY LLC Restaurant 1,168 85108 1.80 CH NFL LLC Restaurant 6,225 421 0.82 GCD MISSION HILLS LLC Drive Thru Restaurant 2,171 85109 1.06 BRENTWOOD LAND PARTNERS LLC Drive Thru Restaurant 2,810 4713 1.27 BARNETT BANK N A Financial Institution 3,840 85106 1.16 AMSOUTH BANK Financial Institution 3,069 218584 6.60 PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS INC Vacant Commercial 50700 220522 1.91 7 ELEVEN INC Store (One Story) 3111 142048 1.65 CYPRESS CYCLE SERVICES INC Auto Sales/Service 2,400 14270 4.30 JONJAMES LLC Florist, Greenhouse 8,525 114.54 725,404 Average Building Sq. Ft. Per Acre: 6,333 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section Commercial Inventory, Collier County Property Appraiser and ArcGIS 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 20 Appendix Table B – 15-Minute Drive Time Undeveloped Competing Parcels FID ACRES_GIS O_NAME1 LUSEDOR_D 484 1.59 VANDERBILT COMMONS I TRUST Vacant Commercial 1695 1.00 PIEDMONT/METROLINA FUND#12 LLC Vacant Commercial 6602 4.11 ROBERT E WILLIAMS TRUST Vacant Commercial 13878 16.17 VOILA II LLC Vacant Commercial 13887 8.92 VOILA II LLC Vacant Commercial 87622 1.01 FIFTH THIRD BANK Vacant Commercial 118716 1.17 850.025 LAND TRUST Vacant Commercial 118718 2.34 850.023 LAND TRUST Vacant Commercial 118721 1.64 850.035 LAND TRUST Vacant Commercial 118725 2.81 GOLDEN GATE BLVD W TRUST Vacant Commercial 118726 2.34 850.024 LAND TRUST Vacant Commercial 118729 2.73 850.028 LAND TRUST Vacant Commercial 118796 5.15 850.018 LAND TRUST Vacant Commercial 118797 5.47 850.018 LAND TRUST Vacant Commercial 119039 2.58 CORDER, MICHAEL A=& LAUREN K Vacant Commercial 119040 2.58 CORDER, MICHAEL A=& LAUREN K Vacant Commercial 119044 2.34 CORDER, MICHAEL=& LAUREN K Vacant Commercial 119112 2.08 CENTRAL FL REAL EST OWNED LLC Vacant Commercial 136373 4.05 TRKR FAMILY TRUST Vacant Commercial 136418 5.46 TAYLOR, NORMAN L=& JOANNE Vacant Commercial 142105 2.58 SOUTHBROOKE MEDICAL OFFICE LLC Vacant Commercial 142149 2.56 SOUTHBROOKE MEDICAL OFFICE LLC Vacant Commercial 161614 5.32 PULTE HOME CORP Vacant Commercial 165698 1.42 CAMERON PARTNERS II LLC Vacant Commercial 165699 1.35 CAMERON PARTNERS II LLC Vacant Commercial 165701 1.74 RACETRAC PETROLEUM INC Vacant Commercial 165704 1.01 PIEDMONT/METROLINA FUND#12 LLC Vacant Commercial 218582 1.28 CYPRESS COMMERCIAL DEV LLC Vacant Commercial 218583 2.09 CVS 75462 FL LLC Vacant Commercial 220531 12.22 BOLLT TR, ROBERTO Vacant Residential 165706 1.00 CAMERON PARTNERS II LLC Vacant Commercial 165707 0.95 V&T LAND LLC Vacant Commercial 165841 1.64 PROFESSIONAL RESOURCE Vacant Commercial 110.69 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section Commercial Inventory, Collier County Property Appraiser and ArcGIS 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 21 Appendix Table C – 15-Minute Drive Time Non-Competing Developed Commercial Eliminated Developed Non-Competitive Uses FID ACRES_GIS O_NAME1 LUSEDOR_D BLDG SQFT 14208 2.39 CLEARY HOLDINGS LLC Tourist Attraction 16,000 82016 0.64 ASSOCIA @ GULF COAST, AAMC Tourist Attraction 2,471 86253 1.13 BRISTOL PINES COMMUNITY Tourist Attraction 4,079 86260 0.33 BRISTOL PINES COMMUNITY Tourist Attraction 334 96886 0.14 COVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Tourist Attraction 648 98020 2.67 CRYSTAL LAKE PROPERTY OWNERS Tourist Attraction 3,440 98024 3.30 CRYSTAL LAKE PROPERTY OWNERS Tourist Attraction 9,292 98325 1.28 CRYSTAL LAKE JOINT VENTURE Tourist Attraction 1,590 102724 1.43 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Tourist Attraction 234 165523 0.37 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Tourist Attraction 255 165633 13.74 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Tourist Attraction 256 165842 0.62 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Tourist Attraction 177 166187 0.82 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Tourist Attraction 307 166562 0.43 CLUBHOMES AT HERITAGE GREENS Tourist Attraction 162 166563 0.97 HERITAGE GREENS COMMUNITY Tourist Attraction 2,358 166570 0.58 CRESTVIEW VILLAS AT HERITAGE Tourist Attraction 269 168512 1.52 HUNTINGTON LAKES ONE Tourist Attraction 9,366 169188 1.96 HUNGTON LAKES FOUR Tourist Attraction 288 169191 1.68 IBIS COVE MASTER PROPERTY Tourist Attraction 4,882 4776 20.81 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 126 11975 100.06 CYPRESS WOODS GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 18,977 12524 75.09 CYPRESS WOODS GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 7,000 12525 38.70 QUAIL CREEK VILLAGE FOUND INC Golf courses, driving ranges 9,425 12658 11.51 QUAIL CREEK VLG FOUNDATION INC Golf courses, driving ranges 6,250 14324 1009.50 BONITA BAY CLUB INC Golf courses, driving ranges 29,835 14522 246.69 OLDE FLORIDA GOLF CLUB INC Golf courses, driving ranges 33,130 101874 109.26 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 126 102568 5.44 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 8,540 161519 86.82 GC OF THE EVERGLADES LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 25,874 165200 2.56 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 12,450 165203 10.82 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 23,982 166571 140.39 HERITAGE GREENS GOLF Golf courses, driving ranges 16,183 14314 27.96 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY Heavy Industrial 1,670 74915 20.89 RES COLLIER HOLDINGS LLC Heavy Industrial 299,340 22632 390.57 APAC-GEORGIA INC Mineral Processing 11,140 13321 20.27 CRYSTAL LAKE PROPERTY OWNERS Open storage, building supplies, junk yd 71,120 142046 5.17 JOHN H WINKLER TR Open storage, building supplies, junk yd 4,704 6169 14.22 FLORIDA CONFERENCE ASSOCIATION Churches 3,600 14269 50.51 DEWANE, BISHOP FRANK J Churches 54,074 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 22 14419 8.80 ST PAUL ANTIOCHIAN Churches 5,866 14429 36.36 LIVING WORD FAMILY CHURCH INC Churches 50,226 14492 4.37 SOUTHEASTERN CONFERENCE ASSOC Churches 3,433 116150 4.74 IGLESIA CRISTIANA LA ROCA INC Churches 10,759 116154 2.58 HAITIAN BETHESDA BAPTIST Churches 3,080 116934 4.77 GOLDEN GATE CONGREGATION OF Churches 8,496 116963 4.55 CYPRESS WOOD PRSBY CHURCH INC Churches 6,360 128775 1.93 CORKSCREW BAPTIST CHURCH INC Churches 3,536 142024 5.49 NORTH NAPLES BAPTIST CH INC Churches 22,416 142037 5.37 DESTINY CHURCH NAPLES INC Churches 8,355 142190 4.95 EAGLE'S NEST WORSHIP CENTER Churches 20,054 142229 2.26 NAPLES BAPTIST TEMPLE INC Churches 4,062 142272 6.02 ST MONICA'S EPISCOPAL Churches 15,252 169192 8.98 CORNERSTONE UNITED METHODIST Churches 16,000 13879 9.68 HERNANDEZ FAMILY LLC Private schools and colleges 7,216 87620 3.36 NAPLES COMMUNITY HOSPITAL INC Private Hospitals 41,465 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section Commercial Inventory, Collier County Property Appraiser and ArcGIS (Rest of page left intentionally blank) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 23 Appendix Table D – 15-Minute Drive Time Non-Competing Undeveloped Commercial Parcels Eliminated Vacant Non-Competitive Uses FID ACRES_GIS O_NAME1 LUSEDOR_D 86408 1.08 WATERWAYS JV HOLDINGS LP Tourist Attraction 165162 0.46 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Tourist Attraction 1509 51.52 STRAND AT NAPLES LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 2006 1.82 TWINEAGLES CLUB LLC, THE Golf courses, driving ranges 2208 13.41 QUARRY GOLF CLUB INC Golf courses, driving ranges 4035 6.97 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 4883 83.78 VANDERBILT CMMTY ASSOC INC Golf courses, driving ranges 11778 56.18 QUARRY GOLF CLUB INC Golf courses, driving ranges 11779 6.89 QUARRY GOLF CLUB INC Golf courses, driving ranges 11783 3.10 GRAND CYPRESS REC ASSOC INC Golf courses, driving ranges 11974 7.80 CYPRESS TRACE RECREATION Golf courses, driving ranges 12527 15.67 REFERENCE ONLY Golf courses, driving ranges 12854 9.45 OLDE CYPRESS DEVELOPMENT LTD Golf courses, driving ranges 13213 7.48 QUARRY GOLF CLUB INC Golf courses, driving ranges 14325 7.09 RESOURCE CONSERVATION SYS LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 101815 0.26 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 101880 1.66 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 101882 0.10 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102002 2.17 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102704 0.53 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102913 13.98 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102977 0.17 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102978 0.06 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102979 0.07 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102982 2.83 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102985 9.50 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102989 7.99 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 102990 29.38 TAYLOR MORRISON ESPLANADE Golf courses, driving ranges 161430 8.94 GC OF THE EVERGLADES LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 161431 0.76 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161432 1.76 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161433 9.72 GC OF THE EVERGLADES LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 161436 3.66 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161438 2.68 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161443 20.97 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161522 62.96 GC OF THE EVERGLADES LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 161528 0.40 GC OF THE EVERGLADES LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 161532 11.03 GC OF THE EVERGLADES LLC Golf courses, driving ranges 161537 5.36 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 24 161539 8.15 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161541 3.13 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161542 0.44 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161544 6.21 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161545 2.48 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161546 1.71 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161548 3.61 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161549 0.35 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161551 6.27 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161554 9.39 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161555 7.22 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161556 0.85 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161557 1.18 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161559 5.58 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 161560 6.05 PULTE HOME CORP Golf courses, driving ranges 165273 32.91 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165275 9.55 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165276 20.73 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165277 28.55 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165278 2.18 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165279 11.80 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165281 28.28 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165283 11.69 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 165284 0.29 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 166499 0.35 HERITAGE BAY GOLF & COUNTRY Golf courses, driving ranges 121752 3.83 URIKA OIL INC Open storage, building supplies, junk yd 20465 1.28 KEMPTON TR, GEORGE R Vacant Institutional 120349 3.41 CONSERVANCY OF SW FL INC Vacant Institutional 121182 7.20 RED APPLE AT COLLIER LLC Vacant Institutional 121183 6.09 RED APPLE AT COLLIER LLC Vacant Institutional 121185 2.96 RED APPLE AT COLLIER LLC Vacant Institutional 126263 1.14 CONSERVANCY OF SW FL INC Vacant Institutional 127061 1.59 CONSERVANCY OF SW FL INC Vacant Institutional 127384 2.73 HABITAT FOR HUMANITY Vacant Institutional 128214 1.17 CONSERVANCY OF SW FL INC Vacant Institutional 128645 3.41 CORKSCREW BAPTIST CHURCH INC Vacant Institutional 130771 2.95 COLLINS, CARY B=& JOYCE A Vacant Institutional 130772 2.46 COLLINS, CARY B=& JOYCE A Vacant Institutional 130774 2.46 SILVA, LEICY Vacant Institutional 131881 1.14 CONSERVANCY OF SW FL INC Vacant Institutional 132576 1.64 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 132614 2.50 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 132615 2.50 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 25 132616 1.61 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 132618 2.50 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 132619 2.50 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 132620 1.68 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 132657 5.00 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 132658 1.67 EMMANUEL EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN Vacant Institutional 133522 3.01 MY JESUS MERCY MINISTRIES INC Vacant Institutional 133523 3.61 MY JESUS MERCY MINISTRIES INC Vacant Institutional 137902 1.59 CONSERVANCY OF SW FL INC Vacant Institutional 142042 2.73 FAITH BIBLE CHURCH/NAPLES INC Vacant Institutional Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section Commercial Inventory, Collier County Property Appraiser and ArcGIS (Rest of page left intentionally blank) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Exhibit V.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis August 29, 2019 Page 1 of 3 IR15PUD Exhibit VE-rev2.docx Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: The proposed Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict is an undeveloped 20± acre parcel. The Subdistrict proposes up to 200,000 square feet of general retail, office and institutional space on approximately 20± acres. The property is zoned Estates and currently permits single-family homes at 1 du/2.25 acres. The property would support up to 7 single family homes under the current plan designation. The public facilities analysis evaluates the project impacts on potable Water, wastewater, drainage, parks, schools, roadways, fire/EMS, and solid waste. The source for the LOS information is the 2017 AUIR. Potable Water The property is located within the Collier County potable water service area. The County has existing plant capacity of 52.75 MGD (FY 2018) and a planned plant capacity of 56.75 MGD (FY 2023). The proposed addition of 200,000 square feet of general commercial uses will not create any LOS issues in the 5-year planning horizon. This Project will have no significant impact on the potable water system and capacity is available in Collier County. Collier County LOS: 150 gpcd/(0.15) gpd/sf* Permitted Capacity: 52.75 mgd Required Plant Capacity FY27: 48.25 mgd *Based on EP Estimates Data Source: Collier County 2017 AUIR Non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is located within the service boundary of Collier County utilities with standards for Sanitary Sewer established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The subdistrict is located in the north sewer service area of the Collier County Water/Sewer District. This Project will have no significant impact on the Collier County Regional Sewer System. Collier County LOS: 100 gpcd/(0.15) gpd/sf* Permitted Capacity: 24.85 mgd Required Plant Capacity FY27: 23.75 mgd 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Exhibit V.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis August 29, 2019 Page 2 of 3 IR15PUD Exhibit VE-rev2.docx *Based on EP Estimates Data Source: Collier County 2016 AUIR Non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. Arterial and Collector Roads Please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement for discussions of the project’s impact on level of service for arterial and collector roadways within the project’s radius of development influence. Drainage The County has adopted a LOS standard for private developments which requires development to occur consistent with water quantity and quality standards established in Ordinances 74 -50, 90-10, 2001-27, and LDC Ordinance 2004-41, as may be amended. An environmental Resource Permit (ERP) issued by the South Florida Water Management District which has established criteria for the volume of water stored on site as well as the quality of the water which may be discharged from the site. The development within the subdistrict will be consistent with the County LOS standards. Solid Waste The adopted LOS for solid waste is two years of lined cell capacity at the previous 3 year average tons per year disposal rate and 10 years of permittable landfill capacity of the disposal rate. There are no current capacity issues and none are anticipated through the year 206 7. Existing: .55/pp disposal rate 2.4 pp/household 9 single family residences permitted 9 x 2.4 pp/household x .55 pp = 11.88 tons solid waste/year Proposed: Retail/office 200,000 x 5 lbs/1,000 sq ft = 1,000 lbs/day x 365 = 365,000 lbs/year or 365 tons/year Current landfill capacity in 2018 is anticipated to be 17,001,964 tons. Total Permitted Landfill Capacity Remaining, 2017 17,244,316 Tons Required Permitted Landfill Capacity, 2017 2,625,495 Tons Total Lined Cell Capacity Remaining, 2017 2,372,915 Tons 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Exhibit V.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis August 29, 2019 Page 3 of 3 IR15PUD Exhibit VE-rev2.docx Required Lined Cell Capacity, 2017 490,736 Tons Source: Collier County 2017 AUIR Cal Recycle Parks: Community and Regional Parks impact fees are not assessed for commercial development. No adverse impacts to Community or Regional Parks result from the amendment of the subdistrict. Schools School impact fees are not assessed for commercial development. No adverse impacts to schools result from the creation of the subdistrict. Fire Control and EMS The proposed project lies within the North Collier Fire Rescue District. The North Collier Fire Rescue District - Station #10 is located at 13240 Immokalee Rd, which is approximately one half mile from the southern property boundary. Emergency Medical Service - Station #10 is located at 17596 Immokalee Road, which is approximately one half mile from the northern property boundary. No significant impacts to Fire Control level of service are anticipated due to the proposed project. Estimated impact fees for EMS and fire would be determined at time of SDP based on each unit. Sheriff, Fire Protection and EMS Services location/address of facilities intended to serve the project are; North Collier Fire and Rescue District - Station #10 13240 Immokalee Rd Emergency Medical Service - Station #10 17596 Immokalee Rd Collier County Sheriff's Office - District 4 (Estates Substation) 14750 Immokalee Rd 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) North Collier Fire Rescue District - Station #10 Sheriff's Office - District 4 Medic 10 Corkscrew Elementary and Middle Schools Palmetto Ridge High School Golden Gate Station 71 Medic 71 Estates Library 0 4000'2000' SCALE: 1" = 4000' GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 SUBJECT PROPERTY 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Traffic Impact Statement Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) Collier County, Florida 09/06/2019 Prepared for: Prepared by: Q. Grady Minor and Associates, PA 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Phone: 239-947-0375 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee – $500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee – Major Study – $1,500.00 Fee 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 2 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E., 47116 State of Florida Digitally signed by Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E., 47116 State of Florida DN: cn=Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E., 47116 State of Florida, o=This item has been electronically signed and sealed using a SHA-1 authentication code., ou=Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed, and the SHA-1 authentication code must be verified on any electronic copies., email=ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz, c=US Date: 2019.09.11 12:09:28 -04'00' 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 3 Table of Contents Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 5 Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................................................... 8 Background Traffic ........................................................................................................................ 10 Existing and Future Roadway Network......................................................................................... 11 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 12 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 13 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 14 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 15 Appendices Appendix A: Project Parcel Aerial .............................................................................................. 16 Appendix B: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition ....................................................... 18 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 4 Project Description The subject project is a proposed commercial/retail development located on the west side of Immokalee Road (CR 846), north of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Randall Boulevard, within Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, in Collier County, Florida. Refer to Figure 1 – Project Location Map, which follows and Appendix A: Project Parcel Aerial. Figure 1 – Project Location Map The property is currently vacant land. The subject site is approximately 20 acres in size and is currently zoned as Estates Zoning District (“E”) as illustrated in the adopted Collier County 2012-2025 Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The purpose of this report is to document the transportation impact analysis for the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment of the Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict from Estates zoning District to Planned Unit Development (PUD) District. The proposed change would allow for two development scenarios as follow: Scenario 1 – 200,000 square feet (sf) retail building; or, Scenario 2 – 150,000 square feet (sf) retail building and 50,000 sf of medical office. Conservatively, this analysis classifies the proposed retail building as shopping center for traffic generation purposes. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 5 For the purposes of this evaluation, the project build-out year is assumed to be consistent with the Collier County 2024 planning horizon. The project provides a highest and best use scenario with respect to the project’s proposed trip generation. The development program is illustrated in Table 1. Table 1 Development Program at Buildout Conditions Development ITE Land Use ITE Land Use Code Total Size Scenario 1 Retail Shopping Center 820 200,000 sf Scenario 2 Retail Shopping Center 820 150,000 sf Medical Office Medical - Dental Office Building 720 50,000 sf Based on the project location relative to Immokalee Road (refer to Appendix A), connection to subject project is expected to consist of a full movement access drive onto Immokalee Road (CR 846) at its intersection with Orange Tree Boulevard, which is currently a signalized intersection. Trip Generation The project’s site trip generation is based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. The software program OTISS – Online Traffic Impact Study Software (most current version) is used to create the raw unadjusted trip generation for the project. The ITE equations are used for the trip generation calculations. Detailed calculations can be found in Appendix B: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition. The internal capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction between the multiple land uses in a site. The ITE guidelines provide internal capture provisions for retail and office uses interactions. Per Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture trips should be reasonable and should not exceed 20% of the total project trips. Projected internal capture traffic reduction for the Scenario 2 development is calculated as 7.3% of the unadjusted PM peak hour traffic. Consistent with ITE guidelines and Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TIS) Guidelines and Procedures, the internal capture trips are not considered for Scenario 1 development. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 6 The pass-by trips account for traffic that is already on the external roadway network and stops at the project on the way to a primary trip destination. It should be noted that the driveway volumes are not reduced as a result of the pass-by reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. As such, pass-by trips are not deducted for operational- access analysis (all external traffic is accounted for). Per ITE User’s Guide and Handbook recommendations, PM peak period average pass-by trip percentage is 34% for the Shopping Center land use (ITE LUC 820). Per Collier County TIS Guidelines and Procedures, the pass-by capture for shopping centers should not exceed 25% for the peak hour. Therefore, based on a conservative approach, this analysis calculates pass-by reduction for shopping center as 25% for AM and PM peak hours, and 15% for daily two-way traffic. The projected trip generation scenarios for the proposed development at build out conditions are illustrated in Table 2A and Table 2B. Table 2A Trip Generation (Proposed Development – Scenario 1) - Average Weekday Development 24 Hour Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Shopping Center Unadjusted Traffic 200,000 sf 9,632 156 96 252 436 472 908 Internal Capture N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A External Traffic 9,632 156 96 252 436 472 908 Pass-by 1,445 39 24 63 109 118 227 Net External Traffic 8,187 117 72 189 327 354 681 Table 2B Trip Generation (Proposed Development – Scenario 2) - Average Weekday Development 24 Hour Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Shopping Center 150,000 sf 7,921 141 86 227 352 382 734 Medical-Dental Office Building 50,000 sf 1,833 94 27 121 48 124 172 Unadjusted Traffic 9,754 235 113 348 400 506 906 Internal Capture 586 12 12 24 33 33 66 External Traffic 9,168 223 101 324 367 473 840 Pass-by 1,144 33 21 54 82 93 175 Net External Traffic 8,024 190 80 270 285 380 665 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 7 In agreement with the Collier County TIS guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2018 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for the adjacent roadway network is PM peak hour. Based on the trip generation results, from a traffic standpoint, the proposed Scenario 1 development is more intense when compared against Scenario 2 option. In addition, as illustrated in Table 2A, the PM peak hour yields a higher trip generation rate when compared to the AM peak hour. For the purpose of this report, the surrounding roadway network link concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour of net external traffic (pass- by traffic is considered) generated by the proposed Scenario 1 development at buildout conditions. The estimated net new increase in external trips by the proposed amendment at build out is 681 PM peak hour two-way trip ends. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 8 Trip Distribution and Assignment The net external traffic generated by the proposed project is assigned to the adjacent roadways using the knowledge of the area and engineering judgement. The site-generated trip distribution is shown in Table 3 and it is graphically depicted in Figure 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour. Table 3 Proposed Development – Traffic Distribution for PM Peak Hour Roadway Link Collier County Link No. Roadway Link Location Distribution of Project Traffic PM Peak Hour Project Vol.* Enter Exit Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 44.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 15% EB – 49 WB – 53 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Wilson Blvd. to Randall Blvd. 30% EB – 98 WB – 106 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Randall Blvd. to Project 50% EB – 164 WB – 177 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Project to Oil Well Rd. 40% WB – 131 EB – 141 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 46.0 North of Oil Well Rd. 15% WB – 49 EB – 53 Wilson Blvd. 118.0 South of Immokalee Rd. 15% NB – 49 SB – 53 Randall Blvd. 132.0 Immokalee Rd. to 8th St NE 15% WB – 49 EB – 53 Randall Blvd. 132.0 8th St NE to Everglades Blvd. 10% WB – 33 EB – 35 Oil Well Rd. 119.0 East of Immokalee Rd. 25% WB – 82 EB – 89 4th Street NE** N/A North of Immokalee Rd. 5% SB – 16 NB – 18 Note(s): *Peak hour, peak direction traffic volumes are underlined and bold to be used in Roadway Link Level of Service calculations. **Not a Collier County monitored roadway. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 9 Figure 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 10 Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates are estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from peak hour peak direction volume (estimated from 2008 through 2018), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2018 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) volume plus the trip bank volume. The higher of the two determinations is to be used in the Roadway Link Level of Service analysis. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the build-out year 2024. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project (2018 - 2024) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2024 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2024 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 44.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 1,770 2.37% 1.1509 2,038 849 2,619 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Wilson Blvd. to Randall Blvd. 2,020 2.38% 1.1516 2,327 389 2,409 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Randall Blvd. to Project 2,020 2.38% 1.1262 2,327 389 2,409 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Project to Oil Well Rd. 2,020 2.38% 1.1262 2,327 389 2,409 Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 46.0 North of Oil Well Rd. 410 4.0% 1.2653 519 168 578 Wilson Blvd. 118.0 South of Immokalee Rd. 340 2.0% 1.1262 383 0 340 Randall Blvd. 132.0 Immokalee Rd. to 8th St NE 820 2.0% 1.1262 924 40 860 Randall Blvd. 132.0 8th St NE to Everglades Blvd. 820 2.0% 1.1262 924 40 860 Oil Well Rd. 119.0 East of Immokalee Rd. 850 4.94% 1.3355 1,136 287 1,137 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate - from 2018 AUIR, 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1 + Annual Growth Rate)6. 2024 Projected Volume = 2018 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2024 Projected Volume = 2018 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2024 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 11 Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the Collier County 2018 AUIR and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5-Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. The Randall Boulevard segment from Immokalee Road to 8th Street NE has intersection improvements planned which will include 4-laning Randall Boulevard to 8th Street NE. As such, this Randall Boulevard segment is expected to have a 2024 peak direction, peak hour capacity volume of 2,000 vph. As no other improvements were identified in the Collier County 2018 AUIR, the other evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build- out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 Roadway Condition Min. Standard LOS 2018 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume 2024 Roadway Condition 2024 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 44.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 6D E 3,300 (EB) 6D 3,300 (EB) Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Wilson Blvd. to Randall Blvd. 6D E 3,300 (EB) 6D 3,300 (EB) Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Randall Blvd. to Project 6D E 3,300 (EB) 6D 3,300 (EB) Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Project to Oil Well Rd. 6D E 3,300 (EB) 6D 3,300 (EB) Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 46.0 North of Oil Well Rd. 2U D 900 (EB) 2U 900 (EB) Wilson Blvd. 118.0 South of Immokalee Rd. 2U D 900 (SB) 2U 900 (SB) Randall Blvd. 132.0 Immokalee Rd. to 8th St NE 2U D 900 (EB) 4D 2,000 (EB) Randall Blvd. 132.0 8th St NE to Everglades Blvd. 2U D 900 (EB) 2U 900 (EB) Oil Well Rd 119.0 East of Immokalee Rd. 4D D 2,000 (EB) 4D 2,000 (EB) Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D = 4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 12 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which are evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future horizon (2024). The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Table 6 illustrates the LOS traffic impacts of the project to the area roadway network. Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2024 Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2024 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2024 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project** % Vol Capacity Impact by Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 44.0 Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. 3,300 (EB) EB – 49 2,668 1.5% No No Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Wilson Blvd. to Randall Blvd. 3,300 (EB) EB – 98 2,507 3.0% No No Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Randall Blvd. to Project 3,300 (EB) EB – 164 2,573 5.0% No No Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 45.0 Project to Oil Well Rd. 3,300 (EB) EB – 141 2,550 4.3% No No Immokalee Rd (CR 846) 46.0 North of Oil Well Rd. 900 (EB) EB – 53 631 5.9% No No Wilson Blvd. 118.0 South of Immokalee Rd. 900 (SB) EB – 53 436 5.9% No No Randall Blvd. 132.0 Immokalee Rd. to 8th St NE 2,000 (EB) EB – 53 977 2.7% No No Randall Blvd. 132.0 8th St NE to Everglades Blvd. 900 (EB) EB – 35 959 3.9% Yes Yes Oil Well Rd. 119.0 East of Immokalee Rd. 2,000 (EB) EB – 89 1,226 4.5% No No Note(s): *Refer to Table 3 from this report. **2024 Projected Volume = 2024 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Based on the information illustrated in Table 6, the following roadway segments are significantly impacted from a traffic perspective: Immokalee Road from Wilson Boulevard to 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 13 east of Oil Well Road (Collier County Link ID #45.0 and ID #46.0), Wilson Boulevard from Immokalee Road to Golden Gate Boulevard (Link ID #118.0), Randall Boulevard from Immokalee Road to Everglades Boulevard (Link ID #132.0) and Oil Well Road from Immokalee Road to Everglades Boulevard (Link ID #119.0). Based on the data contained within the 2018 AUIR, the Randall Boulevard segment from 8th Street NE to Everglades Boulevard (Link ID #132.0) is shown to operate with a LOS deficiency under 2024 under background conditions. The Randall Boulevard segment is being evaluated through the Randall Boulevard Corridor Study (underway) and Immokalee Road and Randall Boulevard intersection improvement PD&E (underway). As illustrated in Table 6, all other analyzed roadway links are projected to operate within Collier County’s adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2024 future build-out conditions. Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) states that “the County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting 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, 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 Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved.” The Developer proposes to provide a transportation mitigation plan in order to stay consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Collier County’s GMP. The Developer may be required to assist the County with potential capacity/operational improvements that would provide sufficient capacity on the Randall Boulevard analyzed segment. It is noted that the Immokalee Road analyzed segments are Collier County designated hurricane evacuation routes as depicted in Collier County Transportation Element – Map TR - 7. Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Connection to subject project is expected to consist of a full movement access drive onto Immokalee Road (CR 846) at its intersection with Orange Tree Boulevard, which is currently a signalized intersection. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 14 Immokalee Road (CR 846) is a 6-lane urban divided arterial under Collier County jurisdiction, and has a posted legal speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of the project. This is currently a curb and gutter facility. As depicted in the Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards (“MUMS”) for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets and Highways (commonly known as the “Florida Greenbook”), Table 3-15, curb and gutter is not to be used on facilities with design speed greater than 45 mph. As such, a design speed of 45 mph is considered for the purposes of this report. Based on FDOT Standard Plans Index 711-001 (sheet 11 of 13), for a design speed of 45 mph – urban conditions – the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Project access is evaluated for turn lane warrants based on Collier County Right-of-way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways – 40 vph for right-turn lane/20 vph for left-turn lane; and (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right turn lanes shall always be provided; and (c) when new median openings are permitted, they shall always include left turn lanes. A dedicated westbound right-turn lane and a dedicated eastbound left-turn lane are warranted as the project meets the multi-lane criterion. Currently, there is an existing +/-340 foot eastbound left-turn lane servicing this intersection. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of zoning application or site development permitting/platting to determine turn lane requirements, as more accurate parameters become available. Improvement Analysis Based on the data contained within the 2018 AUIR, the Randall Boulevard segment from 8th Street NE to Everglades Boulevard (Link ID #132.0) is shown to operate with a capacity and LOS deficiency under 2024 background conditions. All other roadway network facilities have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed new trips for the amended project within the 5-year planning period. Based on the traffic impact analysis results, the proposed project is a significant traffic generator for the roadway network at this location. The significance criterion is not met for Immokalee Road segment located west of Wilson Boulevard. The Developer proposes to provide a transportation mitigation plan in order to stay consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Collier County’s GMP. The Developer may be required to assist the County with potential capacity/operational improvements that would provide sufficient capacity on Randall Boulevard analyzed segment. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 15 Consistent with the site access turn lane analysis results, site related turn lane improvements are warranted to accommodate traffic at build-out conditions. Per Collier County Right-of-way (ROW) Handbook Guidelines, if existing ROW is utilized for site related turn lane improvements, compensating ROW must be provided. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points will be performed at the time of zoning application or site development permitting/platting to determine turn lane requirements, as more accurate parameters will be made available. The development shall be limited to a maximum of 908 two-way unadjusted PM peak hour trips at project buildout conditions. The estimated net new increase in external trips by the proposed amendment at build out conditions is 681 PM peak hour two-way trip ends. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 16 Appendix A: Project Parcel Aerial 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 17 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 18 Appendix B: Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th Edition 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 19 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 20 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 21 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 22 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 23 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 24 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 25 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 26 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 27 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 28 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road – Estates Commercial Subdistrict – GMPA – TIS – September 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 29 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict (PL20160000221) Exhibit V.F1 Flood Zone May 13, 2019 Page 1 of 1 IR15PUD Exhibit VF1-rev2.docx Subject Property – Flood Zones X500, AH (15) and X 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) SUBJECT PROPERTY GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 N.T.S. SUBJECT PROPERTY 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 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 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 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 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 37698440003 3769848000537698360002 Wilson BLVD NI m m o k a l e e R D 4th ST NE2nd ST NE24th AVE NE 33rd AVE NE Orange Grove TRLRan dall B LV D 8th ST NEOi l W e l l R D G r o v e D R 25th AVE NE Valencia DRMystic River DRINLET COVE LN WSu mme r fi e l d DRWaterloo CTMeyer DR A m b e rw o o d L N B L O S S O M C T Rusty Fig CTR u b y R e d D R I n l e t C o v e L N E CITRUS KEY LIME CTGr o ve D R 24th AVE NE 25th AVE NE Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, U SDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN,IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community ´ Proposed Immokalee Road 15-acre CPUDLocation Map 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 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 6, 2020 RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Petition PL20160000221/CP-2018-4, Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict Dear Sir or Madam: A Neighborhood Information Meeting hosted by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., representing BCHD Partners I LLC (Applicant) will be held on Monday, February 24, 2020, 5:30 pm at Station #71, Golden Gate Estates, 100 13th St SW, Naples, FL 34117. BCHD Partners I LLC has submitted a formal application to Collier County, seeking approval of a Growth Management Plan (GMP) Amendment. The GMP amendment proposes to create a new commercial sub-district under the Golden Gate Area Master Plan to allow up to 200,000 square feet of gross floor area for commercial land uses in the subdistrict. Allowable uses shall be limited to those permitted by right and by conditional uses in the C-4, Commercial General zoning district, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. The subject property (Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict) is comprised of approximately 20± acres, located on the west side of Immokalee Road approximately one-half mile north of Randall Boulevard in Section 22, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed to Sharon Umpenhour at Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134, sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. Project Location Map 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 1NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 LEGAL1 LEGAL2 LEGAL3 LEGAL4 FOLIOAFFLECK, JESSICA T 2916 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 2A BLK D LOT 978698004408ALBY, JAMES B 2274 GROVE DRNAPLES, FL 34120---7496 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 878698000185ALTER, JULIANNE M 2897 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---7569 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 378698109646ALVAREZ, MARIANO 701 MEYER DRNAPLES, FL 34120---0 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 1164697501107ARGUELLO, CLAUDIO & MARIA 2885 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---7569 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 678698109701AULT, DANIEL G & DEBORAH D 3060 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1448 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 764697500700AVALLONE, ENRICO ADINA-VIVANNE AVALLONE MARY ANN AVALLONE 2941 4TH ST NE NAPLES, FL 34120---1338 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 150FT OF TR 10437697440004AYALA, BEATRIZ M 3111 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7516 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1153360000328B R & M A HAYES REV TRUST 1989 WHITE MOUND RDSHERMAN, TX 75090---5680 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 150FT OF TR 10637697600006BANTA, SUSAN 3090 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1448 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 1064697501000BARREIRO, FRANK D & MICHELLE L 751 CHERRY BLOSSOM CTNAPLES, FL 34120---1493 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1053360000302BCHD PARTNERS I LLC % DAVID GENSON 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWYNAPLES, FL 34105---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 118 OR 1106 PG 403, LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W37698440003BCHD PARTNERS I LLC % DAVID GENSON 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWYNAPLES, FL 34105---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 119, LESS THE EASTERLY 49 FT FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3111 PG 0500 37698480005BCHD PARTNERS I LLC 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWY ATTN: DAVIS GENSONNAPLES, FL 34105---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 120 LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3111 PG 485.37698520004BCHD PARTNERS I LLC % DAVID GENSON 2600 GOLDEN GATE PKWYNAPLES, FL 34105---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 180FT OF TR 116 OR 294 PG 6237698360002BITTING, ANDREW V & GLADYS J 741 CHERRY BLOSSOM CTNAPLES, FL 34120---1493 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 953360000289BOLLT TR, ROBERTO % ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 164697500108BOLLT TR, ROBERTO % ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 ORANGE TREE UNIT THREE CITRUS GREENS SECTION, PH 1-A PARCEL 1 LESS N 245FT OF W 380 FT LESS W 25FT OR 1524 PG 2370 64700625501BOLLT TR, ROBERTO % ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 ORANGE TREE UNIT THREE CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH, 1-A THAT PT OF PARCEL 2 DESC AS THE W 25FT (R/W PER PLAT) 64700628553BOLLT TR, ROBERTO % ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A TRACT A78698000020BOLLT TR, ROBERTO % ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 178698000046BOLLT TR, ROBERTO % ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 3A TRACT C78698100069BOLLT TR, ROBERTO % ORANGETREE ASSOCIATES PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 22,23,24,25,&26 48 27 ALL, LESS GOLDEN GATE ESTS UNITS 22 24 & 25, LESS ORANGETREE U 1 THRU 4, LESS CITRUS GREENS SEC 00210440007BRAUNSTEIN, SCOTT A & BRENDA L 2927 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 1078698000826BUONGIORNO, RENEE 2860 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1832 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 8437696280003BUSHONG, JUSTIN 3071 ORANGE GROVE TRAILNAPLES, FL 34120---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1553360000409CANDELARIA JR, ORESTES 2275 GROVE DRNAPLES, FL 34120---7497 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK C LOT 378698000444CAPRIROLO, ALFREDO CLAUDIA A GONZALEZ 2920 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 878698000622CASSARO LIVING TRUST 3080 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 964697500904CHARTON, LINA RIOS 740 CHERRY BLOSSOM CTNAPLES, FL 34120---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 353360000166CHAZULLE, M MARGARITA 731 CHERRY BLOSSOM CTNAPLES, FL 34120---1493 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 853360000263CITRUS GREENS AT ORANGETREE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC1130 GROVE DRNAPLES, FL 34120---1425 LAKE LUCERNE TRACT A (DE) LESS THAT PART FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3111 PG 48553360000108COGSWELL, RICKY L & STELLA 2790 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1328 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 8637696400003COGSWELL, RICKY L & STELLA 2790 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1328 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 180FT OF TR 8637696360004COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEME3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101NAPLES, FL 34112---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TRACT A, LESS THAT PORTION OF TRACT "A" AS DESC IN OR 3080 PG 723, AS AMENDED IN OR 4079 37690040003COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEME3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101NAPLES, FL 34112---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 THAT PORTION OF TRACT "A" AS DESC IN OR 3080 PG 723, AS CORRECTED IN OR 4079 PG 135837690040100CROUSE, CYNTHIA JO 7503 BERKSHIRE PINES DRNAPLES, FL 34104---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 253360000140CURTISS INTERNATIONAL INC 2905 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 178698109604D'ANDREA, JAMES FRANCIS 10131 SW 49TH COURTCOOPER CITY, FL 33328---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 180FT OF TR 84 OR 1494 PG 82337696240001DANIEL, EDITH 1401 CROYDEN RDBRIDGEWATER, NJ 08807---1310 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 1/2 OF TR 8537696340008DARIS, ISMENE 2923 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 1178698000842DEL CARMEN FRIAR, MARIA RONALD ARTHUR FRIAR 2894 INLET COVE LANE WNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 5678698110703DOMONTE, EDWARD & LAURA A 3171 VALENCIA DRNAPLES, FL 34120---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 153360000124DONALD E WEIGAND SR TRUST 3150 VALENCIA DRNAPLES, FL 34120---1400 ORANGE TREE UNIT THREE CITRUS GREENS SECTION, PH 1-A LOT 1764700630305DUARTE, ADIELA & HERNANDO 2965 ORANGE GROVE TRAILNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 178698000648DUNNEBACKE, CYNTHIA CHRISTINE DAVID MICHAEL DUNNEBACKE JRJORDAN FRANCIS DUNNEBACKE 3061 4TH ST NE NAPLES, FL 34120---1307 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 10737697720009DUTTON, REVA A 2282 GROVE DRNAPLES, FL 34120---7496 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 678698000143EDEN, KARINA KARINA MANCUSCO 2932 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7494 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 578698000567EL YAMANI, LISA 2939 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 778698000761ENT, GERALD B & BETTY LOU 2936 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7494 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 478698000541ESTRADA, FABIAN & VANESSA 2960 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 578698000127ESTRADA, RAUL & LISA A 2911 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 2A BLK E LOT 1478698004929EVANS III, CLARK BRITTANY LENGACHER 2904 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 5878698110745EVANS, DANIEL KEITH KARA CHRISTINE KIDDER 3490 5TH AVE SWNAPLES, FL 34117---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 1/2 OF TR 112 OR 2050 PG 70637698020009EVANS, DENNIS R 2944 ORANGE GROVE TRAILNAPLES, FL 34120---7494 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 278698000509FERNANDEZ, NESTOR & DOROTHY L 2948 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 178698000486FESTA, DAVID R DENTON, SALENA K 3010 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1332 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 180FT OF TR 8137696000005FRAZIER, ALAN W & SHARON S 2910 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---4310 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 180FT OF TR 8337696160000GANDINI, ROSE ANN T 2886 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 5578698110680GARCIA, FERNANDO & SUSANA R 2915 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 2A BKL E LOT 1378698004903GATT, JEFFREY A & MONICA L 2841 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1336 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 150FT OF 102 OR 1689 PG 103637697360003GIFFORD, BRUCE A 1791 GORDON RIVER LNNAPLES, FL 34104---5296 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 180FT OF TR 111 OR 1902 PG 112437697960005HAYDEN, JAMES M & MARY JANE 2821 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 180FT OF TR 102 AND THE N 180 FT OF TR 10137697320001HEBBLE, DAVID T 3766 E MONON RDMONTICELLO, IN 47960---7135 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 2A BLK F LOT 178698004945HEINDL, PHARES M 156 LELAND WAYMARCO ISLAND, FL 34145---4687 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 180FT OF TR 106 OR 1561 PG 156137697640008HEMMIT, EDWARD RAY & NATALIE 2966 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 478698000101HENRY S PICKANDS JR REV TRUST 6925 CARLISLE CTNAPLES, FL 34109---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 116 OR 1391 PG 194537698320000HERRERA, BERTO & LUCIA 4501 SW 104TH CTMIAMI, FL 33165---5654 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 165 FT OF TR 121 LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3111 PG 485. 37698560006HERRERA, LAZARO A & ELIZABETH 9661 SW 102ND AVENUE RDMIAMI, FL 33176---2734 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 165 FT OF TR 121 LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3111 PG 485. 37698580002HOZA, CHRISTIAN CRISTA M MACIAS 3061 ORANGE GROVE TRAILNAPLES, FL 34120---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1653360000425HUGHES, MAUREEN 721 CHERRY BLOSSOM CTNAPLES, FL 34120---1493 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 753360000247ISABEL DIAZ-GELABERT R/L TRUST 407 CHIQUITANORTH PORT, FL 34287---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 105FT OF TR 11437698160008ISON, CHELSEA TOOD G BENDER II 2964 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 8237696080009JACQUELINE B FORBES REV TRUST 2940 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7494 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 378698000525JONES, MARK STEVEN 2975 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 180FT OF TR 10537697560007JONES, PAULA & STEPHEN 22 HIAWATHA DRGREENVILLE, SC 29615---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 678698000583JP MORGAN CHASE BK N A TR RICHARD D BREWER REST TRUSTUTD 6/28/93 2871 4TH ST NE NAPLES, FL 34120---1336 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 103 AND THE S 180FT TR 10437697400002KALB, JUAN & ANTJE APARTADO AEREO 500MEDELLIN COLOMBIA GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 117 OR 601 PG 104037698400001KINNEY, STEVEN J 149 PINEHURST CIRNAPLES, FL 34113---8330 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 264697500205KONANDREAS LIVING TRUST 34 KONANDREAS DRSTAMFORD, CT 06903---2100 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 122 LESS PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3100 PG 258537698600005KONANDREAS, LUKAS & GEORGIA 34 KONANDREAS DRSTAMFORD, CT 06903---2100 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 124 LESS PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3100 PG 258537698680009KUOMAN, ALFONSO ROSA E ANGULO DE KUOMAN 2957 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 378698000680KUOMAN, RICHARD W & ANA MARIA 2953 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 478698000703KUOMAN, THAIS 2893 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 478698109662LECOMPTE, JENIFER & GERALD 2901 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34114---7917 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 278698109620LITKA, WARREN & PHYLLIS 2940 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---4310 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 150FT OF TR 8337696200009LUKASZEWICZ, ADAM BEATA SUICK 2980 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7449 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 278698000062LUSSIER, RONALD A & GRETCHEN S 3040 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1448 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 564697500506MARRETTA, KEVIN A & DEEANN R 2283 GROVE DRNAPLES, FL 34120---7497 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK C LOT 1, LESS THAT PORTION DESC IN 2777 PG 254378698000402MARTINEZ, JOSEPH SHIRLEY K MENDEZ URIBE 2935 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 878698000787MARTINEZ, LUISA M 3050 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 664697500603MASI, ROBERT A & MELINDA A 3101 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7516 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1253360000344MAXWELL, MICHAEL K & PATRICIA 3081 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1494 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1453360000386MC CLOSKEY JR, JOHN E & ROSE G 730 CHERRY BLOSSOM CTNAPLES, FL 34120---1493 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 453360000182MCKISSICK JR, KENNETH 2982 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---439 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 180FT OF TR 8237696120008MENDOLA, GERALD & JOANNE E 2931 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 978698000800MEUNIER, ANDREW C 3041 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1494 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1853360000467MOON, GERALD LEE 2950 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 75FT OF N 180FT OF TR 11437698200007MOYA, ALONZO & GRACIELA 3010 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1863 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 180FT OF TR 11337698080007MOYE, BRIAN C & MICHELLE L 2949 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 578698000729MUNOZ, EMILIO A DELVIS RIVERO MAYO 2279 GROVE DRNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK C LOT 2, AND THAT PORTION OF LOT 1 DESC IN OR 2777 PG 2543 78698000428MYB PROPERTIES LLC 8356 LAUREL LAKES BLVDNAPLES, FL 34119---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 114 OR 1832 PG 91437698120006NAFDOF 22 LLC 2316 PINE RIDGE RD #453NAPLES, FL 34109---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N1/2 OF TR 11537698240009NAGY, STEPHEN L 2943 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 678698000745NELSON, ARTHUR W & KAREN S 2961 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7450 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 278698000664O GRADY, JAMES T & PATRICIA A 3030 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1448 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 464697500409ORTEGA JR, ERNESTO PROVIDENCE DE AZA 3051 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1753360000441OSPINA, JORGE IVAN 2898 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---7538 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 5778698110729Notice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.Petition: PL20160000221 | Buffer: 1000' | Date: 1/16/2020 | Site Location: 37698520004, 37698360002, 37698480005, 37698440003Copy of POList_1000.xls9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 292Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 2PELLETIER, JOHN M & JENNIFER L 2961 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1338 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 105 OR 1954 PG 99937697520005PEREZ, ISIDORA 3011 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1494 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 2153360000522PEREZ, MARIA C & CARLOS A 3021 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 2053360000506PROENZA TR, WALFRIDO S WALFRIDO S PROENZA TRUST UTFD 08/07/03 515 LOGAN BLVD S NAPLES, FL 34119---2805 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 10037697200008PROGRESS RES BORROWER 2 LLC PO BOX 4090SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85261---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1953360000483RAKES, DARRIN & MARIA 2820 2ND ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1832 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 1/2 OF TR 8537696320002RAMOS JR, ABEL & TAMMY E 2881 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 778698109727REID, GARY 3070 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1448 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 864697500807RESTREPO, LUIS 2889 INLET COVE LN WNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A LOT 578698109688RISING, BLAKE 2970 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---7449 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 378698000088RIVERA, ERNESTO & CARMELINA 3160 VALENCIA DRNAPLES, FL 34120---1400 ORANGE TREE UNIT THREE CITRUS GREENS SECTION, PH 1-A LOT 16 OR 1962 PG 23864700630253ROBERTO BOLLT TR PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 2A TRACT D78698004084ROBERTO BOLLT TR PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 2A TRACT E78698004107ROBERTO BOLLT TR PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 2A TRACT A78698004026RUFFOLO, FRANK & JEANNIE F 3240 S PRINCETON AVECHICAGO, IL 60616---3614 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 TR 123 LESS PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 3100 PG 258537698640007SHERAN, AIXA J 371 BURNT PINE DRNAPLES, FL 34119---9775 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 653360000221SIMPSON, JAMES D & CARLA K 720 CHERRY BLOSSOM CTNAPLES, FL 34120---0 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 553360000205SLETTEN, PAUL A & NICOLE J 3020 ORANGE GROVE TRAILNAPLES, FL 34120---0 ORANGE TREE UNIT TWO CITRUS GREENS SECTION PH 4-A LOT 364697500302SMITH, ELTON G & DOLORES J 2278 GROVE DRNAPLES, FL 34120---7496 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK A LOT 778698000169STEFAAN, BULTINCK REV TRUST % JOHN BRUGGER JR P O BOX 11452NAPLES, FL 34101---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 1/2 OF TR 11237698000003SZCZEPKOWSKI, JENNIFER L L 3030 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1863 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 150FT OF TR 11337698040005THEMEL, JOHN W 2910 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---0 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S1/2 OF TR 115 OR 1673 PG 112837698280001THOMAS, DAVID W 5406 BLOOMINGTON RDSTOUFFVILLE L4A 7X3 CANADA GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 N 180FT OF TR 9937697160009UCCI, MICHAEL G 2924 ORANGE GROVE TRAILNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK D LOT 778698000606VALENCIA LAKES AT ORANGETREE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC% VISION ASSOC MTG 11691 GATEWAY BLVD # 203 FT MYERS, FL 33913---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A TRACT A78698109523VALENCIA LAKES AT ORANGETREE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC% VISION ASSOC MTG 11691 GATEWAY BLVD # 203 FT MYERS, FL 33913---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A TRACT B78698109549VALENCIA LAKES AT ORANGETREE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC% VISION ASSOC MTG 11691 GATEWAY BLVD # 203 FT MYERS, FL 33913---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 7-A TRACT C78698109565WALLACE SR, MARK W & JOANNE M 3091 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---1494 LAKE LUCERNE LOT 1353360000360WALLACE, JULIE 2919 ORANGE GROVE TRLNAPLES, FL 34120---0 VALENCIA LAKES PHASE 1-A BLK E LOT 1278698000868WHEELER, JOHN H & THELMA A 2761 4TH ST NENAPLES, FL 34120---1850 GOLDEN GATE EST UNIT 22 S 150FT OF TR 101 OR 1703 PG 196437697240000ORANGE TREE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION, INC. PO BOX 855BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34133GOLDEN GATE ESTATES AREA CIVIC ASSOCIATION PO BOX 990596NAPLES, FL 34116Copy of POList_1000.xls9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 293Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 2/7/2020 1/1 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Petition PL20160000221Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict February 24, 2020 Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates •BCHD Partners I, LLC –Applicant •D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, Professional Planner –Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. •Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PE, Traffic Engineer –Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA •Bruce Layman, Ecologist –Peninsula Engineering •Russ Weyer –Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. 2 Project Team 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Existing Future Land Use:Estates Designation,Mixed Use District, Residential Estates Subdistrict Proposed Future Land Use:Estates Designation,Commercial District,Immokalee Road –Estates Commercial Subdistrict Current Zoning:E,Estates Project Acreage:20+/-acres Proposed Request:Create new subdistrict to allow commercial land uses 3 Project Information 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates 4 Location Map 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates 8. Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict This Subdistrict is approximately 20±acres in size and is located on the west side of Immokalee Road, north of Randall Boulevard and south of Oil Well Road. The Immokalee Road-Estates Commercial Subdistrict is intended to provide a variety of retail and office land uses. Development within the Subdistrict shall be subject to the following: a.The subdistrict shall be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). b.The rezone Ordinance must include standards for a common architectural theme as well as development standards and buffers to insure compatibility with surrounding properties. c.Allowable uses shall be limited to those permitted by right and by conditional uses in the C-4, Commercial General zoning district, as listed in the Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, as amended. d.Development is limited to a maximum intensity of 200,000 square feet of gross floor area. 5 Proposed Subdistrict Language 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates 6 Conclusion Documents and information can be found online: •Gradyminor.com/Planning •Collier County GMD Public Portal: cvportal.colliergov.net/cityviewweb Next Steps •Hearing sign(s) posted on property advertising Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and Board of County Commissioner (BCC) hearing dates. •Transmittal Hearings: CCPC April 2, 2020, 9AM BCC May 12, 2020, 9AM •Adoption hearings:TBD 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 1 of 20 Wayne Arnold: Okay. Well, good evening everybody. It's 5:30 and we're here for a Neighborhood Information Meeting for, uh, uh, land use petition. It's called the Immokalee Road Estate. It's a commercial subdistrict. I'm Wayne Arnold and I'm a professional planner with Grady Minors & Associates. Sharon Umpenhour is sitting back here. She's recording the meeting, which we're required to do by county, um, rules. Uh. With us tonight is Corby Schmidt. He's the principal planner with Collier County government. It's our meeting, but he's the staff representative here that's handling the project and he's happy to try to answer questions if you have some that are staff or process oriented. Uh. Austin Howell is standing over on the side. He's with Barron Collier Companies, the applicant, Bruce Layman, is with Peninsula Engineering and he's the ecologist working on the – the project. And this is Norm Trebilcock who's the traffic engineer with Trebilcock Planning Solutions. Norm Trebilcock: Oh. I don't know about that. [laughs] Wayne Arnold: We're here to give you a brief presentation of – of what we're doing. And we're modifying the Golden Gate Master Plan to make provisions for this 20-acre property to become eligible for commercial development. We're not rezoning the property through this action, but we're trying to re-designate on the land use plan for this property to have, uh, commercial uses of general commercial intensity. It's called C-4 Commercial through Collier County's, uh, land use code. But um… So, right now it's designated estates, which means it can have either a certain limited number of conditional type uses, whether that would be churches, childcare, schools, et cetera, or it could be residential. We're proposing to change that to create this commercial subdistrict so we can qualify to come through a rezoning process to establish, uh, commercial zoning and have a true masterplan. The property… Most of you obviously got notice if you're one of the more immediate neighbors. It's, uh, highlighted here. It's 20 acres of assemblage. Most of it's on Immokalee Road. It's right at Orange Tree Signal. That's the easiest, uh, location for me. It's center of the site. This is a blow up on the right side just showing properties. It's completely vegetated today and there's no other structure on it. So, our intent is to establish a commercial node at that location. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 2 of 20 The property to the south, we call it the Randall Curve Property. It is owned by Collier County government and then that's under contract by, uh, another lot – another developer who is looking at doing mixed use commercial and residential on that track. And that's circulating through the process of applications filed for that property. Um. This is what we're actually – this is the – the cuts of our application. This is the language that's pending today. It's subject to future modification as the county staff, uh, continues to modify this. But it essentially says, "This is the estate's, uh, commercial subdistrict. Uh. We're going to rezone it to a plan development in the future. Um. We're going to create standards for architectural theme and other development standards to ensure compatibility with our neighbors. Uh. We're allowed uses in the future that are by right and conditional uses of the C-4 commercial zoning district." Which it's probably one of the largest commercial zoning districts. It allows everything from light offices up through restaurants and… Enrico Avallone: Concrete plans? Wayne Arnold: No concrete plans. And then, we're limiting to a 200,000 sq. ft of gross floor area. And that's kind of the standard in Collier County that is asked for. 10,000 sq. ft per acre, which gets us to the 200,000 sq. ft number that we're proposing. And again, this action that we're going through, from the county's perspective, it does not allow us to have these uses by right. We still would have to go back through a separate zoning process. We'll have to do another Neighborhood Informational Meeting for that process. Show you a master plan of development. And that's the point at which, you know, there might be certain conditions of d – of approval that staff would be looking for. And those could be everything, you know, from lighting standards to access location and things of that nature that we deal with. Um. All of this information can be found on our website, gradyminor.com, under our planning tab. They're also available through the colliergov.net site through a proj – through a portal they call CityView. And our next steps will be we have tentative hearing dates set up. There's – the process we're in, it's confusing, but it's – it's required under the statute to have a transmittal hearing for a comp plan amendment. So, the county commission and the planning commission will hold transmittal hearings. At which case they will decide whether to transmit the 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 3 of 20 application to the State Department of, uh, Economic Opportunity. The state then gets three days to review these, come back with any comments. And mostly those are related to any state agency related things. Um. Typically they've not been commenting on projects of this scale, but that's a part of the process statutorily they're allowed to do that. And then, it would come back and then we'd go through what is considered an adoption process. And then, that would go back again through the planning commission and the board of county commissioners. And in this case, the board has the final decision-making authority on it, and we need to get four out of five votes at the county commission to adopt a land use change as we're proposing tonight. So, that's kind of in a nutshell what we're proposing to do. And I'm sure you all have some questions. We're here to try to answer those. Alan Frazier: What do – what do you want to put on there that you can't – that you're not zoned for now? Wayne Arnold: Well, right now we're zoned for single family dwelling units and we're zoned for – we could come through the process for condition use for certain things like a church, or a school, or et cetera. It does not allow any conventional commercial that we're proposing to do. Um. And we did a marketing study that's, um – Alan Frazier: What – what are you proposing to do? Wayne Arnold: Well, we don't have any definitive plans yet. Austin and his group are looking at that. They're out there talking to different, um, prospective commercial users. There's a lot of interest in this corridor because 1) there's a lot of graphic on Immokalee road. So there's a lot of opportunity to capture trips that are on the road, so people don't have to go all the way back into town for goods and services. And, you know, they're looking around. There's, uh, the public shopping center that's the most recent addition to the commercial out here. It's very successful. There are other grocery stores who are looking to be in this corridor, but the process we're going through. I mean, we started this process in 2016, so this isn't a quick process. So, the process of getting through this takes anywhere from a year to sometimes two years or more. This one we kind of put it on hold trying to determine what was going on with the county property to the south of us. Any questions? 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 4 of 20 Phyllis Litka: So, what's going in across from, um, the Orange Tree. The public's already – they were supposed to do the sanctuary and now they're not doing that. What's going in there now? Wayne Arnold: Well, the county's, um, under contract with, uh, a local gentleman who is going to be going through the process to – the same land use change process, as well as a rezoning for this property that will be tied to another property down at Wilson and Golden Gate. And it's not, obviously, part of this application, but the idea is to have more commercial and some residential in that location. Um. And that's yet to be determined how much of that. But again, you have – in that case, the reason this is seen as good potential for commercial is 1) There's a demand for commercial in this area. 2) It has really good access because it has signals, uh, at Orange Tree and again one at, uh, Randall. So, that provides really good signalized access for having that type of intensity at this location that isn't offered in a lot of other locations on Immokalee Road. And again, in talking to the Civic Association and others, you know, the idea was to not have commercial penetrate Golden Gate Estates et cetera, but to keep it on the perimeter. So, if you can keep it on Immokalee Road, you don't have to have those smaller intrusions of commercial into the interior. Even though, you know, the estate shopping center, which was approved several years ago and has not been built, that was viewed as a good example of, "Hey, its inside the – the center of the universe for Golden Gate Estates." But the residents really think the – prefer some of that commercial to be up on Immokalee Road rather than have so much commercial down at Wilson and Golden Gate. So, that's – that's why we're here. And Austin, I don't know if you want to add anything else to the discussion. Austin Howell: Not really. I think you got it all. Phyllis Litka: What – what type of commercial are they talking? Like a big box store? I mean, something that's 10 – 20,000 sq. ft. Wayne Arnold: Well, we're asking for 200,000 sq. ft total as part of this 20 acres. And that obviously is, you know, potentially a big box store. You know, just my experience is that the big box stores are not in an expansion mode, so I don't know that we're going to deliver one. The C-4 zoning would allow one, but, um, you know… 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 5 of 20 But it also allows the gambit of things that we've heard people say they want, restaurants, hardware store - whether it's a big box hardware store or, you know, something more local. Those are permitted type uses. Office buildings, medical office. All those things are things that we've heard that residents want in this part of our community. Yes, sir? Enrico Avallone: What is your need for a little poke that sticks out? Wayne Arnold: That was – honestly, I don't know the history of it, but it was just part of the assemblage that was available for the vacant land – Enrico Avallone: Yeah. Wayne Arnold: – vicinity. Enrico Avallone: Because I can tell you that the people of the street are not gonna wanna see a road put through there or anything like that. Wayne Arnold: And we're not at that stage yet to determine all of our access. I think we know that we're intending to use the signal access on Immokalee Road. I don't know what the county's position would be for us to even try to use 4th as an access point. Enrico Avallone: Yeah, because it's right across the street from me and I don't want to see that. I'd rather see you cut that off and sell it to one of the people on the street and just use the rest of it for a big box store or whatever. Wayne Arnold: Sure. Enrico Avallone: Because, I mean, yes. We do need amenities out here, but we do not need a "Oh, let's get, you know, the big trucks to –" Wayne Arnold: Sure. Enrico Avallone: "– supply the thing –" Wayne Arnold: Understood. Enrico Avallone: "– in through the back yards of everybody who lives on that street." Wayne Arnold: That's understood and that's something that we're clearly – 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 6 of 20 Enrico Avallone: The road is already crumbling in areas – Wayne Arnold: Hmm. Enrico Avallone: – because it's not taken care of well enough. Wayne Arnold: Okay. Enrico Avallone: And, uh, you know, having big trucks, you know, big raise and what not barreling down my road where we've got kids and what not. Wayne Arnold: Sure. Enrico Avallone: Playing, you know, you don't want to see it tearing up the street even more. Wayne Arnold: Oh, of course not. Enrico Avallone: So. Wayne Arnold: And then something – like I said, this stage of the process is really to allow us to come through a zoning process. And at that point we'll have a plan that truly depicts our access locations. We'll work with the neighbors again. As for the neighbors, we can – I can't promise you today that access is prohibited there. There may be a reason that the county wants us to do that. Which, in that case, we'll be dealing with that and you. But I'm not – I'm not saying we will, but I'm just saying that that is part of the process that we'll have to evaluate as we move ahead. But I fully understand that, you know, there are other utility functions that we can utilize that. We have open space requirements. We need water management areas. We have native vegetation preservation requirements. Enrico Avallone: And also, if you just preserve, leave it as is, that's… Wayne Arnold: I can't promise you tonight that that's what it will be, but I mean, those are uses that are – have utility to us beyond just an access point. Yes, sir. Richard Brewer: A map that was on your website, you've got a 300-foot radius that goes all the way around it. what exactly is that? What's that for? Wayne Arnold: I'm not sure which exhibit you're looking at. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 7 of 20 Richard Brewer: On the website. [shuffles papers] Wayne Arnold: That I think was just an offset that Sharon did to show surrounding land uses. This is part of their county's application process so we can identify the uses that are around the site. But the notice requirements are larger than 300 feet, so every way within – is it 1,000 feet – Sharon Umpenhour: 1,000. Wayne Arnold: – for this part of the community? Yeah. Phyllis Litka: So, what you are saying is you're off of 4th, I take it? Enrico Avallone: I – if you look at that, uh – can I step on the floor? Wayne Arnold: Of course. Wayne Arnold: Or you can use my pointer if you want. Enrico Avallone: Yeah, man. Wayne Arnold: It's little button is a red pointer. Enrico Avallone: I am – okay. So, this is my house. This is my neighbor Jonathan. Just walked in the building. I am right here. I have a neighbor who owns all of this. Richard Brewer: Which is me. Wayne Arnold: Yeah. [laughs] Enrico Avallone: All of that. So, I mean, we are right all along here, and we don't want to see trucks – big trucks coming in and out of here as is. It's already, you know – the road is not the greatest. Wayne Arnold: Mm-hmm. Enrico Avallone: And, uh – Wayne Arnold: Sure. No, understood. And like I said, this – this really is a – Enrico Avallone: If that stays woods, then, you know, that's – that – that's – for me, my biggest concern is that little click of land. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 8 of 20 Wayne Arnold: Understood. Yeah. We'll see – Enrico Avallone: What you put over there, if you can get a Home Depot in there or something like that, I'm all for that. Wayne Arnold: I think Austin would love to have that, too. [laughs] I just know we're not there yet. Enrico Avallone: Yeah, I know we're not there yet. But I mean, it's like I said. My concern is that poke of land. Wayne Arnold: Understood. And we'll be obviously communicating with you through the next step of the process when we come through the zoning process with this. And gentlemen, I know that you all just stepped in. Just gave a brief presentation on the project. Enrico Avallone: This is John who owns just north of the poke. Wayne Arnold: Gotcha. Enrico Avallone: Or I mean up. Up from the poke. Wayne Arnold: Right. Enrico Avallone: Yeah, that is north though. Wayne Arnold: It's technically north. [laughs] I know it's hard to… Enrico Avallone: I can never tell with maps. Wayne Arnold: Any questions? Phyllis Litka: Are they going farther down Immokalee Road with all kinds of rope and commercial? Or this is… Wayne Arnold: Corby, I'm not sure of any other applications that are pending, other than I know the Curve property is, you know, being considered for mix use. But I can't speak to the north. Corby Schmidt: None that I know of that are pending, but in this area, you have an abundance of commercial uses planned or zoned already. Uh. So. Alan Frazier: Isn't there – Corby Schmidt: You would expect – 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 9 of 20 Alan Frazier: – your mall's supposed to be just a little east of that? Corby Schmidt: Say again? Alan Frazier: Is your mall a little east of where this is at? Haven't they approved that? Corby Schmidt: I don't know. Alan Frazier: On Immokalee Road. Corby Schmidt: At – not the mall itself, but the property that it would sit on, that's approved. Wayne Arnold: Yes. Richard Brewer: Briefly when they were talking about that whole area, that Randal Curve property, and then access through your property across Main Street. Wayne Arnold: Correct. Richard Brewer: And is that on your – in the planning? Wayne Arnold: I think that's certainly something we're – we're talking about because I think that there used to be some cooperation and access management. The county's going to encourage us to interconnect with a like property. So, if there's commercial on the property we're talking about tonight and there's commercial approved to the south, I think there's going to be strong encouragement from the county. They have policies that talk about interconnecting sites and obviously getting access to signals and port for both properties. Phyllis Litka: When we sit on our lanai on 2nd, and we have the canal, and then you guys are 4th – Alan Frazier: Mm-hmm. Phyllis Litka: We can hear all kinds of traffic down Immokalee Road. We can hear whatever's happening at the high school, whatever's happening at the fairgrounds, and now if they do these big stores, we're talking 3:00 to 4:00 in the morning. Wayne Arnold: Well, those are some of the things too that as you go through the zoning process, sometimes there are hours of operation standards, uh, delivery hours, standards that we can look at. Lighting 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 10 of 20 standards. Those are pretty common things that get evaluated at this part or not. Alan Frazier: Yeah, but all that I over once it's approved to build. Wayne Arnold: Well, not really. I think the county – those things get codified in an ordinance. And that's a law. So, if you're violating the conditions of your approval, the county has recourse against the property owner. Alan Frazier: Okay. And exactly how much more traffic can we stand? Norm Trebilcock: As far as, uh, north? Wayne Arnold: Why don't you introduce yourself since you haven't spoken yet. Norm Trebilcock: Yep. Wayne Arnold: Just so that recorder knows who's talking. Norm Trebilcock: Yes. So, my name is Norm Trebilcock. I'm a professional engineer and certified planner. And so, I prepare the traffic study for the projects. So, we do have a traffic impact statement that we prepared for it. And so, when we did that, I based the traffic on a 200,000 sq. ft shopping center. That's the maximum amount of use we'd look at. And so, the total like net amount of traffic in terms of peak hour that this site would generate would be 681, uh. I'll just double check that. 681 p.m. peak hour trips from the project. Enrico Avallone: Can you find that? Norm Trebilcock: And then, we distribute those trips around the road network. Yes, under there. Alan Frazier: Is it gonna need more work on it? Norm Trebilcock: Yeah, trips. But that would be – you know, really the idea is that traffic would service the area. You know, so, you know… Hopefully ideally reduce this. Vehicle's mile travel, but that would be the net amount. Wayne Arnold: You have questions? Enrico Avallone: No, I just didn't know what that, uh – that term that you used, uh, to define the p.m.… 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 11 of 20 Norm Trebilcock: …p.m. peak hour? That's the one that is p.m. peak hour. And p.m. peak hour is – is 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. typically. And that's usually looked at as that's the heaviest travel on the road network. Enrico Avallone: And you're saying during that time how many cars you expect to see here? Norm Trebilcock: 681 seeing in peak hour. Enrico Avallone: So, an extra 681. Norm Trebilcock: It'll be two-way traffic coming and going to the site. Enrico Avallone: Right, right. Norm Trebilcock: Yeah. Enrico Avallone: The reason I ask that is because we are already know that this – this whole area here… I mean, like I said, it's going to get developed. We know that, but this area is also a cluster of fun, is the term I'm going to use, of – of traffic. Norm Trebilcock: Mm-hmm. Enrico Avallone: In that area. I mean, you know what I mean. It's – it is a traffic nightmare there. Um. Norm Trebilcock: Yeah, the count – like the Randall Boulevard – Enrico Avallone: Especially the Randall – the Randall boulevard. Norm Trebilcock: – is being studied now, um, for improvements. Enrico Avallone: That needs to be widened – Norm Trebilcock: Yep. Enrico Avallone: – at least two each way, but I would expect even three each way. Immokalee Road is going to be needing – especially if you're going to put all this other stuff here. And we have that other, uh, residential that's going down. Was an oil well or… Phyllis Litka: The Village or whatever. Enrico Avallone: The Village, exactly. All that. The amount of traffic we're getting through here, we need these roads widened even more. I know 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 12 of 20 there was at one point a talk of an overpass over here. Just a – to make things run smoother. Norm Trebilcock: Yeah. Enrico Avallone: Just don't put a roundabout. Don't do a roundabout, because it was a nightmare. Norm Trebilcock: No, part – part of the improvements that the county is planning for improvements on Randall Boulevard at Immokalee like you're talking about. Enrico Avallone: Right. Norm Trebilcock: So, there'd be kind of a short-term fix. What we call that grade, it'd be a turn lane improvements to improve the capacity like you're talking about. And then, the long-term improvement is potentially an overpass like, uh – Enrico Avallone: When can we expect a long-term improvement? Because we did a short-term improvement just recently there when you put three turning lanes from Randall onto Immokalee Road. And I can tell you it's still backed up there. I mean, I have friends who live down there and it's backed up to, uh – what is it? Uh. What's that first major street there? Phyllis Litka: 16th? Enrico Avallone: 16th and even beyond that. What's the – the one that goes, uh, um… Phyllis Litka: Evergreen? Enrico Avallone: Everglades, yeah. Phyllis Litka: Everglades. Enrico Avallone: I mean, it gets backed up to there sometimes. That's miles. Norm Trebilcock: And the planning rising that we looked at, we're looking at a four- lane improvement of Randall itself in that – in that section there. And that's what we call the accurate improvement since the number of turn lanes and – and in the county, they do have a – there is a masterplan. It's actually on the county's webpage. It shows those Randall improvements and then it shows the longer 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 13 of 20 term. The longer term, though, is – is many years off though. It's outside of what we call the planning horizon from this. Which is like five years is what we typically look at. Wayne Arnold: And I think too just, you know, from a traffic standpoint, one of the ideas is to capture some of the trips that are in this part of the area, so everybody isn't so – so, um, necessarily going back to Collier Boulevard or even farther in town. That you can get goods and services here to keep you out here. So, at least, if nothing else, your vehicle trips can be shorter. Norm Trebilcock: That's a good point. Phyllis Litka: Oh, that makes sense. Yeah. Norm Trebilcock: They call it – yeah, vehicle mile travels. So, people don't have to go into town. So, in the sense, it is a trip – a traffic generator, but it is really what we call an attractor. It brings folks in versus a residence, you call it generator. The moment a home is built, you're generating new trips versus this, you're really attracting folks from the area is really what you're hoping to do. To bring them in. So. Wayne Arnold: Any other questions or comments? I know it's – we don't have a lot of details to share with you. That's just kind of the nature of this process. Corby, I don't know if there's anything you want to add before we wrap up. Corby Schmidt: Well, I hear a lot of concerns about traffic and [clears throat] the road system out here. Certainly it won't be like this as time passes. Alan Frazier: What kind of timeframe are we talking about? Corby Schmidt: Well – Phyllis Litka: Because he's nearing 70. All: [laughs] Alan Frazier: I've been here a long time. Corby Schmidt: Well, then your concept of what it's like is more – that's your context. Alan Frazier: Well, it seems to me like every time they build – they do an improvement on the roads, it's already outdated before they get it 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 14 of 20 done. Corby Schmidt: Well… Enrico: It's true. Corby Schmidt: Things move quickly and the way the regulations are written – Alan Frazier: That's the problem. Things are moving too quickly. Corby Schmidt: Well. Alan Frazier: Maybe we ought to slow it down a little bit. Corby Schmidt: We – we live in one of the fastest developing states and the reg – the regulations state – Alan Frazier: Maybe we ought to slow that down a little bit. Corby Schmidt: – something like we have to try to keep up with that. When the impact on the roads are there, the improvements should be sufficient to handle that traffic. Alan Frazier: Should be. Corby Schmidt: Now the impacts may immediately be demanding more. The more stores may be being built, the roads may be impacted more, and so forth. So, again, within five years there'd be maybe more improvements necessitated. So, every five years or so you may see improvements. Heck, I've been here 15 years and yeah. It seems like it's continuous. Out here where you're at one of the highest changing areas in the county, expect it. That's plain and simple. I don't know how you can't. You would want – Alan Frazier: I can – I can understand roadways, but like I don't understand – Corby Schmidt: – along a two-lane road going – Alan Frazier: – 50,000 to 75,000 way. Corby Schmidt: – between point A and point B and you no longer are. You're the target. Alan Frazier: Well, I understand that. It's gotta go up back. But why don't they 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 15 of 20 make preparations before it gets out that way? Phyllis Litka: Well, 28 years ago when we bought the property, the realtor said, "That is going to be the middle of Naples." And we're like [laughs], "Yeah. Oh, okay." Wish we would have bought the block. [laughs] But, I mean, so they knew this 28 years ago. So, I think what Dale is trying to say is, "But all of a sudden it just all happened." Corby Schmidt: Well, one of the things that would encourage you to do it, because much of what Wayne talked about is county plans and county planning. Alan Frazier: Right. Corby Schmidt: We have two levels of road plans and facility planning. Those that we can afford to do and those that we plan to do. And when we can afford them, we will do them even more so. Take a look. Everything is online. Whether it's transportation department or whether it's the conference planning department. Wherever you look, we have a document called "The Annual Update Inventory Report", the AUIR. It's a key document. We update is every year in an attempt to keep up with what's going on. Whether developers and Wayne and his business did nothing, there's still stuff going on all the time. The infrastructure improvements we need to make people moving around and including what goes on to accommodate incoming people day to day. Alan Frazier: Well, just seems to me like it's a slow growth now – it'd be beneficial to everybody. Not just, uh, [coughs] the few people of – well – Corby Schmidt: I – I can't argue that point, but we don't have a statement then. Corby Schmidt: True, but they haven't… Wayne Arnold: Yeah. Alan Frazier: If we slow things down, that property's going to be worth twice what it is now. Corby Schmidt: Yeah, but – Wayne Arnold: Part of the – 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 16 of 20 Corby Schmidt: – I think 3 states out of 50 allow us to do that. Wayne Arnold: Yeah. This – this is Wayne just for the record. So, you know, to answer your question, there are some statutory reasons that things do move fast. The state has been very pro-growth oriented and pro- property rights oriented. So, there are timeframes that are established in our – our statutes that regulate how long the county can even take to do some of their reviews, et cetera and then getting to a point of once they deem it a sufficient application, they have to get it to public hearings within 180 days now for several land use applications. So, part of it is just a statutory process we're going through. [coughs] All of this can be slowed down. The economy, you know, is one of those things that really – it's roaring right now, so things are being built. Um. You know. Back in 2008, not so and we were all here crying for more things to happen. So, I mean, it's a cycle and we're in that upcycle right now and… You know, will it continue? You know – Speaker 2: Probably. Wayne Arnold: – probably to some extent. Sure. Phyllis Litka: Does anyone know if the property on Immokalee in Wilson on the north side, is that zone commercial? Wayne Arnold: Mmm. I don't believe it is. Phyllis Litka: At one time it was years and years ago. Wayne Arnold: I think there was a proposal for commercial at Wilson and… Phyllis Litka: But then across the way on Immokalee and Wilson, um, that's commercial and I guess St. Agnes was looking into purchasing that property. Anybody hear that? Wayne Arnold: I – that I don't know. Phyllis Litka: That was about three years ago. Enrico Avallone: Which property are you talking about on that map? Wayne Arnold: It's not on that exhibit. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 17 of 20 Enrico Avallone: Not on the bigger one? Wayne Arnold: It wasn't there, um, when… Enrico Avallone: Wilson is right at the bottom-line corner. Wayne Arnold: Wilson, but I don't know that the four corners of that intersection are not shown, but that's Wilson. Enrico Avallone: So, what are you talking about? Right on – Phyllis Litka: North on Wilson. Enrico Avallone: So north? Just north of Wilson across the street on Immokalee, you mean? Phyllis Litka: Yes. Enrico Avallone: Okay. Over there. Phyllis Litka: Which is, you know, right before – you're – you're 4th we're 2nd. So, is that commercial also? Enrico Avallone: You have to go through that to get to your street is what you're saying? Phyllis Litka: Mm-hmm. Enrico Avallone: Okay. Yeah, I see what you're… Wayne Arnold: I'm not aware of any commercial there. Norm Trebilcock: Nor am I. Wayne Arnold: Uh-uh. Anything else? Yes, sir. Richard Brewer: I have a question, you mentioned that you – plans were what you can afford and what you would like. The impact these – of these – this development will generate – will those go to this immediate area since the money will be there? To the – to take care of the impact or is the impact fees just go to a general fund and they're used where they're needed first? Norm Trebilcock: Goes into district. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 18 of 20 Wayne Arnold: They're still impacting districts in the county. So, they program those dollars that are collected within that district to be utilized first and foremost there. Not to say that the county hasn't borrowed from other sources, but there are impacting districts in which those fees are collecting in and predominantly there. Richard Brewer: So, right here on Collier you have developed a – we're paying impact fees that won't necessarily go to improving the conditions here. Wayne Arnold: Well, I – I think it – the answer's yes. It's programmed to do that. I can't say what the county's financial situation is going to be. If there's a higher demand at some other location that they wouldn't borrow money from this district in order to fund something. But the monies that are paid here are allocated to that impact fee district. Corby Schmidt: Yeah. Wayne's saying that correctly. The impacts on the roadways, let's say, and the transportation impact fees, they're assigned to where those impacts are within the margin district. Now, whether they reach there, they may be really allocated when they're due back here. It'll eventually be here. Those specific dowers and those exact dowers maybe not, because they're moving around all the time. But they'll be used here. Wayne Arnold: Any other questions before we close it down for the evening? Gracie Moya: I – wait. I have one question. Wayne Arnold: Sure. Gracie Moya: I got here late. Um. So, do we know what's going on there? I mean, is it a store, a restaurant down there? Wayne Arnold: We don't have a specific plan. We don't have those details. We're asking for general commercial land uses at this point. Gracie Moya: Okay. Wayne Arnold: We have to go through a separate zoning process in which we would establish a more defined list of uses with development standards and all of those things. And that's yet to be filed. Gracie Moya: So, no idea what's gonna go in there? Wayne Arnold: Nope. Not yet. 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 19 of 20 Phyllis Litka: And nothing too soon, so we're still a few years down. Wayne Arnold: Well, we're obviously months away from this and then the separate zoning application that we'll have to follow is going to take another 10 or 11 months once it's filed with the county. But I would encourage you to pick up Sharon's business card from the table where you signed in and you can stay in touch with her through email or phone calls. And – and we have – put that back up. We have links to, um, our gradyminor.com planning page. As well as the County CityView portal, which you can view all the status of all the submittals with the county. It'll have hearing dates posted et cetera. So, I encourage you to stay plugged in. I appreciate you all coming out this evening. Gracie Moya: I really thought it was tonight that we're going to get an idea what was going to go on it. [laughs] But I guess not. Wayne Arnold: Well, I – I wish, and I bet the applicant wished they knew, too. Corby Schmidt: Yeah, and the way comprehensive planning looks at these kinds of requests – Gracie Moya: Yeah. Corby Schmidt: – we're simply changing the color on a map for any possible use as quickly as they can get to it. Now it may take years like some properties that have been planned and then zoned for it. I would assume that doesn't begin to get used, but that's part of demand. Is it a paint store, a hardware store, a grocery store? We don't even know this time. Wayne Arnold: Yeah. Enrico Avallone: It could be a Bus Barn. [laughs] Gracie Moya: No, but whatever it is – Enrico Avallone: The Bus Barn Store. Phyllis Litka: What is – what is the biggest square footage something – can they do one building that's 200,000 sq. ft? Wayne Arnold: Theoretically yes, because we're asking for 200,000 sq. ft. I can't tell you it's not going to happen, but it's probably unlikely that that 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) Transcript Pl20160000221 Immokalee Road-Estates Feb 24 2020 NIM Page 20 of 20 happens. Corby Schmidt: And you have a rather thin dense view of population, so no matter how much you put there, it's too… Wayne Arnold: Like it's under your greatest possible demand. Gracie Moya: Thank you. Wayne Arnold: Everybody good? Thank you all very much for coming out. Wayne Arnold: We're adjourned. Wayne Arnold: Appreciate it. [End of Audio] Duration: 30 minutes 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.e Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 323Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.fPacket Pg. 324Attachment: 04_CCPC Ad as posted 7.20.20 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 9.A.1.g Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: 05_Virtual Meeting Waiver_CCPC-BCC (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict) 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.3 Item Summary: MPUD-PL20180002813-An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 07-30, the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), to allow up to 265 multi-family rental dwelling units plus 148,500 square feet of commercial development as an alternative to 160,000 square feet of retail and office currently allowed; by changing the name of the CPUD from Hammock Park Commerce Centre to the Hammock Park Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD); by revising the development standards; by amending the Master Plan and revising developer commitments. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 19.13± acres; and by providing an effective date. (Companion to PL20180002804) [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Principal – Zoning Name: Nancy Gundlach 04/09/2020 1:46 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 04/09/2020 1:46 PM Approved By: Review: Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 05/18/2020 5:23 PM Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 05/29/2020 5:53 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 06/11/2020 11:14 AM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 06/11/2020 2:08 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 06/12/2020 8:53 AM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 9.A.2 Packet Pg. 326 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FULL SCALE AMENDMENT PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 (ADOPTION HEARINGS) CCPC: August 6, 2020 BCC: October 13, 2020 9.A.2.a Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: 00_CCPC COVER (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC August 6, 2020 [continued from April 2, 2020] PL2018002804/CP-18-8 GMP Amendment Adoption Hammock Park 1) TAB: Adoption Staff Report DOCUMENTS: CCPC Staff Report: 2) TAB: Adoption Ordinance DOCUMENTS: Ordinance with Exhibit “A” text (and/or maps): 3) TAB: Project PL20180002804/ DOCUMENT: Petition/Application Petition CP-2018-8 4) TAB: Transmittal Ex. Summary DOCUMENT: Ex. Summary 5) TAB: Transmittal Staff Report DOCUMENT: CCPC Staff Report 6) TAB: Transmittal Resolution DOCUMENT: Resolution 7) TAB: Legal Advertising DOCUMENT: CCPC Advertisement 8) TAB: Virtual Public Waiver DOCUMENT: Virtual Public Meeting letter 9.A.2.b Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: 00_Table of Contents (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Page 1 of 5 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Agenda #9.A. STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: August 6, 2020 RE: PETITION CP-2018-08/PL20180002804, 2018 Cycle 3 LARGE SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to PUDA- PL20180002813) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agents: Alexis Crespo, AICP Waldrop Engineering 28100 Bonita Grande Dr. #305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman Yovanovich Koester 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Owner/Applicant: Wilton Land Company, LLC 206 Dudley Road Wilton, CT 06897 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The ±19.13-acre site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Collier Blvd. (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864), in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. (Royal Fakapalm Planning Community). 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: 01_CCPC Adoption Staff Report_CP-2018-8 Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Page 2 of 5 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The applicant proposes a large-scale Comprehensive Plan amendment (text-based only) to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to amend the Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict #7 to increase residential density to allow a maximum of 265 multi-family rental apartments (only) within the Hammock Park Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) at a density rate of 13.85 DU/A. This amendment project is located in the northeast quadrant of Activity Center #7. Residential use is currently allowed in the Activity Center but the two easterly quadrants, including the subject site, is limited to the density allowed in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict – 1.5 DU/A or 2.5 DU/A with use of Transfer of Development Rights credits. The Activity Center boundaries and acreage are proposed to remain the same. Note: A companion PUD amendment petition is scheduled for this same hearing. The Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) is requesting to add residential use to the previously approved mixture of retail, commercial and office uses and to revise the name of the project from Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD to Hammock Park Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). This companion PUDA zoning petition (PL201800002813) is being reviewed by the CCPC for recommendation of approval at the same time as this Adoption hearing for the GMPA petition. PREVIOUS TRANSMITTAL ACTIONS: Transmittal hearings on this proposed Growth Management Plan amendment were held on October 31, 2019 by the CCPC (Collier County Planning Commission) and on January 14, 2020 by the BCC (Collier County Board of County Commissioners). The Transmittal recommendations/actions are presented further below. Within CCPC materials provided, you will find the Transmittal Executive Summary from the Board hearing, and the Transmittal CCPC staff report for the petition, which provides staff’s detailed Proposed Project Site 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: 01_CCPC Adoption Staff Report_CP-2018-8 Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Page 3 of 5 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 analysis of the petition. In accordance with Chapter 163.3184(3)(b)1., F.S., pertaining to the Expedited State Review Process, this Transmittal package was provided to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) and other reviewing agencies on January 16, 2020. TRANSMITTAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: To Transmit to DEO. CCPC RECOMMENDATION: Transmit to DEO (vote: 5/2). Chairman Strain and Commissioner Homiak opposed. BOARD ACTION: Transmitted to DEO (vote: 4/1), per CCPC recommendation, Commissioner Taylor opposed. STAFF SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), as required by Land Development Code (LDC) Section A, was duly advertised, noticed, and held on June 19, 2019, 5:30 p.m. at South Regional Library, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, FL 34113. This NIM was advertised, noticed, and held jointly for this large scale GMP amendment and the companion Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) petition. On June 19, 2019 the applicant’s team gave a presentation and then responded to questions. Approximately 11 members of the public along with approximately 6 members of the applicant’s team and County staff signed in at the NIM. Commissioner Donna Fiala was also in attendance. Agent Alexis Crespo presented the project. The public asked questions about the project details. The consultant explained the PUDA application included reducing commercial square footage and adding a maximum of 265 multi-family market-rate rental dwelling units. There was no opposition expressed at the meeting. There were questions concerning the reduction in commercial equaling the number of residential trips – they will; will the housing be apartments or condominiums – apartments; will there be additional restaurants – probably due to the success on US41 at Collier Blvd. The consultants explained the trips generated from the project would not increase beyond the previously approved total number of trips, the pattern of travel times might be different. The meeting ended at approximately 6:30 p.m. Note: Collier County’s 2017 Administrative Code for Land Development states, “If the applicant’s petition activity extends beyond 1 year from the date of the first NIM, a second NIM will be required and shall be noticed in accordance with this chapter.” Due to this petition starting the public hearing process for transmittal in October 2019, which falls well within the 1 -year timeline of the NIM, staff did not request the applicant hold a second NIM. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] REVIEW AGENCY COMMENT LETTERS After BCC approval to transmit the GMPA (January 14, 2020) and in accordance with Chapter 163.3184 (3)(a) F.S., Staff prepared a letter/packet requesting State agencies review the Transmitted amendment within each reviewing agency’s authorized scope of review, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), as well as the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services/Florida Forrest 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: 01_CCPC Adoption Staff Report_CP-2018-8 Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Page 4 of 5 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Service, Florida Department of State/Bureau of Historic Preservation, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), and Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC), rendered their comment letters indicating “no comment” or “no adverse impacts found” or the agency did not respond. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) conducted a planning level analysis and rendered comments within their authorized scope of review but did not express any concerns regarding this project. The Comments Letters received are located within materials provided to the CCPC. The remaining reviewing agencies did not provide a Comment Letter. Within CCPC materials provided is an Ordinance with Exhibit “A” text (and map) for the petition; this exhibit reflects the text as approved by the Board for Transmittal. There have been no revisions from the version Transmitted. Florida State Statutes state the following under “Expedited State Review Process for Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Amendments” Chapter 163.3184 (4) (c) 1, “The local government shall hold its second public hearing, which shall be a hearing on whether to adopt one or more comprehensive plan amendments pursuant to subsection (11). If the local government fails, within 180 days after receipt of agency comments, to hold the second public hearing, the amend ments shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended by agreement with notice to the state land planning agency and any affected person that provided comments on the amendment…” The County received agency comments between February 24 and 26, 2020. Staff requested a time extension for the 180-day adoption of this petition due to the extraordinary circumstances of Covid-19 and canceled meetings. The DEO granted a three-month extension that will expire on November 27, 2020. ADOPTION: No revisions to the GMPA petition (from the final transmittal documents) were submitted for the adoption process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the CCPC forward the single, 2016 Cycle 3 petition to the Board with a recommendation to adopt and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and reviewing agencies that provided comments. LEGAL REVIEW This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on June 9, 2020. The criteria for Growth Management Plan text amendments to the Future Land Use Element and Map Series is in Section 163.3177(1)(f), Florida Statutes. [HFAC] [Remainder of page intentionally left blank] 9.A.2.c Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: 01_CCPC Adoption Staff Report_CP-2018-8 Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.d Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 031920 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.d Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 031920 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.d Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 031920 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.d Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 031920 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 APPLICATION 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 1 APPLICATION FOR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN APPLICATOIN NUMBER: ___________________ DATE RECEIVED: ______________________________ PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE: __________________________________________________ DATE SUFFICIENT: ______________________________________________________________________ This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Growth Management Department, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252- 2400. The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I.GENERAL INFOMRATION A.Name of Applicant ______________________________________________________________ Company _______________________________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________________________ City ______________________________ State _____________________ Zip Code __________ Phone Number ______________________ Fax Number ________________________________ B.Name of Agent * _________________________________________________________________ •THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company________________________________________________________________________ Address ___________________________________________________________________ City ___________________________ State ____________________ Zip Code ________ Phone Number ____________________ Fax Number ___________________________ C.Name of Owner (s) of Record ____________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________________________________ City ___________________________ State ___________________ Zip Code ________ Phone Number _______________________ Fax Number ______________________________ D.Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. II.Disclosure of Interest Information: A.If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 2 Name and Address Percentage of Ownership __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 3 __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ 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______yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option:______________ and date option terminates: ______________, or anticipated closing: _______________________. H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION ______________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ B. GENERAL LOCATION _____________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ C. PLANNING COMMUNITY D. TAZ _____________________ E. SIZE IN ACRES F. ZONING _________________ G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN________________________________________________ H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S)____________________________________ IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: _______ Housing Element _______ Recreation/Open Space _______ Traffic Circulation Sub-Element _______ Mass Transit Sub-Element _______ Aviation Sub-Element _______ Potable Water Sub-Element _______ Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element _______ NGWAR Sub-Element _______ Solid Waste Sub-Element _______ Drainage Sub-Element 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 4 _______ Capital Improvement Element _______ CCME Element _______ Future Land Use Element _______ Golden Gate Master Plan _______ Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) _________________OF THE _______________________________ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike-through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM ______________________________ TO _______________________________________________________________________________ D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: ________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I”=400’. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE __________ Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI’s, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. __________ Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. __________ Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION __________ Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ___________ Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN “A” ABOVE. ___________ Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.).Identify historic and/or 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 5 archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference F.A.C. Chapter 163-3177 and Collier County’s Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT “Y” FOR YES OR “N” FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: ___________Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? IF so, identify area located in ACSC. ___________Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? ___________Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. __________ Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: __________ Potable Water __________ Sanitary Sewer __________ Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ ____________________________ __________ Drainage __________ Solid Waste __________ Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. ________ Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3. ________ Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 6 ______ Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). ______ Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) ______ Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable ______ Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable ______ High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ______ $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) ______ $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) ______ Proof of ownership (copy of deed) ______ Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) ______ 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * If you have held a pre-application meeting and paid the pre-application fee of $250.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre-application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising costs. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1”=400’ or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 LEGAL 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) EXHIBIT III.A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION 14 50 26 S1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 LESS R/W, AND W80FT OF S1/2 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 4336 PG 3681, AND N30FT OF N1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4 OF SEC 23-50-26 LESS R/W 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 AERIAL 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community ¯CR 951CR 951R at tl es na k e H am m o c k R d Hammock ParkAerial MapCollier CountyExhibit V.A.-2 Frame Time: 2018 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 ZONING MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community ¯CR 951CR 951Rattlesnake Hammock Rd Legend Major Roads Subject Parcel Collier County Parcels A C-4 PUD RSF-1 TTRVC Zoning PUD PUD PUD RPUD CFPUD PUD PUD PUD RPUD MPUD MPUD MPUD MPUD MPUD MPUD RPUD RPUD CPUD Hammock Park Current Zoning Map Collier County 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 FUTURE LAND USE MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Sou rc e: Es ri, Digita lG lobe , G eoE ye, Ea rt hst ar Ge ogr aph ic s, CNES/Airb us DS,USDA, USG S, A ero G RID, I G N, a nd th e GI S User Com m unity ¯CR 951CR 951Ra ttl es na k e Ha m m o ck R d Legend Major Roads Sub ject Parce l Co llie r Coun ty Parcels Collier C ounty Future Land U se Co llie r Blvd Comm unity F acility Subdistr ict Co nserva tion Desig nation Mixed Use Activity Cen ter Subd istrict Re sidentia l De nsity Bands Ur ban Re sidentia l Fring e Subdistr ict Ur ban Re sidentia l Sub district Ham mock Park Fut ure La nd Us e M apExhibit V.B 1 9 +/- A cr e s 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 300-FOOT RADIUS MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park ¯ 0 0.075 0.15 0.225 0.3Miles 300 FOOT RADIUS 500 FOOT RADIUS Collier BlvdRattlesnake Hammock Rd Collier BlvdExisting Land Use and Zoning Within a Radius of 300 FeetExhibit V.A.-3 Hammock Park Legend 500 foot Buffer 300 foot Buffer Subject Property ZONED: MPUDUSE: Vacant Commercial (Good Turn Center MPUD) ZONED: MPUDUSE: Public Right-of-Way (Rattlesnake Hammock Rd.) Vacant Commercial (Hacienda Lakes of Naples MPUD) ZONED: PUDUSE: Public Right-of-Way (CR 951) Multi-Family & Golf Course (Naples Lake Country Club; Sierra Meadows) Commercial (Naples Lakes Village Center)ZONED: MPUDUSE: Vacant Commercial (McMullen MPUD) Subject Propety - 19+/- Acres Existing Zoning: Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUDExisting FLUE: Urban Commercial District Mixed use Activity Center, Urban Residential FringeExisting Use: Vacant Commercial North Zoning: MPUD Use: Vacant Mixed Use (Good Turn Center)South Zoning: MPUD Use: Public Right-of-Way (Rattlesnake Hammock Rd.) Vacant Commercial (Hacienda Lakes of Naples)East Zoning: MPUD Use: Vacant Mixed Use (McMullen)West Zoning: MPUD Use: Public Right-of-Way (CR 951) Multi-Family & Golf Course (Naples Lake Country Club; Sierra Meadows) Commercial (Naples Lakes Village Center) Adjacent Property IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 JUSTIFICATION NARRATIVE 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Justification Narrative Page 1 of 6 HAMMOCK PARK GMPA AMENDMENT JUSTIFICATION NARRATIVE Revised January 2019 The Hammock Park subject property (“Property”) comprises 19+/- acres and is generally located at the northeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road in unincorporated Collier County, Florida. The Property is designated within the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center #7, and Urban Residential Fringe (URF) future land use designations. The Property is zoned Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) pursuant to Ordinance 07-30. The CPUD allows up to 160,000 square feet of commercial uses, including commercial retail and office. The Property is currently undeveloped and partially vegetated. The Applicant is requesting a site-specific text amendment to the Future Land Use Element, Mixed Use Activity Center #7, to allow up to 265 multi-family dwelling units (limited to rental apartments) within the Hammock Park project, along with the permitted commercial uses. The amendment will allow for build-out of this quadrant of an arterial intersection and activity center node with a compact, mixed-use project that provides for market-rate rental housing in close proximity to available public infrastructure, goods, services and employment. The proposed GMPA text amendment applies solely to the Hammock Park property as described in the application materials and will not apply to other properties in Mixed Use Activity Center #7. The companion CPUD rezone application will maintain the ability to develop 160,000 square feet of commercial uses, as well as the option to develop a mixed-use project containing 265 multi-family dwelling units and 100,000 square feet of commercial uses. The proposed mixed-use development program provides a vehicular trip generation cap that ensures the project will not exceed the PM peak hour trip count for the currently approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses. As outlined in detail below, the proposed text amendment will further the County’s stated goals to: • Provide a diversity of housing options, particularly market-rate workforce housing, to address gaps in the existing local housing supply; 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Justification Narrative Page 2 of 6 • Accommodate higher density and intensity development within designated mixed-use activity centers along arterial roadways to reduce development pressures on rural areas; • Efficiently use the County’s investment in public infrastructure by locating intensive land uses in urban-designated areas of the County where adequate and available public facilities and infrastructure exist; • Integrate residential and non-residential uses within the same master- planned development to encourage multi-modal transportation options and reduce vehicle miles travelled; and • Uphold the intent of the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) future land use category by providing the necessary transition between the urban and rural designated areas of the County. The following is data and analysis that supports approval of the proposed GMP Amendment and identifies the request’s appropriateness in relation to the adopted Goals, Objectives and Policies in the GMP and the requirements set forth in Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. PROJECT HISTORY/BACKGROUND In 2007, the Property was rezoned from Planned Unit Development to Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) per Ordinance No. 07-30. The CPUD as currently approved allows for a maximum of 160,000 square feet of commercial retail and office uses. Due to lacking market demand, the site remains undeveloped. Since the 2007 zoning approval, all other surrounding parcels have secured zoning entitlements to allow for similar intensive commercial retail and office development, as well as Assisted Living Facilities (ALF). Additionally, the Hacienda Lakes MPUD/DRI has been approved, allowing for a master-planned community consisting of 1,760 dwellings units, 327,500 square feet of retail, 70,000 square feet of office, 135 hotel rooms, and 140,000 square feet of business park uses. These approvals and the resulting development pattern along the Collier Blvd. corridor have significantly urbanized this portion of the County and resulted in continued investment in public infrastructure to serve the growth. These investments include, but are not limited to: utilities, roadways, transit, schools, Fire/EMS, library and other facilities outlined in Exhibit IV.E., which includes the Urban Facilities Map. LOCATION & SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT PATTERN The Property is located at the intersection of Collier Boulevard and Rattlensake Hammock Road, both county-maintained arterial roadways. The site represents infill development based upon the existing and approved/planned developments surrounding the project. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Justification Narrative Page 3 of 6 Please refer to Table 1 below, which provides an inventory of the immediately adjacent Future Land Use Categories, zoning districts, and existing land uses. TABLE 1: INVENTORY OF SURROUNDING LANDS DIRECTION FUTURE LAND USE ZONING DISTRICT EXISTING LAND USE North Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center MPUD Vacant Commercial (Good Turn Center MPUD) South Urban Residential Fringe MPUD Vacant Commercial (Hacienda Lakes of Naples MPUD) East Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center MPUD Vacant Commercial (McMullen MPUD) West Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center PUD Multi-Family & Golf Course (Naples Lake Country Club; Sierra Meadows); Commercial The Property is within a designated Mixed-Use Activity Center, which is specifically intended to provide for concentrated commercial and mixed-use development with “carefully configured access to the road network”. Activity Center #7 in general encompasses 197.5+/- acres and includes a diverse mix of approved Mixed Use Planned Unit Developments (MPUDs). The Good Turn Center MPUD immediately to the north of the site is approved for a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facility uses with a maximum of 200 units (21 du/acre) per Ordinance 09- 53. The McMullen MPUD to the east of the Property is approved for a maximum of 185,000 square feet of commercial uses pursuant to Ordinance 10-18. Care units are also permitted in this project utilizing a commercial intensity conversion. The commercial tract of the Hacienda Lakes MPUD to the south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road is approved for up to 327,500 square feet of retail land uses and 70,000 square feet of professional and medical office uses. 135 hotel rooms are also allowed on this tract. The surrounding development pattern is indicative of the intent for compact, urban levels of development at the Collier Blvd./Rattlesnake Hammock intersection to accommodate the need for goods and services in southern Collier County. Due to historical limitations in the GMP relating to density in the URF-portion of Activity Center #7, this area is lacking in multi-family housing types that are closely integrated with commercial uses in the form of a mixed-use project. GMP ANALYSIS & CONSISTENCY • TRANSITION OF DENSITY 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Justification Narrative Page 4 of 6 The Property is within the Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict per the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). This subdistrict is specifically sited on the Future Land Use Map to provide transitional densities between the Urban-designated area along the coast, and the Agricultural/Rural area generally located 1 mile east of Collier Blvd. The URF was established in 1989 to provide a transition from the urban area which allowed a density of 4 units per acre, to the rural area that allowed a density of 1 unit per 5 acres. Since 1989, the Hacienda Lakes MPUD/DRI has been approved, which fully satisfies the intended transition of land uses and densities from the arterial frontage to the Urban/Rural interface one mile east of the Property. Specifically, Hacienda Lakes’ master plan provides for commercial uses at the arterial intersection, which transitions to residential uses straddling the future Benfield Parkway, and finally designated preserve tracts along the project’s eastern edge. Due to this confirmed development pattern, along with other intervening MPUDs such as McMullen to the east, the GMP’s intent to provide for a logical transition from Urban to Rural in this area of the County is not impacted by this amendment. • ENCOURAGING MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS As stated in the Underlying Concepts section of the GMP, “…commercial development opportunities in the form of Mixed Use Activity Centers are provided to include a mixture of uses which has the potential to lessen the impact on the transportation system.” The proposed text amendment is in direct compliance with the intent of this section. The amendment reduces vehicular trips, provides a bona fide mix of uses in an urban area, and supports diverse housing options. Higher densities are necessary to support commercial uses, multi-modal development patterns, and transit usage, all of which result in reduced vehicle miles traveled. The Property is ideally located in a mixed-use activity center that currently permits density and intensity within other approved mixed-use developments surrounding the property. As detailed in the enclosed Ch. 163 Sprawl Analysis, the amendment directly supports sound planning principles, including the integration of residential and non-residential land uses. The requested amendment directly facilitates live-work opportunities in the Urban- designated area, and locates residents in walking distance to goods, and services and employment. • DIVERSE HOUSING & COMPATIBILITY The property’s location on a key growth corridor in the County makes it an ideal area to accommodate higher density residential uses. The site is not located adjacent to established low-density areas that would result in compatibility concerns with neighboring developments. The amendment will allow for the development of up to 265 apartment units, which directly addresses the identified demand for diversified housing to accommodate the 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Justification Narrative Page 5 of 6 County’s existing residents and projected population growth. The enclosed Market Study further substantiates the need for this amendment to meet both short- and long-term housing needs in the County. The resulting gross project density is approximately 14 du/acres, which is slightly less than the allowance of 16 du/acre within the other Mixed-Use Activity Centers throughout the County. The density proposed is appropriate for the location considering the adjacent densities and intensities as noted above; the existing and available public infrastructure in the immediate area; the lack of environmentally sensitive lands and natural resources on the site; and the demand for higher-density, market -rate workforce housing. ENVIRONMENTAL As outlined in the Environmental Report prepared by Passarella & Associates, the site contains a relatively small amount of wetlands (1.63+/- acres) that are concentrated in the northwestern portion of the site. The proposed site-specific text amendment to Mixed Use Activity Center #7 will have no effect on the requirements of the preserve areas previously approved for the Hammock Park CPUD. The forthcoming PUD application will retain the required on-site preserve area in full compliance with the GMP and LDC. A letter from the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources, indicates no significant archaeological or historical sites are recorded or likely to be present within the subject property. Based upon this information, the site is suitable for increased densities due to a lack of environmental sensitivity and on-site natural resources. INFRASTRUCTURE The subject property will be accessed from Collier Blvd., a 6-lane arterial roadway through a shared access with the Good Turn MPUD to the north, and through two (2) approved points of ingress/egress along Rattlesnake Hammock Road. As outlined in the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by Trebilcock Consulting, Inc., all roadways impacted by the project will continue to operate at the County’s adopted minimum Level of Service through project build-out. Potable water and sanitary sewer services for this project will be provided by Collier County Public Utilities (CCPU) through existing infrastructure located along Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Exhibit IV.E. demonstrates the property’s proximity to available public infrastructure including parks, schools, fire, and EMS services. This data reflects that the subject property is an appropriate location for the addition of density, and the compact development pattern will effectively utilize the County’s investment in public infrastructure in this area. CONCLUSION 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Justification Narrative Page 6 of 6 In summary, the proposed site-specific text amendment is justified as follows: 1) The proposed amendment furthers the goals of the Mixed-Use Activity Centers by encouraging density in an area where it is appropriate and will reduce impacts on the transportation network; 2) Will further the objectives of the Mixed-Use Activity Centers by providing more intense mixed-use development in a planned urbanized area; 3) Will allow for a compact and contiguous development pattern along a major arterial thoroughfare with available public services and infrastructure surrounded by other mixed used planned developments; and 4) Will be compatible with adjacent existing, planned and approved developments. Accordingly, the Applicant respectfully requests approval of this petition. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 CHAPTER 163 CRITERIA 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Sprawl Analysis Page 1 of 3 Hammock Park GMPA Chapter 163.3177 Sprawl Analysis Section 163.3177(6)(a)9.a, F.S., states that “… any amendment to the future land use element shall discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl.” Section 163.3177(6)(a)9.b, F.S., specifies that an amendment shall be determined to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl if it incorporates a development pattern or urban form that achieves four of eight criteria listed in the statute. This Growth Management Plan Amendment provides for a development pattern that achieves the following five indicators: (I) Directs or locates economic growth and associated land development to geographic areas of the community in a manner that does not have an adverse impact on and protects natural resources and ecosystems. Response: The proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) directs growth to an urbanized area of the county where development is encouraged. As a result, less demand is placed on developing closer toward environmentally sensitive lands and wildlife habitats. (II) Promotes the efficient and cost-effective provision or extension of public infrastructure and services. Response: As outlined in Exhibit IV.E, Public Facilities Analysis, adequate and available infrastructure exists to accommodate the proposed increase in residential density. (III) Promotes walkable and connected communities and provides for compact development and a mix of uses at densities and intensities that will support a range of housing choices and a multimodal transportation system, including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, if available. Response: The project is serviced by an adequate roadway system including Collier Blvd. and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. Development authorized through this amendment will demonstrate a high level of connectivity by providing opportunities for multi-modal transportation through the integration of residential and commercial uses in a single project, resulting in walking, bicycling, and less vehicle miles traveled. The amendment proposes to include multi-family (apartment) housing in an area of the county where such demand exists and in proximity to commercial uses. The project will connect to existing sidewalks on both Collier Blvd. and Rattlesnake Hammock Road, and existing public transit facilities. (IV) Promotes conservation of water and energy. Response: The proposed amendment does not alter existing preserve areas within the Hammock Park PUD. The amendment area, located in an urbanized area of the county with existing and available public infrastructure, will not require an expansion of facilities to 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Sprawl Analysis Page 2 of 3 support the development, thereby conserving energy. This site is not environmentally-sensitive, nor contiguous to large tracts intended for long-term conservation purposes, and is therefore appropriate for the proposed mix of uses. (V) Preserves agricultural areas and activities, including silviculture, and dormant, unique, and prime farmlands and soils. Response: The site is not appropriate for agricultural uses due to the levels of existing and planned development in the immediate area. The proposed GMPA is site-specific to an area located within a mixed-use activity center. By allowing a mixed-use project to occur in an area where it is appropriate and compatible to surrounding land uses, the demand to develop in areas that preserve agricultural activities is protected, in direct compliance with this statute. (VI) Preserves open space and natural lands and provides for public open space and recreation needs. Response: By locating the requested development program in a mixed-use activity center surrounded by other mixed-use developments, the project directly complies by preserving existing natural lands. Furthermore, as detailed in the forthcoming companion PUD rezone application, the project provides for a 1.63+/- acre preserve area that connect directly to a preserve area to the north in the Good Turn Center MPUD. The project will provide open space in compliance with the Land Development Code., and will? (VII) Creates a balance of land uses based upon demands of the residential population for the nonresidential needs of an area. Response: In direct compliance with this statute, the proposed amendment provides for the development of a mixed-use project to provide more diverse, in-demand housing options to serve the projected population growth. The project will consist of apartment housing in proximity to goods and services, as well as employment opportunities). As noted in the Market Study, there is a strong demand for apartment housing in this area, especially in those areas proximate to commercial uses. (VIII) Provides uses, densities, and intensities of use and urban form that would remediate an existing or planned development pattern in the vicinity that constitutes sprawl or if it provides for an innovative development pattern such as transit-oriented developments or new towns as defined in s. 163.3164. Response: The proposed GMPA provides a mixed-use development consisting of higher- density residential housing and commercial uses in the form of a planned development. The proposed development is surrounded by existing mixed use planned developments, and therefore contributes to the development pattern in this area where such development is appropriate and anticipated. By clustering higher density residential uses at arterial intersections within the urbanized areas with public infrastructure, the County can 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Sprawl Analysis Page 3 of 3 accommodate projected long-term growth in population while preserving the rural lands in the eastern-portions of the County. In sum, this amendment specifically addresses all aspects of the County’s vision for clustered, compact development in the urban service area, which makes efficient use of the public investment in infrastructure, while ensuring the long-term preservation of large tracts of environmentally sensitive and agriculturally productive lands in the rural area. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 PROPOSED TEXT 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) C. Urban Commercial District This District is intended to accommodate almost all new commercial zoning; a variety of residential uses, including higher densities for properties not located within the Urban Coastal Fringe or Urban Residential Fringe Subdistricts; and a variety of non-residential uses. 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict Mixed Use Activity Centers have been designated on the Future Land Use Map Series identified in the Future Land Use Element. The locations are based on intersections of major roads and on spacing criteria. When this Plan was originally adopted in 1989, there were 21 Activity Centers. There are now 19 Activity Centers, listed below, which comprise approximately 3,000 acres; this includes three Interchange Activity Centers (#4, 9, 10) which will be discussed separately under the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict. Two Activity Centers, #19 and 21, have been deleted as they are now within the incorporated City of Marco Island. * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Mixed-Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. Further, they are generally intended to be developed at a human-scale, to be pedestrian-oriented, and to be interconnected with abutting projects – whether commercial or residential. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged. Allowable land uses in Mixed Use Activity Centers include the full array of commercial uses, residential uses, institutional uses, hotel/motel uses at a maximum density of 26 units per acre, community facilities, and other land uses as generally allowed in the Urban designation. The actual mix of the various land uses shall be determined during the rezoning process based on consideration of the factors listed below. Except as restricted below under the provision for Master Planned Activity Centers, all Mixed Use Activity Centers may be developed with any of the land uses allowed within this Subdistrict. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mixed-use developments ‒ whether consisting of residential units located above commercial uses, in an attached building, or in a freestanding building ‒ are allowed and encouraged within Mixed Use Activity Centers. Density for such a project is calculated based upon the gross project acreage within the Activity Center. If such a project is located within the 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict and is not within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the eligible density is sixteen (16) dwelling units per acre. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center that is not within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict but is within the Coastal High Hazard Area, the eligible density shall be limited to four (4) dwelling units per acre, except as allowed by the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Overlay. If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict. For a project located partially within and partially outside of an Activity Center, and the portion within an Activity Center is developed as mixed use, some of the density accumulated from the Activity Center portion of the project may be distributed to that portion of the project located outside of the Activity Center. In order to promote compact and walkable mixed use projects, where the density from a mixed use project is distributed outside the Activity Center boundary: * * * * * * * * * * * * * The factors to consider during review of a rezone petition for a project, or portion thereof, within an Activity Center, are as follows: a. Rezones are encouraged to be in the form of a Planned Unit Development. There shall be no minimum acreage limitation for such Planned Unit Developments except all requests for rezoning must meet the requirements for rezoning in the Land Development Code. b. The amount, type and location of existing zoned commercial land, and developed commercial uses, both within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two (2) road miles of the Mixed Use Activity Center. c. Market demand and service area for the proposed commercial land uses to be used as a guide to explore the feasibility of the requested land uses. d. Existing patterns of land use within the Mixed Use Activity Center and within two (2) radial miles. e. Adequacy of infrastructure capacity, particularly roads. f. Compatibility of the proposed development with, and adequacy of buffering for, adjoining properties. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) g. Natural or man-made constraints. h. Rezoning criteria identified in the Land Development Code. i. Conformance with Access Management Plan provisions for Mixed Use Activity Centers, as contained in the Land Development Code. j. Coordinated traffic flow on-site and off-site, as may be demonstrated by a Traffic Impact Analysis, and a site plan/master plan indicating on-site traffic movements, access point locations and type, median opening locations and type on the abutting roadway(s), location of traffic signals on the abutting roadway(s), and internal and external vehicular and pedestrian interconnections. k. Interconnection(s) for pedestrians, bicycles and motor vehicles with existing and future abutting projects. l. Conformance with the architectural design standards as identified in the Land Development Code. * * * * * * * * * * * * * The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center #7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant, except that the northeast quadrant may have a total of 68.3 acres and the southeast quadrant may have a total of 49.2 acres, for a total of 197.5 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; the balance of the land area shall be limited to non-commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. Multi-family (apartment) uses shall also be permitted in the northeast quadrant within the Hammock Park MPUD and shall be limited to a total of up to 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units. The addition of the 9.3 acres to the northeast quadrant of the Activity center shall not be the basis for adjacent parcels to be rezoned to commercial pursuant the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict. With respect to the +/- 19 acres in the northeast quadrant of Activity Center #7, said acreage lying adjacent to the east of the Hammock Park Commerce Center CMPUD, commercial development (exclusive of the allowed “1/4 mile support medical uses”) shall be limited to a total of 185,000 square feet of the following uses: personal indoor self-storage facilities – this use shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building square feet; offices for various contractor/builder construction trade specialists inclusive of the offices of related professional disciplines and services that typically serve those construction businesses or otherwise assist in facilitating elements of a building and related infrastructure, including but not limited to architects, engineers, land surveyors and attorneys – these offices of related professional disciplines 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) and services shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building square feet; warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; mortgage and land title companies; related businesses including but not limited to lumber and other building materials dealers, paint, glass, and wallpaper stores, garden supply stores – all as accessory uses only, accessory to offices for various contractor/builder construction trade specialists or accessory to warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; management associations of various types of buildings or provision of services to buildings/properties; and, fitness centers. * * * * * * * * * * * * * 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 EXECUTED AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK MPUD OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Wilton Land Company, LLC is owned by: 99% George P. Bauer Revocable Trust 1% Carol P. Bauer Revocable Trust George and Carol Bauer are husband and wife. Beneficiaries depend on timing: This is a revocable trusts so during grantor’s lifetime, he or she are the beneficiary. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Exhibit I.D Professional Consultants Planning: Alexis Crespo, AICP Waldrop Engineering, P.A. 28100 Bonita Grande Drive #305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 239.405.7777 239.405.7899 fax alexis.crespo@waldropengineering.com Land Use Attorney: Richard D. Yovanovich, Esq Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 239.435.3535 239.435.1218 fax ryovanovich@cyklawfirm.com Transportation: Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, PE Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Boulevard, Suite 202 Naples, FL 34110 239.566.9551 ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Market Analysis: Russ Weyer Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. 239.269.1341 rweyer@ree-i.com Environmental: Bethany Brosious Senior Ecologist Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, #200 Fort Myers, FL 33912 239.274.0067 bethanyb@passarella.net 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) ALEXIS CRESPO Vice President of Planning Biography Project Experience education licensure professional experience professional affiliations resume AICP, LEED AP Alexis Crespo has over 13 years of professional planning experience in Southwest Florida, and is certified with the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP). Since joining Waldrop Engineering in 2011 she has led the Planning Staff in the successful completion of numerous privately initiated rezoning petitions, comprehensive plan amendments, annexations, variances, special exceptions and other planning and zoning actions relating to residential, commercial, institutional, and mixed-use development. Alexis regularly assists local governments with the formulation of Land Development Code amendments, Comprehensive Plan updates, review of privately initiated development applications, and other special projects. She also provides expert witness testimony and planning analysis relating to a variety of litigation matters, including Bert Harris actions and eminent domain proceedings. Alexis is a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Accredited Professional (LEED AP). Bachelor of Urban and Regional Planning, Ryerson University American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Acredited Professional (LEED AP) 13 years American Planning Association (APA) Florida Planning and Zoning Association (FPZA) Urban Land Institute (ULI) Real Estate Investment Society (REIS) Tiger Bay Club of Southwest Florida Collier County Building Industry Association (CBIA) Land Development Code Amendments - Bonita Springs, Florida Lead planner assisting the City of Bonita Springs with the preparation of land development code amendments to address aesthetics and community-specific design standards, redevelopment overlay districts, and supplementary regulations for intensive uses, such as automobile service stations, “big box” retail, and homeless shelters. Hendry County Airglades Land Use Study - Hendry County, Florida Ms. Crespo directed a long-range planning analysis for 36,000 acres in northern Hendry County surrounding the Airglades International Airport. Waldrop Engineering provided consulting services to the County for this state-funded project, which included extensive public facilitation and outreach, assessment of existing conditions, and growth projections and land use needs analyses. The resulting deliverables included three (3) land use scenarios depicting employment- based land uses, commercial and mixed-use nodes, and areas appropriate for workforce housing and civic support uses. The study was unanimously accepted by the Hendry County Board of County Commissioners and transmitted to the Department of Economic Opportunity in June 2018. Greater Pine Island Community Plan Update - Lee County, Florida Lead planning consultant for the preparation and processing of updates to the Greater Pine Island Community Plan and community-specific land development code regulations. The project also involved planning consultation in defense of eight (8) Bert Harris suits. The Loop - Punta Gorda, Florida Principal-in-Charge of the annexation, large-scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and rezoning of this 200+/-acre property at the I-75 and Jones Loop Interchange. The project entailed the drafting of a new Future Land Use Category and zoning district to accommodate intensive employment centers uses near the Jones Loop Road/I-75 Interchange. North Olga Community Plan - Lee County, Florida Coordinated all aspects of community facilitation, policy writing, and representation at public hearings on behalf of the North Olga Community Planning Panel for preparation of their first community plan. The community plan was adopted by the Lee County Board of County Commissioners in October 2011, following over two (2) years of public input and consensus building efforts. Ms. Crespo also developed land development code regulations to implement the community’s long-range plan. community involvement Board of Directors, Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Sun Coast Board of Governors, REIS Vice President of Financial Affairs, FPZA Immediate Past Chair, Promised Lands Section of APA Florida PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE WALDROP ENGINEERING BONITA SPRINGSSarasota p. (239) 405-7777 f . (239) 405-7899 e. alexis.crespo@waldropengineering.com 28100 Bonita Grande Dr. #305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 OrlandoTampa 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Richard D. Yovanovich Experience/History: Rich Yovanovich is one of the firm’s shareholders. He was an Assistant County Attorney for Collier County from 1990-1994. As an Assistant County Attorney, he focused on land development and construction matters. Mr. Yovanovich has an extraordinary amount of experience in real estate zoning, construction and land-use, including projects ranging from residential and commercial projects to large developments of regional impact. Professional Activities/Associations: The Florida Bar Collier County Bar Association Awards & Recognition Recognized in 2010-2017 editions of The Best Lawyers in American for Real Estate Law AV Preeminent Peer Rating by Martindale Hubble Education: University of South Carolina: J.D. 1987 and M. Ed., 1986 Furman University: B.A., cum laude, 1983 Bar & Court Admissions: Florida, 1988 U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. President, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 1205 Piper Blvd., Suite 202  Naples, FL 34110 P 239.566.9551  www.trebilcock.biz Mr. Trebilcock specializes in transportation engineering. His professional experience includes highway design; signalization; utility relocation; drainage design; street and site lighting; access management; and permitting projects. He prepares and reviews traffic impact statements and related reports. He has attended numerous transportation seminars, and held leadership positions on many transportation-related task forces and in professional societies. Mr. Trebilcock served as the first Public Works Director for the City of Marco Island (1998-2000). As Public Works Director, he successfully transferred services within 30 days from Collier County Government (i.e., parks and recreation, streets and drainage, bridges, waterways, land development permitting, and beautification); developed master plans and multi- year capital improvement programs for Public Works; secured the city’s first stormwater quality improvement grant from the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD); and established successful privatization program for efficient delivery of services. Representative Project Experience • Old 41 Downtown Improvements Design-Build; City of Bonita Springs, FL. Reconstruction of Old 41 as a complete street with sidewalks, bike lanes, narrow median, and two travel lanes. TCS provided traffic design for roadway improvements. Project length = 4,414 LF (0.84 miles). • Winterberry Dr & Collier Blvd (CR 951) Signal Evaluation; City of Marco Island, FL. TCS conducted a Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis at the intersection of Collier Blvd/Winterberry Dr. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the intersection and make recommendations for the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection. • Golden Gate Pkwy (CR 886) Grade Separated Overpass; Collier County, FL – Managed planning study for the project, as well as design up to 60% plans for 3-mile reconstruction converting 4-lane rural section to 6-lane urban section. Traffic operations design included signing, pavement marking, channelization, lighting, and signalization. Key coordination element was integrating design into proposed I -75 Interchange at Golden Gate Pkwy. • Vanderbilt Beach Road (CR 862); Collier County, FL – Project was a 2.1-mile, 4-lane new construction urban highway extension with provisions for 6-laning. Traffic operations design included signing, pavement marking, channelization, lighting, and signalization. From concept to concrete project, completed in less than half the time (6 yrs vs 13 yrs) compared to statewide experience with similar complex highway projects. Successfully permitted alignment through Cocohatchee Strand wetland system, avoiding building a bridge originally identified by permitting agencies, for a savings of over $2 million. • Coconut Road Traffic Study; Village of Estero, FL – TCS conducted a traffic study for the Coconut Road Corridor. Tasks included data collection, completing a detailed traffic analysis of the Coconut Road corridor from its western-most terminus to Three Oaks Pkwy for selected links and one intersection along the study section, completing an operational analysis at the Coconut Road/US 41 intersection using HCS traffic analysis software, safety review, and document collection. • Designed street lighting system for Airport-Pulling Road, Golden Gate Pkwy, Vanderbilt Beach Road, and Airport-Pulling Road intersection with Davis Blvd. • Designed arterial roadway signalization systems for 16 locations in SW Florida, including mast arm and concrete strain pole installations. • FDOT Driveway Access, Drainage and Utility Permits for the Northeast Commercial Area at Pelican Bay, Naples International Park, and Pelican Marsh PUD. Total Years of Experience 28 years (1990 – present) Education • University of Florida Master of Eng. in Public Works, 1989 • University of Miami B.S. in Civil Engineering, 1988 • US Army Engineering School Engineer Officer Basic Course, 1988 Licenses / Certifications • Professional Engineer, Florida #47116 • Certified Planner, American Institute of Certified Planners • Certification, FDOT Advanced Work Zone Traffic Control The firm is registered by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) as a Small Business Enterprise (SBE). Affiliations • American Planning Association • American Institute of Certified Planners • American Society of Civil Engineers • Florida Engineering Society, Calusa Chapter (Past President) • Institute of Transportation Engineers • Illuminating Engineering Society • Society of American Military Engineers Firm FDOT Pre-qualifications Group 3 Highway Design - Roadway 3.1 Minor Highway Design Group 6 Traffic Engineering & Operations Studies 6.1 Traffic Engineering Studies 6.2 Traffic Signal Timing Group 7 Traffic Operations Design 7.1 Signing, Pavement Marking & Channelization 7.2 Lighting 7.3 Signalization Group 13 Planning 13.4 Systems Planning 13.5 Subarea/Corridor Planning 13.6 Land Planning/Engineering 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Curriculum Vitae George Russell Weyer President Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. 707 Orchid Drive Naples, FL 34102 (239) 269-1341 rweyer@ree-i.com Overview • Over 30 years of real estate development experience in Florida, Ohio and Nevada with large corporations and family-owned companies that focused on commercial office, retail, industrial, hospitality, amenity and large scale community and residential development. • Senior management experience with the entire development process from acquisition identification, due diligence, purchase negotiations, financing, planning and securing entitlements, horizontal and vertical construction, sales/leasing and marketing, to property management and condominium turnover and disposition. Skills also include land acquisition, land planning, entitlement process, financing proforma development, market analysis, land development, CDD management, financing and assessment determination, home and commercial construction, sales and Marketing management, builder selection and management, amenity design and management, residential and commercial property owners association management and design review committee management . • Experience with governmental entities on budgeting, financing and identifying and implementing economic development programs. • Full member of the Urban land Institute and the past chairman of ULI’s Southwest Florida District Council. Professional Experience • President, Real Estate Econometrics, Inc., Naples, FL 2014-Present Real Estate Econometrics, Inc., a full-service consulting firm specializing in financial, economic and fiscal analysis and implementation for real estate projects, is well-versed in all aspects of the real estate/land development process from determining the market and land acquisition through planning and development and finally marketing and land disposition. Performing real estate valuation analysis, entitlement analysis (commercial need, affordable housing, fiscal impact), CDD formation and management, CDD methodology consultant, commercial POA management, fiscal impact analysis of real estate projects, large scale development market analysis, economic impact analysis, government assessment methodology development, litigation support analysis, public/private partnership coordination, tax increment financing. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) • Senior Associate, Fishkind & Associates, Inc., Naples, FL 2004-2014 Real estate valuation analysis, entitlement analysis (commercial need, affordable housing, fiscal impact), CDD formation and management, CDD methodology consultant, commercial POA management, fiscal impact analysis of real estate projects, large scale development market analysis, economic impact analysis, government assessment methodology development, litigation support analysis, Cape Canaveral economic and fiscal impact, annexation analysis, impact fee analysis, public/private partnership coordination, tax increment financing. • V.P. Development, JED of Southwest Florida, Inc. Naples, FL 2003-2004 Office complex design, construction and management, neighborhood retail complex design, construction and management, entitlement process management. • President, GRW Management, Inc., Naples, FL 2001-2003 Market and entitlement analysis • President, London Bay Homes, Inc. subsidiary, Romanza, Inc. Naples, FL 2000-2001 Managed two offices of an interior design company. Turn around into profitable entity. • V.P. Resort Operations, Lake Las Vegas Joint Venture, Las Vegas NV 1999-2000 Managed all commercial operations on site – 2 hotels, small retail center, two casinos, private community club, lake/marina operations, managed public and private golf course operations, designed and constructed third public golf course and clubhouse, community liaison for development company, design review committee chair, property owners association chair. • President & CEO, Cavalear Corporation, Toledo, OH 1997-1999 Management of 3 master planned communities – one with lake and two with golf courses, development and construction management of 2 residential villa neighborhoods, unit construction for two villa developments, single family unit construction • Director of Commercial Sales, Amenity Management & Marketing, Westinghouse Communities, Inc. Naples/Fort Myers, FL 1983-1997 Amenity manager, managed public and private golf courses, builder program manager, builder sales manager, model row development, marketing manager for two large scale master planned communities – Pelican Bay and Gateway, started and managed Pelican Landing and Pelican Marsh marketing departments. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Expert Testimony • Mr. Weyer has testified as an expert in front of the following courts of law: o In the Circuit Court of the Fifth Judicial Circuit in and for Sumpter County, FL o Florida Department of Administrative Hearings o In the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit Court in and for Collier County, FL o in the Circuit Court of the Twentieth Judicial Circuit Court in and for Lee County, FL o United States Bankruptcy Court, Middle District of Florida, Fort Myers Division o United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, Fort Myers Division • Mr. Weyer has testified as an expert in front of the following governmental jurisdictions: o City of Naples, Florida o Collier County, Florida o City of Bonita Springs, Florida o Hillsborough County, Florida o Lee County, Florida o City of Fort Myers, Florida o City of Cape Coral, Florida o City of North Port, Florida o City of Tamarac, Florida o Miami-Dade County, Florida o Community Redevelopment Agency, Fort Myers, Florida o Community Redevelopment Advisory Board, Naples, Florida • Mr. Weyer has testified as an expert for following bond validation hearings: o Ave Maria Stewardship Community District o Fronterra Community Development District o Hacienda Lakes Community Development District o Cypress Shadows Community Development District Education University of Miami, Miami, FL MBA 1993 Michigan State University, Bachelor of Arts, Communications, 1977 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Bethany Brosious Senior Ecologist Offices in Florida and South Carolina 13620 Metropolis Avenue • Suite 200 • Ft. Myers, FL 33912 | 505 Belle Hall Parkway • Suite 102 • Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464 www.passarella.net Senior Ecologist for Passarella & Associates, Inc., an ecological consulting firm providing environmental and ecological services. Services include state, federal, and local permitting; agency negotiations; environmental impact assessments; ecological assessments; listed species surveys, permitting and relocation; state and federal wetland jurisdictionals; wetland mitigation design, permitting and construction observations; and environmental project management. REPRESENTATIVE PROJECT EXPERIENCE AVIATION Southwest Florida International Airport, Lee County COMMERCIAL & RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Corkscrew Crossing, Lee County Argo Manatee PUD, Collier County Avalon of Naples, Collier County Enclave Livingston, Collier County Residences at North Bay Village, Lee County Tree Farm PUD, Collier County The Terraces at Bonita Springs, Lee County Good Turn Center, Collier County Premier Airport Park, Lee County Meridian Center, Lee County Vincentian, Collier County Estero Grande, Lee County Creative Commons, Collier County MINING Cemex Alico North Quarry, Lee County East Naples Mine, Collier County San Marino Mine, Collier County Section 20 Mine, Collier County Charlotte County Mine, Charlotte County OTHER Collier County Public Schools, Collier County Suncoast Schools Federal Credit Union - Immokalee Branch, Collier County Bonita Springs Utilities, Lee County EXPERIENCE Senior Ecologist Passarella & Associates, Inc. (July 2012 – Present) Ecologist Passarella & Associates, Inc. (July 2006 – July 2012) Graduate Research Assistant Florida Gulf Coast University Coastal Watershed Institute (November 2004 – July 2006) Intern South Florida Water Management District (October 2003 – July 2006) EDUCATION Master of Science, Environmental Science 2010 Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, Florida Bachelor of Science, Animal Science 2003 University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida CERTIFICATIONS SCUBA Certified Diver by the National Association of Underwater Instructors PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Florida Association of Environmental Professionals Society of Wetland Scientists Calusa Nature Center and Planetarium Board of Trustees (2011 - 2013) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 SANITARY LIFT STATION CALCULATIONS 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Project No. 05TSC1438 HAMMOCK PARK COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Revised April 2019 Prepared For: Tract L Development, LLC 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 208-4079 Prepared By: Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274-0067 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1 Environmental Data Authors .........................................................................................................1 Vegetation Descriptions .................................................................................................................2 Listed Species Survey ....................................................................................................................4 Native Vegetation Preservation .....................................................................................................4 References ......................................................................................................................................5 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) ii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Native and Non-Native Habitat Types and Vegetation Acreages ......................... 5 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) iii LIST OF EXHIBITS Page Exhibit 1. Project Location Map ......................................................................................... E1-1 Exhibit 2. Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands Map ........................................................ E2-1 Exhibit 3. Native Vegetation Map ...................................................................................... E3-1 Exhibit 4. Listed Species Survey ........................................................................................ E4-1 Exhibit 5. Aerial with Bald Eagle Nest and Protection Zones ........................................... E5-1 Exhibit 6. Aerial with On-Site and Adjacent Off-Site Preservation Areas ........................ E6-1 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 1 INTRODUCTION The following environmental data report is provided in support of the zoning application for Hammock Park (Project). The following information was prepared in accordance with the Collier County environmental data submittal requirements outlined in Chapter 3.08.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The Project totals 19.13± acres and is located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Exhibit 1). More specifically, the Project is located northeast of the intersection of Collier Boulevard (County Road 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The Project is bordered by the Good Turn Center project to the north, the McMullen Parcel to the east, Rattlesnake Hammock Road to the south, and Collier Boulevard to the west. The Project includes a modification to an existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as Hammock Park Commerce Center (Ordinance No. 07-30). The modification includes the addition of a potential mixed-use or residential component. South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Permit No. 11-02130-P and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Permit No. SAJ-1999-04926 were issued for the Project on October 10, 2002 and February 12, 2009, respectively. Additional modifications to the SFWMD permit were issued on February 8, 2008 and July 1, 2014 and to the COE permit on July 21, 2014. The majority of the Project site is comprised of previously cleared, disturbed land. The Project site contains a 1.66± acre Collier County native vegetation preserve along the northern portion boundary which was designated as part of Ordinance No. 7-30. This report includes details regarding the authors’ qualifications, vegetation descriptions for the various on-site habitats, results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) in October 2018, and the minimum native vegetation preservation requirement. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA AUTHORS This report was prepared by Heather Samborski and Bethany Brosious. They both satisfy the environmental credential and experience requirements, per Section 3.08.00(A)2 of the Collier County LDC. Ms. Samborski is an Ecologist with PAI, with four years of consulting experience in the environmental industry. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Studies from Eastern Connecticut State University and a Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from Florida Gulf Coast University. Ms. Brosious is an Ecologist with PAI, with 12 years of consulting experience in the environmental industry. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Animal Sciences from the University of Florida and a Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from Florida Gulf Coast University. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 2 VEGETATION DESCRIPTIONS The existing vegetative cover and land uses on the Project site include a combination of undeveloped, disturbed land and forested uplands and wetlands with varying degrees of exotic infestation. The vegetation associations for the property were delineated using December 2017 rectified color aerials (Scale: 1" = 100'). Groundtruthing was conducted in October 2018. These delineations were classified based on the nomenclature of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) Levels III and IV (Florida Department of Transportation 1999). Level IV FLUCFCS was utilized to denote disturbance and “E” codes were used to identify levels of exotic species invasion (i.e., melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), downy rose-myrtle (Rhodomyrtus tomentosa), and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius)). AutoCAD Map 3D 2017 software was used to determine the acreage of each mapped polygon, produce summaries, and generate the final FLUCFCS map (Exhibit 2). A total of 12 vegetative associations and land uses (i.e., FLUCFCS codes) were identified on the property. The dominant habitat type on the property is Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401), accounting for 45.2 percent of the property (8.64± acres). Exotic vegetation documented on-site includes, but is not limited to, Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, torpedograss (Panicum repens), and melaleuca. The degree of exotic infestation ranges from 0 to nearly 100 percent cover. The Project site contains 13.59± acres of SFWMD and potential COE jurisdictional wetlands (Exhibits 2 and 3). The jurisdictional wetlands identified by FLUCFCS code include approximately 2.59± acres of Hydric Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E1); 1.89± acres of Hydric Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E4); 0.47± acre of Freshwater Marsh, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6419 E3); and 8.64± acres of Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401). The on-site wetland quality has been diminished by previously authorized site disturbance, a degraded regional hydrologic connection, and the infestation of exotic vegetation including Brazilian pepper, torpedograss, melaleuca, and earleaf acacia. The acreage and descriptions for each FLUCFCS classification are outlined below. Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4159 E1) The canopy contains slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The sub-canopy consists of slash pine, cabbage palm, wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes gulfdune paspalum (Paspalum monostachyum), little blue maidencane (Amphicarpum muehlenbergianum), and torpedograss. Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4159 E4) The canopy is similar to FLUCFCS Code 4159 E1. The sub-canopy consists of 76 to 100 percent cover by earleaf acacia, melaleuca, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover includes torpedograss, spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), bushy bluestem (Andropogon glomeratus), and beaksedge (Rhynchospora microcarpa). 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 3 Cypress, Pine, Cabbage Palm, Disturbed and Drained (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6245 E4) The canopy consists of slash pine, cypress (Taxodium distichum), and Brazilian pepper. The sub- canopy was mostly open with scattered cabbage palm. The ground cover includes grapevine (Vitis sp.), caesarweed (Urena lobata), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), torpedograss, and spermacoce. Hydric Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E1) The canopy consists primarily of slash pine. The sub-canopy contains slash pine, wax myrtle, myrsine (Myrsine cubana), dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), and cypress. The ground cover includes sand cordgrass (Spartina bakeri), sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), little blue maidencane, gulfdune paspalum, and spermacoce. Hydric Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E4) The canopy consists of slash pine with some cabbage palm. The sub-canopy contains Brazilian pepper and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes torpedograss, spermacoce, bushy bluestem, and beaksedge. Freshwater Marsh, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6419 E3) The canopy is open with scattered cypress. The sub-canopy is open with scattered cypress, Brazilian pepper, and willow (Salix caroliniana). The ground cover includes pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), arrowhead (Sagittaria lancifolia), smartweed (Polygonum spp.), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), torpedograss, and fireflag (Thalia geniculata). Disturbed Land (FLUCFCS Code 740) The canopy and sub-canopy are open. The ground cover consists of torpedograss, spermacoce, bushy bluestem, and coastal foxtail (Setaria corrugata). Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401) The canopy and sub-canopy are open with scattered melaleuca. The ground cover includes torpedograss, spermacoce, dog fennel, beaksedge, and inundated beaksedge (Rhynchospora inundata). Spoil Areas (FLUCFCS Code 743) The canopy is open and the sub-canopy includes Brazilian pepper and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes fennel (Eupatorium leptophyllum), torpedograss, spermacoce, and caesarweed. Road (FLUCFCS Code 814) This area consists of a paved road which occupies 0.01± acre or 0.1 percent of the property. Utilities (FLUCFCS Code 830) This is comprised of a pump station and accounts for 0.10± acre or 0.5 percent of the property. Electrical Transmission Lines (FLUCFCS Code 832) This area is occupied by Florida Power & Light powerlines and accounts for 0.30± acre or 1.6 percent of the property. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 4 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY A listed plant and wildlife species survey was conducted by PAI on the Project site on October 2, 2018. No listed wildlife species were observed during the listed species survey. The listed species survey methodology and results are provided as Exhibit 4. The Project has previously been reviewed by both the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as part of the state and federal permitting process. A biological opinion for the Project was issued by the USFWS on December 17, 2008 and addressed potential Project impacts to the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi). In addition, as part of a COE permit extension request, a USFWS concurrence letter was issued on March 20, 2014 and found that the Project “may affect but is not likely to adversely affect” the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus). During a December 2018 site visit, a bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nest was documented approximately 20 feet north of the Project site. The nest is located in a live slash pine approximately 800± feet east of Collier Boulevard. An aerial depicting the location of the bald eagle nest and USFWS protection zones is included as Exhibit 5. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the developer will coordinate with Collier County, the USFWS, and the FWCC with respect to the newly identified bald eagle nest regarding applicable guidelines and permitting requirements as described in the FWCC Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook (FWCC 2010) and the USFWS National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007). NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVATION Per PUD Ordinance 07-30, 15 percent of the on-site native vegetation was required to be preserved to meet the Collier County minimum native vegetation preservation requirement in accordance with Section 3.05.07.B.1 of the Collier County LDC. This resulted in a preservation requirement of 1.63± acres of native vegetation. A 1.66± acre Collier County native vegetation preserve, which both satisfies and exceeds the minimum native vegetation preservation requirement, was established on the northern boundary of the Project. The preserve is protected via a conservation easement granted to Collier County and the SFWMD. The preserve has been enhanced through the removal of exotic vegetation and supplemental plantings. The proposed zoning amendment application incudes the addition of a residential land use to the PUD. Per LDC Section 3.05.07.B.1, for a residential or mixed-use development that is less than 20 acres in size, the minimum preserve requirement is 15 percent of the native vegetation. The Project contains 7.14± acres of native vegetation. A utility easement which bisects the eastern portion of the property was not classified as native vegetation for this zoning amendment application. In addition, 2.22± acres area of Disturbed Land; 8.64± acres of Disturbed Land, Hydric; 0.37± acre of Spoil Areas; 0.01± acre of Road; 0.10± acre of Utilities; and 0.30± acre of Electrical Transmission Lines were classified as non-native vegetation. Also excluded was 0.35± acre of Freshwater Marsh (50-75% Exotics) located within the existing electrical powerline easement (Exhibit 3). 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 5 Table 1 provides a summary of the existing native vegetation communities on-site and the native vegetation preservation calculation. Table 1. Native and Non-Native Habitat Types and Vegetation Acreages FLUCFCS Code Description Native Acreage Non-Native Acreage 4159 E1 Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) 0.16 4159 E4 Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) 0.63 6245 E4 Cypress, Pine, Cabbage Palm, Disturbed and Drained (76-100% Exotics) 1.75 6259 E1 Hydric Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) 2.59 6259 E4 Hydric Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) 1.89 6419 E3 Freshwater Marsh, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) 0.12 0.35 740 Disturbed Land 2.22 7401 Disturbed Land, Hydric 8.64 743 Spoil Areas 0.37 814 Road 0.01 830 Utilities 0.10 832 Electrical Transmission Lines 0.30 Total 7.14 11.99 Minimum Retained Native Vegetation Requirement Per Collier County Ordinance No. 07-30 1.63* *Per Collier County Ordinance No. 07-30, 15 percent of the on-site native vegetation was preserved. Please see the Master Concept Plan and Exhibit 6 for the preserve area location. The on-site preserve location and habitats were selected according to the priority criteria set forth in Sections 3.05.07(A)4 and 3.05.05(A)5 of the Collier County LDC. The on-site preserve maintained the highest quality native vegetation on-site, connects to off-site preservation areas to the north, and is in close proximity to off-site adjacent preservation areas to the east (Exhibit 6). Enhancement activities conducted within the preserve areas included the removal of exotic vegetation and supplemental planting. The preserve area is currently protected via a conservation easement granted to both Collier County and the SFWMD and will remain protected in perpetuity. REFERENCES Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Second Edition. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2010. Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook. Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) REVIEWED BY DRAWN BY REVISED DATE DATE DATECCHHAARRLLEEMMAAGGNNEEBBLLVVDD AAUUGG UUSS TT AA BBLLVVDDW HITA K ER R DWHITAKER R D LLAAKKEEWWOOOODDBBLLVVDDAALLBBIIRRDDVV EE RR OO NN AAWW AALLKK CC II RROOUU TT EE RR DD RR DDIIXX IIEE DD RR TTRREEVVIISSOOBBAAYYBBLLVVDDHHEENNLL EEYYDDRRG A I L B LV DGAIL B LV D GGAABBRRIIEELLCCIIRRCOUNTY BARN RDCOUNTY BARN RDN E W M A N D RNEWMAN D R NN OO RR TT HH RR DD TTEEXXAASSAAVVEEGE OR G I A A V EGEOR G I A A V E CO P E L NCOPE L N CR EW S R DCREWS R D PP OO LLLLYYAAVVEEPALM DRPALM DRLE BUFFS RDLE BUFFS RDBENFIELD RDBENFIELD RDMA RK LE Y AV EMARKLEY AV E TT HH OOMMAASSSSOONN DDRRCCOO RRSSOOBBEE LLLLOODDRRTT EE RR YYLLRRDDF L OR I D A N A V E F L OR I D A N A V E SMITH RDSMITH RDRR OO YYAA LLWWOOOODDBBLLVVDDLIVINGSTON RDLIVINGSTON RDWAS HBURN AV EWASHBURN AV E KKIINNGGSSWWAAYYCCOOUUNNTTRRYYSSIIDDEEDDRR BE C K B LV DBECK B LV D 33 22 NN DD AAVV EE SS WW BBAA RR EE FF OO OO T T WWI I LLLLI I AAMMSSRRDDNNAAPPLLEESSHHEERRIITTAAGGEE D DRR CC LL UU BB EE SSTTAATTEESSDDRRCCEERRRROO MM AARR DDRR WWIILLDDFFLLOOWWEERR WWAA YY LLEELLYYRREESSOORRTTBBLLVVDDCCEELLEESSTTEEDDRRGGLLEENNEEAAGGLLEEBBLLVVDD GGRRAAN N DDLLEE LLYYDDRR SSAAIINNTT AA NN DD RR EE WW SS BBLLVVDDWWHHIITTEELLAAKKEE BBLLVVDD KK IINN GG SS LLAAKKEEBBLLVVDDBLACKBURN RDBLACKBURN RD SANTA BARBARA BLVDSANTA BARBARA BLVDRA D IO R DRADIO R D RR AATT TT LL EE SS NN AAKK EE HH AAMM MM OO CC KK RR DD D AV IS B LV DDAVIS B LV D S A B AL PA L M R DSABAL PA L M R DCOLLIER BLVD (CR 951)COLLIER BLVD (CR 951)KKEENN TTDDRR LLAAMMBB TT OO NN LLNN BB EELLVVIILL LLEEBBLLVVDD (/41 ;3EXIT101 §¨¦75 Gulf of MexicoOL DUS41S AN MARCOD R OIL WELL R D EVERGLADES BLVD¿À951 ¿À858 ¿À837 ¿À839 ¿À846 ¿À29 (/41 §¨¦75 C O L L I E RCOLLIER L E ELEE ^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ MIAMI TAMPA NAPLES ORLANDO KEY WEST SARASOTA PENSACOLA FORT MYERS VERO BEACH LAKE PLACID PANAMA CITY GAINESVILLE TALLAHASSEE JACKSONVILLE DAYTONA BEACH FORT LAUDERDALE¶ PROJECT LOCATIONSEC 14, TWP 50 S, RNG 26 E EXHIBIT 1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP T.F. B.B. 10/8/18 10/8/18HAMMOCK PARK 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) EXHIBIT 2 AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) P/L743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.04 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)740(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)~CR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~832(0.30 Ac.±)7401(0.28 Ac.±)6419E3(0.47 Ac.±)7401(0.21 Ac.±)740(0.12 Ac.±)6259E1(1.50 Ac.±)4159E1(0.16 Ac.±)4159E4(0.63 Ac.±)6245E4(0.15 Ac.±)740(2.05 Ac.±)814(0.01 Ac.±)6259E1(<0.01 Ac.±)6259E4(1.89 Ac.±)7401(6.96 Ac.±)7401(0.31 Ac.±)6245E4(1.60 Ac.±)~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~6259E1(1.09 Ac.±)830(0.05 Ac.±)7401(0.93 Ac.±)J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 2 Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands 101618.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 10:14am Plotted by: TomFD.B.B.B.REVISIONS10/16/18DATEDATE10/16/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 100'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.FLUCFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM 1"=200' AERIALPHOTOGRAPHS AND LOCATIONS APPROXIMATED.HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAPEXHIBIT 2LEGEND:SFWMD AND COE WETLANDS(13.64 Ac.±)SURVEYED WETLAND LINEFLUCFCS PER FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER ANDFORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCFCS)(FDOT 1999).SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER VANESSE &DAYLOR DRAWING NO. PASS0318041.DWG DATEDMARCH 22, 2004.WETLAND LINES REVIEWED AND APPROVED BYSFWMD AS PART OF ERP NO. 11-02130-P.9.A.2.ePacket Pg. 404Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) EXHIBIT 3 NATIVE VEGETATION MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) P/L743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.04 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)740(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)~CR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~832(0.30 Ac.±)7401(0.28 Ac.±)7401(0.21 Ac.±)740(0.12 Ac.±)6259E1(1.50 Ac.±)4159E1(0.16 Ac.±)4159E4(0.63 Ac.±)6245E4(0.15 Ac.±)740(2.05 Ac.±)814(0.01 Ac.±)6259E1(<0.01 Ac.±)6259E4(1.89 Ac.±)7401(6.96 Ac.±)7401(0.31 Ac.±)6245E4(1.60 Ac.±)~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~6259E1(1.09 Ac.±)6419E3(0.35 Ac.±)6419E3(0.12 Ac.±)830(0.05 Ac.±)7401(0.93 Ac.±)J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 3 Native Vegetation Map 101618.dwg Tab: 17x11 Mar 26, 2019 - 10:15am Plotted by: TomFD.B.B.B.REVISIONS10/16/18DATEDATE10/16/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 100'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.FLUCFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM 1"=200' AERIALPHOTOGRAPHS AND LOCATIONS APPROXIMATED.HAMMOCK PARKNATIVE VEGETATION MAPEXHIBIT 3LEGEND:NATIVE VEGETATION(7.14 Ac.±)SURVEYED WETLAND LINEELECTRICAL POWER LINEEASEMENTFLUCFCS PER FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER ANDFORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCFCS)(FDOT 1999).SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER VANESSE &DAYLOR DRAWING NO. PASS0318041.DWG DATEDMARCH 22, 2004.WETLAND LINES REVIEWED AND APPROVED BYSFWMD AS PART OF ERP NO. 11-02130-P.9.A.2.ePacket Pg. 406Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) EXHIBIT 4 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) E4-1 HAMMOCK PARK LISTED SPECIES SURVEY Revised March 2019 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) on October 2, 2018 for the 19.13± acre Hammock Park (Project). The Project includes a proposed mixed-use commercial/residential development with associated infrastructure and stormwater management system. Listed species surveys for the Project were previously conducted in September 2006 and July 2012. The Project is located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Figure 1). More specifically, the Project is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Collier Boulevard (County Road 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The Project is bound by Good Turn Center to the north, the McMullen Parcel to the east, Rattlesnake Hammock Road to the south, and the 951 Canal and Collier Boulevard to the west. The Project site contains an on-site preservation area that is located on the northern boundary. The remainder of the Project site is comprised of undeveloped, partly forested land that has been invaded to various degrees by exotic vegetation. 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD SURVEY METHODOLOGY A literature review and field survey was conducted to determine whether the Project site was being utilized by state and/or federally-listed species as identified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. In addition, the property was surveyed for plant species listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and the USFWS as endangered, threatened, or commercially exploited or species included on the Collier County Rare and Less Rare plant lists (Land Development Code (LDC) Section 3.04.03). 2.1 Literature Review The literature review involved an examination of available information on listed species in the Project’s geographical region. The literature sources reviewed included the FWCC Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species (2017); Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991); USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region (1987); the Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan (Logan et al. 1993); the Landscape Conservation Strategy Map (Kautz et al. 2006); and USFWS and FWCC databases for telemetry locations of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW), Florida black bear (Ursus americanus 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) E4-2 floridanus), Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), and wading bird rookeries (such as the wood stork (Mycteria americana)) in Collier County. The FWCC and USFWS database information is updated on a periodic basis and is current through different dates, depending on the species. The FWCC information that was reviewed is current through the noted dates for the following four species: Florida panther telemetry – September 2018; bald eagle nest locations – April 2016; black bear telemetry – December 2007; and RCW locations – August 2017. 2.2 Field Survey The field survey was conducted during daylight hours by qualified ecologists walking parallel belt transects across the Project site. Transects were spaced to ensure that sufficient visual coverage of ground and flora was obtained. Approximate transect locations and spacing are shown on Figure 2. At regular intervals the ecologists stopped, remained quiet, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. The survey was conducted with the aid of 8x or 10x power binoculars. The listed wildlife species surveyed for included, but were not limited to, gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), RCW, wood stork, Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), and Florida panther. The listed plant species surveyed for included species typical to forested upland and wetland habitats in this geographical region, as well as listed epiphytes and terrestrial orchids common in Southwest Florida. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Literature Review The literature search found no documented occurrences for listed wildlife species on the Project site (Figure 3). The closest documented bald eagle nest is an unnumbered nest located approximately 20 feet north of the northern property boundary. The nest was discovered during a December 2018 site visit and is located in a live slash pine (Pinus elliottii) tree. The location of the nest and the USFWS eagle protection zones are depicted in Figure 4. Bald eagles are not a state or federally-listed species; however, they are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. No RCW colonies or cavity trees are documented on the Project site, per the FWCC’s database (Figure 3). The closest documented RCW location is located approximately 0.25 mile west of the Project site. This location and the others documented west of Collier Boulevard are considered relic or historic locations, as there are no currently known active cavity trees west of Collier Boulevard, based on PAI’s survey experience in 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) E4-3 this region over the last 20 years. The RCW is a state and federally-listed endangered species. The Project site is located within the 30± kilometer (18.6± miles) Core Foraging Area (CFA) of one documented wood stork rookery (No. 619018) (Figure 5). The wetlands within the proposed development limits are predominantly infested with exotic vegetation including torpedograss (Panicum repens), spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). As such, the property’s foraging potential is rather poor. The wood stork is a state and federally-listed threatened species. No Florida panther telemetry is located on the Project site; however, panther telemetry points were documented in the immediate vicinity of the Project (Figure 3). The telemetry points were from Florida panther Nos. 148 and 219 and were recorded in August 2010 and December 2013, respectively. Both panthers have since died. The property is within the Florida panther Primary Zone (Kautz et al. 2006) (Figure 6). The Florida panther is a state- and federally-listed endangered species. The Project site is located within the USFWS Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridana) Consultation Area but outside of the USFWS Florida bonneted bat Focal Area (Figure 7). The Florida bonneted bat is a state and federally-listed endangered species. 3.2 Field Survey The field survey was conducted on October 2, 2018. Weather conditions during the survey were partly cloudy skies, with 10 to 15 miles per hour easterly winds, and temperatures in the upper 80s to low 90s. The field survey identified no listed wildlife or plant species on the Project site (Figure 2). No listed species were documented utilizing the Project site during the October 2018 survey. During a December 2018 site visit, a bald eagle nest was discovered approximately 20 feet north of the northern property boundary (Figure 4). 4.0 SUMMARY The literature search and review of agency databases found no documented occurrences for listed species on the Project site. The Project site is located within the Primary Zone for the Florida panther and is located within one documented wood stork colony CFA. The Project is located within the consultation area for the RCW and the Florida bonneted bat. The October 2, 2018 field survey documented no listed species within the Project limits. In December 2018, an active bald eagle nest was documented approximately 20 feet north of the Project. This is a previously undocumented nest location. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the developer will coordinate with Collier County, the USFWS, and the FWCC with respect to the newly identified bald eagle nest regarding applicable guidelines and permitting requirements as described in the FWCC Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook (FWCC 2010) and the USFWS National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007). 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) E4-4 5.0 REFERENCES Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2010. Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2017. Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species. Official Lists, Bureau of Non-Game Wildlife, Division of Wildlife. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Tallahassee, Florida. Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape-scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation, Volume 130, Issue 1, Pages 118-133 Logan, Todd, Andrew C. Eller, Jr., Ross Morrell, Donna Ruffner, and Jim Sewell. 1993. Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan South Florida Population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Gainesville, Florida. Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. Robson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986 - 1989. Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) REVIEWED BY DRAWN BY REVISED DAT E DAT E DAT ECCHHAARRLLEEMMAAGGNNEEBBLLVVDDAAUUGGUUSSTTAABBLLVVDDWHITAKER RDWHITAKER RD AALLBBIIRRDDVVEERR OONNAAWWAALL KK CCIIRROOUUTTEERR DDRR DDIIXXII EE DDRR HHEENNLL EEYYDDRRGAIL BLVDGAIL BLVD GGAABBRRIIEELLCCIIRRCOUNTY BARN RDCOUNTY BARN RDNEWMA N DRNEWMAN DR HHAARRDDEEEESSTTNORT H RDNORTH RD TTEEXXAASSAAVVEEGEOR GIA AVE GEOR GIA AVE COP E LNCOPE LN CREWS RDCREWS RDINDUSTRIAL BLVDINDUSTRIAL BLVDPP OO LLLLYYAAVVEEPALM DRPALM DRLE BUFFS RDLE BUFFS RDBENFIELD RDBENFIELD RDMARKLEY AVEMARKLEY AVE TT HHOOMM AASSSSOONN DDRRCCOORRSSOOBBEE LLLLOODDRRTTEERR YYLLRRDDFLORIDAN AVE FLORIDAN AVE SMITH RDSMITH RDRROO YYAA LLWWOOOODDBBLLVVDDLIVINGSTON RDLIVINGSTON RDWASHBURN AVEWASHBURN AVE KKIINNGGSSWWAAYYCCOOUUNNTTRRYYSSIIDDEEDDRRBBEECCKK BBLLVVDD 32 ND AVE SW32ND AVE SW BBAA RR EEFF OO OO TT WWI I LLLLII AAMMSSRRDDNNAAPPLLEESSHHEERRIITTAAGGEE DDRR CC LLUUBB EE SSTTAATTEESSDDRRCCEERRRROOMMAARR DDRR WWIILLDDFFLLOOWWEERRWW AA YY LLEELLYYRREESSOORRTTBBLLVVDDCCEELLEESSTTEEDDRRGGLLEENNEEAAGGLLEEBBLLVVDD GGRRAANNDDLLEELLYYDDRRSSAAIINNTTAANNDDRREEWWSSBBLLVVDD WWHHIITTEELLAAKKEEBBLLVVDD KKIINNGGSSLLAAKKEE BB LLVVDDBLACKBURN RDBLACKBURN RD SANTA BARBARA BLVDSANTA BARBARA BLVDRADIO RDRADIO RD RRAATTTTLLEESSNNAAKKEE HHAAMMMMOOCC KK RR DD DAV IS BLVDDAVIS BLVD SABAL PALM RDSABAL PALM RDCOLLIER BLVD (CR 951)COLLIER BLVD (CR 951)KKEENN TTDDRR LLAAMMBB TT OONN LLNN BB EELLVV IILL LLEEBBLLVV DD (/41 ;3EXIT101 §¨¦75 Gulf of Mexico OLDUS41SAN MARCOD R OIL W ELL R D EVERGLADES BLVD¿À951 ¿À858 ¿À837 ¿À839 ¿À846 ¿À29 (/41 §¨¦75 C O L L I E RCOLLIER L E ELEE ^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ MIAMI TAMPA NAPLES ORL ANDO KEY WEST SARASOTA PENSAC OL A FORT MY ERS VERO BEAC H LAKE PL ACID PANAMA C ITY GAIN ESVILLE TALLAHASSEE JAC KSON VI LLE DAYTONA BEACH FORT LAUD ERD ALE¶ PRO JE CT LOCATIONSEC 14, T WP 50 S, RNG 26 E FIGUR E 1. P ROJECT LOCATION MA P T.F. B.B. 10/8/18 10/8/18HAMMOCK PARK 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) P/L~SR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\LSS\Figure 2 Aerial with Survey Transects.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Oct 25, 2018 - 2:18pm Plotted by: ThoneST.F.B.B.REVISIONS10/1/18DATEDATE10/1/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 100'13620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Fort Myers, Florida 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BY HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH SURVEY TRANSECTSFIGURE 2NOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.LEGEND:SURVEY TRANSECTS9.A.2.ePacket Pg. 413Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) DRAWN BY REVIEW ED BY REVISED DATE DATE DATE                LEGEND  A  #* !H  !( A  0 0.5 1Miles ¶ FIGU RE 3. DOCUMENTED O CCURRENCES OF LISTED SPECIES D.B. R.F. 10/10/18 10/10/18HAMMOCK PARK A !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H!H !H !H !H !H!H !H !H !H !H!H A A A A A A A A A A A A AA A BE CK BLV D SANTA BARBARA BLVDCOUNTY BARN RDRADIO RD RAT TLESNAKE H AMMOC K DAVIS BLVD ¿À951 (/41 §¨¦75 PROJECT LOCATION T.F.3/26/19 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) P/L~SR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\LSS\Figure 4 Aerial with Eagle Nest 011619.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 11:48am Plotted by: TomFT.F.B.B.REVISIONS10/1/18DATEDATE10/1/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 200'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'SOFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER RWA, INC. DRAWINGNo.501160003DM01.DWG DATED APRIL 2, 2008.HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH BALD EAGLE NEST AND PROTECTION ZONESFIGURE 4LEGEND:APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF BALD EAGLE NEST330' ZONE660' ZONE9.A.2.ePacket Pg. 415Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) DRAWN BY REVIEW ED BY REVISED DATE DATE DATE kj kjkj kj kj Gulf of Mexico BarronCollier 619018(Corkscrew) Sadie Cypress LI VI NGSTONRDLOGAN BLVDBIRDONRDTERRY S T CRAYTONRDR AD I O RDTHREEOAKSPKWYVANDERBILT DROI L WE L L G R A D E R D CAMP KEAIS RDD A V IS BLVDO L D US41 GOLD EN G A T E P K W Y GOODLETTEFRANKRDBO NITA BEACH RD ESTEROBLVD AIRPORT-PULLING RDGOLDE N G AT E B LV D SAN MARCO DROI L WE L L RD C OR K S C R EW RD EVERGLADES BLVD¿À849 ¿À850 ¿À951 ¿À858 ¿À837 ¿À846 ¿À29 (/41 §¨¦75 C O L L I E RCOLLIER L E ELEE 0 3 6Miles ¶         LEGEND  kj      FIGU RE 5. FLORIDA WOO D STORK NESTING COLONIES D.B. R.F . 10/9/18 10/9/18HAMMOCK PARK PROJECT LOCATION AND 18.6 MILE C ORE FO RAGING AREAS 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Gulf of Mexico (/41B (/27 (/41 C H A R L O T T ECHARLOTTE C O L L I E RCOLLIER G L A D E SGLADES H E N D R YHENDRYLEELEE M O N R O EMONROE §¨¦75 REVIEWED BY DRAWN BY REVISED DATE DATE DATE              FIGURE 6. PANTHER ZONES WITH PANTHER FOCU S AREA D.B. R.F. 10/9/18 10/9/18HAMMOCK PARK 0 5 10Miles ¶ LEGEND       PROJECT LOCATION 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) EXHIBIT 5 AERIAL WITH BALD EAGLE NEST AND PROTECTION ZONES 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) P/L~SR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 5 Aerial with Eagle Nest 011619.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 10:19am Plotted by: TomFT.F.B.B.REVISIONS10/1/18DATEDATE10/1/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 200'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'SOFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER RWA, INC. DRAWINGNo.501160003DM01.DWG DATED APRIL 2, 2008.HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH BALD EAGLE NEST AND PROTECTION ZONESEXHIBIT 5LEGEND:APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF BALD EAGLE NEST330' ZONE660' ZONE9.A.2.ePacket Pg. 419Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) EXHIBIT 6 AERIAL WITH ON-SITE AND ADJACENT OFF-SITE PRESERVE AREAS 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) P/LHAMMOCK PARKMCMULLENPARCELGOOD TURN CENTERHACIENDA LAKES~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~~CR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 6 Aerial with On-site and Off-site Preserve Areas.dwg Tab: 11X8-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 10:21am Plotted by: TomF SCALE: 1" = 300'DRAWN BYREVIEWED BYREVISEDT.F.B.B.12/6/18DATEDATE12/6/18DATENOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.EXHIBIT 6. AERIAL WITH ON-SITE AND ADJACENT OFF-SITE PRESERVE AREASHAMMOCK PARKLEGEND:ON-SITE PRESERVE AREAOFF-SITE PRESERVE AREAS9.A.2.ePacket Pg. 421Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 PUBLIC FACILITIES MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) #1 #1 #2 #1#1 #1 #2#1 #2 #3 #4 #1 !H !H !H !H!H Hammock Park ¯ 0 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2Miles 1 Mile 2 Miles 3 Miles Collier BlvdRattlesnake Hammock Rd Collier BlvdU S 41Santa Barbara BlvdU S 41 Radio Rd §¨¦75 Urban Services & Facilities MapExhibit IV.E Hammock Park Legend Hammock Park Parcel Collier County Parks Employment Nodes !H Commercial Plaza by Davis Blvd !H Hacienda Lakes Bussiness Park !H Florida SouthWestern College Center !H Physicians Regional Hospital !H Walmart Supercenter Plaza Collier County Libraries #1 South Regional Library Collier County Schools #1 Calusa Park Elementary School #2 Lely Elementary School #3 Lely High School #4 Parkside Elementary School Golden Gate Fire Department #1 Station 72 #2 Station 75 Collier County Sheriff #1 East Naples Substation Dist 3 Physicians Regional - Collier Blvd #1 Physicians Regional - Collier Blvd Collier County EMS #1 Medic 25 #2 Medic 75 (Housed at FD Station 75) BusStop #1 BusStop Route17 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 PUBLIC FACILITIES 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Public Facilities Analysis Page 1 of 3 Hammock Park GMPA Exhibit V.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis Revised March 2019 The proposed text amendment is site-specific and only applies to the northeast corner of Mixed Use Activity Center #7, specifically the Hammock Park PUD. The Hammock Park CPUD currently permits up to 160,000 square feet of commercial uses on approximately 19 acres. The GMPA proposes to add a maximum of 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units with a maximum of 148,500 square feet of commercial, so as not to exceed the existing trip count for the currently approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses. The following public facilities analysis evaluates the project impacts on potable water, wastewater, drainage, parks, schools, roadways, fire/EMS, and solid waste. The source for the LOS information is the 2018 AUIR). 1. POTABLE WATER Adopted Level of Service Standard = 150 GPD/person/day for Collier County Utilities Existing Demand: None Total Existing Demand: 0 GPD Proposed Demand: Multi-family 265 DU x 150 GPD x 2.5 x 1.3 = 129,188 GPD Total Proposed Demand: 129,188 GPD Permitted Capacity: 52.75 MGD Required Plant Capacity FY24: 44.8 MGD The proposed GMP amendment results in an increased potable water demand of 129,188 GPD. The property is located within the Collier County potable water service area. The County has existing plant capacity of approximately 48.75 MGD. The proposed addition of 265 multi-family dwelling units will not create any LOS issues in the 5-year planning horizon. This Project will have no significant impact on the potable water system and capacity is available in Collier County. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Public Facilities Analysis Page 2 of 3 2. SANITARY SEWER Adopted Level of Service Standard = 150 GPD/person/day Existing Demand: None Total Existing Demand: 0 GPD Proposed Demand: Multi-family 265 DU x 100 GPD x 2.5 X 1.5 = 99,375 GPD Total Proposed Demand: 99,375 GPD Permitted Capacity: 16.0 MGD Required Plant Capacity FY24: 16.0 MGD The proposed GMP amendment results in an increased sanitary sewer demand of 99,375 GPD. The subdistrict is located in the South Sewer Service Area of the Collier County Water/Sewer District. This Project will have no significant impact on the Collier County Regional Sewer System. 3. ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROADS Please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement for discussions of the project’s impact on level of service for arterial and collector roadways within the project’s radius of development influence. 4. DRAINAGE The County has adopted a LOS standard for private developments which requires development to occur consistent with water quantity and quality standards established in Ordinances 74-50, 90-10, 2001-27, and LDC Ordinance 2004-41, as may be amended. The single project within the proposed subdistrict has been issued a surface water management permit by the South Florida Water Management District which has established criteria for the volume of water stored on site as well as the quality of the water which may be discharged from the site. The development within the subdistrict is consistent with the County LOS standards. 5. SOLID WASTE The adopted LOS for solid waste is two years of lined cell capacity at the previous 3-year average tons per year disposal rate and 10 years of permittable landfill capacity of the disposal rate. Existing Demand: Retail 160,000 SF x 5 lbs./1,000 SF = 800 lbs./day x 365 = 292,000 lbs./year or 292 tons/year 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park GMPA Public Facilities Analysis Page 3 of 3 Total Existing Demand: 292,000 lbs./year Proposed Demand: Retail 148,500 SF x 5 lbs./1,000 SF = 500 lbs./day x 365 = 271,013 lbs./year or 271 tons/year Multi-family 265 DU x 0.54 tons per person x 2.4 = 343.44 tons Total Proposed Demand: 614,453 lbs./year The proposed GMP amendment results in an increased solid waste demand of 322,453 lbs. a year. Current landfill capacity in 2018 is anticipated to be 18,710,256 tons. There are no current capacity issues, and none are anticipated through the year 2069. 6. Parks: Community and Regional The proposed 265 multi-family dwellings will pay park impact fees to mitigate for their impacts on this public facility. No adverse impacts to Community or Regional Parks result from the amendment of the subdistrict. 7. Schools The proposed 265 multi-family dwellings will pay school impact fees to mitigate for their impacts. No adverse impacts to schools result from the amendment to this subdistrict. 8. Fire Control and EMS The proposed project lies within the Greater Naples Fire and Rescue District. The Greater Naples Fire and Rescue District - Station #23 is located at 6055 Collier Blvd., which is approximately 4.5 miles from the property boundary. No significant impacts to Fire Control level of service are anticipated due to the proposed project. Estimated impact fees for EMS and fire would be determined at time of SDP based on each unit. Sheriff, Fire Protection and EMS Services location/address of facilities intended to serve the project are; North Collier Fire and Rescue District - Station #23 6055 Collier Blvd. Collier County Sheriff North Naples Substation 8075 Lely Cultural Pkwy. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 APARTMENT MARKET NEEDS ANALYSIS 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) APARTMENT MARKET NEEDS ANALYSIS FOR HAMMOCK PARK AT THE NE INTERSECTION OF COLLIER BOULEVARD AND RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA October 22, 2018 Prepared for Wilton Land Company, LLC C/O Mr. David Torres 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, FL 33912 Prepared by Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. Suite 100 707 Orchid Drive Naples, Florida 34102 (239) 269-1341 Ree-i.com 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 1 Background The Wilton Land Company (“Applicant”) is proposing a site-specific text amendment to the Collier County (“County”) Future Land Use Element, Mixed Use Activity Center #7 to allow for up to 265 multi-family dwelling units (limited to rental apartments) with the Hammock Park project, along wit the existing permitted commercial uses. The Hammock Park subject property (“Property”) comprises 19+/- acres and is generally located at the northeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road in unincorporated Collier County, Florida. The Property is designated within the Urban Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center #7, and Urban Residential Fringe (URF) future land use designations. The Property is zoned Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) pursuant to Ordinance 07-30. The CPUD allows up to 160,000 square feet of commercial uses, including commercial retail and office. The Property is currently undeveloped and partially vegetated. The proposed text amendment will allow for build-out of this quadrant of an arterial intersection and activity center node with a compact, mixed-use project that provides for market-rate rental housing in close proximity to available public infrastructure, goods, services and employment. The Applicant has requested an apartment market study from Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. (“Consultant”) to accompany the application. The apartment market study is comprised of four parts; the site assessment, the supply component, the demand component and the supply/demand comparison analysis. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 2 1.0 Site Assessment 1.1 Subject Property Attributes The Subject Property is located on the north side of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and the east side of Collier Boulevard (County Road 951) approximately three and a half miles south of Interstate 75 in Section 14 – Township 50 – Range 26. An aerial locator photo in Figure 1.1.1 is followed by a summary of the Subject Property’s legal, location, zoning, and land use attributes obtained from the Collier County Property Appraiser website. Figure 1.1.1 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 3 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser 2.0 Market Area 2.1 Market Area Definition During the pre-application meeting for the Subject Site, County Staff indicated that the apartment needs analysis market area should follow the urban services boundary area which is a mile east of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and would include all of the urban area of the County. The Consultant utilized the ESRI Business Analyst GIS program to calculate the boundaries of the Subject Site’s market area. Figure 2.2.1 below depicts the market area from the Subject Property. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 4 Figure 2.2.1 Subject Property Market Area Source: ESRI ArcGIS Business Analyst Mapping System 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 5 2.2 Market Area Demographic Detail Table 2.2.1 below shows the 2010 U.S. Census demographic profile of the population that lives within the 282 square-mile market area of the subject site. The remaining 2010 U.S. Census data can be found in Appendix A. It is important to note that the U.S. Census Bureau uses the Decennial Census as the basis for issuing their annual American Community Survey census data that is used in the demand section of this report. The 2018 ACS report was the most recent data source available at the time of this report. Table 2.2.1 Source: ESRI and U.S. Census Bureau 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 6 Also important to the development of this apartment project is the location of businesses and subsequent employment centers located near the subject site. Figure 2.2.1 below shows businesses near the subject site with 50 or more employees that would benefit from having residential offerings available to their employees. Figure 2.2.1 Despite an economy that relies a great deal on real estate, construction and tourism, the industry mix for the Naples MSA is not severely out of line with U.S. averages. The shares of employment devoted to the Trade, Transportation & Utilities; Financial Activities; Information; and Education & Health Services industries are within about 100 basis points (“bps”) of the national norms. Figure 2.2.2 on the next page shows the industry mix within the Naples Metropolitan Statistical Area (“MSA”). 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 7 The largest differences from the national norms are in Leisure & Hospitality (+939 bps); Manufacturing (-592 bps); Professional & Business Services (-284 bps); Other Services (+249 bps); and Government (-596 bps). Given the number of wealthy retirees who make Naples at least their winter home, it is not surprising to see larger shares of employment in industries that cater to this population. Although the share of Health Services was not significantly different from the U.S. share, it has increased by about 200 bps since 1996. The increase of industries outside of construction and leisure/hospitality will continue to diversify the market economy and will continue to increase the median income leading to an increase in the demand for apartment living as a residential choice. Although the nearby employment hubs will provide a source of future residents, the demographics trends and lifestyle choices will also determine the subject site’s demand potential. 3.0 MARKET ANALYSIS 3.1 Market Area Supply Shown on the next page is a map and table of existing and future apartment complexes located in Collier County. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 8 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9 The previous map shows a mixture of subsidized and market rate apartment complexes. For purposes of this study, the subsidized apartment complexes were removed along with the apartment complexes east of the urban services boundary located 1 mile east of Collier Boulevard/CR 951 including Ave Maria and Immokalee. 3.2 Market Rate Apartments Market rate apartments were the first developed in the county, with subsidized housing starting in the late 1980’s to accommodate the increasing employment for hotels and other hospitality related industries. There is a total of 5,579 market rate rental units in Collier County which accounts for 46.32% of the total. The increase in market rate apartment supply of 3- and 4-bedroom units did not begin until 2000 when the availability of affordable family accommodations was restricting due to rapidly rising home prices. Home prices are still on the rise, which continues to create a demand for the larger market rate apartment units. Most of the market rate rental apartment communities are located on major arterial roadways allowing for easy access to a wider market area. Market rate rental apartment complexes prefer to be located closer to employment centers, entertainment venues and other support facilities to attract tenants. Average occupancy rate for market rate apartments has been hovering just above 95% for the past five years, which is indicative of a very tight under-supplied rental market. Table 3.2.1 on the next page shows the market rate apartment complexes that are used in this report. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 10 Table 3.2.1 Collier County Market Rate Apartment Complexes County Map ID Apartment Complex Address Units Acres Density 2 Belvedere 260 Quail Forest Blvd Naples 162 14.87 10.89 3 Berkshire Reserve 3536 Winifred Row Ln Naples 146 11.53 12.66 5 Brittany Bay I & II 14815 Triangle Bay Dr Naples 392 13.06 30.02 6 Bryn Mawr 7701 Davis Blvd Naples 240 11.55 20.78 12 Ibis Club 8210 Ibis club Dr Naples 134 14.62 9.17 14 La Costa 3105 La Costa Cir Naples 276 31.01 8.90 15 Laguna Bay 2602 Fountain View Cir Naples 363 38.19 9.51 16 Malibu Lakes 2115 Malibu Lakes Cir Naples 356 9.88 36.03 18 Naples 701 3531 Plantation Way Naples 188 11.81 15.92 19 Naples Place I-III 4544 Sunset Rd Naples 160 12.21 13.10 21 Northgate Club 4300 Atoll CT Naples 120 9.99 12.01 22 Oasis - Arbor Walk 2277 Arbour Walk Cir Naples 216 10.82 19.96 25 River Reach 2000 River Reach Dr Naples 556 50.15 11.09 28 San Marino-Aventine 9300 Marino Cir Naples 350 38.96 8.98 29 Shadowood Park 6475 Sea Wolf Ct Naples 96 16.95 5.66 33 Summer Wind-Arium Gulfshore 5301 Summerwind Dr Naples 368 28.05 13.12 36 Waverley Place 5300 Hemingway Ln Naples 300 27.42 10.94 40 Aster Lely Resort 8120 Acacia ST Naples 308 17.79 17.31 41 Sierra Grande 6975 Sierra Club Cir Naples 270 18.1 14.92 46 Orchid Run 10991 Lost Lake Dr Naples 282 21.91 12.87 66 Milano Lakes 418400700 Naples 296 23.65 12.52 5,579 432.52 14.59 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section The average density per acre of the market rate apartment complexes is 14.59 apartments per acre. The proposed Project’s density will be 13.25 apartments per acre, which is right in line with previously approved and built market rate apartments. Apartment complexes in the approval and development process must also be considered on the supply side of the supple/demand calculation. Table 3.2.2 on the next page shows the apartment complexes that are currently in the development process pipeline. There are currently 3,473 apartment units in the Collier County approval and development process pipeline. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 11 Table 3.2.2 Collier County Pipeline Market Rate Apartment Complexes County Map ID Apartment Complex Parcel ID Units 62 Springs at Sabal Bay 71750000402 340 64 Inspira at Lely Resort 53570120027 304 65 Journey's End 736200103 483 67 Briarwood Apartment 24767504003 320 68 Legacy Naples New Hope Ministries 399760006 304 69 Addison Place 188360002 240 70 Pine Ridge Commons 240280606 375 71 I-75/Alligator Alley PUD 21968000121 425 72 Courthouse Shadows PUD 28750000523 300 73 Livingston Rd/GG Parkway Residential Subdistrict 38100120001 382 3,473 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section The total apartment unit supply in Collier County is currently 9,052 using both the existing apartments and approved apartments in process. The aging of market rate apartments must also be considered. Over 50% of the market rate apartments in Collier County are more than 20 years old. A national report by Apartmentlist.com noted that the balance of new and old units affects the rents being charged. The report stated the percentage of rental units less than 10 years old is at an all time low in the Naples area. The report also shows that rentals over 30 years old increased 33% from 2000 to 2016 while buildings aged out so that the share of rentals 10 years old or less declined by 26%. The result of the study is that the cost of renting a house or apartment isn’t likely to go down in older units until there are enough new ones coming into the market to replace them. Note Appendix C where the report was noted in the Naples Daily News editorial September 7, 2018. The Chart on the next page shows the number of apartment units that were brought on line by year in Collier County since 1975. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 12 Chart 3.2.1 Apartments Built by Year in Collier County 3.3 Source: Collier County Property Appraiser Market Area Demand The first step in determining market demand is to start with the current population of the apartment market area. The market area covers many Collier County planning areas and bisects a few of them. So in order to determine an accurate population forecast for the apartment market area, the Consultant utilized the American Community Survey (“ACS”) which is the annual update to the 2010 Census performed the by the US Census Bureau. The ACS is an ongoing survey that provides vital information on a yearly basis about our nation and its people. Information from the survey generates data that help determine how more than $675 billion in federal and state funds are distributed each year. Table 3.3.1 on the next page is the 2018 Collier County housing profile. This table is the updated ACS survey for the 282.5 square mile market area. It shows the current population for this market area is 284,220. The ACS survey also estimates the same data in the report for 2023, which matches the County’s 5-year planning horizon. ACS estimates that the market area population will be 308,530 in 2023. The census annual percent growth of 1.65 % was used to calculate the annual population from 2018 to 2023. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 1975 1986 1988 1989 1990 1991 1995 1998 2000 2001 2002 2014 2015 Total Apartment Units Built by Year 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 13 Table 3.3.1 2018 Collier County Housing Profile Source: U.S. Census Bureau Table 3.3.1 also shows that the percent of renter occupied housing units is 19.1% in 2018 and falls to 17.7% in 2023. That is a reduction of 0.3% annually and is used in the calculation of the market area demand. Table 3.3.2 on the next page establishes the household income and corresponding monthly rental payment. The median household income in Collier County is $63,202. The table shows the income ranges that are used in the calculation of demand. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 14 Table 3.3.2 Monthly Rental Payment Calculations Median Household Income: $63,202 Household Income Monthly Household Income Monthly Rental Payment @ 30% $30,000 $2,500 $750 40,000 3,333 1,000 50,000 4,167 1,250 60,000 5,000 1,500 63,202 5,267 1,580 70,000 5,833 1,750 80,000 6,667 2,000 90,000 7,500 2,250 100,000 8,333 2,500 Source: The Consultant The percent of households by income is shown in Table 3.3.3 on the next page. The percentage of households in the $30,000 to $100,000 range ranges from the current 69.4% to 63.2% in 2023. That is a reduction of 1.24% annually and is used in the calculation of the market area demand. (Rest of Page left Intentionally Blank) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 15 Table 3.3.4 Apartment Study Market Area Demographic and Income Profile Source: U.S. Census Bureau 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 444 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 16 Table 3.3.5 below shows the renter-occupied housing units by contract rent. The number of units in the $800 to $1,999 range is 20,725. That is 70.11% of the 29,559 total cash rent units and is used in the calculation of the apartment market area demand. That data range is highly reliable data according to ACS. Table 3.3.5 Apartment Study Market Area Housing Summary Source: U.S. Census Bureau 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 445 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 17 Table 3.3.6 below shows the apartment study market area demand calculation using the date points previously explained in Tables 3.3.1 through 3.3.5. The population is increased annually. The percent of rental households were reduced annually and multiplied with the corresponding annual households to obtain the annual rental households. The rental households were then multiplied by the percentage of households with incomes in the $30,000 to $90,000 range. That calculation establishes the annual demand for market rate rental housing units in the market area. That annual number is then multiplied by the percent of rental units with rents in the $800 to $1,999 range to establish the demand for market rate apartment units. That demand is slowly declining over the next five years. Table 3.3.6 Apartment Study Market Area Demand Calculation Year Population Total Households Percent Rental Rental Households % With Income $30k-$99k Annual Demand % of Units with rent $800-$1,900 Unit Demand 2018 284,220 127,052 19.1% 24,267 69.4% 16,841 70% 11,789 2019 289,082 129,286 18.8% 24,332 68.2% 16,584 70% 11,609 2020 293,944 131,519 18.5% 24,384 66.9% 16,318 70% 11,422 2021 298,806 133,753 18.3% 24,423 65.7% 16,041 70% 11,229 2022 303,668 135,986 18.0% 24,450 64.4% 15,756 70% 11,029 2023 308,530 138,220 17.7% 24,465 63.2% 15,462 70% 10,823 Sources: U.S. Census Bureau and the Consultant Table 3.3.7 on the next page shows the same market area demand calculation from Table 3.3.6 above and adds the existing market rate apartments shown in Table 3.2.1 and the future apartment complexes in the planning and development process. The Table establishes that there is a current deficit of 2,737 market rate apartments in the market area and falling to a deficit of 1,771 market rate apartments in 2023. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 446 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 18 Table 3.3.7 Apartment Study Market Area Supply – Demand Analysis Year Population Total Households Percent Rental Rental Households % With Income $30k- $99k Annual Demand % of Units with rent $800- $1,900 Unit Demand Market Supply Surplus/Deficit Units 2018 284,220 127,052 19.1% 24,267 69.4% 16,841 70% 11,789 9,052 -2,737 2019 289,082 129,286 18.8% 24,332 68.2% 16,584 70% 11,609 9,052 -2,557 2020 293,944 131,519 18.5% 24,384 66.9% 16,318 70% 11,422 9,052 -2,370 2021 298,806 133,753 18.3% 24,423 65.7% 16,041 70% 11,229 9,052 -2,177 2022 303,668 135,986 18.0% 24,450 64.4% 15,756 70% 11,029 9,052 -1,977 2023 308,530 138,220 17.7% 24,465 63.2% 15,462 70% 10,823 9,052 -1,771 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ARCgis mapping system and the Consultant Adding the proposed 265 proposed apartment units to the market supply (the units would most likely be added in 2021) will still show a significant deficit of market rate rental units in the horizon year of 2023 as shown in Table 3.3.7 below. Table 3.3.7 Apartment Study Market Area Supply – Demand Analysis with Subject Property Units Included Year Population Total Households Percent Rental Rental Households % With Income $30k- $99k Annual Demand % of Units with rent $800- $1,900 Unit Demand Market Supply Market Supply with Subject Property Surplus/Deficit Units 2018 284,220 127,052 19.1% 24,267 69.4% 16,841 70% 11,789 9,052 9,052 -2,737 2019 289,082 129,286 18.8% 24,332 68.2% 16,584 70% 11,609 9,052 9,052 -2,557 2020 293,944 131,519 18.5% 24,384 66.9% 16,318 70% 11,422 9,052 9,052 -2,370 2021 298,806 133,753 18.3% 24,423 65.7% 16,041 70% 11,229 9,052 9,317 -1,912 2022 303,668 135,986 18.0% 24,450 64.4% 15,756 70% 11,029 9,052 9,317 -1,712 2023 308,530 138,220 17.7% 24,465 63.2% 15,462 70% 10,823 9,052 9,317 -1,506 Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section, Collier County Property Appraiser, ESRI ARCgis mapping system and the Consultant 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 4.1 The Consultant used all of the data and analysis in the previous sections to determine that the total supply of market rate apartments will still be significant in the horizon year of 2023. The analysis also shows that with the addition of the Project’s proposed apartment units, there will still be a deficit of 1,922 units in the year 2021 as highlighted in Table 3.3.7 above. That is very close to the 2021 1,900-deficit number that the County Staff calculated for 2021 and as reported in the Brent Batten article in Appendix C. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 19 APPENDICIES 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 20 Appendix A 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 21 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 22 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 23 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 24 Appendix B 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 25 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 26 Appendix C 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 MASTER SITE FILE LETTER 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 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. October 17, 2018 Lindsay Felice Robin, MPA Project Planner CIVIL ENGINEERING | PLANNING | LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Direct: E: lindsay.robin@waldropengineering.com Office: P: (239) 405-7777 | F: (239) 405-7899 In response to your inquiry on October 17, 2018, the Florida Master Site File lists no archeological sites and no other cultural resources located at the designated area at the Hammock Park, Collier County, Florida T50S R26E Section 14 as submitted with search request When interpreting the results of this 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. • 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, Eman M. Vovsi, Ph.D. Data Base Analyst Florida Master Site File Eman.Vovsi@DOS.MyFlorida.com 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 457 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) CR01165 CR00878 CR011 64 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 458 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 459 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 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 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 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 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Print Tax Bills Change of Address   Parcel No 00416720000 Site Address 8530 COLLIER BLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone *Note 34114 Name / Address WILTON LAND COMPANY LLC 206 DUDLEY RD City WILTON State CT Zip 06897 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 5B14 000100 005 5B14 14 50 26 18.99 Legal 14 50 26 S1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 LESS R/W, AND W80FT OF S1/2 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 4336 PG 3681, AND N30FT OF N1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4 OF SEC 23-50-26 LESS R/W Millage Area 39 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub /Condo 100 ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Property Summary Property Detail Sketches Trim Notices Page 1 of 1Details 9/6/2018http://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=127729460&Map=No&FolioNum=0041... 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) LOCATION MAP 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 463 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 WARRANTY DEED 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 464 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 465 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 466 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 467 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 468 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 469 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 LIST IDENTIFYING ALL PROPERTY OWNERS & PARTIES OF THE CORPORATION 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 470 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Department of State /Division of Corporations /Search Records /Detail By Document Number / Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company WILTON LAND COMPANY, LLC Filing Information L09000066780 27-0590349 07/10/2009 FL ACTIVE Principal Address 206 DUDLEY ROAD WILTON, CT 06897 Mailing Address 206 DUDLEY ROAD WILTON, CT 06897 Registered Agent Name & Address COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL N. SUITE 300 NAPLES, FL 34103 Name Changed: 04/20/2011 Address Changed: 04/20/2011 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title MGR GEORGE P BAUER REVOCABLE TRUST UAD 7/20/90 206 DUDLEY ROAD WILTON, CT 06897 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2016 07/18/2016 2017 04/24/2017 2018 01/19/2018 DIVISION OF CORPORATIONSFlorida Department of State Page 1 of 2Detail by Entity Name 10/15/2018http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 471 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Document Images 01/19/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/24/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 07/18/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/23/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 06/10/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/15/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/27/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/20/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/08/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 07/10/2009 -- Florida Limited Liability View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Page 2 of 2Detail by Entity Name 10/15/2018http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 472 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 473 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Traffic Impact Statement Hammock Park Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) Collier County, Florida 04/05/2019 Prepared for: Prepared by: Waldrop Engineering, PA 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Phone: 239-405-7777 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee* – $500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee* – Small Scale Study – No Fee Note – *to be collected at time of first submittal 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 474 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 2 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 475 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 3 Table of Contents Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 6 Background Traffic .......................................................................................................................... 8 Existing and Future Roadway Network........................................................................................... 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 12 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 13 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 13 Appendices Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan ................................................................................... 14 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) .................................................. 16 Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Calculations ............................................................................. 23 Appendix D: Collier County Transportation Element Map TR-7 – Excerpt .................................. 33 Appendix E: Turning Movement Exhibits .................................................................................... 35 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 476 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 4 Project Description The Hammock Park project (formerly known as Hammock Park Commerce Center) is located in the northeast quadrant of the Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) intersection and lies within Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The subject property is approximately 18.99 acres in size. Refer to Figure 1 – Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan. Figure 1 – Project Location Map Currently, the subject parcel is vacant. This development was previously approved to allow up to 160,000 square feet (sf) of retail and office uses (per Collier County Ordinance #07-30). A purpose of this report is to document the transportation impacts associated with the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA). The proposed amendment requests to allow up to 148,500 sf of commercial uses and up to 265 multifamily dwelling units (apartments). Additionally, a Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) proposes a change to the projects current zoning classification of Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) with a request to rezone the property to add a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units as a permitted use. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 477 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 5 The proposed amendment would allow for this alternative mixed-use development scenario, while preserving the right to build out the project with the approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses, depending upon market demand. For the purposes of this report, it is anticipated that the project will be a single-phase development. The traffic analysis utilizes year 2023 planning horizon for buildout conditions. Traffic generation associated with the proposed development is evaluated generally based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition and ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. In agreement with ITE Land Use Code (LUC) descriptions, the ITE land use designations are illustrated in Table 1. Consistent with the previously approved Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) entitled “Hammock Park Commerce Center” dated September 7, 2006, the ITE Retail LUC 820 – Shopping Center is utilized to model the commercial land uses. Table 1 Development Program – ITE Land Use Designation Development Land Use - [SIC Code in Brackets] ITE LUC Size (ITE variable) Approved Development Parameters Commercial Retail and Office - [All PUD permitted uses typical for a shopping center as an inline/outparcel use]1,2 820 – Shopping Center 160,000 square feet Proposed Development Parameters Residential Multifamily (Apartments) - [N/A]3 220 – Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 265 dwelling units Commercial Retail and Office - [All PUD permitted uses typical for a shopping center as an inline/outparcel use]1,2 820 – Shopping Center 148,500 square feet Notes: 1) Refer to PUD section III 3.3A. 2) Shopping Center used as a highest and best use. Other SIC land uses may be used subject to size and trip cap limitations as applicable. 3) N/A= Not applicable. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on October 18, 2018, via email [ref. Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting)]. Please note that specific development parameters have changed. Proposed access points to the surrounding roadway network are depicted in the Conceptual Site Plan (Appendix A). A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 478 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 6 requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Trip Generation The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software), most current version is used to evaluate the projected trip generation for the project. The ITE equations and/or rates are used for the trip generation calculations, as applicable. The ITE – OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Calculations. The internal capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction between the multiple land uses in a site. For this project, the software program OTISS is used to generate associated internal capture trips. The OTISS process follows the trip balancing approach as recommended in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. As internal capture data for the weekday daily time period is not available, the daily internal capture is assumed consistent with the AM peak hour internal capture rates. Based on the Collier County TIS Guidelines recommendations, the overall internal capture rate should be reasonable and should not exceed 20%. The resulting internal capture rates associated with the proposed development for the weekday traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour are 1%, 1% and 18%, respectively. The pass-by trips account for traffic that is already on the external roadway network and stops at the project on the way to a primary trip destination. It should be noted that the driveway volumes are not reduced as a result of the pass-by reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. As such, pass-by trips are not deducted for operational turn lane analysis (all external traffic is accounted for). Per ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition traffic data, the average pass-by trip percentage for LUC 820 – Shopping Center, PM peak period is 34%. The Collier County TIS Guidelines recommend that shopping center pass-by rates should not exceed 25% for the peak hour and that the daily capture rates are assumed to be 10% lower than the peak hour capture rate. For the purposes of this report, the shopping center daily pass-by capture rate is calculated at 15%, and the associated AM and PM peak hour capture rates are capped at 25%. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 479 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 7 In addition, consistent with the Collier County TIS Guidelines, the approved pass-by percentage is applied to the total (external) traffic and the resulting number of pass-by trips is equally split between the inbound and outbound trips. Per FDOT’s Site Impact Handbook (Section 2.4.4) the number of pass-by trips should not exceed 10% of the adjacent street traffic. Based on our trip generation evaluation, the proposed pass- by trips do not exceed the 10% threshold. The estimated trip generation associated with the approved development parameters is illustrated in Table 2A. The traffic evaluation for the proposed GMPA/PUDA development conditions is summarized in Table 2B. Table 3 shows the estimated net new traffic volume – the difference between Table 2A and Table 2B (proposed conditions versus approved development parameters). Table 2A Trip Generation – Approved Development – Average Weekday Proposed Build-out Daily Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size* Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Shopping Center 160,000 sf 8,276 144 88 232 369 400 769 Total Traffic 8,276 144 88 232 369 400 769 Internal Capture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total External 8,276 144 88 232 369 400 769 Pass-by 1,241 29 29 58 96 96 192 Net External 7,035 115 59 174 273 304 577 Note(s): *sf = square feet. Table 2B Trip Generation – Proposed GMPA/PUDA Build-out Conditions – Average Weekday Proposed Build-out Daily Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size* Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Shopping Center 148,500 sf 7,867 140 86 226 349 379 728 Multifamily Housing (Low Rise) 265 du 1,963 28 92 120 89 52 141 Total Traffic 9,830 168 178 346 438 431 869 Internal Capture 60 2 2 4 63 63 126 Total External 9,770 166 176 342 375 368 743 Pass-by 1,176 28 28 56 83 83 166 Net External 8,594 138 148 286 292 285 577 Note(s): *sf = square feet; du = dwelling units. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 480 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 8 In agreement with the Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TIS) guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2018 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this TIS, the surrounding roadway network link concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour net new external traffic generated by the proposed GMPA/PUDA project as illustrated in Table 3. Table 3 Trip Generation – Projected Net New External Traffic – Average Weekday Development PM Peak Hour* Enter Exit Total Proposed Development GMPA/PUDA 292 285 577 Current Approved Development 273 304 577 Net New External Traffic Increase/(Decrease) 19 (19) 0 Note(s): *refer to Table 2A and Table 2B. As illustrated in Table 3, transportation concurrency impacts associated with the proposed GMPA/PUDA development scenario do not exceed the traffic impacts allowed under current zoning conditions. In addition, the development should be limited to a maximum of 577 two- way PM peak hour net external trips generated at project buildout conditions. The site access turn lane analysis is evaluated based on the projected AM and PM peak hour external traffic conditions. The evaluated external two-way PM peak hour traffic associated with the proposed development is less intensive than the projected external traffic allowed under current zoning conditions. However, the inbound AM and PM peak hour traffic calculated under the proposed development scenario is higher and will be utilized in the traffic operational analyses. Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates are estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 481 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 9 minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from peak hour peak direction volume (estimated from 2008 through 2017), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2018 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) volume plus the trip bank volume. The higher of the two determinations is to be used in the Roadway Link Level of Service analysis. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without project) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the planning horizon year 2023. It is noted that the Rattlesnake Hammock Road segment located east of Collier Boulevard (aka Florida Sports Park Rd) is not a Collier County monitored roadway. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project (2018 - 2023) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Collier Blvd 34.0 Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 1,660 2.0% 1.1041 1,833 506 2,166 Collier Blvd 35.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd to US 41 1,900 2.0% 1.1041 2,098 338 2,238 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 75.0 Santa Barbara Blvd to Collier Blvd 530 2.0% 1.1041 586 170 700 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate - from 2018 AUIR, 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1+Annual Growth Rate)5. 2023 Projected Volume= 2018 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2023 Projected Volume= 2018 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2023 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the Collier County 2018 AUIR and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5-Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 482 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 10 Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. As no such improvements were identified in the Collier County 2018 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 Roadway Condition Min. Standard LOS 2018 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume 2023 Roadway Condition 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Collier Blvd 34.0 Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 6D E 3,000 (NB) 6D 3,000 (NB) Collier Blvd 35.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd to US 41 6D E 3,200 (NB) 6D 3,200 (NB) Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 75.0 Santa Barbara Blvd to Collier Blvd 6D E 2,900 (WB) 6D 2,900 (WB) Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D =4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service. Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which are evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future horizon year 2023. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to exceed the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2023 future build-out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the surrounding roadway network. As illustrated in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), Chapter 6.02.02 – M.2., once traffic from a development has been shown to be less than significant on any segment using the 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 483 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 11 Collier County TIS criterion, the development’s impact is not required to be analyzed further on any additional segments. Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2023 Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project** % Vol Capacity Impact by Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Collier Blvd 34.0 Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 3,000 (NB) N/A 2,166 0.0% No No Collier Blvd 35.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd to US 41 3,200 (NB) N/A 2,238 0.0% No No Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 75.0 Santa Barbara Blvd to Collier Blvd 2,900 (WB) N/A 700 0.0% No No Note(s): *N/A = not applicable; No additional trips are projected over what was previously approved. **2023 Projected Volume= 2023 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Policy 5.1 of the Collier County Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) states that “the County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting 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, 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 Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved.” As illustrated in Table 6 of this report there is available capacity on the analyzed surrounding roadway network to accommodate the proposed development. Therefore, the subject development is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Collier County’s GMP. It is noted that Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road facilities are Collier County designated hurricane evacuation routes as depicted in Collier County Transportation Element – Map TR - 7. For details refer to Appendix D. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 484 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 12 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Proposed access points to the surrounding roadway network are depicted in the Conceptual Site Plan (refer to Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan), and these access connections will be further described in future SDP, PPL or DO submittals, as applicable, to determine turn lane requirements as more accurate parameters become available. Connections to the subject project are proposed via an existing right-in/right-out access on westbound Rattlesnake Hammock Road, a proposed full movement access on westbound Rattlesnake Hammock Road and a proposed right-in/right-out access on northbound Collier Boulevard. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is under Collier County Department of Transportation jurisdiction. This roadway is a north-south six-lane divided arterial roadway. This roadway has a posted legal speed of 50 mph and an assumed design speed of 50 mph in the vicinity of project. Based on FDOT Standard Plans Index #711-001, the minimum turn lane length is 240 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) is under Collier County Department of Transportation jurisdiction. This roadway is a four-lane divided no outlet roadway. This roadway has a posted legal speed of 40 mph and an assumed design speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of project. Based on FDOT Standard Plans Index #711-001, the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier County Right-of- way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways – 40 vph for right-turn lane/20 vph for left-turn lane; (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right-turn lanes shall always be provided; and c) when median openings are permitted, they shall always include left-turn lanes. Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles within the peak hour traffic. Rattlesnake Hammock Western Access: The proposed project is expected to generate 33 vph and 75 vph westbound right-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. A dedicated westbound right-turn lane is warranted at this location as it meets the multi-lane criterion. At the minimum, the right-turn lane should be 235 feet which includes a minimum 50 feet of storage. Rattlesnake Hammock Eastern Access: The proposed project is expected to generate 17 vph and 38 vph westbound right-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 485 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 13 respectively. A dedicated westbound right-turn lane is warranted at this location. At the minimum, the right-turn lane should be 210 feet which includes a minimum 25 feet of storage. The proposed project is expected to generate 66 vph and 150 vph eastbound left-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. A dedicated eastbound left-turn lane is warranted at this location as it meets the multi-lane criterion. At the minimum, the turn-lane should be 310 feet which includes a minimum 125 feet of storage. There is an existing approximately 350 foot left-turn lane at this location that is currently gore striped. Collier Boulevard Access: The proposed project is expected to generate 50 vph and 112 vph northbound right-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. A dedicated northbound right-turn lane is warranted at this location as it meets the multi-lane criterion. At the minimum, the turn-lane should be 290 feet which includes a minimum 50 feet of storage. There is an existing approximately 410 foot right-turn lane available for this proposed access. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, the proposed project is not a significant and adverse traffic generator for the roadway network at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. The development shall be limited to a maximum of 577 two-way PM peak hour net external trips. These trips shall be calculated based on applicable land use codes as illustrated in the ITE Trip Generation Manual in effect at the time of future development order applications. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 486 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 14 Appendix A Project Conceptual Site Plan 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 487 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 15 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 488 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 16 Appendix B Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 489 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 17 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 490 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 18 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 491 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 19 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 492 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 20 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 493 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 21 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 494 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 22 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 495 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 23 Appendix C ITE Trip Generation Calculations 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 496 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 24 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 497 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 25 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 498 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 26 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 499 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 27 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 500 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 28 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 501 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 29 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 502 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 30 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 503 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 31 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 504 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 32 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 505 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 33 Appendix D Collier County Transportation Element Map TR-7 – Excerpt 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 506 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 34 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 507 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 35 Appendix E Turning Movement Exhibits 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 508 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 36 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – April 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 37 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 510 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE – NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 511 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 512 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) May 16, 2019 RE: Vanderbilt Commons PUDA-PL20180003366 GMPA-PL20180003372 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that Waldrop Engineering, P.A. on behalf of Vanderbilt Way Apartments, LLC has filed two (2) concurrent applications to Collier County. These applications seek approval of: (1) a PUD amendment for the Vanderbilt Commons Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) to remove the requirement to provide commercial uses on the first floor of the mixed-use building on Lots 5 and 6, and add one (1) deviation relating to building perimeter plantings; AND (2) a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) to allow residential uses on the first floor of buildings on Lots 5 and 6. The GMPA does not request to increase density or intensity and no changes made affect any other portion of the MPUD. The subject property totals 14.49+/- acres and is generally located immediately north of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately ¼ of a mile west of Collier Boulevard in unincorporated Collier County, Florida. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to hear a presentation about this application and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Monday, June 3rd, 2019 at 5:30 p.m. at the Greater Naples Fire Rescue Headquarters, 14575 Collier Blvd., Naples, FL 34119. Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 405-7777 ext. 2232, or lindsay.robin@waldropengineering.com. Sincerely, WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A. Lindsay F. Robin, MPA Project Planner *Please note that Greater Naples Fire Rescue does not sponsor or endorse this program. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 513 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 1 NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME67205 VANDERBILT WAY LLC PTA-CS# 5406 PO BOX 320099 ALEXANDRIA, VA 22320---0ABREU, MILAGROS PO BOX 117 KEASBEY, NJ 08832---117ALLEN, MARCUS A & MARY L 7347 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---8091ANDREEV, BORISLAV VIOLETA ANDREEV 158 RANKIN CRES TORONTO M6P 4H9AVENOSO, DONALD G 7355 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0BARRIOS, HARVY E NUVIA AGUILERA DE BARRIOS 7029 AMBROSIA LN APT 606 NAPLES, FL 34119---9651BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD SUITE #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BEADLE, RYAN J & TONYA 7359 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---1900BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CRDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC %CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BNEI RIVKAH GROUP LLC 156 DUFFY AVENUE HICKSVILLE, NY 11801---0BOTIE, PHILIP KERRY MINER 4 RYDER AVE DIX HILLS, NY 11746---6107CARUS, CARLOS M & KAREM 7070 VENICE WAY #2903 NAPLES, FL 34119---0COLLIER CNTY % OFC OF COLLIER CNTY ATTORNEY 3299 TAMIAMI TRL E HARMON TURNER BLDG 8TH FL NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER CNTY % OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY 3299 TAMIAMI TRL E STE 800 NAPLES, FL 34112---5749COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER COUNTY 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL E NAPLES, FL 34112---0CONTI FAMILY RES TRUST 20 NAUGHTON DRIVE RICHMOND HILL L4C 4M7CUBERO, ROY 1504 BAY ROAD #2408 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139---0DORGAN, CHRISTOPHER P FABRIENA A DORGAN 7367 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611DORSEY, STEPHEN M SUSAN SERRA DORSEY 17 TIFFANY PL SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866---9059DUPRE, JAMES 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430EASTMAN TR, JULIE MAE 7050 AMBROSIA LN APT 3408 NAPLES, FL 34119---9630EBICADO LLC 250 SUNNY ISLES BLVD BLDG 3 APT 1905 SUNNY ISLES, FL 33160---0EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EMERITUS INVESTMENTS INC 2600 S DOUGLAS RD SUITE 510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0FALLS OF PORTOFINO MASTER HOA INC C/O ASSOC LAW GROUP P L 1200 BRICKELL AVENUE PH 2000 MIAMI, FL 33131---0FLYNN LIVING TRUST 6209 WINNEQUAH RD MONONA, WI 53716---3461FONTANA TR, BUDD & MARION BUDD & MARION FONTANA L/TRUST UTD 01/20/2011 4180 5TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1500FUCHS REVOCABLE TRUST 7351 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611GILMORE, BRUCE & CRISTINA 4281 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---0GIMENEZ, TEODORO-& MILDRED 5530 RIDGE XING HANOVER PARK, IL 60133---5369IGLESIAS, NARCISA 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430J & C L MAYNARD JT TRUST 7362 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0J L PHIPPS D D S LOVING TRUST 521 ERIE CT BOWLING GREEN, OH 43402---2745KEAGY, DOROTHY 7327 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0KERRY A NICI GIFTING TRUST 1185 IMMOKALEE RD STE 110 NAPLES, FL 34110---4806KUPEL, GEORGE W & MARIANNE K 7342 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0LANG, ANN WEBER & TIMOTHY W 4161 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1521LOT 3 VANDERBILT COMMONS LLC % WELSH CO FL INC 2950 N TRAIL STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0MANOO, HAROLD 1187 OLD COLONY ROAD OAKVILLE L6M1J1 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 514 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 2 MARTIN, ROBERT E MARY ELIZABETH ROGAN 7330 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0MAUSEN, JOHN C ROBERT E MAUSEN 1086 FOREST LAKES DR #303 NAPLES, FL 34105---0MAUSEN, ROBERT E & GEORGINA M 4355 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1525MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MENDAX, SCOTT 7371 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611MISSION HILLS STATION LLC 11501 NORTHLAKE DRIVE CINCINNATI, OH 45249---0NAZARIAN, CHRISTINE 7060 VENICE WAY APT 3104 NAPLES, FL 34119---9626NISTOR, JOHN J & DIANE E 4331 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1525NORBERTO JR, FRANK & DENNINE 7326 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610NOSSEN ROBERT P & FRANCES 7335 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---8091NUNES, NORBERTO A 3345 27TH AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---7141O'DONNELL, PAUL F 7358 ACORN WAY S NAPLES, FL 34119---0OZBAY, EREN 5361 CHERRY WOOD DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34119---0OZBAY, ERHAN 5361 CHERRY WOOD DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34119---0PIAZZA, SALVATORE & ANNA G 3765 HELMSMAN DR NAPLES, FL 34120---0POLLAK, LAURA E JEFFREY A PETRINITZ 7346 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0POPE FAMILY TRUST 7350 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610PRD OWNER LLC % PROFESSIONAL RESOURCE DEV PO BOX 768 EFFINGHAM, IL 62401---0PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 515 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 3 PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 516 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 4 PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430R J FAY & J D FAY REV/L/TRUST 4191 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1521REFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 1, THEREFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 2, THEREFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 5, THEREFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 6, THEREYES, CRISTOBAL & LOYDA 110 9TH ST SW NAPLES, FL 34117---0SCHMADER, JOHN F VIRGINIA M ELLIOTT 7323 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9625SHALOM, YEHIEL SAR 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430SUN, WEIYONG QIUYAN KONG 210 STOKES FARM RD FRANKLIN LAKES, NJ 07417---0SUNCOAST SCHOOLS FED CR UNION ATTN: CINDY CURTIS 6801 E HILLSBOROUGH AVE TAMPA, FL 33610---4110TABOR, DONALD J & AGNES H 4241 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1523TERIMAKI LLC 175 SW 7TH STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0THE FALLS OF PORTOFINO LAND TRUST I 1615 S CONGRESS AVENUE STE 200 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33435---0UNIVERSAL PROPERTY LLC 175 SW 7 STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0UNIVERSAL PROPERTY LLC 175 SW 7 STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0UNIVERSAL PROPERTY LLC 175 SW 7TH STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0VANDERBILT COMMONS OWNERS' ASSOCIATION INC 2950 TAMIAMI TRL N #200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT COMMONS I TRUST 2950 TAMIAMI TRAIL N #200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT COMMONS OWNERS ASSN INC 2950 9TH STREET NORTH NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT COMMONS OWNERS ASSN INC 2950 9TH STREET NORTH NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT WAY APARTMENTS LLC 2950 TAMIAMI TRL N STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT WAY APARTMENTS LLC 2950 TAMIAMI TRL N STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VASSAR, ROBERT A & ANGELA C 7343 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611VIGILANTE, ANTHONY KATHLEEN WHITE-VIGILANTE 7319 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0VIVAS, NEOMI FREDDY VIVAS JACOB AGAY 1669 DIPLOMAT DR MIAMI, FL 33179---6404WEILAND, JAY H & JOAN M 7338 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610WILLIAMS, SEAN S & TARA LEE 7363 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611WITT, DAVID C & JOYCE E 7334 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610WOERZ, GARY F & ANNA G 7315 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 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.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A. 2281189 Neighborhood Meeting Pub DatesMay 17, 2019 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before meThis May 17, 2019 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 518 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 14A z FRIDAY, MAY 17, 2019 z NAPLES DAILY NEWS + NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting held by Wa ldrop Engineering,P.A.on behalf of Va nderbilt Wa y Apartments,LLC at the following time and location: Monday,June 3,2019,at 5:30 p.m. Greater Naples Fire Rescue District Headquarters 14575 Collier Blvd,Naples,FL 34119 Please be advised that Va nderbilt Way Apartments,LLC has filed two (2) concurrent applications (PL20180003366 &PL20180003372)with Collier County.These applications are seeking approval of:(1)a PUD amendment for the Va nderbilt Commons Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD)to remove the requirement to provide commercial uses on the first floor of the mixed-use building on Lots 5 and 6,and add one (1)deviation relating to building perimeter plantings;AND (2)a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA)to allow residential uses on the first floor of buildings on Lots 5 and 6.The GMPA does not request to increase density or intensity and no changes made affect any other portion of the MPUD. The existing MPUD consists of 14.49+/-acres and is generally located immediately north of Va nderbilt Beach Road,approximately ¼of a mile west of Collier Boulevard in unincorporated Collier County,Florida. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT Business and property owners and residents are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss the project with the owners’representatives and Collier County staff.If you are unable to attend this meeting,but have questions or comments,they can be directed to: Waldrop Engineering,P.A.c/o Lindsay Robin 28100 Bonita Grande Dr.,Suite 305,Bonita Springs,FL 34135 (239)405-7777,ext.2232 OR lindsay.robin@waldropengineering.com *Please note that Greater Naples Fire Rescue District does not sponsor or endorse this program. Summer Rate $38 Includes Green Fee and Cart Quail Run Golf Club 1 Forest Lakes Blvd Naples,FL 34105 239-261-3930 Call for Special Afternoon RatesCallforSpecialAfternoonRates Memberships AvailableMembershipsAvailable MEMB E R FOR A DAY! A HIDDEN JEWEL IN THE MIDDLE OF NAPLES! HindmanAuctions.com Compliment ar y Auction Estimates AMeissen Porcelain Pate sur Pate Four Piece Clock Garniture. Sold for 87,500. 8506th Avenue South Naples,Florida 34102 239.643.4448 naples@hindmanauctions.com hindmanauctions.com/naples SCHEDULE ACOMPLIMENTARY AUCTION ESTIMATE Hindmanspecialists in ourNaples of ficeare currentlyproviding complimentar yauction estimates foryourFineFurniture,Decorative Arts andSilver. Compliment ar y HAPPYHOUR $4 COCKTA ILS $6 APPETIZERS BAR 3PM -8PM 1DINNER PLUS 1GLASS OF WINE $14.99 10711 TA MIAMI TRL AC ROSS FROM TRADER JOE’S 239-260-1075ND-GCI0110434-01 SEAFOOD-STEAKS-PASTA Breakfast-Lunch-Dinner 643-2559 933 Airport Rd.S,Naples,FL 34104 3.5 blks.N.of Davis,1 blk S.of Naples Airport Open Sun 1-5pm •Mon.-Sat.10am-6pm all widths AAAA -EEEE custom fi tting by trained factory sales staff. We help consumers achieve pain-free walking by providing 5 star service, great selection,and superior quality comfort fashion footwear. NAOT,Mephisto,Ta ryn Rose,Helle Comfort,Wolky,Cole Haan, Thierry Rabotin,Beautifeel,Sperry,Ecco,Birkenstock,Florsheim, Finn Comfort,New Balance,SAS,Saucony,Asics,Sebago, Hushpuppy,Te va,Merrell,Fit Flop,Orthaheel,Acorn Slippers and many more... COUPONCOUPON www.shoewarehousenaples.com $25 OFF Must present Coupon at time of purchase. Not valid with any other offer. Expires 5/31/19 *Excludes SAS & Mephisto Kybun and Birkenstock Qual it y Co mfort and Service ND-GCI0177716-10 When Sergio Hostins moved from Maine to Saraso- ta in April of 2018, he planned to visit his aunt often. They talked on the phone every other day, and Hos- tins told Teresa Giani, 66, of West Palm Beach, he was looking forward to only being a few hours in the car away. However, Hostins, 55, was killed by a man he was having a relationship with — about six months after he moved to Florida. “Sergio was very friendly,” Giani said. “He liked to help friends and he helped his family a lot in Brazil. He worked here and all he thought about was his family back in Brazil.” Hostins moved to the U.S. as a child and worked at an Italian restaurant in Maine for 22 years. Then he accepted a job near Sarasota that was opening under the same ownership. “He used to do everything,” Giani said. “He would do plumbing, he was a good painter, he was a good waiter, he was a good electrician. He did it all at the restaurant.” Hostins often sent money to his mother and other family he left behind in Brazil , Giani said. “He was such a good person,” she said. “He was a very happy person, Sergio. He was al- ways making jokes.” On Tuesday, a jury found Daniel Da- venport, 31, of Sarasota, guilty of sec- ond-degree murder. Davenport killed Hostins in October 2018, stole his car and credit cards then dumped his carpet-wrapped body at a home in Naples Park, prosecutors said during the trial. The jury also found Davenport guilty of grand theft of a motor vehicle, 10 counts of fraudulent use of per- sonal identification information and unlawful posses- sion of four or fewer identities. Davenport was arrested in Orlando after eluding authorities for more than a week. He and Hostins met on a social media app for gay men, called Grindr, in September 2018 and developed a relationship. The last time Giani talked with her nephew it seemed like he knew he was in danger, she said. A few days before Hostins’ body was discovered at the home in the 700 block of 102nd Avenue North, he called Giani and asked for her address. Hostins told Giani he needed it so authorities would know to contact her in case something bad happened to him. Hostins was at the Department of Motor Vehicles and didn’t have time to explain what was going on. He told her he would call her back later, Giani said. “I gave the address to him, and those were the last words I heard from him,” Giani said. Hostins told a different family member he was fighting with his boyfriend, who kept asking him for money, Giani said. “What happened to Sergio with this guy, it was just for money,” Giani said. “He just wanted more and more money and then Sergio told him to get out because he needed money to pay his own bills.” It was hard for Giani to sit in the Sarasota courtroom for more than a week so close to her nephew’s killer, she said. “There was a lot, a lot of evidence,” Giani said. “They had so much evidence to prove he was guilty.” Twelfth Judicial Circuit Court Judge Stephen Walk- er deferred Davenport’s sentencing, pending a pre- sentence investigation. Everyone, from Hostins’ family to his boss loved him, Giani said. Homicide victim moved to Fla. shortly before his death Sergio Hostins is pictured inside the Italian restaurant he worked at near Sarasota. Hostins was killed about six months after he moved down to Florida from Maine.COURTESY OF TERESA GIANI Jake Allen Naples Daily News USA TODAY NETWORK - FLORIDA Davenport 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 519 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) HAMMOCK PARK GMPA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 NIM SYNOPSIS 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 520 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 1 of 3 Memorandum To: Nancy Gundlach, PLA, AICP & Sue Faulkner From: Lindsay Robin cc: David Torres, Wilton Land Company, LLC Richard Yovanovich, Esq., Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester Date: June 27, 2019 Subject: Hammock Park PUDA & GMPA (PL20180002904 & PL20180002813) Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis Waldrop Engineering, P.A., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) on Wednesday, June 19, 2019. The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, Florida 34113. The sign-in sheet is attached as Exhibit “A” and demonstrates 11 residents were in attendance. Handouts were distributed providing the project overview and development regulations. The handouts are attached as Exhibit “B”. Alexis Crespo (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and Staff, and an overview of the proposed GMPA and PUD amendment applications, including the location of the 19-acre subject property and the request to add a maximum of 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units, with a maximum of 148,500 square feet of commercial as an option for development. She also outlined the amendment processes and opportunities to provide input at public hearings. David Torres, the Applicant, also spoke about the project and provided input on details relating to the surrounding residential developments in proximity to the subject area, and the market demand to create a mixed-use project on this intersection. Following the Consultant’s presentation, the meeting was opened up to the attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The following is a summarized list of the questions asked and responses given. The Applicant’s representatives’ responses are shown in bold. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 521 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 2 of 3 Question/Comment 1: You’ve only reduced the commercial by a few thousand square feet. How does that equate to 265 multi-family units?  Response: The reduction of commercial does equate to the same number of trips as 265 multi-family units. Commercial uses produce significantly more trips than residential uses. [the project traffic engineer provided further explanation on the traffic study]. It was also pointed out that in reality, you will not be able to fit all of the residential and commercial on the property. Question/Comment 2: Will the residential element of this development be similar to residential developments the owner has constructed previously?  Response: It will use similar building designs, but with updated exteriors and façades. Question/Comment 3: What type of consumer and income groups are you trying to attract? Will this be apartments or condominiums?  Response: There were some zoning commitments relating to “Essential Service Provider” Housing that were attached to our previous residential developments on Lord’s Way that will not be committed to in this project. Question/Comment 4: So, you’re thinking apartments versus condominiums?  Response: Apartments. Even though the code defines multi-family as multi- family regardless of the use. Question/Comment 5: Is there enough demand for commercial uses such as restaurants?  Response: There’s currently not enough demand in the area yet. Adding apartments will create more demand. Question/Comment 6: Commissioner Fiala commented on the commercial branding that real estate agents are using to brand their developments in this area of Collier County as “South Naples”. She noted the residents are proud of the East Naples area and would like to keep that naming intact.  Response: We recognize the conditions out here. A lot of it goes back to large companies signing leases, and they are looking at the numbers. Being on the east side can hurt us because we are on the fringe. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 522 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 3 of 3 Question/Comment 7: What is the business “success” factor that would entice national restaurant brands to come to the area? Is the success rate of certain restaurants factored in?  Response: Absolutely, and it speaks well all the success on US 41, particularly the national chains like Outback and Carrabas. Sue Faulkner asked the Applicant to clarify if the dwelling units proposed are rental or “for sale” multi-family units. Alexis clarified that the zoning limits the multi-family units to rental apartments. There were no further questions or comments. Ms. Crespo thanked the attendees for coming and noted that their contact information is available for those who wished to reach out with any further questions. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:30 p.m. The meeting was recorded per the CD attached as Exhibit “C”. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 523 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Name Address E-Mail Address EXHIBIT "A" NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING HAMMOCK PARK MPUD PL20180002813 & PL20180002804 June 19, 2019@ 5:30p.m. PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY ***Please be ciclvtsecl*** The information on this sheet is to contact you regarding this project and future public meetings. Under Florida law, e-mail addresses, phone numbers and certain home addresses are public records once received by a government agency. If you do not want your e-mail address, phone number or home address released if the county receives a public records request, you can refrain from including such information on this sheet. You have the option of checking with the county staff on your own to obtain updates on the project as well as checking the county Web site for additional information. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 524 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park MPUD - PL20180002813 & PL20180002804 Neighborhood Information Meeting Wednesday, June 19, 2019 5:30 p.m. PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET Project Size: 19+/- Acres Future Land Use: Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center Current Zoning: Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Proposed Zoning: Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Approved Density/Intensity/Uses: 160,000 sq. ft. commercial uses Proposed Density/Intensity/Uses: 265 multi-family dwelling units and up to 148,500 sq. ft. of commercial uses Project Requests: (PL20180002804) a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for a site-specific text amendment to the Future Land Use Element, Mixed Use Activity Center #7, to allow up to 265 multi-family dwelling units within the Hammock Park project, along with the permitted commercial uses - (PL20180002813) PUD Amendment to the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) to add a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units as a permitted use; reduce the maximum intensity of non-residential uses from 160,000 sq. ft. to 148,500 sq. ft.; and to change the name of the CPUD from Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD to Hammock Park Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). EXHIBIT "B"9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 525 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Hammock Park MPUD PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures 1. Amusement and recreation services, Indoor only (Groups 7911-7941, 7991, 7993, 7997, 7999) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (Groups 5611, 5621, 5631, 5641, 5651, 5661, 5699) 3. Automotive repair, services and parking (Groups 7514, 7542) All uses are prohibited within 500 feet from the easterly right-of-way line of C.R. 951. 4. Auto and home supply stores (Group 5531) 5. Building construction - general contractors (groups 1521 -1542). 6. Building materials, hardware, garden supply (Groups 5231, 5251, 5261) 7. Business services (Groups 7311, 7323, 7334, 7335, 7336, 7338, 7352, 7359, 7371-7379, 7384, 7389) 8. Communications (Groups 4832, 4833) 9. Construction - special trade contractors (Groups 1711-1793, 1796, 1799) 10. Depository institutions (Groups 6011-6099) 11. Eating and drinking places (Groups 5812, 5813 except contract feeding, food service and industrial feeding) 12. Engineering, accounting and management (Groups 8711-8721, 8741, 8742, 8748) 13. Food stores (Groups 5411, 5421, 5441, 5451, 5461, 5499) 14. Funeral service and crematories (Group 7261) 15. Gasoline service stations (5541 subject to the provisions of the LDC) 16. General merchandise stores (Groups 5311, 5331, 5399) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 526 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 17. Hardware stores (5251) 18. Health services (Groups 8011-8059) 19. Home furniture, furnishings, and equipment stores (Groups 5712, 5713, 5714, 5719,5722,5731,5734,5735,5736) 20. Hospitals (Group 8062) 21. Hotels and motels (Group 7011) 22. Insurance agents, brokers and service (Group 6411) 23. Membership organizations (Groups 8641, 8661) 24. Miscellaneous repair services (Groups 7622, 7623, 7629, 7631, 7641) (Group 7699 with approval of County Manager, or his designee, who shall be guided by the objective of allowing uses that are compatible with existing development.) All uses are prohibited within 500 feet of the easterly right-of- way line of C.R. 951. 25. Miscellaneous retail (Groups 5912, 5921, 5932, 5941-5949, 5984, 5992, 5993, 5999) 26. Motion pictures (Groups 7832-7833) 27. Museum, art galleries (Group 8412) 28. Multi-family rental dwelling units. 298. Non-depository credit institutions (Groups 6141, 6159, 6162, 6163) 2930. Offices (All Groups) 310. Personal services (Groups 7211-7212, 7215, 7219, 7221, 7231, 7241, 7251, 7291) 321. Restaurants (All Groups) 323. Real estate (Groups 6531, 6541, 6552) 334.Social services (Group 8351) 345.United States Postal Service (Group 4311) 356. Veterinarian's office (Group 0742, except no outside kenneling) 367. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 527 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES A. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted. B. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (COMMERCIAL) A. Minimum lot area: Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. B. Minimum lot width: One hundred (100) feet. C. Minimum yard requirements: 1. Front yard: Twenty-five (25) feet. 2. Side yard: Zero for common or abutting walls, otherwise one-half the height of the building, but not less than ten (10) feet. 3. Rear yard: Twenty (20) feet. 4. Preserve: Twenty-five (25) feet D. Distance between principal structures: The distance between any two principal structures on the same parcel shall be fifteen (15) feet or a distance equal to one half the sum of their heights, whichever is greater. E. Minimum floor area of principal structure: Seven hundred (700) square feet per building on the ground floor. F. Landscaping and off-street parking shall be in accordance with the LDC, as amended. G. Maximum height: Fifty (50) feet. H. General application for setbacks: Front yard setbacks shall comply with the following: 1. If the parcel is served by a public or private right-of-way, the setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. 2. If the parcel is served by a non-platted private drive, the setback is measured from the back of curb or edge of pavement. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 3. If the parcel is served by a platted private drive, the setback is measured from the road easement or property line. I. All buildings, landscaping and visible infrastructures shall be architecturally and aesthetically unified. Said unified architectural theme shall include a similar architectural design and similar use of materials and colors on all of the buildings to be erected on site. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the site. A conceptual landscape plan for the entire site shall be submitted concurrent with the first application for site development plan approval. J. Outside storage or display of merchandise is prohibited unless it is ancillary to a permitted use and screened from view from adjacent public roadways. Outside storage may be approved by the County Manager, or his designee, as part of the approval of an SDP. K. The FP&L easement may be used for ancillary uses such as parking, storage, service drives, and water management, provided written authorization for those uses is obtained from FP&L and submitted with the application for SDP. L. The two accessory tower structures described in Deviation 3 shall have a minimum PUD perimeter setback of ten (10) feet, and a maximum actual height of thirty (30) feet for the southern tower and maximum actual height of fifteen (15) feet for the northern most tower.2 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (RESIDENTIAL) PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MULTI-FAMILY Min. Lot Area 1 acre Min. Lot Width N/A Min. Lot Depth N/A Front Yard (1) 10 feet Side Yard 5 feet Min. Lake Maintenance Easement Tract Setback 0 feet Min. Setback from FPL Easement 0 feet Min. PUD Boundary Setback, excluding boundary abutting FPL Easement 25 feet Min. Distance Between Buildings 20 feet Rear Yard 10 feet Preserve 25 feet MAXIMUM HEIGHT Actual Zoned 60 feet 50 feet ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Front Yard SPS Side Yard SPS Rear Yard 5 feet Preserve 10 feet MAXIMUM HEIGHT Actual Zoned SPS SPS Footnotes: (1) Front setback is measured from the edge of pavement or back of curb except for public roads. (2) Approved in HEX decision 2016-42. GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners’ association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.e Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) CP-2016-3 Goodlette/Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict GMP Amendment Page 1 of 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommendation to approve the single petition within the 2018 Cycle 3 of Growth Management Plan Amendments for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity for review and comments for an amendment specific to the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD in the northeast quadrant of the Mixed-Use Activity Center #7 at the intersection of Rattlesnake-Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard. (Transmittal Hearing) PL20180002804/CP-2018-8 OBJECTIVE: For the Board to approve the single petition in the 2018 Cycle 3 of amendments to the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required agencies. CONSIDERATIONS: • Chapter 163, F.S., provides for an amendment process for a local government’s adopted Comprehensive Plan. • Collier County Resolution No. 12-234 provides for a public petition process to amend the GMP. • The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), sitting as the “local planning agency” under Chapter 163.3174, F.S., held their Transmittal hearing for the 2018 Cycle 3 petition on October 3, 2019, continued to October 17, 2019 and further continued to October 31, 2019 (one petition only, PL20180002804/CP-2018-8). • This Transmittal hearing for the 2018 Cycle 3 considers an amendment to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). The GMP amendment requested is specific to the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD in the Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict (#7)/Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, approximately 19.13 acres, and is located in the northeast quadrant of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Rattlesnake-Hammock Road (CR 864) in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East (Royal Fakapalm Planning Community). The Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD is already approved for 160,000 sq. ft. of office and retail commercial uses and is undeveloped. This petition seeks to amend the GMP, adopted by Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) by: Adding text to the Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict #7 to allow up to 265 multi-family (apartment) rental dwelling units in the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD for a gross density of 13.85 DU/A. In the proposed amendment, Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD would be changed to Hammock Park MPUD to reflect a proposed change to that PUD. No new map is proposed for this amendment. The proposed amended Subdistrict text, as recommended by the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), is depicted in Ordinance Exhibit “A.” Based on the review of this large-scale GMP amendment petition, including the supporting data and analysis, staff makes the following findings and conclusions. 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: 04_Transmittal Ex_Summary_CP-18-8_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) CP-2016-3 Goodlette/Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict GMP Amendment Page 2 of 4 • There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • No net increase in the number of vehicular trips is proposed. • There are no utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. • There are no concerns for impacts upon other public infrastructure. • Adding the residential density of 13.85 DU/A is generally compatible with surrounding development, most of which is commercial, based upon the high-level review for GMP amendments. • The proposed changes to the Mixed-Use Activity Center #7 are consistent with the purpose of the FLUE’s Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict, including mixed use, high density, location at a major intersection, proximity to residential development. The data and analysis provided for the amendment generally supports the proposed changes to the FLUE. The complete staff analysis of this petition is provided in the CCPC Staff Report. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impacts to Collier County result from this amendment, as this approval is for the Transmittal of this proposed amendment. Petition fees account for staff review time and materials, and for the cost of associated legal advertising/public notice for the public hearings. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: Approval of the proposed amendment by the Board for Transmittal and its submission to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required agencies will commence the Department’s thirty (30) day review process and ultimately return the amendment to the CCPC and the Board for Adoption hearings tentatively to be held in the Spring of 2020. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Growth Management Plan (GMP) amendment is authorized by, and subject to the procedures established in, Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes, The Community Planning Act, and by Collier County Resolution No. 12-234, as amended. The Board should consider the following criteria in making its decision: “plan amendments shall be based on relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue.” 163.3177(1)(f), FS In addition, s. 163.3177(6)(a)2, FS provides that FLUE plan amendments shall be based on surveys, studies and data regarding the area, as applicable including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of non-conforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 534 Attachment: 04_Transmittal Ex_Summary_CP-18-8_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) CP-2016-3 Goodlette/Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict GMP Amendment Page 3 of 4 f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The need to modify land uses and development patterns with antiquated subdivisions. i. The discouragement of urban sprawl. j. The need for job creation, capital investment and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. This item is approved as to form and legality. It requires a majority vote for approval because this is a transmittal hearing. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: That the CCPC forward petition PL20170002804/CP-2018-8 to the Board with a recommendation of approval, subject to minor edits to the petitioner’s proposed amendment text (as reflected in the CCPC Staff Report). COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard this petition at their October 31, 2019 meeting after continuing from the September 5 and October 3, 2019 meetings. The Planning Commission voted 5/2 to forward the subject petition to the Board with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other statutorily required agencies, per the staff recommendation. The dissenters expressed the following concerns/opinions: a) the Growth Management Plan recognizes this location as a transitional area by designating the subject land as part of the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict; b) no other place along the Collier Boulevard corridor/Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict has similarly high density; and c) this is not good planning and will hurt the TDR Program by using just one Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) credit per acre for an additional 11 dwelling units per acre. The CCPC also recommended five items to be addressed in the PUD amendment (which will be heard as a companion item to this GMP amendment petition, should the BCC approve it for Transmittal): 1) require purchase of one TDR credit per acre; 2) provide a minimum of 18% of the apartments (48) for Essential Services Personnel; 3) provide a minimum of 10% of the apartments (27) to those earning no greater than 100% of the area median household income; 4) prohibit storage facility use; and, 5) if developed with apartments, require a minimum of 20,000 square feet of commercial floor area inclusive of a 5,000 square feet minimum quality sit-down restaurant. There was one public speaker, John Jenkins, that supports obtaining a commitment from the developer to include some type of access to accommodate public transportation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION: That the BCC approve petition PL20170002804/CP-2018-8 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, and other statutorily required agencies, for review. 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 535 Attachment: 04_Transmittal Ex_Summary_CP-18-8_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) CP-2016-3 Goodlette/Pine Ridge Mixed Use Subdistrict GMP Amendment Page 4 of 4 [Staff reminder: This GMP amendment follows the Expedited State Review process. Chapter 163.3184 (3)(c)1, Florida Statutes, provides that the County Board (local governing body) shall hold its Adoption (second public) hearing within 180 days after receipt of agency comments, unless extended by agreement with notice to the DEO (state land planning agency) and any affected person that provided comments on the amendment. This notification, review and comment process period is approximately 7.5 months (225 days) from the time the County Board holds its Transmittal (initial public) hearing.] Prepared by: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, and David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division 9.A.2.f Packet Pg. 536 Attachment: 04_Transmittal Ex_Summary_CP-18-8_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 1 of 9 STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: September 12, 2019 RE: PETITION CP-2018-08/PL20180002804, 2018 Cycle 3 LARGE SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to PUDA- PL20180002813) [TRANSMITTAL HEARING] ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agents: Alexis Crespo, AICP Waldrop Engineering 28100 Bonita Grande Dr. #305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Richard Yovanovich, Esq. Coleman Yovanovich Koester 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Naples, FL 34103 Owner/Applicant: Wilton Land Company, LLC 206 Dudley Road Wilton, CT 06897 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The ±19.13-acre site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Collier Blvd. (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864), in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. (Royal Fakapalm Planning Community). 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 537 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 2 of 9 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a large-scale Comprehensive Plan amendment (text-based only) to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) to amend the Mixed-Use Activity Center Subdistrict #7 to increase residential density in the northeast quadrant, within the Hammock Park Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), to allow a maximum of 265 multi-family (rental apartment) dwelling units. The request is also to reflect the proposed PUD amendment from CPUD to Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD) via a companion petition that will be reviewed at the Adoption hearing for this GMPA petition (assuming it is transmitted). The proposed amended text is as follows (reflected in the Ordinance Exhibit A): (Single underline text is added, single strike-through text is deleted). Master Planned Activity Centers [Pg. 59] *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center #7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant, except that the northeast quadrant may have a total of 68.3 acres and the southeast quadrant may have a total of 49.2 acres, for a total of 197.5 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; the balance of the land area shall be limited to non-commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. Multi-family (apartment) uses shall also be permitted in the northeast quadrant within the Hammock Park MPUD and shall be limited to a total of up to 265 multi -family (apartment) dwelling units. The addition of the 9.3 acres to the northeast quadrant of the Activity center shall not be the basis for adjacent parcels to be rezoned to commercial pursuant the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict. With respect to the +/- 19 acres in the northeast quadrant of Activity Center #7, said acreage lying adjacent to the east of the Hammock Park Commerce Center MPUD, commercial development (exclusive of the allowed “1/4 mile support medical uses”) shall be limited to a total of 185,000 square feet of the following uses: personal indoor self-storage facilities – this use shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building square feet; offices for various contractor/builder construction trade specialists inclusive of the offices of related professional disciplines and services that typically serve those Proposed Project Site 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 538 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 3 of 9 construction businesses or otherwise assist in facilitating elements of a building and related infrastructure, including but not limited to architects, engineers, land surveyors and attorneys – these offices of related professional disciplines and services shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building squ are feet; warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; mortgage and land title companies; related businesses including but not limited to lumber and other building materials dealers, paint, glass, and wallpaper stores, garden supply stores – all as accessory uses only, accessory to offices for various contractor/builder construction trade specialists or accessory to warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; management associations of various types of buildings or provision of services to buildings/properties; and, fitness centers. PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of the Growth Management Plan Amendment is to amend the FLUE to increase the allowable residential density in the northeast quadrant of the Mixed Use Activity Center #7, within the Hammock Park Commerce Center CPUD limited to 265 multi-family rental apartments only (13.85 DU/A). Residential use is allowed in the Activity Center but the two easterly two quadrants, including the subject site, are limited to the density allowed in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict – 1.5 DU/A or 2.5 DU/A with use of Transfer of Development Rights credits. The Activity Center boundaries and acreage will remain the same. There is a companion Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) zoning petition (PL201800002813) that is requesting to add residential use to the previously approved mixture of retail, commercial and office uses and to revise the name of the project to Hammock Park Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). SURROUNDING ZONING, FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, AND CURRENT LAND USE: Subject Property: The +19.13-acre subject site is currently zoned Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD allowing uses from the Commercial Professional and General Office District (C-1), Commercial Convenience District (C-2), and Commercial Intermediate District (C-3) zoning districts. The Future Land Use designation of the PUD as shown on the FLUM is Urban Designation, Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center #7 Subdistrict but is also considered within Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. The site is currently undeveloped. Surrounding Properties: North: To the north is zoned the Good Turn MPUD and is designated Urban, Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center #7 Subdistrict and Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict; it is currently undeveloped but approved for a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facilities. Further to the north is undeveloped land that is zoned C-4 and has the same FLUM designation. South: Immediately adjacent to the south (across Rattlesnake Hammock Road) is a portion of the 2,262-acre Hacienda Lakes MPUD, a development of regional impact (DRI) approved for a wide variety of residential and commercial uses (with a maximum gross density of 0.78 DU/A). The area directly south is currently under development and is designated Urban, Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center #7 Subdistrict and Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. Further to the south is the Collier Regional Medical Center. The Medical Center is zoned Collier Regional Medical Center PUD (approved for hospital and related uses). The most northerly portion of the Collier Regional Medical Center PUD is designated Urban, 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 539 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 4 of 9 Commercial District, Mixed-Use Activity Center #7 Subdistrict and Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, and the southern portion is designated Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. East: To the east is the McMullen MPUD that is currently undeveloped but is approved for 185,000 square feet of commercial development. It is designated Urban, Commercial District, Mixed Use Activity Center #7 Subdistrict and Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. Further to the east is a portion of Hacienda Lakes MPUD, currently under development and designated Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. West: Immediately adjacent to the west (across Collier Boulevard), is the Naples Lakes Country Club PUD. The southeast corner of this PUD is designated Urban, Commercial District, Mixed-Use Activity Center #7 Subdistrict, developed with commercial uses (grocery anchored shopping center) and is approved for a maximum of 110,000 square feet of commercial land uses. Further to the west is the residential and golf course development components of the Naples Lakes Country Club PUD, which are designated Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: The amendment is consistent with other Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), which promote mixed use development and connectivity. The petitioner states, “The Property is within a designated Mixed-Use Activity Center, which is specifically intended to provide for concentrated commercial and mixed-use development with “carefully configured access to the road network”. Activity Center #7 in general encompasses 197.5+/- acres and includes a diverse mix of approved Mixed Use Planned Unit Developments (MPUDs).” The applicant’s justification for the requested amendment is to meet the market demands for multi-family rental housing, while continuing to offer opportunities for commercial development in this Mixed Use Activity Center #7 Subdistrict. The petitioner believes this location will allow for residents to live, shop and work within a convenient travel distance. The petitioner submitted a market study with his application that indicated that there is a demand in Collier County for multi-family rental housing that would be supported at this location. One recent development (Orchid Run located at the southwest corner of Golden Gate Parkway and Livingston Road) of new multi- family rental housing at market price has been very well received. Although a number of other market-rate multi-family rental housing developments are in various stages currently , the market study indicated that the occupancy rate for market rate apartments has been hovering just above 95% for the past five years, which is indicative of a very tight under-supplied rental market. The subject site is located in the northeast quadrant at the intersection of two arterial roadways, Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard, as well as easy access to I-75. Hammock Park MPUD’s location is within 1 mile of the high employment center of Collier Regional Medical Center; and within 6 miles of Naples downtown, Collier County schools in Lely, Naples Community Hospital Downtown, Collier County government offices, multiple shopping areas (including Coastland Center), and many other employment locations. With easy access to two arterial roadways and commuting times and distances potentially reduced, this location can be attractive to prospective renters. This location is well situated for a mixed- use development with market-rate multi-family rental housing. 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 540 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 5 of 9 Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent GMPA Criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3177: Section 163.3177(1)(f): All mandatory and optional elements of the comprehensive plan and plan amendments shall be based upon relevant and appropriate data and an analysis by the local government that may include, but not be limited to, surveys, studies, community goals and vision, and other data available at the time of adoption of the comprehensive plan or plan amendment. To be based on data means to react to it in an appropriate way and to the extent necessary indicated by the data available on that particular subject at the time of adoption of the plan or plan amendment at issue. 1. Surveys, studies, and data utilized in the preparation of the comprehensive plan may not be deemed a part of the comprehensive plan unless adopted as a part of it. Copies of such studies, surveys, data, and supporting documents for proposed plans and plan amendments shall be made available for public inspection, and copies of such plans shall be made available to the public upon payment of reasonable charges for reproduction. Support data or summaries are not subject to the compliance review process, but the comprehensive plan must be clearly based on appropriate data. Support data or summaries may be used to aid in the determination of compliance and consistency. 2. Data must be taken from professionally accepted sources. The application of a methodology utilized in data collection or whether a particular methodology is professionally accepted may be evaluated. However, the evaluation may not include whether one accepted methodology is better than another. Original data collection by local governments is not required. However, local governments may use original data so long as methodologies are professionally accepted. 3. The comprehensive plan shall be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, which shall either be those published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research or generated by the local government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. The plan must be based on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research for at least a 10 -year planning period unless otherwise limited under s. 380.05, including related rules of the Administration Commission. Absent physical limitations on population growth, population projections for each municipality, and the unincorporated area within a county must, at a minimum, be reflective of each area’s proportional share of the total county population and the total county population growth. Section 163.3177(6)(a) 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: (a) The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. (b) The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. (c) The character of undeveloped land. (d) The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. (e) The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. (f) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. (g) The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s.330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 541 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 6 of 9 (h) The discouragement of urban sprawl. (i) The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. (j) The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. STAFF ANALYSIS The Future Land Use Element (FLUE) states, “The Mixed-Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal points within the community. Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. Further, they are generally intended to be developed at a human -scale, to be pedestrian-oriented, and to be interconnected with abutting projects – whether commercial or residential. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged.” Within the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, the FLUE states, “If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict.” Residential land uses in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict may be allowed at a maximum base density of 1.5 units per gross acre, plus any density bonus that may be achieved up to 1.0 unit per gross acre via the transfer of up to one (1.0) dwelling unit (TDR, transferable development right) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands. This provision allows a maximum density of 2.5 DU/acre. The maximum density as described above will only allow for 48 DUs (19.1 3ac * 2.5DU/a = 47.825 DUs). The applicant is requesting 265 multi-family dwelling units, which is contingent on this Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA). The GMPA is requesting text be added to allow 265 residential units (rental apartments only) within Hammock Park MPUD, yielding a density of 13.85 DU/A (265 DUs /19.13 A = 13.85 DU/A), and without use of TDR credits. If this project was located on the west side of Collier Boulevard within the Mixed-Use Activity Center #7, it would be eligible for a maximum density of 16 DU/A, instead of 2.5 DU/A (using TDR credits). The applicant stated that the approved density of Hacienda Lakes PUD (as you move further east from the urbanized area and Collier Blvd.) serves as the transition from Urban to Agricultural/Rural area (the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict is intended as that transition – it is a 1-mile corridor along the east side of Collier Blvd., south of Beck Blvd.). There are a wide range of uses approved in the area surrounding Hammock Park CPUD. The uses range from an MPUD to the north; a PUD/DRI to the east and south with a full gamut of retail and commercial uses; a PUD to the south that consists of a hospital and related uses; and a PUD to the west with residential, golf course and commercial development. The addition of residential use to the northeast quadrant of the Mixed-Use Activity Center within the Hammock Park CPUD is consistent with the concept of a true mixed use development, the FLUE’s intent for a Mixed Use Activity Center, and thus is not out of character with the surrounding area. Compatibility can be more specifically addressed at time of zoning, and may include building height and size limitations, setback and buffer requirements, etc. 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 542 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 7 of 9 Environmental Impacts and Historical and Archaeological Impacts: Craig Brown, Senior Environmental Specialist reviewed and approved the petition in December 2018. He noted the following: A PUD Ordinance #07-30 was approved. The property was 19.13 acres, 13.64 acres of wetland; 15% preserve was required or 1.63acres; the property has been partially cleared. No EAC (Environmental Advisory Council) review is required; no changes to the Environmental Goals and Policies of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element. Public Facilities Impacts: Eric Fey, Senior Project Manager with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division, completed his review and approved this petition (for potable water, sanitary sewer and solid waste) in May 2019. Transportation Impacts: Michael Sawyer, Project Manager with Collier County Transportation Planning, completed his review and approved this petition in February 2019. Collier County Public Schools Impacts: At this time there is existing or planned capacity within the next five years for the purposed development at the elementary, middle and high school levels. At the time of site plan or plat the development would be reviewed for concurrency to ensure there is capacity either within the concurrency service area the development is located within or adjacent concurrency service areas. The petitioner states there are no significant or adverse impacts upon any of the public facilities (potable water, sanitary sewer, arterial and collector roads, drainage, solid waste, parks, schools, fire control and EMS) and staff concurs. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), as required by Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.03.05 A, was duly advertised, noticed, and held on June 19, 2019, 5:30 p.m. at South Regional Library, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, FL 34113. This NIM was advertised, noticed, and held jointly for this large scale GMP amendment and the companion Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) petition. The applicant’s team gave a presentation and then responded to questions. Approximately 11 members of the public along with approximately 6 members of the applicant’s team and County staff signed in at the NIM. Commissioner Donna Fiala was also in attendance. Agent Alexis Crespo presented the project. The public asked questions about the project details. The consultant explained the PUDA application included reducing commercial square footage and adding a maximum of 265 multi-family market-rate rental dwelling units. There was no opposition expressed at the meeting. There were questions concerning the reduction in commercial equaling the number of residential trips – they will; will the housing be apartments or condominiums – apartments; will there be additional restaurants – probably due to the success on US41 at Collier Blvd. The consultants explained the trips generated from the project would not increase beyond the previously approved total number of trips, the pattern of travel times might be different. The meeting ended at approximately 6:30 p.m. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 543 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 8 of 9 FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • There are no utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. • There are no concerns for impacts upon other public infrastructure. • Adding the residential density of 13.85 DU/A is generally compatible with surrounding development, most of which is commercial. • The proposed changes to the Mixed Use Activity Center #7 are consistent with the purpose of the FLUE’s Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, including mixed use, high density, location at a major intersection, proximity to residential development. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on August 15, 2019. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2, Florida Statutes. [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20180002804/CP- 2018-8 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve for transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity and other agencies required by Statute, subject to replacing the petitioner’s added sentence with Staff’s rewrite: Petitioner’s added sentence: “Multi-family (apartment) uses shall also be permitted in the northeast quadrant within the Hammock Park MPUD and shall be limited to a total of up to 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units.” Staff’s rewrite: “The previously established residential density limits in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict notwithstanding, up to 265 multi-family rental apartments shall be allowed in the northeast quadrant within the Hammock Park MPUD.” 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 544 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Page 9 of 9 9.A.2.g Packet Pg. 545 Attachment: 05_Transmittal Staff Report CP-18-8 Hammock Prk_Ra_FNL (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) RESOLUTION NO. 20- 1 6 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN, ORDINANCE 89-05, AS AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TO AMEND THE URBAN MIXED USE ACTIVITY CENTER #7 TO ALLOW UP TO 265 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RENTAL DWELLING UNITS IN THE HAMMOCK PARK MIXED-USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN ADDITION TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 19.13± ACRES AND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. [PL20180002804] WHEREAS, Collier County, pursuant to Section 163.3161, et. seq., Florida Statutes, the Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985, was required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive plan; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan on January 10, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Act of 2011 provides authority for local governments to amend their respective comprehensive plans and outlines certain procedures to amend adopted comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, Petitioner, Wilton Land Company, LLC, has initiated this amendment to the Future Land Use Element; and WHEREAS, on October 3, 2019, October 17, 2019 and October 31, 2019, the Collier County Planning Commission considered the proposed amendment to the Growth Management Plan pursuant to the authority granted to it by Section 163.3174, F.S., and has recommended approval of said amendment to the Board of County Commissioners; and WHEREAS, on January 14, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing approved the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the state land planning agency in accordance with Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, upon receipt of Collier County's proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, various State agencies and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) have Words underlined are additions; Words struck through are deletions are a break in text 18-CMP-01044H15115 Hammock Park/PL20180002804 12/30/19 Page 1 of 2 9.A.2.h Packet Pg. 546 Attachment: 06_Transmittal Resolution 2020-016 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) thirty (30) days to review the proposed amendment and DEO must transmit, in writing, to Collier County its comments within said thirty (30) days pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, Collier County, upon receipt of the written comments from DEO must adopt, adopt with changes or not adopt the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment within one hundred and eighty (180) days of such receipt pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.; and WHEREAS, the DEO, within five (5) days of receipt of Collier County's adopted Growth Management Plan Amendment, must notify the County of any deficiencies of the Plan Amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(3), F.S. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by reference herein, for the purpose of transmittal to the Department of Economic Opportunity and other reviewing agencies thereby initiating the required State evaluation of the Growth Management Plan Amendment prior to final adoption. THIS RESOLUTION ADOPTED after motion, second and majority vote this I LP" day of .To,,,vial 2020. ATTE priO4,q ., BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS CRY AL f "KIL, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORID; 7_,...' ' 14 4 Lieutiot BY: All177Xid st as •ter Clerk URT L. SAUNDERS, Chairman it Appr+ g. . ;fo'form and legality: 40.11%; . / 44 eidi Ashton-Cicko Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A -text Words underlined are additions;Words struck through are deletions are a break in text 18-CMP-01044]115 Hammock Park/PL20180002804 12/30/19 Page 2 of 2 9.A.2.h Packet Pg. 547 Attachment: 06_Transmittal Resolution 2020-016 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) PL20180002804/CP2018-8 EXHIBIT A FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** I. URBAN DESIGNATION TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** C. Urban Commercial District: TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** 1. Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Master Planned Activity Centers TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Pg.59] The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center#7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant, except that the northeast quadrant may have a total of 68.3 acres and the southeast quadrant may have a total of 49.2 acres, for a total of 197.5 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; the balance of the land area shall be limited to non-commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. The previously established residential density limits in the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict notwithstanding, up to 265 multi-family rental apartments shall be allowed in the northeast quadrant within the Hammock Park MPUD. The addition of the 9.3 acres to the northeast quadrant of the Activity center shall not be the basis for adjacent parcels to be rezoned to commercial pursuant the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict. With respect to the +/- 19 acres in the northeast quadrant of Activity Center #7, said acreage lying adjacent to the east of the Hammock Park Commerce Center MPUD, commercial development (exclusive of the allowed "1/4 mile support medical uses") shall be limited to a total of 185,000 square feet of the following uses: personal indoor self-storage facilities—this use shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building square feet; offices for various contractor/builder construction trade specialists inclusive of the offices of related professional disciplines and services that typically serve those construction businesses or otherwise assist in facilitating elements of a building and related infrastructure, including but not limited to architects, engineers, land surveyors and attorneys — these offices of related professional disciplines and services shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building square feet; warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; mortgage and land title companies; related businesses including but not limited to lumber and other building materials dealers, paint,glass, and wallpaper stores,garden supply stores—all as accessory uses only,accessory to offices for various contractor/builder construction trade specialists or accessory to warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; management associations of various types of buildings or provision of services to buildings/properties; and, fitness centers. TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Underlined text is added; struck through text is deleted. 9.A.2.h Packet Pg. 548 Attachment: 06_Transmittal Resolution 2020-016 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) F1DSOHV'DLO\1HZ)ULGD\ˆˆ3DJH$ 9.A.2.i Packet Pg. 549 Attachment: 07_CCPC Adoption Ad as posted 2.17.20 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 9.A.2.jPacket Pg. 550Attachment: 08_Virtual public meeting ltr_CP-2018-8 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption) 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.4 Item Summary: PL20190002017-An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 89-05, as amended, the Collier County Growth Management Plan for the unincorporated area of Collier County, Florida, specifically amending the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map and Map Series by changing the designation of property from the Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District, Residential Subdistrict and the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District -Sending Lands to the Urban Designation, Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center #9 to allow construction of commercial and industrial development. The subject property is located on the North side of Beck Boulevard near the terminus of Beck Boulevard in Sections 35 and 36, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, and Sections 1 and 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 3.43 acres; and furthermore, recommending Transmittal of the Adopted amendment to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity, providing for severability and providing for an effective date. (Companion to PL20190002018) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: Planner, Senior – Zoning Name: Marcia R Kendall 07/20/2020 7:01 AM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 07/20/2020 7:01 AM Approved By: Review: Zoning Sue Faulkner Additional Reviewer Completed 07/20/2020 10:45 AM Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 07/20/2020 11:20 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 07/20/2020 1:08 PM Zoning Anita Jenkins Additional Reviewer Completed 07/20/2020 4:43 PM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 07/21/2020 9:49 AM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/22/2020 4:41 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 9.A.3 Packet Pg. 551 PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 1 of 14 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT - PLANNING & REGULATION HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 2020 SUBJECT: PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MIXED-USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) – COMPANION TO ITEM GMPA- PL20180002804, HAMMOCK PARK GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT _______________________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT AND AGENTS: Property Owner/Applicant: David Torres c/o Wilton Land Company, LLC 206 Dudley Road Wilton, CT 06897 Agents: Alexis Crespo, AICP Richard Yovanovich, Esquire Waldrop Engineering, P.A. Coleman, Yovanovich and Koester, P.A. 28100 Bonita Grande Drive # 305 4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Naples, FL 34103 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 07- 30, the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), to allow up to 265 multi-family rental dwelling units plus 148,500 square feet of commercial development as an alternative to 160,000 square feet of retail and office currently allowed; by changing the name of the CPUD from Hammock Park Commerce Centre to the Hammock Park Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD); by revising the development standards; by amending the Master Plan and revising developer commitments and by providing an effective date. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 2 of 14 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 553 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 3 of 14 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 4 of 14 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject PUD, consisting of 19.13 acres, is located at the northeast corner of Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) and Collier Boulevard (CR 951) in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See the Location Map on page 2 of this Staff Report.) PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject undeveloped property was originally rezoned from Rural Agricultural (A) to PUD in 2000 per Ordinance Number 00-79. In 2007, the subject property was rezoned from PUD to CPUD per Ordinance Number 07-30 to allow for a maximum of 160,000 square feet of commercial retail and office uses. The CPUD was amended in 2014 per HEX Decision 2014-28, to allow for signage related to Hacienda Lakes of Naples PUD. The CPUD was amended again in 2016 per HEX Decision 2016-42 to allow for the construction of accessory structures. See Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Decisions. The petitioner proposes an alternative land use to add a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units, with a density of 13.85 dwelling units per acre, creating an MPUD from the current CPUD. If the 265 multi-family dwelling units are developed, the maximum amount of non-residential uses will be limited to 148,500 square feet, so as not to exceed the current trip count for the currently approved 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 5 of 14 160,000 square feet of commercial land uses, or 577 PM peak hour trips. See Attachment A– Proposed PUD Ordinance. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: An undeveloped 9.5 acre parcel with a zoning designation of Good Turn Center PUD which allows 100,000 square feet of commercial land use and/or a variety of skilled nursing care facility uses with a maximum of 200 units. East: An undeveloped 19.32 acre parcel with a zoning designation of McMullen MPUD which allows 185,000 square feet of commercial and/or independent living, assisted living, and nursing home care units. South: An undeveloped 34.16 acre commercial parcel (which is part of a 2,262 acre DRI) with a zoning designation of Hacienda Lakes MPUD and a gross density of 0.78 dwelling units per acre. West: SFWMD 951 Canal, Collier Boulevard, a 6-lane divided roadway, and a developed commercial strip shopping center with a zoning designation of Naples Lakes Country Club PUD and a gross density of 1.67 dwelling unit per acre. Please see Attachment F-Density Exhibit. AERIAL PHOTO Subject Site 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 556 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 6 of 14 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Comprehensive Planning staff has reviewed the proposed PUD Amendment and has found it consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GMP. See Attachment C – FLUE Consistency Review. Transportation Element: In evaluating this project, staff reviewed the applicant’s May 30, 2019, Trip Generation Statement (TIS) for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP using the then applicable 2018 and the current 2019 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP states; “The County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting 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, 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 Standard within the 5-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 the project’s significant impacts on all roadways.” Staff finding: According to the TIS provided with this petition, the requested PUD amendment proposes mixed-use development by adding 265 multi-family dwelling units along with 148,500 square feet of commercial uses; which represents a reduction of approximately 11,500 square feet of commercial uses. Both the original commercial development and the new proposed mixed-use development will generate a projected 577 PM peak hour, two-way trips that will occur on the following adjacent roadway network. The trips generated by this development will occur on the following adjacent roadway link: 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 557 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 7 of 14 Link/Roadway Link 2018 AUIR LOS 2019 AUIR LOS Current Peak Hour Peak Direction Service Volume/Peak Direction 2018 Remaining Capacity 2019 Remaining Capacity 34.0/CR-951 Collier Blvd Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake Hammock Road D D 3,000/North 834 580 35.0/CR-951 Collier Blvd Rattlesnake Hammock Road to US-41 Tamiami Trail C C 3,200/North 962 813 75.0/Rattlesnake Hammock Road CR-951 Collier Blvd to Santa Barbara Blvd B B 2,900/West 2,200 2,147 Based on the 2019 AUIR, the adjacent roadway network will continue to have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed trips for this project within the 5-year planning period. Therefore, the subject rezoning can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental Planning staff found this project to be consistent with the CCME. Native vegetation required to be retained for the PUD was approved in accordance with Ordinance Number 07-30 (minimum 1.63 acres). A conservation easement for 1.66 acres of native vegetation has been placed under preservation and dedicated to Collier County (OR 4496, Page 258) and to South Florida Water Management District (OR 5056, Page 3544). GMP Conclusion: The proposed PUD Rezone may be deemed consistent with the FLUE of the GMP subject to the adoption of the companion GMP amendment. 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 to as the “PUD Findings”), and Section 10.02.08 F., Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC 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 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 558 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 8 of 14 on the rezoning request. An evaluation relative to these subsections is discussed below, under the headings “Rezone Findings” and “PUD Findings.” In addition, staff offers the following analysis: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition to address environmental concerns. The PUD preserve requirement is 1.63 acres, per Ordinance Number 07- 30; 1.66 acres of native vegetation has been placed in a conservation easement and dedicated to Collier County and South Florida Water Management District. No listed plant or animal species were observed on the property. The Environmental Data indicates the subject property falls within the USFWS Primary Florida Panther (Felis concolor coryi) Habitat. There were no observations of panther onsite and the USFWS issued a Biological Opinion on December 17, 2008, to address potential project-related impacts to the Florida panther or its habitat. A habitat management plan for protected species will be included at PPL or SDP review. An active bald eagle nest was documented approximately 20 feet north of the project site. Consultation with USFWS and FWCC r egarding guidelines and permitting requirements will be required prior to construction. This project does require Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) review, as this project does meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. Specifically, the project is within the 330-foot and 660-foot bald eagle nest protection zones. Transportation Review: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval. Utilities Review: The project lies within the regional potable water service area and south wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are readily available via connections to existing infrastructure on-site and within the adjacent right- of-way. Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Adequate downstream wastewater system capacity must be confirmed at the time of development permit ((Site Development Plan (SDP) or Plans and Plat (PPL)) review through a thorough engineering analysis, which will be discussed at a mandatory pre-submittal conference with representatives from the Public Utilities Engineering and Project Management Division and the Growth Management Development Review Division. As stated in subsection 5.6 of the PUD document, any improvements to the Collier County Water-Sewer District’s wastewater collection/transmission system necessary to provide sufficient capacity to serve the project will be the responsibility of the owner/developer and will be conveyed to the Collier County Water-Sewer District at no cost to the County at the time of utility acceptance. School Board Review: At this time there is existing or planned capacity within the next five-years for the purposed development at the elementary, middle, and high school levels. At the time of SDP or 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. Zoning and Land Development Review: FLUE Policy 5.4 requires new land uses to be compatible with, and complementary to, the surrounding land uses. In reviewing the appropriateness of the 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 559 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 9 of 14 requested uses and intensity on the subject site, the compatibility analysis included a review of the subject proposal comparing it to surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location. Staff believes that the proposed development will be compatible with and complementary to the surrounding land uses. Staff offers the following analysis of this project: The Master Plan, located on page 3 of this Staff Report, depicts the area of proposed mixed-use (commercial and residential development). Residential development is permitted only in the eastern three-quarters of the PUD. An approximately 100-foot wide preserve area separates the area from the undeveloped Good Turn Center PUD to the north. A 170-foot wide FPL easement and an 80-foot wide conservation area along the eastern boundary separates the Hammock Park PUD from the McMullen MPUD to the east. To the south is Rattlesnake Hammock Road, an approximately 130-foot wide right- of-way and then the undeveloped commercial area of the Hacienda Lakes MPUD. To the west is an approximately 100-foot wide canal area and then Collier Boulevard, a 6-lane divided roadway, and then a developed commercial strip shopping center at Naples Lakes Country Club PUD. The proposed PUD boundary setback for the residential uses is 25 feet. (This does not include the area along the east boundary as there already is an FPL easement there.) The front yard, side yard, and rear yard setbacks are 10 feet, 5 feet, and 10 feet respectively. All other development standards are similar to the previously approved commercial development standards. The building height is the same, 50 feet zoned height. A minimum of 30% open space has been provided. The Developer has committed to providing a minimum of 48 rental units to Essential Service Personnel. A minimum of 27 of the 48 units will be income-restricted to households earning 100% of Collier County’s median income. The development is required to provide a minimum of 20,000 square feet of commercial uses, of which a minimum of 5,000 square feet will be dedicated to Eating and Drinking Places, Restaurants (SIC 5812). Storage facilities, such as mini-storage and self-storage, are prohibited from the MPUD. CONCURRENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS: There are no concurrent land use applications under review at the present time. REZONE FINDINGS: 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 Amendment is consistent with all applicable elements of the FLUE of the GMP. See Attachment C – FLUE Consistency Review. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 560 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 10 of 14 2. The existing land use pattern. As described in the “Surrounding Land Use and Zoning” portion of this report and discussed in the zoning review analysis, the neighborhood’s existing land use pattern can be characterized as developed and undeveloped commercial, and undeveloped continuing care retirement communities. 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. It is also comparable with expected land uses by virtue of its consistency with the FLUE of the GMP. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. The district boundaries are logically drawn as discussed in Items 2 and 3. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezone necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to develop the property with mixed- use and residential land uses. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The proposed change from commercial development to mixed-use development consisting of multi- family residential and commercial development will reduce the overall intensity of land uses allowed by the current PUD. Therefore, the proposed change will not adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project at this time, i.e., the GMP is consistent at the time of rezoning as evaluated as part of the GMP Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at the time of the first development order (SDP or Plat). Additionally, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals are sought. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 561 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 11 of 14 The proposed development 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. It is anticipated that the proposed PUD Amendment will not reduce light and air to adjacent areas inside or outside the PUD. 10. Whether the proposed change would adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. This is a subjective determination based upon anticipated results, which may be internal or external to the subject property. Property valuation is affected by a host of factors including zoning; 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. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the LDC is that their sound application, when combined with the SDP and PPL approval process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not result in deterrence to improvement or development of the 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 Rezone 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 used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed uses cannot be achieved without rezoning the property. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed PUD Amendment is not out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or County. 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 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 562 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 12 of 14 was reviewed on its own 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. Any development anticipated by the PUD Document would require site alteration, and this project will undergo extensive evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the SDP and/or PPL processes, and 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 project will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in LDC Section 6.02.00 regarding Adequate Public Facilities (APF), and the project will need to be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities, except as may be exempt by federal regulations. This petition has been reviewed by County staff responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the amendment process, and those staff persons have concluded that no Level of Service will be adversely impacted with the commitments contained in the PUD Document. The concurrency review for APF is determined at the time of SDP review. The activity proposed by this amendment will have no impact on public facility adequacy in regard to utilities. 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 “In support of its recommendation, the CCPC shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria:” 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. Water distribution and wastewater collection mains are readily available along Rattlesnake Hammock Road and within the western portion of the PUD, and there are adequate water and wastewater treatment capacities to serve the proposed PUD as amended. 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. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 563 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 13 of 14 Documents submitted with the application provided satisfactory evidence of unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be required to gain SDP 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. 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 has found this petition 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 screenin g requirements. The landscaping and buffering standards are compatible with the adjacent uses. 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 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. 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, the project’s development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any SDPs or PPLs, are sought. The CCWSD has sufficient treatment capacities for water and wastewater services to the project. Conveyance capacities must be confirmed at the time of development permit application. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. The area has adequate supporting infrastructure, including readily available County 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. 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 564 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PUDA-PL20180002813 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD July 13, 2020 Page 14 of 14 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 not seeking any new deviations. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The applicant conducted a NIM meeting on June 19, 2019, at the South Regional Library located at 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway, Naples, Florida. Approximately 11 residents attended the meeting along with the Agent’s team and Applicant. For further information, see Attachment D - NIM Synopsis. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the Staff Report for this petition on July 13, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: Planning and Zoning Review staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition PUDA- PL20180002813, Hammock Park MPUD to the BCC with a recommendation of approval. Attachments: Attachment A - Proposed PUD Ordinance Attachment B - Previous Ordinances and Decisions Attachment C - FLUE Consistency Review Attachment D - NIM Synopsis Attachment E - Application Attachment F - Density Exhibit 9.A.3.a Packet Pg. 565 Attachment: Hammock Park PUD Staff Report.docx 7-13-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) ORDINANCE NO. 20- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 07-30, THE HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD), TO ALLOW UP TO 265 MULTI-FAMILY RENTAL DWELLING UNITS PLUS 148,500 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO 160,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL AND OFFICE CURRENTLY ALLOWED; BY CHANGING THE NAME OF THE CPUD FROM HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE TO THE HAMMOCK PARK MIXED-USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (MPUD); BY REVISING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; BY AMENDING THE MASTER PLAN AND REVISING DEVELOPER COMMITMENTS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP SO SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 19.13± ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PL20180002813] WHEREAS , WILTON LAND COMPANY LLC, represented by Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. and Alexis Crespo, AICP of Waldrop Engineering, P.A., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to amend the CPUD and change the zoning classification of the additional herein described real property . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: SECTION ONE: Zoning Classification. The PUD Document attached to Ordinance No. 07-30, is hereby amended for a 19± acre project to be now known as the Hammock Park Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development in accordance with the revised MPUD Document, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein. SECTION TWO: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State and on the date that the Growth Management Plan Amendment in Ordinance No. 20-__ becomes effective . [1 9 -C PS-0 1859/1523012/1] 129 Hammock Park\PL20180002813 2/13 /1 9 Page I of2 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this ___ day of ________ , 2020. ATTEST: CRYSTAL K. KINZEL, CLERK By:---------- Deputy Clerk Approved as to form and legality: ,!f\c.. ~n 'V ,,,_,:Y --------------..t:lA;, Heidi Ashton-Cicko u Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A -PUD Document [ 19-CPS -0 1859/1523012/ I] 129 Hammock Park\PL20180002813 2/13/19 Page 2 of2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By :------------- Burt L. Saunders, Chairman 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE GMPUD TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE SECTION I SECTION II SECTION III SECTION IV SECTION V SECTION VI EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT "A-1" EXHIBIT "C-1" EXHIBIT "C-2" Property Ownership & Description Project Development Community Commercial-Mixed Use District Preserve Area General Development Commitments Requested Deviations from the LDC 1 LIST OF EXHIBITS PUD Master Plan Off-Premises Directional Sign Location 1 Tower Locations 2 Tower Renderings 2 1. Approved in HEX decision 2014-28. 2. Approved in HEX decision 2016-42. Hammock Park MPUD -PUDA-PL20180002813 Last Revised : February 12, 2020 Page 2 of20 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 569 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 578 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 579 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 581 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 583 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 584 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 585 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 587 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 591 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.b Packet Pg. 593 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 598 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 599 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 600 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 601 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 602 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 603 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 604 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 605 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 606 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 607 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 608 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 609 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 610 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 611 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 612 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 613 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 614 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 615 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.cPacket Pg. 616Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 617 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 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 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CPUD FOR A PROJECT KNOWN AS HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE PUD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF CR AND RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK ROAD IN SECTION TOWNSHIP SOUTH RANGE EAST COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA CONSISTING OF ACRES PROVIDING FOR THE ENTIRE REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NUMBER AS AMENDED THE FORMER HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE PUD AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE c Ic rr c rtl J J rz l r gexmcx Nl N WHEREAS RobertMulhereof RWA Inc and RBruceAndersonEsq of RoetzelAndressrepresentingthe SemplerFamily Partnership Number LTD c o Joseph A Filippelli petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described real property NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA that SECTION ONE The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section Township South Range East Collier County Florida is changed from Planned Unit Development PUD to Commercial Planned Unit Development CPUD in accordance with the CPUD Document attached hereto as Exhibit A which is incorporated herein and by reference made part hereof The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps as described in Ordinance Number as amended the Collier County Land Development Code is are hereby amended accordingly SECTION TWO Ordinance Number as amended known as the Hammock Park Commerce Centre PUD adopted on November by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County is hereby entirely repealed Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 618 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) SECTION THREE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super majority vote by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County Florida this day of FeiJ p y ATT T pWiGH f E J ROCK CLERKBOARD OFCOUNTY COMMISSIONERS COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA BY JAM S COLETT A cHAIRMAN Atte atf ltJO otSIOItltwrtApprovedas to formand legal sufficiency m Marjori M Student S irling Assistant County Attorney PUDA AR I Mlisp This ordinance filed with tfle Secretory of State s Office the day of lV ardl ocl and acknowledgement of that filinreceived this day of Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 619 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DOCUMENT FOR Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Prepared by D XTA NC CONSULTINGA Planning Visualization Civil Engineerin g Surveying Mapping And D r r b c iiC rTi CO r mr oC rIll WILLOW PARKDRIVE SUITE NAPLESFLORIDAROETZELANDANDRESS PARK SHORE DRIVE TRIANON CENTRE THIRD FLOOR NAPLES FLORIDA Date Approved by BCC November Ordinance Number Date Amendment Approved by BCC OC Amendment Ordinance Number Exhibit A C Documents and Settings sandraherrera Local SettingslTemporary Internet FieslOLKl C Hammock Park CPUD clean doc 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 620 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) T ABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE SECTION I Property Ownership Description SECTION II Project Development SECTION IIICommunity Commercial District SECTION IV Preserve Area SECTION V General Development Commitments LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT A PUD Master Plan C IDocuments and Settings sandraherreralLocal Settings Temporary Internet FileslOLKIC Hammock Park CPUD c ean doc 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 621 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE The development of approximately acres of property in Section Township South Range East Collier County as a Commercial Planned Unit Development to beknown as Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD will be in compliance with the planning goals and objectives of Collier County as set forth in the Collier County Growth Management Plan GMP The retail commercial and office facilities of the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD will be consistent with the growth policies land development regulations and applicable comprehensive planning objectives for thefollowingreasonsThesubjectpropertyislocated within the northeast quadrant of the CR Rattlesnake Hammock Road Mixed Use Activity Center Land Use Designation as identified on the Future Land Use Map The permitted uses are described in the Activity Center Sub district of the Urban Commercial District in the Future Land Use Element FLUE This category described in the FLUE permits afullmixofresidentialandnonresidentiallandusesinthisareaThisstrategiclocationallowsthe site superior access for the location of retail commercial and office land uses The subject property s location in relation to existing or proposed community facilities and services permits the development sintensity of land use as required in Objective of the FLUE The project development iscompatible with and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy of the FLUE The project shall be in compliance withall applicable County regulations including the GMP All final development orders for this project are subject to the Adequate Public Facilities requirements of the Collier County Land Development Code LDC as amended as set forth in Policy of the FLUE The project has access from both CR and Rattlesnake Hammock Road Further the access points will be consistent with theadopted Access Management Plan for Mixed Use Activity Center which encourages shared access points along CR and isfurther described in Policy of the FLUE Where possible Hammock Park Commerce Centre will incorporate natural systems for water management in accordance with theirnatural functions and capabilities as may be required by Objective ofthe Drainage Sub Element of the Public Facilities Element The project will be served by acomplete range ofservicesandutilitiesasapprovedbytheCountyNoresidentialusesarebeingrequested for this CPUD Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 622 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) SECTION PROPERTY OWNERSHIP ANDDESCRIPTION PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the location and ownership ofthe property and to describe the existing conditions of the property proposed to be developed under the name of Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in the southwest of Section Township South Range East Collier County Florida being more particularly described asfollowsORPageTheNorthonehalfNofthe South one half S of the Southwest one quarter SWof the Southwest one quarter SWII less the West feet of roadway for CountyRoadSectionTownshipSouthRangeEastCollierCountyFloridaandtheWestfootparcelofthe South one half S of the Southeast one quarter SE of the SouthwestonequarterSWlSectionTownshipSouthRangeEastCollierCountyFloridaORPageITheSouthoftheSouth of theSouthwest of the Southwest of Section Township South Range East Collier County Florida less the west feet thereof for road right of way Containing acres more or less Subject to easements reservations or restrictions of record PROPERTY OWNERSHIP The subject propertyis currently owned by Sembler Family Partnership Ltd Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 623 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) GENERALDESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AREA AThe subject property is located at the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and CR of unincorporated Collier County Florida The subject property is located within a Mixed Use Activity Center as designated on the Future Land Use Map FLUM B The property is currently vacant The entire site has Hammock Park Commerce Centre PUD Zoning PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD will include amixture of land uses for retail commercial and office land uses The Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD intends to establish guidelines and standards to ensure a high and consistent level of quality for proposed features and facilities Uniform guidelines and standards will be created for such features and facilities as landscaping signage lighting roadway treatments fences and buffers The Concept Plan is illustrated graphically on Exhibit A CPUD Master Plan A Land Use Summary indicating approximate land use acreage isshown on the Master Plan SHORT TITLE This Ordinance shall beknown and cited as the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development Ordinance Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 624 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development relationships to applicable County ordinances the respective land uses of the tracts included in the project as well as other project relationships GENERAL A Regulations for development of the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents ofthis Document CPUD Commercial Planned Unit Development District applicable sections and parts of the LDC and GMP in effect at the time of final local development order or building permit application Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards then the provisions of the most similardistrictintheLDCshallapplyBUnlessotherwisenoted the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the date of adoption of this PUD CAll conditions imposed and graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD shall become part of the regulations that govern the manner in which the CPUD site may be developed D Unless specifically waived through any variance or waiver provisions from any other applicable regulations theprovisionsofthoseregulationsnototherwiseprovidedforthisCPUD remain in full force and effect PROJECT PLAN AND PROPOSED LAND USES AThe project Master Plan is illustrated graphically by Exhibit A CPUD Master Plan B Minor modifications to Exhibit A may be permitted at the time of Site Development Plan approval subject to the provisions of the LDC as amended oras otherwise permitted by this CPUD Document CIn addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit A easements such as utility private and semi public shall be established and or vacated within or along the properly as may be necessary Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 625 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) LANDUSE A Exhibit A CPUD Master Plan constitutes the required CPUD Development Plan Except as otherwise provided within this CPUD Document any division of the property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the subdivision regulations and the platting laws of the State of Florida B Appropriate instruments will beprovided at the time of infrastructure improvements regarding anydedicationsandthemethodologyforprovidingperpetualmaintenanceofcommon facilities NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Pursuant tothe LDC as amended of the native vegetation on site shall be retained The exact boundaries of the preserve may vary in order toaccommodate final alignment of Rattlesnake Hammock Extension butaminimumofacresofnativepreserveshallbeprovidedforinaccordancewiththe LDC SIGNS Signs shall bein accordance with the LDC as amended Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 626 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) SECTION III COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to identify permitted uses and development standards for areas within the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD designated on Exhibit A CPUD Master Plan as C Commercial GENERAL DESCRIPTION A There isone area designated as C Commercial on the Master Plan This Commercial area is intended to accommodate different ranges of retail and office uses essential services and customary accessory uses B The approximate acreage of the Commercial parcel isas follows Parcel Tract Right of way outside of development area Total Acreage lI l l Use Retail andOffice Right ofway Actualacreage of all development tracts will be provided at the time of Site Development Plan or Preliminary Subdivision Plat approvals in accordance with the LDC as amended Commercial tracts are designed toaccommodate internal roadways open spaces lakes water management facilities and other similar uses CWithin the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD up to a maximum of one hundred sixty thousand square feet of retail and office uses are allowed Land uses for the development may be permitted as generally outlined below PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure or part thereof shall be erected altered or used or land used in whole or in part for other than the following A Permitted Principal Uses and Structures Amusement and recreation services Indoor only Groups Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 627 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Apparel and accessory stores Groups Automotive repair services and parking Groups All uses are prohibited within feet from the easterly right of way line of c RAuto and home supply stores Group Building construction general contractors groups Building materials hardware garden supply Groups Business services Groups Communications Groups Construction special trade contractors Groups Depository institutions Groups Eating and drinking places Groups except contract feeding food service and industrial feeding Engineering accounting and management Groups Food stores Groups Funeral service and crematories Group Gasoline service stations subject to the provisions ofthe LDC General merchandise stores Groups Hardware stores Health services Groups Home furniture furnishings and equipment stores Groups Hospitals Group Hotels and motels Group Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 628 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Insurance agents brokers and service Group Membership organizations Groups Miscellaneous repair services Groups Group with approval of County Manager or his designee who shall beguidedbytheobjectiveofallowingusesthatarecompatiblewithexistingdevelopment All uses are prohibited within feet of the easterly right ofwaylineofCRMiscellaneousretailGroupsMotionpicturesGroupsMuseumartgalleries Group Non depository credit institutions Groups Offices All Groups Personal services Groups Restaurants All Groups Real estate Groups Social services Group United States Postal Service Group Veterinarian s office Group except no outside kenneling Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC as amended ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES A Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted B Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC as amended DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 629 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) A Minimum lot area Ten thousand square feet B Minimum lot width One hundred feet C Minimum yard requirements Front yard Twenty five feet Side yard Zero for common or abutting walls otherwise one half the height of the building but not less than ten feet Rear yard Twenty feet D Distance between principal structures The distance between any two principal structures on the same parcel shall be fifteen feetoradistanceequaltoonehalfthesumoftheirheightswhicheverisgreaterEMinimum floor area of principal structure Seven hundred square feet per building on the ground floor FLandscaping and off street parkingshallbeInaccordancewith the LDC as amended G Maximum height Fifty feet HGeneral application for setbacks Front yard setbacks shall comply with the following If the parcel is served by a public or private right of way the setback IS measured from the adjacent right of way line If the parcel is served by a non platted private drive the setback is measured from the back of curb or edge of pavement If the parcel is served by a platted private drive the setback ismeasured from the road easement or property line All buildings landscaping and visible infrastructures shall bearchitecturally and aesthetically unified Said unified architectural theme shall include a similar architectural design and similar use of materials and colors on all of the buildings to be erected on site Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the site A conceptual landscape plan for theentire site shall be submitted concurrent with the first application for site development plan approval Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 630 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) J Outside storage or display of merchandise is prohibited unless it is ancillary to a permitted use and screened from view from adjacent public roadways Outside storage may be approved by the County Manager or his designee as part of the approval of an SDP K The FP L easement may be used for ancillary uses such as parking storage service drives and water management provided written authorization for those uses is obtained from FP L and submitted with the application for SDP Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 631 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) SECTION IV PRESERVE AREA PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the development plan for areas designated as Preserve Area on Exhibit A CPUD Master Plan The primary function and purpose of this Tract is to preserve and protect vegetation and naturally functioning habitats such as wetlands including upland buffers in their natural and or enhanced state USES PERMITTED No building or structure or part thereof shall be erected altered or used or land used in whole or in part for other than the following subject to the issuance of regional state and federal permits when required A Permitted Principal Uses Nature preserves B Accessory Uses Water management structures Mitigation areas Hiking trails boardwalks shelters or other such facilities constructed for the purposes of passage through or enjoyment of the site s natural attributes subject to approval by the appropriate permitting agencies Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 632 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) SECTION V GENERAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to set forth the standards for development of the project GENERAL All facilities shall be constructed in strict accordance with the Final Site Development Plans Final Subdivision PlatsandallapplicableStateandlocallawscodesandregulationsapplicabletothis CPUD Except where specifically noted or stated otherwise the standards and specifications of the LDC as amended shall apply to this project even if the land within the CPUD is not to be platted The developer his successor and assigns shall be responsible for the commitments outlined in this Document The developer his successor and assigns shall follow the Master Plan and the regulations of the CPUD as adopted and any other conditions or modifications as may be agreed to in the rezoning of the property In addition any successor or assigns of the developer are bound by the commitments within this agreement PUD MASTER PLAN A ExhibitA CPUD Master Plan illustrates the proposed development and is conceptual in nature Proposed area lot orland use boundaries or special land use boundaries shall not be construed to befinal and may be varied at any subsequent approval phase such as final plattingorsitedevelopmentplanapprovalSubjecttotheprovisionsoftheLDCamendments may be made from time totime B All necessary easements dedications or other instruments shall be granted to ensure the continued operation and maintenance of all sewer utilities and all common areas inthe project WATER MANAGEMENT A Excavation permits shall berequired for the proposed lakes in accordance with the LDC as amended Excavated material from the property is intended to beused within the project site Hanunock Park Conunerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 633 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) B Detailed paving grading and site drainage plans shall be submitted to EngineeringReviewServicesstaffforreviewNoconstructionpermitsshallbeissuedunless and until approval of the proposed construction in accordance with the submitted plans is granted by Engineering Review Services C In accordance with the Rules of the South Florida Water Management District SFWMD Chapters E and E this project shall be designed for a storm event of day duration and year frequency D The proposed stormwater management system for the project will outfall to the existing drainage canal running along the site swestern boundary line TRANSPORTATION AThe developer shall provide a fair share payment toward the capital improvements at the intersection of CR and Rattlesnake Hammock Road This shall occur within days ofrequest for said payment by Collier County B The developer shall provide any required arterial level street lighting at the project entrances prior to the issuance of a certificate ofoccupancy CO C The project entry from CR shall be located at the northwest corner of the property and designed to provide shared access with the parcel to the north All necessary dedications and easements shall be provided with the application for first development order D Following zoning approval interconnections as shown on the Master Plan shall be designed and accommodated on the appropriate development order phase that may occur or as directed by the Transportation Division E Site related improvements necessary for safe ingress and egress to this project as determined by Collier County shall not be eligible for impact fee credits All required improvements shall be in place and available to the public prior to the issuance of the first CO or within days of when requested by Collier County F All proposed median opening locations shall be in accordance with the Collier County Access Management Policy Resolution No as it may be amended and theLDC as it may be amended Collier County reserves the right to modify or close any median opening existing at thetime of approval of this CPUD which isfound to be adverse to the health safety and welfare of the public Any such modifications shall be based on but are not limited to safety operational circulation and roadway capacity Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 634 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) G Nothing in any development order shall vest a right of access in excess of a rightinrightoutconditionatanyaccesspointNeithershalltheexistenceofapointof ingress a point of egress or a median opening nor the lack thereof be the basis for any future cause of action for damages against the County by the developer its successor in title or assignee All external access points including both drivewaysproposedstreetspedestrianandvehicularinterconnectionsareconsideredtobe conceptual Nothing depicted on any such Master Plan shall vest any right of access at any specific point along any property frontage or property line All such access issues shall be approved or denied during the review of any applications for development orders The number of access points may be less than the number depicted on the Master Plan however no additional external access points shall be considered unless a PUD amendment or PUD insubstantial change is approved H If in the sole opinion of Collier County a traffic signal or other traffic control device sign or pavement marking improvement within a public right of way or easement is determined to be necessary the cost of such improvement shall be borne by the developer and shall be paid to Collier County before the issuance of the first CO or within days of when requested by the County I Payment in lieu of sidewalks and bike lanes for Collier Boulevard frontage shall be required The amount shall be determined utilizing the FDOT Transportation Costs asamendedPaymentshallberequiredwithindaysofwrittenrequestofCollierCountyor prior to site development plan or plat approval whichever is first JAt the request of Collier County the developer shall install or make payment in lieu of construction at the discretion of the County for a Collier Area Transit CAT bus stop with shelter The exact location shall be determined during site development plan review KThedeveloper shall convey right of way along the project s south property line for the future extension of Rattlesnake Hammock Road The required right of way shall be determinedbyCollierCountyThededicationsshallbeprovidednolaterthantheearlier of first issuance of the first certificate of occupancy with respect to this Development or within days of a written request from Collier County The developer shall convey a marketable title free of any liens encumbrances exceptions or qualifications excluding those applicable to subsurface mineral rights and or natural gas deposits existing FP L and County easements and any other existing easementsforutilitiesanddrainageTheCountyagreestocondemntheeasementsdescribed in Items and lion Exhibit A CPUD Master Plan if necessary toobtain termination of such easements Marketable title shall bedetermined according to applicable title standards adopted by the Florida Bar and in accordance with Florida law Harrunock Park Corrunerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 635 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) L The developer shall construct at its sole expense the canal crossing suitable for expansion and consistent with a four lane design for the north half of the Rattlesnake Hammock future extension approach to CR The canal crossing shallincludeallappropriateturnlanesM Should the developer permit a driveway on the Rattlesnake Hammock Road extension less than feet from the intersection of Collier Boulevard the County at its sole discretion may reduce the access point to a right in only if the County determines thattheaccesspointhasanimpactonhealthsafetyandwelfareortrafficcirculation This reduction if required shall be at the developer s expense with noclaimfordamagestotheCountyUTILITIESA Water distribution sewage collection and transmission facilities toserve the project are to be designed constructed conveyed owned and maintained in accordance with applicable Collier County Ordinance and other applicable County rules and regulations ENGINEERING A Except as otherwise provided within this CPUD Document this project shall be required to meet all County ordinances in effect at the time final construction documents are submitted for development approval B The subdivision of property into three or more parcels shall conform with applicable laws pertaining to platting BUFFERS The Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD shall provide perimeter buffering consistent with the following table Direction North South EastWestAdjacentUseVacantAgriculturally zoned land Rattlesnake Hammock Sports Park Rd Vacant Agriculturally Zoned Land CR and canal Buffer Type A DA D ENVIRONMENTAL A The developer shall comply with the guidelines and recommendations of the U S Fish Wildlife Service USFWS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission FFWCC regarding potential impacts to protected wildlife species Where protected species are observed on site a Habitat Management Plan forthoseHammockParkCommerceCentreCPUDPageof 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 636 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) protected species shall be submitted to Environmental Services Department Staff for review and approval prior to final site planconstruction plan approval B An exotic vegetation removal monitoring and maintenance exotic free plan for the site with emphasis on the conservationpreservation areas shall be submitted to Environmental Services Department Staff for review and approval prior to final site planconstruction plan approval C The project shall comply with the environmental sections of the LDC and the Growth Management Plan in effect at the time of final development order approval D An Environmental Impact Statement ElS addressing existing conditions and anticipated environmental impact s has been submitted as part of this CPUD Document E All Category I invasive exotic plants as defined by the Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council shall be removed from within the preserve areas and subsequent annual removal of these plants in perpetuity shall be the responsibility of the property owner F A Preserve Management Plan shall be provided to Environmental Services Staff for approval prior to site construction plan approval identifying methods to address treatment of invasive exotic species fire management and maintenance Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page of 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 637 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) I II I U II II II I i III Illjl III IIIiiiIIitlliIirliliihIIiIiIIiIIIiJIIflUIIIijlliIIiIiiIIIllIIlhlhiIfIIIIIiIiIqiIIiiilllliiI fmjGIIIIiIilllHlluliiibiiIiIifirlilliIllimIiIIiiiliiIhllIbIiiIaIISaiilI Ili i IIII I isildhSs b Jabgun oi lit IIIkI IIIIcicr t fIt nI I J a IJ I I I Ii IHH Ii I i i Ii I NIl f jsII Ibm h Ur l l I I h I il m n u iiqdlJJ ii c t jIn I g IS tJis I l II uEi E d lDII F Jg l il u I I f g iii9.A.3.cPacket Pg. 638Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF COLLIER I DWIGHT E BROCK Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit Collier County Florida do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of ORDINANCE Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the th day of February during Regular Session WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County Florida this th day of March DWIGHT E BROCK Clerk of Courts and Clerk Ex officio to Boardi County Commission rs h V By Martha VergaxaJ Deputy Cler 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 639 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 640 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 641 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 6 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 642 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT "A" Page 2 of 6 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 643 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT "A" Page 3 of 6 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 644 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT "A" Page 4 of 6 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 645 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT "A" Page 5 of 6 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 646 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT "A" Page 6 of 6 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 647 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT "B" Page 1 of 29.A.3.cPacket Pg. 648Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park EXHIBIT "B" Page 2 of 29.A.3.cPacket Pg. 649Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 650 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 651 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 652 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) AMENDMENT TO TABLE OF CONTENTS/LIST OF EXHIBITS, OF THE PUD DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NO. 07-30, HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE CPUD, AS AMENDED. Table of Contents/List of Exhibits, of the PUD Document attached to Ordinance No. 07-30, Hammock Park Centre Commerce CPUD, as amended, is hereby amended as follows: HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE CPUD TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE SECTION I Property Ownership & Description SECTION II Project Development SECTION III Community Commercial District SECTION IV Preserve Area SECTION V General Development Commitments SECTION VI Requested Deviations from the LDC LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT “A” PUD Master Plan EXHIBIT “A-1” Off-Premises Directional Sign Location EXHIBIT “C-1” Tower Locations EXHIBIT “C-2” Tower Renderings * * * * * * * * * * * * * Exhibit "A" to HEX Decision 2016-42 Page 1 of 7 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 653 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) AMENDMENT TO SECTION III, COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, OF THE PUD DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NO. 07-30, HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE CPUD, AS AMENDED. Section III, Community Commercial District, of the PUD Document attached to Ordinance No. 07-30, Hammock Park Centre Commerce CPUD, as amended, is hereby amended as follows: SECTION III COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS * * * * * * * * * * * * * L. The two accessory tower structures described in Deviation 3 shall have a minimum PUD perimeter setback of ten (10) feet, and maximum actual height of thirty (30) feet for the southern tower and maximum actual height of fifteen (15) feet for the northern most tower. * * * * * * * * * * * * Exhibit "A" to HEX Decision 2016-42 Page 2 of 7 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 654 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) AMENDMENT TO SECTION VI, REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC, OF THE PUD DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NO. 07-30, HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE CPUD, AS AMENDED. Section VI, Requested Deviations from the LDC, of the PUD Document attached to Ordinance No. 07-30, Hammock Park Centre Commerce CPUD, as amended, is hereby amended as follows: * * * * * * * * * * * * * SECTION VI REQUESTED DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDC 6.1 SIGN DEVIATIONS A. Deviation #1 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.a to allow the off-premises directional sign for the Hacienda Lakes PUD/DRI depicted on Exhibit A-1 to have a maximum of 38 square feet in sign area (total square footage of all sign copy areas, including the name of the project and insignias or mottos), rather than 12 square feet as limited in the LDC. B. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.04.G.2.b to allow the off-premises directional sign for the Hacienda Lakes PUD/DRI depicted on Exhibit A-1 to have a maximum height of 13 feet above the lowest center grade of the roadway adjacent to the sign location, rather than 8 feet as limited in the LDC. C. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.02.03.A, which requires accessory structures to be constructed simultaneously with or following the construction of the principal structure, to instead allow accessory structures to be constructed prior to construction of the principal structure. This deviation shall apply only to the two (2) accessory tower structures at the location depicted on Exhibit C-1, “Tower Locations,” and further shown on Exhibit C-2, “Tower Renderings.” * * * * * * * * * * * * * Exhibit "A" to HEX Decision 2016-42 Page 3 of 7 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 655 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT C-1, TOWER LOCATIONS, IS HEREBY ADDED TO THE PUD DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NO. 07-30, HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE CPUD, AS AMENDED. Exhibit C-1, entitled "Tower Locations", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby added to the PUD Document attached to Ordinance No. 07-30, Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD, as amended. Exhibit "A" to HEX Decision 2016-42 Page 4 of 7 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 656 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK BLVD.COLLIER BOULEVARD / CR 951PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (TOWER - 15' HEIGHT) PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (TOWER - 30' HEIGHT) PUD BOUNDARY (TYP.) 10.0' SETBACK 112'± 100.0' CANAL ROW CR 951 ROW PREPARED FOR: HAMMOCK PARK PDI HACIENDA LAKES, LLC / TOLL BROTHERS B:\Projects\549-02 (Hacienda Lakes DRI) Entry Signage Permitting\Drawings-Exhibits\549-02-E01 DRI Signage Exhibit\Current Plans\54902E0101.dwgWALDROP ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEERING 28100 BONITA GRANDE DRIVE - SUITE 305 BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34135 P: 239-405-7777 F: 239-405-7899 EMAIL: info@waldropengineering.com PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE EXHIBIT C-1 "TOWER LOCATIONS"SCALE: 1" = 100'Exhibit "A" to HEX Decision 2016-42 Page 5 of 7 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 657 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT C-2, TOWER RENDERINGS, IS HEREBY ADDED TO THE PUD DOCUMENT ATTACHED TO ORDINANCE NO. 07-30, HAMMOCK PARK COMMERCE CENTRE CPUD, AS AMENDED. Exhibit C-2, entitled "Tower Renderings", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby added to the PUD Document attached to Ordinance No. 07-30, Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD, as amended. Exhibit "A" to HEX Decision 2016-42 Page 6 of 7 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 658 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PREPARED FOR: HAMMOCK PARK PDI HACIENDA LAKES, LLC / TOLL BROTHERS B:\Projects\549-02 (Hacienda Lakes DRI) Entry Signage Permitting\Drawings-Exhibits\549-02-E01 DRI Signage Exhibit\Current Plans\54902E0102.dwgWALDROP ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEERING 28100 BONITA GRANDE DRIVE - SUITE 305 BONITA SPRINGS, FL 34135 P: 239-405-7777 F: 239-405-7899 EMAIL: info@waldropengineering.com PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE EXHIBIT C-2 "TOWER RENDERINGS" *DESIGNS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AT TIME OF APPROVAL Exhibit "A" to HEX Decision 2016-42 Page 7 of 7 9.A.3.c Packet Pg. 659 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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, and David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division Date: February 10, 2020 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review PETITION NUMBER: Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) - PL20180002813 - REV 5 PETITION NAME: Hammock Park MPUD REQUEST: The applicant has requested a name change with this petition from Hammock Park Commerce Center CPUD to Hammock Park Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) with submittal 2. The petition is requesting to amend the Hammock Park MPUD, previously approved by Ordinance #00-79, as amended, to add a maximum of 265 multi-family rental dwelling units as a permitted use within the PUD. The existing CPUD permits up to 160,000 square feet of a variety of office, retail and personal service uses. However, if the dwelling units requested with this petition are developed, the maximum square feet of non- residential uses would be limited to 148,500 square feet, so as not to exceed the existing trip count currently approved (trip cap = 577 two-way PM peak hour net trips). Submittal 2 has clarified on the Master Plan and in the revised Environmental Report that there will be 1.66 acres of preserve under a conservation easement. Submittal 2 revised the Statement of Utility Provisions, the PUD document , boundary survey, and the ownership information. Submittal 3 has corrected the required and provided Preserve area to 1.63 acres on the Master Plan, but still reads in the PUD Section 5.9 Environmental F. as 1.66 acres (therefore appearing to be inconsistent.) Submittal 3 addressed other environmental review comments in the revised PUD document and addressed public utilities comments by revising the Statement of Utility Provisions. Submittal 3 has revised the Master Plan to respond to zoning and landscape review comments. Submittal 4 has revised the PUD document for preserve acreage (1.63 acres throughout), utilities easements, and the Conservation Easement, as well as modified the Master Plan to show access easement. Submittal 4 revised the PUD, Master Plan and added an Amendment to Bridge and Entrance Drive Construction and Easement Agreement. LOCATION: The ±19.13-acre site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Collier Blvd. (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864), in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The subject property is designated Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict #7/Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the Growth Management Plan. This site is currently zoned Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD; however, this petition will revise the zoning to Hammock Park MPUD zoning district. The Future Land Use Element (FLUE) states, “The Mixed-Use Activity Center concept is designed to concentrate almost all new commercial zoning in locations where traffic impacts can readily be accommodated, to avoid strip and disorganized patterns of commercial development, and to create focal 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 660 Attachment: Attachment C-FLUE Consistency Review 2-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Zoning Division · 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, FL 34104 · 239-252-2400 Page 2 of 3 points within the community. Mixed Use Activity Centers are intended to be mixed-use in character. Further, they are generally intended to be developed at a human-scale, to be pedestrian-oriented, and to be interconnected with abutting projects – whether commercial or residential. Street, pedestrian pathway and bike lane interconnections with abutting properties, where possible and practicable, are encouraged.” Within the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, the FLUE states, “If such a project is located within the boundaries of a Mixed Use Activity Center which is within the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, eligible density shall be as allowed by that Subdistrict.” Residential land uses in the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict may be allowed at a maximum base density of 1.5 units per gross acre, plus any density bonus that may be achieved up to 1.0 unit per gross acre via the transfer of up to one (1.0) dwel ling unit (TDR, transferable development right) per acre from lands located within one mile of the Urban Boundary and designated as Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands. This provision allows a maximum density of 2.5 DUs/acre. The maximum density as described above will only allow for 48 DUs (19.13ac * 2.5DU/a = 47.825 DUs). The applicant is requesting 265 multi-family dwelling units, which is contingent on the companion Growth Management Plan Amendment (PL20180002804/CP2018-8). The GMPA is requesting text be added to allow 265 residential units on the subject site, yielding a density of 13.85 DU/A (265 DUs / 19.13 A = 13.85 DU/A), and without use of TDR credits. In reviewing for compliance with Policy 5.6 (shown in italics below) of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) staff provides the following 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 staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety.] In reviewing for compliance with FLUE Objective 7 and related Policies (shown in italics), staff provides the following analysis in [bracketed bold text]. FLUE 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 A, MPUD Master Plan’ in the petition packet, depicts three access points: two onto Rattlesnake-Hammock Road (Extension), a road not yet shown on the FDOT Federal Functional Classification Map – which serves as a collector road, and one on an unnamed future to be constructed road at the northern boundary of the proposed project site that will give indirect access to Collier Blvd. (CR951), which is a principal arterial roadway.] FLUE 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 A – MPUD Master Plan’ shows only existing roads and driveway accesses, no internal roads are depicted. If developed as multiple tracts, all would be accessed internally.] FLUE Policy 7.3: All new and existing developments shall be encouraged to connect their local streets and/or their 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 A - MPUD Master Plan’ indicates an interconnection point to the north with the adjoining property, the Good Turn Center MPUD, which is currently undeveloped land approved for 100,000 square feet of commercial or a variety of skilled nursing units. To the east lies the McMullen MPUD which is approved for 185,000 square feet of commercial. To the south of the project site lies Rattlesnake-Hammock Road and to the west lies Collier Blvd.] 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 661 Attachment: Attachment C-FLUE Consistency Review 2-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Zoning Division · 2800 North Horseshoe Drive · Naples, FL 34104 · 239-252-2400 Page 3 of 3 FLUE 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. [There is an existing sidewalk along Collier Blvd. The Exhibit A - MPUD Master Plan does not depict any details of sidewalks, open spaces, civic facilities, or housing details. The proposed residential for this development is for high density multi-family dwelling units. The revised PUD document details the preserve area in Section 4 to itemize passive recreation activities as accessory uses in the preserve. No deviations are requested for sidewalks, therefore the project will be subject to L.D.C. requirements for sidewalks.] CONCLUSION: Based on the above analysis, staff finds the subject petition NOT consistent with the FLUE; however, the petition may be deemed consistent IF the companion GMP amendment is adopted and becomes effective. The PUDA Ordinance needs to contain an effective date linked to the effective date of the companion GMPA. Petition on CityView cc: David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section Raymond V. Bellows, Manager, Zoning Division, Zoning Services Section PUDA-PL2018-2813 Hammock Park MPUD R5.docx 9.A.3.d Packet Pg. 662 Attachment: Attachment C-FLUE Consistency Review 2-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 1 of 3 Memorandum To: Nancy Gundlach, PLA, AICP & Sue Faulkner From: Lindsay Robin cc: David Torres, Wilton Land Company, LLC Richard Yovanovich, Esq., Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester Date: June 27, 2019 Subject: Hammock Park PUDA & GMPA (PL20180002904 & PL20180002813) Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis Waldrop Engineering, P.A., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) on Wednesday, June 19, 2019. The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, Florida 34113. The sign-in sheet is attached as Exhibit “A” and demonstrates 11 residents were in attendance. Handouts were distributed providing the project overview and development regulations. The handouts are attached as Exhibit “B”. Alexis Crespo (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and Staff, and an overview of the proposed GMPA and PUD amendment applications, including the location of the 19-acre subject property and the request to add a maximum of 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units, with a maximum of 148,500 square feet of commercial as an option for development. She also outlined the amendment processes and opportunities to provide input at public hearings. David Torres, the Applicant, also spoke about the project and provided input on details relating to the surrounding residential developments in proximity to the subject area, and the market demand to create a mixed-use project on this intersection. Following the Consultant’s presentation, the meeting was opened up to the attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The following is a summarized list of the questions asked and responses given. The Applicant’s representatives’ responses are shown in bold. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 663 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 2 of 3 Question/Comment 1: You’ve only reduced the commercial by a few thousand square feet. How does that equate to 265 multi-family units?  Response: The reduction of commercial does equate to the same number of trips as 265 multi-family units. Commercial uses produce significantly more trips than residential uses. [the project traffic engineer provided further explanation on the traffic study]. It was also pointed out that in reality, you will not be able to fit all of the residential and commercial on the property. Question/Comment 2: Will the residential element of this development be similar to residential developments the owner has constructed previously?  Response: It will use similar building designs, but with updated exteriors and façades. Question/Comment 3: What type of consumer and income groups are you trying to attract? Will this be apartments or condominiums?  Response: There were some zoning commitments relating to “Essential Service Provider” Housing that were attached to our previous residential developments on Lord’s Way that will not be committed to in this project. Question/Comment 4: So, you’re thinking apartments versus condominiums?  Response: Apartments. Even though the code defines multi-family as multi- family regardless of the use. Question/Comment 5: Is there enough demand for commercial uses such as restaurants?  Response: There’s currently not enough demand in the area yet. Adding apartments will create more demand. Question/Comment 6: Commissioner Fiala commented on the commercial branding that real estate agents are using to brand their developments in this area of Collier County as “South Naples”. She noted the residents are proud of the East Naples area and would like to keep that naming intact.  Response: We recognize the conditions out here. A lot of it goes back to large companies signing leases, and they are looking at the numbers. Being on the east side can hurt us because we are on the fringe. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 664 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 3 of 3 Question/Comment 7: What is the business “success” factor that would entice national restaurant brands to come to the area? Is the success rate of certain restaurants factored in?  Response: Absolutely, and it speaks well all the success on US 41, particularly the national chains like Outback and Carrabas. Sue Faulkner asked the Applicant to clarify if the dwelling units proposed are rental or “for sale” multi-family units. Alexis clarified that the zoning limits the multi-family units to rental apartments. There were no further questions or comments. Ms. Crespo thanked the attendees for coming and noted that their contact information is available for those who wished to reach out with any further questions. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:30 p.m. The meeting was recorded per the CD attached as Exhibit “C”. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 665 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Name Address E-Mail Address EXHIBIT "A" NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING HAMMOCK PARK MPUD PL20180002813 & PL20180002804 June 19, 2019@ 5:30p.m. PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY ***Please be ciclvtsecl*** The information on this sheet is to contact you regarding this project and future public meetings. Under Florida law, e-mail addresses, phone numbers and certain home addresses are public records once received by a government agency. If you do not want your e-mail address, phone number or home address released if the county receives a public records request, you can refrain from including such information on this sheet. You have the option of checking with the county staff on your own to obtain updates on the project as well as checking the county Web site for additional information. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 666 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD - PL20180002813 & PL20180002804 Neighborhood Information Meeting Wednesday, June 19, 2019 5:30 p.m. PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET Project Size: 19+/- Acres Future Land Use: Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center Current Zoning: Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Proposed Zoning: Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Approved Density/Intensity/Uses: 160,000 sq. ft. commercial uses Proposed Density/Intensity/Uses: 265 multi-family dwelling units and up to 148,500 sq. ft. of commercial uses Project Requests: (PL20180002804) a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for a site-specific text amendment to the Future Land Use Element, Mixed Use Activity Center #7, to allow up to 265 multi-family dwelling units within the Hammock Park project, along with the permitted commercial uses - (PL20180002813) PUD Amendment to the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) to add a maximum of 265 multi- family dwelling units as a permitted use; reduce the maximum intensity of non- residential uses from 160,000 sq. ft. to 148,500 sq. ft.; and to change the name of the CPUD from Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD to Hammock Park Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). EXHIBIT "B"9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 667 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures 1. Amusement and recreation services, Indoor only (Groups 7911- 7941, 7991, 7993, 7997, 7999) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (Groups 5611, 5621, 5631, 5641, 5651, 5661, 5699) 3. Automotive repair, services and parking (Groups 7514, 7542) All uses are prohibited within 500 feet from the easterly right-of-way line of C.R. 951. 4. Auto and home supply stores (Group 5531) 5. Building construction - general contractors (groups 1521 -1542). 6. Building materials, hardware, garden supply (Groups 5231, 5251, 5261) 7. Business services (Groups 7311, 7323, 7334, 7335, 7336, 7338, 7352, 7359, 7371-7379, 7384, 7389) 8. Communications (Groups 4832, 4833) 9. Construction - special trade contractors (Groups 1711-1793, 1796, 1799) 10. Depository institutions (Groups 6011-6099) 11. Eating and drinking places (Groups 5812, 5813 except contract feeding, food service and industrial feeding) 12. Engineering, accounting and management (Groups 8711-8721, 8741, 8742, 8748) 13. Food stores (Groups 5411, 5421, 5441, 5451, 5461, 5499) 14. Funeral service and crematories (Group 7261) 15. Gasoline service stations (5541 subject to the provisions of the LDC) 16. General merchandise stores (Groups 5311, 5331, 5399) 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 668 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 17. Hardware stores (5251) 18. Health services (Groups 8011-8059) 19. Home furniture, furnishings, and equipment stores (Groups 5712, 5713, 5714, 5719,5722,5731,5734,5735,5736) 20. Hospitals (Group 8062) 21. Hotels and motels (Group 7011) 22. Insurance agents, brokers and service (Group 6411) 23. Membership organizations (Groups 8641, 8661) 24. Miscellaneous repair services (Groups 7622, 7623, 7629, 7631, 7641) (Group 7699 with approval of County Manager, or his designee, who shall be guided by the objective of allowing uses that are compatible with existing development.) All uses are prohibited within 500 feet of the easterly right-of- way line of C.R. 951. 25. Miscellaneous retail (Groups 5912, 5921, 5932, 5941-5949, 5984, 5992, 5993, 5999) 26. Motion pictures (Groups 7832-7833) 27. Museum, art galleries (Group 8412) 28. Multi-family rental dwelling units. 298. Non-depository credit institutions (Groups 6141, 6159, 6162, 6163) 2930. Offices (All Groups) 310. Personal services (Groups 7211-7212, 7215, 7219, 7221, 7231, 7241, 7251, 7291) 321. Restaurants (All Groups) 323. Real estate (Groups 6531, 6541, 6552) 334.Social services (Group 8351) 345.United States Postal Service (Group 4311) 356. Veterinarian's office (Group 0742, except no outside kenneling) 367. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 669 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES A. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted. B. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (COMMERCIAL) A. Minimum lot area: Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. B. Minimum lot width: One hundred (100) feet. C. Minimum yard requirements: 1. Front yard: Twenty-five (25) feet. 2. Side yard: Zero for common or abutting walls, otherwise one-half the height of the building, but not less than ten (10) feet. 3. Rear yard: Twenty (20) feet. 4. Preserve: Twenty-five (25) feet D. Distance between principal structures: The distance between any two principal structures on the same parcel shall be fifteen (15) feet or a distance equal to one half the sum of their heights, whichever is greater. E. Minimum floor area of principal structure: Seven hundred (700) square feet per building on the ground floor. F. Landscaping and off-street parking shall be in accordance with the LDC, as amended. G. Maximum height: Fifty (50) feet. H. General application for setbacks: Front yard setbacks shall comply with the following: 1. If the parcel is served by a public or private right-of-way, the setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. 2. If the parcel is served by a non-platted private drive, the setback is measured from the back of curb or edge of pavement. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 670 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 3. If the parcel is served by a platted private drive, the setback is measured from the road easement or property line. I. All buildings, landscaping and visible infrastructures shall be architecturally and aesthetically unified. Said unified architectural theme shall include a similar architectural design and similar use of materials and colors on all of the buildings to be erected on site. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the site. A conceptual landscape plan for the entire site shall be submitted concurrent with the first application for site development plan approval. J. Outside storage or display of merchandise is prohibited unless it is ancillary to a permitted use and screened from view from adjacent public roadways. Outside storage may be approved by the County Manager, or his designee, as part of the approval of an SDP. K. The FP&L easement may be used for ancillary uses such as parking, storage, service drives, and water management, provided written authorization for those uses is obtained from FP&L and submitted with the application for SDP. L. The two accessory tower structures described in Deviation 3 shall have a minimum PUD perimeter setback of ten (10) feet, and a maximum actual height of thirty (30) feet for the southern tower and maximum actual height of fifteen (15) feet for the northern most tower.2 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 671 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (RESIDENTIAL) PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MULTI-FAMILY Min. Lot Area 1 acre Min. Lot Width N/A Min. Lot Depth N/A Front Yard (1) 10 feet Side Yard 5 feet Min. Lake Maintenance Easement Tract Setback 0 feet Min. Setback from FPL Easement 0 feet Min. PUD Boundary Setback, excluding boundary abutting FPL Easement 25 feet Min. Distance Between Buildings 20 feet Rear Yard 10 feet Preserve 25 feet MAXIMUM HEIGHT Actual Zoned 60 feet 50 feet ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Front Yard SPS Side Yard SPS Rear Yard 5 feet Preserve 10 feet MAXIMUM HEIGHT Actual Zoned SPS SPS Footnotes: (1) Front setback is measured from the edge of pavement or back of curb except for public roads. (2) Approved in HEX decision 2016-42. GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners’ association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. 9.A.3.e Packet Pg. 672 Attachment: Attachment D-Hammock Park NIM Synopsis (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 APPLICATION 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 673 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 674 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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: ________________ 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 675 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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: ______ 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 676 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 677 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park CPUD PL2018002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 1 of 5 HAMMOCK PARK CPUD EVALUATION CRITERIA PUD REZONE CONSIDERATIONS (LDC SECTION 10.02.13.B) 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. The Hammock Park CPUD is approved for 160,000 square feet of commercial uses. The proposed amendment seeks to amend the CPUD to allow for an alternative development scenario of 100,000 square feet of commercial uses and a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units. The existing trip count for the currently approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses will not be exceeded by the proposed amendment. The Hammock Park CPUD (“Property”) is within Activity Center #7, which encompasses 197.5+/- acres at the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard/CR 951. This Activity Center includes a diverse mix of approved Mixed Use Planned Unit Developments (MPUDs), that permit a range of uses including commercial retail, office, hotel, and assisted living facilities. This Activity Center generally serves the CR 951 corridor, northern portions of Lely Resort, and the surrounding East Naples area. These designated Activity Centers are specifically intended to provide an integrated mixed of land uses with access to the multi-modal transportation network and other public infrastructure. The existing and approved land uses on adjacent properties directly support the proposed CPUD amendment, and the project will maintain compatibility with the surrounding land use pattern. The Good Turn Center MPUD to the north (Ordinance 09-53) is approved for a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and skilled nursing care facilities with a maximum of 200 units (21 du/acre). The McMullen MPUD (Ordinance 10-18) to the east is approved for a maximum of 185,000 square feet of commercial. Care units are also permitted in this project utilizing a commercial intensity conversion. The commercial tract of the Hacienda Lakes MPUD to the south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road, is approved for up to 327,500 square feet of retail land uses, and up to 70,000 square feet of professional and medical office uses. A hotel of up to 135 rooms is also allowed on this parcel. The addition of multi-family residential uses will not impact the CPUD’s compatibility with surrounding mixed-use projects, and will provide a transition of intensity from the CR 951 frontage, to the lower intensity/density uses in Hacienda Lakes to the east. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 678 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park CPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 2 of 5 The application materials demonstrate adequate capacity on the surrounding roadway network, available public utilities, and all other required services (including schools, Fire/EMS, and Sherriff). Based upon the nature of surrounding uses, the established development pattern in the general area of the property, and the existing levels of public infrastrcture to service the CPUD, the Property is suitable for the addition of multi-family dwelling units to form a mixed use development as proposed through this application. Moreover, the project will ensure the existing land area within the County’s Urban- designated is not underutilized from a public infrastructure standpoint, thereby upholding sound planning principles. 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 toe be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. The subject property is under Unified Control by Wilton Land Company, LLC, who has authorized Waldrop Engineering and Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester to file this application. Please also refer to the enclosed Covenant of Unified Control. c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. (This is to include identifying what subdistrict, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that subdistrict, policy or other provision.) The CPUD will remain consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as follows: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 5.2: All applications and petitions for proposed development shall be consistent with this Growth Management Plan, as determined by the Board of County Commissioners. FUTURE LAND USE 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). The proposed amendment will provide a mixed-use development option that is complimentary and compatible with the surrounding land uses. Currently, the property is surrounded by a variety of MPUDs with diverse non-residential and ALF uses. The addition of multi-family dwelling types to the project will not impact compatibility with these approved uses. Additionally, the CPUD provides buffers surrounding the perimeter of the property to provide separation and screening. The 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 679 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park CPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 3 of 5 proposed development standards are also consistent with and comparable to the surrounding approved PUDs. FUTURE LAND USE 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. The proposed PUD Master Plan provides vehicular ingress/egress to the site from a shared access with the Good Turn Center MPUD to the north onto CR 951, as well as two (2) points of access onto Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The shared access with the project to the north is directly in line with this policy’s intent to provide interconnections to surrounding properties. Please also refer to the Transportation Analysis prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Solutions. FUTURE LAND USE 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. The proposed amendment is in direct compliance with this policy. Encouraging horizontally integrated mixed-use development will provide opportunities for reduced vehicle miles traveled, increased multi-modal options, and a decrease on overall automobile dependence by allowing residents to walk to goods, services and employment within the project and on adjacent properties. FUTURE LAND USE 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. As noted above and outlined in further detail in the Transportation Analysis, the proposed PUD Master Plan provides for interconnection to the MPUD to the north, thereby reducing the number of access points onto the arterial roadway network. FUTURE LAND USE 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. In direct compliance with the policy above, the CPUD amendment proposes a mixed-use development containing both residential and commercial uses. The residential portion provides multi-family residential housing at higher densities to provide in-demand workforce housing. Therefore, the CPUD amendment directly provides for diversity in the housing market, and in a location where such diversity can be accommodated by existing public infrastructure. The project is also walkable via connections to the surrounding sidewalk and pathway systems. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 680 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park CPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 4 of 5 CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT GOAL 6: TO IDENTIFY, PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIATELY USE NATIVE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AND WILDLIFE HABITAT. The CPUD will maintain the on-site preserve area as previously approved per Ordinance 2007-30. The Property is comprised of 19+/- acres, of which 10.87+/- acres are considered existing native habitat. As shown on the PUD master plan, the project will continue to provide 1.63+/- acres of on-site native habitat preservation. GOAL 7: TO PROTECT AND CONSERVE THE COUNTY’S FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE. The CPUD locates the required preserve area in the northern portion of the project to allow for connection with offsite preserves within the adjacent MPUD. 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 amendment will allow for the development of multi-family residential and commercial uses in a well-integrated and compact mixed-use project. The approved commercial uses and the proposed residential uses are compatible and complimentary to the surrounding existing and future development pattern, thereby ensuring external compatibility. The proposed rezoning will allow for a continuation of a mixed-use development pattern within a designated Mixed Use Activity Center where such development is approved, anticipated, and appropriate. Landscape buffers and open space is provided in accordance with the requirements of the GMP and LDC. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The proposed amendment will not modify the minimum requirement for 1.63+/- acres of on-site preserve area. Additionally, the CPUD will provide landscape buffers, lakes and recreational areas, which will meet the LDC’s definition of useable open space. Per the proposed PUD master plan, the project will provide preserve and useable open space in compliance with the GMP and LDC requirements. f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. As outlined in the enclosed application, all required public infrastructure is available and adequate to service the CPUD. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 681 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park CPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 5 of 5 While the CPUD boundary is not expanding in size, the zoning is being amended to add residential uses and allow for horizontally-integrated mixed use development at an atertial intersection. The mix of uses proposed by the amendment will not exceed the existing trip cap in place for the approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses. Additionally, the mixed-use development program will provide opportunities for workforce housing and multi-modal movement through the site that will ultimately reduce the reliance on automobiles. The CPUD is located in an area of the County specifically intended for this type of development, and where the expansion of mixed uses can be accomodaed by appropriate faciliities and infrastructure. h. 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. The project will continue to conform to all applicable PUD regulations, except where a deviation is approved. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 682 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 683 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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: ____________________________________________________ 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 684 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 685 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 686 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 687 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 688 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 PROJECT AERIAL 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 689 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community ¯CR 951CR 951Rattlesnake Hammock Rd Hammock Park Aerial Map Collier County 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 690 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 COVER LETTER/NARRATIVE OF REQUEST 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 691 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD Cover Letter – Request Narrative Page 1 of 6 January 24, 2019 REVISED APRIL 2019 Ms. Nancy Gundlach, AICP, RLA Zoning & Land Development Review Department Community Development & Environmental Services 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 RE: Hammock Park MPUD PUD Amendment (PUDA-PL20180002813) Dear Ms. Gundlach: Enclosed for your review is the Application for PUD amendment for the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD), a 19+/- acre project generally located on the northeast corner of Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road in unincorporated Collier County. The Property is designated within the Urban Commercial District Mixed Use Activity Center, Urban Residential Fringe future land use designation and is zoned CPUD pursuant to Ordinance 07-30. The CPUD allows up to 160,000 square feet of commercial uses. The property is currently undeveloped. BACKGROUND/PROJECT HISTORY: The Property was originally rezoned from Rural Agricultural (A) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) in 2000 per Ordinance No. 00-79 to allow for commercial retail and office uses. In 2007, the Property was rezoned from Planned Unit Development to Commercial Planned Unit Development per Ordinance No. 07-30. The CPUD allows for a maximum of 160,000 square feet of commercial retail and office uses. The CPUD was amended in 2014, per HEX Decision 2014-28, to allow for ground signage associated with the Hacienda Lakes of Naples on the southwest corner of the property. The PUD was amended again in 2016, per HEX Decision 2016-42, to allow for the construction of accessory structures. No development has occurred on-site based upon these approvals, except for the signage and accessory structures, and the Property remains vacant and partially vegetated. REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting approval to amend the CPUD to add a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units as a permitted use, and to change the name of the CPUD from Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) to Hammock Park Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). If these units are developed the maximum amount of non-residential uses would be limited to 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 692 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD Cover Letter-Request Narrative Page 2 of 6 148,500 square feet, so as not to exceed the existing trip count for the currently approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses, or 577 PM Peak hour trips. The proposed amendment would allow for this alternative mixed-use development scenario, while preserving the right to build out the project with the approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses, depending upon market demand. The Applicant is also requesting associated revisions to the PUD document to provide residential development standards, and to address commitments that have been satisfied by the developer since the 2007 approval. The Applicant is not requesting any further deviations from the Land Development Code (LDC) to support the mixed-use development program. SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT The subject property is located in an urbanized portion of the County as evidenced by the property’s proximity to Collier Boulevard, a six-lane arterial roadway, and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The Property is also proximate to existing and approved urban levels of development, as well as major public facilities including schools, hospitals, and libraries. Please refer to Table 1 below, which provides an inventory of the immediately adjacent Future Land Use Categories, zoning districts, and existing land uses. TABLE 1: INVENTORY OF SURROUNDING LANDS DIRECTION FUTURE LAND USE ZONING DISTRICT EXISTING LAND USE North Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center MPUD Vacant Mixed Use (Good Turn Center MPUD) South Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict MPUD Public Right-of-Way (Rattlesnake Hammock Rd.); Vacant Commercial (Hacienda Lakes of Naples MPUD) East Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center MPUD Vacant Mixed Use (McMullen MPUD) West Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center PUD Public Right-of-Way (CR 951); Commercial (Naples Lakes Village Center); Multi-Family & Golf Course (Naples Lake Country Club & Sierra Meadows) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 693 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD Cover Letter-Request Narrative Page 3 of 6 The Property is within a designated Mixed-Use Activity Center, which is specifically intended for concentrated commercial and mixed-use development due to access to the arterial roadway network and available public services. Activity Center #7 encompasses 197.5+/- acres at the intersection of CR 951 and Rattlesnake Hammock Road and includes a diverse and intensive mix of approved MPUDs, which allow for commercial, hotel, and assisted living facility uses. Please refer to the Evaluation Criteria enclosed in this application for a detailed inventory of the surrounding land uses, densities and intensities. The proposed addition of multi-family uses to the MPUD will not impact the project’s compatibility with the surrounding land use pattern and will serve as an appropriate transition from the intensive Collier Blvd. frontage to the lower density and intensity uses in Hacienda Lakes to the east. COMPANION GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT The Applicant has filed a companion Growth Management Plan Amendment (PL20180002804) requesting the ability to develop the Hammock Park PUD as a horizontally integrated mixed-use project with 265 multi-family units and 100,000 square feet of commercial uses via the following text amendment: “The maximum amount of commercial uses allowed at Activity Center #7 (Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard) is 40 acres per quadrant, except that the northeast quadrant may have a total of 68.3 acres and the southeast quadrant may have a total of 49.2 acres, for a total of 197.5 acres maximum in the entire Activity Center; the balance of the land area shall be limited to non-commercial uses as allowed in Mixed Use Activity Centers. Multi- family (apartment) uses shall also be permitted in the northeast quadrant within the Hammock Park MPUD and shall be limited to a total of up to 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units. The addition of the 9.3 acres to the northeast quadrant of the Activity center shall not be the basis for adjacent parcels to be rezoned to commercial pursuant the Office and Infill Commercial Subdistrict. With respect to the +/- 19 acres in the northeast quadrant of Activity Center #7, said acreage lying adjacent to the east of the Hammock Park Commerce Center MPUD, commercial development (exclusive of the allowed “1/4 mile support medical uses”) shall be limited to a total of 185,000 square feet of the following uses: personal indoor self-storage facilities – this use shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building square feet; offices for various contractor/builder construction trade specialists inclusive of the offices of related professional disciplines and services that typically serve those construction businesses or otherwise assist in facilitating elements of a building and related infrastructure, including but not limited to architects, engineers, land surveyors and attorneys – these offices of related professional disciplines and services shall occupy no greater than 50% of the total (185,000) building square feet; warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; mortgage and land title companies; related businesses including but not limited to lumber and other building materials dealers, paint, glass, and wallpaper stores, garden supply stores – all as accessory uses only, accessory to offices for 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 694 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD Cover Letter-Request Narrative Page 4 of 6 various contractor/builder construction trade specialists or accessory to warehouse space for various contractor/builder construction trades occupants; management associations of various types of buildings or provision of services to buildings/properties; and, fitness centers.” The GMPA application is directly supported by a market study that substantiates the need for multi-family rental housing across Collier County, and within the immediate area of the subject property. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT/JUSTIFICATION The MPUD amendment to permit a mix of residential and commercial uses in the project directly addresses the County’s identified goals of providing diverse housing for the workforce; encouraging more integrated land use patterns that co-locate housing, goods and services; clustering new development within established urban areas with adequate infrastructure; and increasing multi-modal transportation options, particularly along arterial corridors. The MPUD will have shared access with the MPUD to the north, providing for better connectivity with adjacent lands intended for similar mixed-use development. Buffers, open space, and preserve areas will be provided in accordance with the GMP and LDC to uphold the County’s intent for attractive, well-planned and compatible development. The proposed PUD Master Plan and associated development standards for the multi- family uses are consistent with the height and setbacks approved for similar multi-family projects in the immediate area. The application materials demonstrate adequate infrastructure and facilities exist to support the proposed mix of uses. Additionally, this application has been crafted to ensure the mixed-use development program does not exceed the maximum number of PM peak hour trip already approved for the MPUD. As proposed, this amendment will allow for diverse housing opportunities in an area intended for a mix of uses as evidenced by the surrounding development approvals and the property’s location in the heart of an established Activity Center. ENVIRONMENTAL: As outlined in the Environmental Report prepared by Passarella & Associates, the site contains a 1.63+/- acre portion of wetlands concentrated in the northwestern portion of the site within the area identified as “Preserve” on the proposed and approved PUD Master Plans. The proposed amendment will have no impact on the approved preserve or other environmental conditions. The amendment application delineates and quantifies the preserve area, demonstrating the project’s compliance with current GMP policies for conservation of on-site native vegetation. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 695 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD Cover Letter-Request Narrative Page 5 of 6 INFRASTRUCTURE: The subject property will be accessed from Collier Blvd., a 6-lane arterial roadway through a shared access with the Good Turn MPUD to the north, and through two (2) approved points of ingress/egress along Rattlesnake Hammock Road. One (1) of the approved points of access will be relocated as shown on the attached MPUD Master Plan. As outlined in the Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) prepared by Trebilcock Consulting, Inc., all roadways impacted by the project will continue to operate at the County’s adopted minimum Level of Service through project build-out. As noted above, the proposed amendment will maintain the maximum PM peak hour trip cap approved via Ordinance 2007-30. Potable water and sanitary sewer for this project will be provided by Collier County Utilities (CCU) through existing infrastructure located along Collier Blvd. The Property is in close proximity to available public infrastructure including parks, schools, fire, and EMS services. This data reflects that the subject property is an appropriate location for the addition of density to create a mixed-use project. CONCLUSION: In summary, the proposed amendment will allow for up to 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units and 148,500 square feet of commercial use as an alternative development scenario within the Hammock Park MPUD. The request will not result in increased traffic, as the existing trip cap for the approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses will be maintained through the PUD commitments. As outlined in the attached application, the proposed MPUD is consistent with the LDC and Growth Management Plan (GMP). Per the Pre-Application Meeting Notes, the following items are enclosed for your review: 1. A check in the amount of $12,350.00 for the PUD Amendment Application Fees; 2. Cover Letter; 3. Completed PUD Amendment Application including Evaluation Criteria; 4. Pre-application Meeting Notes; 5. Affidavit of Authorization; 6. Covenant of Unified Control; 7. Approved Addressing Checklist; 8. Warranty Deed; 9. List Identifying Parties of the Corporation; 10. Boundary Survey (signed and sealed); 11. Project Aerial; 12. Statement of Utility Provisions; 13. Environmental Report and FLUCCS Map; 14. Traffic Impact Study; 15. School Impact Analysis Application; 16. Proposed PUD Document Exhibits A-F; 17. PUD Conceptual Site Plan (24”x36”and 8.5”x11”); 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 696 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD Cover Letter-Request Narrative Page 6 of 6 18. Original Zoning Ordinance No. 2007-30; 19. Right-of-Way Deed; 20. Access Easement; and 21. Wastewater Calculations. Should you require additional information or have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at (239) 405-7777, extension 2207, or alexis.crespo@waldropengineering.com. Sincerely, WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A. Alexis V. Crespo, AICP, LEED AP Vice President of Planning Enclosures cc: David Torres, Wilton Land Company, LLC Richard Yovanovich, Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester, P.A. Norman J. Trebilcock, Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, LLC Bethany Brosious, Passarella & Associates, Inc. Russ Weyer, Real Estate Econometrics, Inc. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 697 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 EVALUATION CRITERIA 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 698 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD PL2018002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 1 of 5 HAMMOCK PARK MPUD EVALUATION CRITERIA PUD REZONE CONSIDERATIONS (LDC SECTION 10.02.13.B) REVISED JUNE 2019 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. The Hammock Park MPUD is approved for 160,000 square feet of commercial uses. The proposed amendment seeks to amend the MPUD to allow for an alternative development scenario of 148,500 square feet of commercial uses and a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units. The existing trip count for the currently approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses will not be exceeded by the proposed amendment. The Hammock Park MPUD (“Property”) is within Activity Center #7, which encompasses 197.5+/- acres at the intersection of Rattlesnake Hammock Road and Collier Boulevard/CR 951. This Activity Center includes a diverse mix of approved Mixed Use Planned Unit Developments (MPUDs), that permit a range of uses including commercial retail, office, hotel, and assisted living facilities. This Activity Center generally serves the CR 951 corridor, northern portions of Lely Resort, and the surrounding East Naples area. These designated Activity Centers are specifically intended to provide an integrated mixed of land uses with access to the multi-modal transportation network and other public infrastructure. The existing and approved land uses on adjacent properties directly support the proposed PUD amendment, and the project will maintain compatibility with the surrounding land use pattern. The Good Turn Center MPUD to the north (Ordinance 09-53) is approved for a maximum of 100,000 square feet of commercial land uses and skilled nursing care facilities with a maximum of 200 units (21 du/acre). The McMullen MPUD (Ordinance 10-18) to the east is approved for a maximum of 185,000 square feet of commercial. Care units are also permitted in this project utilizing a commercial intensity conversion. The commercial tract of the Hacienda Lakes MPUD to the south of Rattlesnake Hammock Road, is approved for up to 327,500 square feet of retail land uses, and up to 70,000 square feet of professional and medical office uses. A hotel of up to 135 rooms is also allowed on this parcel. The addition of multi-family residential uses will not impact the MPUD’s compatibility with surrounding mixed-use projects, and will provide a transition of intensity from the CR 951 frontage, to the lower intensity/density uses in Hacienda Lakes to the east. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 699 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 2 of 5 The application materials demonstrate adequate capacity on the surrounding roadway network, available public utilities, and all other required services (including schools, Fire/EMS, and Sherriff). Based upon the nature of surrounding uses, the established development pattern in the general area of the property, and the existing levels of public infrastrcture to service the MPUD, the Property is suitable for the addition of multi-family dwelling units to form a mixed use development as proposed through this application. Moreover, the project will ensure the existing land area within the County’s Urban- designated is not underutilized from a public infrastructure standpoint, thereby upholding sound planning principles. 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 toe be provided or maintained at public expense. Findings and recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultation with the County Attorney. The subject property is under Unified Control by Wilton Land Company, LLC, who has authorized Waldrop Engineering and Coleman, Yovanovich, Koester to file this application. Please also refer to the enclosed Covenant of Unified Control. c. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the growth management plan. (This is to include identifying what subdistrict, policy or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that subdistrict, policy or other provision.) The MPUD will remain consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP) as follows: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 5.2: All applications and petitions for proposed development shall be consistent with this Growth Management Plan, as determined by the Board of County Commissioners. FUTURE LAND USE 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). The proposed amendment will provide a mixed-use development option that is complimentary and compatible with the surrounding land uses. Currently, the property is surrounded by a variety of MPUDs with diverse non-residential and ALF uses. The addition of multi-family dwelling types to the project will not impact compatibility with these approved uses. Additionally, the MPUD provides buffers surrounding the perimeter of the property to provide separation and screening. The 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 700 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 3 of 5 proposed development standards are also consistent with and comparable to the surrounding approved PUDs. FUTURE LAND USE 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. The proposed PUD Master Plan provides vehicular ingress/egress to the site from a shared access with the Good Turn Center MPUD to the north onto CR 951, as well as two (2) points of access onto Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The shared access with the project to the north is directly in line with this policy’s intent to provide interconnections to surrounding properties. Please also refer to the Transportation Analysis prepared by Trebilcock Consulting Solutions. FUTURE LAND USE 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. The proposed amendment is in direct compliance with this policy. Encouraging horizontally integrated mixed-use development will provide opportunities for reduced vehicle miles traveled, increased multi-modal options, and a decrease on overall automobile dependence by allowing residents to walk to goods, services and employment within the project and on adjacent properties. FUTURE LAND USE 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. As noted above and outlined in further detail in the Transportation Analysis, the proposed PUD Master Plan provides for interconnection to the MPUD to the north, thereby reducing the number of access points onto the arterial roadway network. FUTURE LAND USE 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. In direct compliance with the policy above, the MPUD amendment proposes a mixed-use development containing both residential and commercial uses. The residential portion provides multi-family residential housing at higher densities to provide in-demand workforce housing. Therefore, the MPUD amendment directly provides for diversity in the housing market, and in a location where such diversity can be accommodated by existing public infrastructure. The project is also walkable via connections to the surrounding sidewalk and pathway systems. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 701 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 4 of 5 CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT GOAL 6: TO IDENTIFY, PROTECT, CONSERVE AND APPROPRIATELY USE NATIVE VEGETATIVE COMMUNITIES AND WILDLIFE HABITAT. The MPUD will maintain the on-site preserve area as previously approved per Ordinance 2007-30. The Property is comprised of 19+/- acres, of which 10.87+/- acres are considered existing native habitat. As shown on the PUD master plan, the project will continue to provide 1.63+/- acres of on-site native habitat preservation. GOAL 7: TO PROTECT AND CONSERVE THE COUNTY’S FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE. The MPUD locates the required preserve area in the northern portion of the project to allow for connection with offsite preserves within the adjacent MPUD. 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 amendment will allow for the development of multi-family residential and commercial uses in a well-integrated and compact mixed-use project. The approved commercial uses and the proposed residential uses are compatible and complimentary to the surrounding existing and future development pattern, thereby ensuring external compatibility. The proposed rezoning will allow for a continuation of a mixed-use development pattern within a designated Mixed Use Activity Center where such development is approved, anticipated, and appropriate. Landscape buffers and open space is provided in accordance with the requirements of the GMP and LDC. The onsite native vegetation preserve location and habitats were selected according to the priority criteria set forth in Sections 3.05.07(A)4 and 3.05.05(A)5 of the Collier County LDC. The location of the onsite native vegetation preserve area maintains the highest quality native vegetation onsite, connects to offsite preservation areas to the north and is in close proximity to offsite adjacent preservation areas to the east. In addition, the preserve location will provide a buffer between the offsite bald eagle nest, located just north of the property boundary, and proposed future development activities on the Project site. e. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The proposed amendment will not modify the minimum requirement for 1.63+/- acres of on-site preserve area. Additionally, the MPUD will provide landscape buffers, lakes and recreational areas, which will meet the LDC’s definition of useable open space. Per the proposed PUD master plan, the project will provide preserve and useable open space in compliance with the GMP and LDC requirements. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD PL20180002813 Evaluation Criteria Page 5 of 5 f. The timing or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities, both public and private. As outlined in the enclosed application, all required public infrastructure is available and adequate to service the MPUD. g. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. While the MPUD boundary is not expanding in size, the zoning is being amended to add residential uses and allow for horizontally-integrated mixed use development at an atertial intersection. The mix of uses proposed by the amendment will not exceed the existing trip cap in place for the approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses. Additionally, the mixed-use development program will provide opportunities for workforce housing and multi-modal movement through the site that will ultimately reduce the reliance on automobiles. The MPUD is located in an area of the County specifically intended for this type of development, and where the expansion of mixed uses can be accomodaed by appropriate faciliities and infrastructure. h. 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. The project will continue to conform to all applicable PUD regulations, except where a deviation is approved. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 705 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 706 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 721 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 EXECUTED AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 722 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 723 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 EXECUTED DISCLOSURE FORM 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK MPUD OWNERSHIP INFORMATION Wilton Land Company, LLC is owned by: 99% George P. Bauer Revocable Trust 1% Carol P. Bauer Revocable Trust George and Carol Bauer are husband and wife. Beneficiaries depend on timing: This is a revocable trusts so during grantor’s lifetime, he or she are the beneficiary. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 EXECUTED COVENANT OF UNIFIED CONTROL 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Print Tax Bills Change of Address   Parcel No 00416720000 Site Address 8530 COLLIER BLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone *Note 34114 Name / Address WILTON LAND COMPANY LLC 206 DUDLEY RD City WILTON State CT Zip 06897 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 5B14 000100 005 5B14 14 50 26 18.99 Legal 14 50 26 S1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 LESS R/W, AND W80FT OF S1/2 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 4336 PG 3681, AND N30FT OF N1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4 OF SEC 23-50-26 LESS R/W Millage Area 39 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub /Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Property Summary Property Detail Sketches Trim Notices Page 1 of 1Details 11/30/2018http://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=146859313&Map=No&FolioNum=00... 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Print Tax Bills Change of Address   Parcel No 00416720000 Site Address 8530 COLLIER BLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone *Note 34114 Name / Address WILTON LAND COMPANY LLC 206 DUDLEY RD City WILTON State CT Zip 06897 Map No. Strap No. Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 5B14 000100 005 5B14 14 50 26 18.99 Legal 14 50 26 S1/2 OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 LESS R/W, AND W80FT OF S1/2 OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4, LESS THAT PORTION FOR R/W AS DESC IN OR 4336 PG 3681, AND N30FT OF N1/2 OF NW1/4 OF NW1/4 OF SEC 23-50-26 LESS R/W Millage Area 39 Millage Rates *Calculations Sub /Condo 100 ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Property Summary Property Detail Sketches Trim Notices Page 1 of 1Details 9/6/2018http://www.collierappraiser.com/main_search/recorddetail.html?sid=127729460&Map=No&FolioNum=0041... 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) LOCATION MAP 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 WARRANTY DEED 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 LIST IDENTIFYING ALL PROPERTY OWNERS & PARTIES OF THE CORPORATION 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Department of State /Division of Corporations /Search Records /Detail By Document Number / Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company WILTON LAND COMPANY, LLC Filing Information L09000066780 27-0590349 07/10/2009 FL ACTIVE Principal Address 206 DUDLEY ROAD WILTON, CT 06897 Mailing Address 206 DUDLEY ROAD WILTON, CT 06897 Registered Agent Name & Address COLEMAN, YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL N. SUITE 300 NAPLES, FL 34103 Name Changed: 04/20/2011 Address Changed: 04/20/2011 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title MGR GEORGE P BAUER REVOCABLE TRUST UAD 7/20/90 206 DUDLEY ROAD WILTON, CT 06897 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2016 07/18/2016 2017 04/24/2017 2018 01/19/2018 DIVISION OF CORPORATIONSFlorida Department of State Page 1 of 2Detail by Entity Name 10/15/2018http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Document Images 01/19/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/24/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 07/18/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/23/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 06/10/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/15/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/27/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/20/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/08/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 07/10/2009 -- Florida Limited Liability View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Page 2 of 2Detail by Entity Name 10/15/2018http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 BOUNDARY SURVEY 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 748Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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: ____________________________________________________ 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 WASTEWATER FLOW CALCULATIONS 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Project:Hammock Park MPUD Task:Determine impacts to previously approved Hacienda Lakes Lift Station #1. Number of Units (SF) Flow Per Unit Average Daily Flow (GPD) Average Daily Flow (GPM) ERU (1ERU=100 GPD) 327,500 0.10 32,750 22.7 328 70,000 0.15 10,500 7.3 105 32,824 22.8 328 51,400 35.7 514 127,474 88.5 1,275 Number of Units (Residential) Flow Per Unit Average Daily Flow (GPD) Average Daily Flow (GPM) ERU (1ERU=100 GPD) 302 181 54,662 38.0 547 152 141 21,432 14.9 214 183 181 33,123 23.0 331 198 142 28,116 19.5 281 4,000 2.8 40 14,000 9.7 140 155,333 107.9 1,553 Total Inflow Zone 1 Total Average Day Inflow = (Gravity Sewer Flow) + (Pumped Inflow) Total Average Day Inflow = 196.4 GPM Peak Factor = 18 + (P)1/2 Peaking Factor 3.46 4 + (P)1/2 P=2.828 (ERU / 1000) Total Peak Hour Inflow = (Total Average Day Inflow) x Peaking Factor Total Peak Hour Inflow = 679 GPM Lift Station Station Designed Capacity Modeled Flow Rate 742 GPM Capacity Available in Lift Station #100 Capciaty Available 63 GPM Hacienda Lakes Lift Station #1 Original Master Plan Gravity Sewer Flows Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD (1) Lift Station 2 Single Family (1) (Esplanade at Haceinda Lakes) Lift Station 3 Single Family (1) (Azure at Hacienda Lakes) Junior Deputy (1) Parcel Use ---- ---- Total Gravity Inflow Parcel Use Hacienda Lakes Commercial(1) Hacienda Lakes Office(1) McMullen MPUD(1) Lift Station 2 Multi-Family (1) (Esplanade at Haceinda Lakes) Lift Station 3 Multi-Family (1) (Azure at Hacienda Lakes) Total Pumped Inflow Hacienda Lakes Lift Station #1 Original Master Plan Pumped Inflows(1) Public School ---- ---- 1 of 3 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Number of Units Flow Per Unit Average Daily Flow (GPD) Average Daily Flow (GPM) ERU (1ERU=100 GPD) 327,500 SF 0.10 32,750 22.7 328 70,000 SF 0.15 10,500 7.3 105 265 250 66,250 46.0 663 148,500 0.125 18,563 12.9 186 51,400 35.7 514 179,463 124.6 1,796 Number of Units (Residential) Flow Per Unit Average Daily Flow (GPD) Average Daily Flow (GPM) ERU (1ERU=100 GPD) 443 ----102,700 71.3 1,027 1,313 0.9 13 405 250 101,250 70.3 1,013 1,724 1.2 17 3,406 2.4 34 14,000 9.7 140 224,393 155.8 2,244 Total Inflow Zone 1 Total Average Day Inflow = (Gravity Sewer Flow) + (Pumped Inflow) Total Average Day Inflow = 280.5 GPM Peak Factor = 18 + (P)1/2 Peaking Factor 3.33 4 + (P)1/2 P=4.040 (ERU / 1000) Total Peak Hour Inflow = (Total Average Day Inflow) x Peaking Factor Total Peak Hour Inflow = 934 GPM Lift Station Station Designed Capacity Modeled Flow Rate 742 GPM Capacity Available in Lift Station #100 Capciaty Available (192)GPM Total Pumped Inflow Parcel Use Lift Station 2 Single Family (Esplanade at Haceinda Lakes) Hacienda Lakes Lift Station #1 Revised Gravity Sewer Flows ---- Hacienda Lakes Office(1) Total Gravity Inflow Parcel Use Hacienda Lakes Commercial(1) ---- ---- Hammock Park MPUD (Multi-Family) Hammock Park MPUD (Commercial) Lift Station 2 Commercial (Esplanade at Haceinda Lakes)---- Lift Station 3 Commercial (Azure at Hacienda Lakes)---- Lift Station 3 Single Family (Azure at Hacienda Lakes) Junior Deputy Public School McMullen MPUD(1) Hacienda Lakes Lift Station #1 Revised Pumped Inflows 2 of 3 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Conclusion: Notes: (1) (2) (3) (4) The revised land use proposed under the zoning application for the Hammock Park MPUD will increase the previously designed Peak Hour Flow from 679 GPM to 934 GPM. This increase in Peak Hour Flow may require modification of lift station #1 (PS 302.70) located at the southeast corner of the project, and having a desing capacity (operating point) of 742 GPM, to facilitate the revised land use. Modifications may include upgrades to the control panel, variable frequency drives, submersible pumps, and standby Diesel pump as well as adjustment of level setpoints. Input data for sanitary flows is based on Hacienda Sanitary Sewer Design Calculations by RWA Inc, March 29, 2013. Lift Station 2 (PS 302.71) average daily flow per PL20180000648 Engineering Report prepared by Waldrop Engineering dated 5/2/2018 Lift Station 3 (PS 302.72) average daily flow per PL20180002205 Engineering Report prepared by Waldrop Engineering dated 11/13/2018 Junior Deputy average daily flow per Camp Discovery (PL201600001148) Engineering Report prepared by Hagan Engineering, dated 8/23/2017 3 of 3 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Traffic Impact Statement Hammock Park Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) Collier County, Florida 05/30/2019 Prepared for: Prepared by: Waldrop Engineering, PA 28100 Bonita Grande Drive, Suite 305 Bonita Springs, FL 34135 Phone: 239-405-7777 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Phone: 239-566-9551 Email: ntrebilcock@trebilcock.biz Collier County Transportation Methodology Fee* – $500.00 Fee Collier County Transportation Review Fee* – Small Scale Study – No Fee Note – *to be collected at time of first submittal 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 2 Statement of Certification I certify that this Traffic Impact Statement has been prepared by me or under my immediate supervision and that I have experience and training in the field of Traffic and Transportation Engineering. Norman J. Trebilcock, AICP, P.E. FL Registration No. 47116 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA 2800 Davis Boulevard, Suite 200 Naples, FL 34104 Company Cert. of Auth. No. 27796 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 3 Table of Contents Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 4 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................... 6 Background Traffic .......................................................................................................................... 8 Existing and Future Roadway Network........................................................................................... 9 Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis ............................................................ 10 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis ...................................................................................................... 12 Improvement Analysis .................................................................................................................. 13 Mitigation of Impact ..................................................................................................................... 13 Appendices Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan ................................................................................... 14 Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) .................................................. 16 Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Calculations ............................................................................. 23 Appendix D: Collier County Transportation Element Map TR-7 – Excerpt .................................. 33 Appendix E: Turning Movement Exhibits .................................................................................... 35 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 4 Project Description The Hammock Park project (formerly known as Hammock Park Commerce Center) is located in the northeast quadrant of the Collier Boulevard (CR 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) intersection and lies within Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, in Collier County, Florida. The subject property is approximately 19.13 acres in size. Refer to Figure 1 – Project Location Map and Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan. Figure 1 – Project Location Map Currently, the subject parcel is vacant. This development was previously approved to allow up to 160,000 square feet (sf) of retail and office uses (per Collier County Ordinance #07-30). A purpose of this report is to document the transportation impacts associated with the proposed Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA). The proposed amendment requests to allow up to 148,500 sf of commercial uses and up to 265 multifamily dwelling units (apartments). Additionally, a Planned Unit Development Amendment (PUDA) proposes a change to the projects current zoning classification of Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) with a request to rezone the property to add a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units as a permitted use. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 5 The proposed amendment would allow for this alternative mixed-use development scenario, while preserving the right to build out the project with the approved 160,000 square feet of commercial uses, depending upon market demand. For the purposes of this report, it is anticipated that the project will be a single-phase development. The traffic analysis utilizes year 2023 planning horizon for buildout conditions. Traffic generation associated with the proposed development is evaluated generally based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition and ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. In agreement with ITE Land Use Code (LUC) descriptions, t he ITE land use designations are illustrated in Table 1. Consistent with the previously approved Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) entitled “Hammock Park Commerce Center” dated September 7, 2006, the ITE Retail LUC 820 – Shopping Center is utilized to model the commercial land uses. Table 1 Development Program – ITE Land Use Designation Development Land Use - [SIC Code in Brackets] ITE LUC Size (ITE variable) Approved Development Parameters Commercial Retail and Office - [All PUD permitted uses typical for a shopping center as an inline/outparcel use]1,2 820 – Shopping Center 160,000 square feet Proposed Development Parameters Residential Multifamily (Apartments) - [N/A]3 220 – Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 265 dwelling units Commercial Retail and Office - [All PUD permitted uses typical for a shopping center as an inline/outparcel use]1,2 820 – Shopping Center 148,500 square feet Notes: 1) Refer to PUD section III 3.3A. 2) Shopping Center used as a highest and best use. Other SIC land uses may be used subject to size and trip cap limitations as applicable. 3) N/A= Not applicable. A methodology meeting was held with the Collier County Transportation Planning staff on October 18, 2018, via email [ref. Appendix B: Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting)]. Please note that specific development parameters have changed. Proposed access points to the surrounding roadway network are depicted in the Conceptual Site Plan (Appendix A). A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 6 requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Trip Generation The software program OTISS (Online Traffic Impact Study Software), most current version is used to evaluate the projected trip generation for the project. The ITE equations and/or rates are used for the trip generation calculations, as applicable. The ITE – OTISS trip generation calculation worksheets are provided in Appendix C: ITE Trip Generation Calculations. The internal capture accounts for a reduction in external traffic because of the interaction between the multiple land uses in a site. For this project, the software program OTISS is used to generate associated internal capture trips. The OTISS process follows the trip balancing approach as recommended in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. As internal capture data for the weekday daily time period is not available, the daily internal capture is assumed consistent with the AM peak hour internal capture rates. Based on the Collier County TIS Guidelines recommendations, the overall internal capture rate should be reasonable and should not exceed 20%. The resulting internal capture rates associated with the proposed development for the weekday traffic, AM peak hour and PM peak hour are 1%, 1% and 18%, respectively. The pass-by trips account for traffic that is already on the external roadway network and stops at the project on the way to a primary trip destination. It should be noted that the driveway volumes are not reduced as a result of the pass-by reduction, only the traffic added to the surrounding streets and intersections. As such, pass-by trips are not deducted for operational turn lane analysis (all external traffic is accounted for). Per ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition traffic data, the average pass-by trip percentage for LUC 820 – Shopping Center, PM peak period is 34%. The Collier County TIS Guidelines recommend that shopping center pass-by rates should not exceed 25% for the peak hour and that the daily capture rates are assumed to be 10% lower than the peak hour capture rate. For the purposes of this report, the shopping center daily pass-by capture rate is calculated at 15%, and the associated AM and PM peak hour capture rates are capped at 25%. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 7 In addition, consistent with the Collier County TIS Guidelines, the approved pass-by percentage is applied to the total (external) traffic and the resulting number of pass-by trips is equally split between the inbound and outbound trips. Per FDOT’s Site Impact Handbook (Section 2.4.4) the number of pass-by trips should not exceed 10% of the adjacent street traffic. Based on our trip generation evaluation, the proposed pass- by trips do not exceed the 10% threshold. The estimated trip generation associated with the approved development parameters is illustrated in Table 2A. The traffic evaluation for the proposed GMPA/PUDA development conditions is summarized in Table 2B. Table 3 shows the estimated net new traffic volume – the difference between Table 2A and Table 2B (proposed conditions versus approved development parameters). Table 2A Trip Generation – Approved Development – Average Weekday Proposed Build-out Daily Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size* Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Shopping Center 160,000 sf 8,276 144 88 232 369 400 769 Total Traffic 8,276 144 88 232 369 400 769 Internal Capture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total External 8,276 144 88 232 369 400 769 Pass-by 1,241 29 29 58 96 96 192 Net External 7,035 115 59 174 273 304 577 Note(s): *sf = square feet. Table 2B Trip Generation – Proposed GMPA/PUDA Build-out Conditions – Average Weekday Proposed Build-out Daily Two- Way Volume AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ITE Land Use Size* Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Shopping Center 148,500 sf 7,867 140 86 226 349 379 728 Multifamily Housing (Low Rise) 265 du 1,963 28 92 120 89 52 141 Total Traffic 9,830 168 178 346 438 431 869 Internal Capture 60 2 2 4 63 63 126 Total External 9,770 166 176 342 375 368 743 Pass-by 1,176 28 28 56 83 83 166 Net External 8,594 138 148 286 292 285 577 Note(s): *sf = square feet; du = dwelling units. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 8 In agreement with the Collier County Traffic Impact Study (TIS) guidelines, significantly impacted roadways are identified based on the proposed project highest peak hour trip generation (net external traffic) and consistent with the peak hour of the adjacent street traffic. Based on the information contained in Collier County 2018 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR), the peak hour for adjacent roadway network is PM. For the purpose of this TIS, the surrounding roadway network link concurrency analysis is analyzed based on projected PM peak hour net new external traffic generated by the proposed GMPA/PUDA project as illustrated in Table 3. Table 3 Trip Generation – Projected Net New External Traffic – Average Weekday Development PM Peak Hour* Enter Exit Total Proposed Development GMPA/PUDA 292 285 577 Current Approved Development 273 304 577 Net New External Traffic Increase/(Decrease) 19 (19) 0 Note(s): *refer to Table 2A and Table 2B. As illustrated in Table 3, transportation concurrency impacts associated with the proposed GMPA/PUDA development scenario do not exceed the traffic impacts allowed under current zoning conditions. In addition, the development should be limited to a maximum of 577 two- way PM peak hour net external trips generated at project buildout conditions. The site access turn lane analysis is evaluated based on the projected AM and PM peak hour external traffic conditions. The evaluated external two-way PM peak hour traffic associated with the proposed development is less intensive than the projected external traffic allowed under current zoning conditions. However, the inbound AM and PM peak hour traffic calculated under the proposed development scenario is higher and will be utilized in the t raffic operational analyses. Background Traffic Average background traffic growth rates are estimated for the segments of the roadway network in the study area using the Collier County Transportation Planning Staff guidance of a 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 9 minimum 2% growth rate, or the historical growth rate from peak hour peak direction volume (estimated from 2008 through 2017), whichever is greater. Another way to derive the background traffic is to use the 2018 Annual Update and Inventory Report (AUIR) volume plus the trip bank volume. The higher of the two determinations is to be used in the Roadway Link Level of Service analysis. Table 4, Background Traffic without Project illustrates the application of projected growth rates to generate the projected background (without pr oject) peak hour peak direction traffic volume for the planning horizon year 2023. It is noted that the Rattlesnake Hammock Road segment located east of Collier Boulevard (aka Florida Sports Park Rd) is not a Collier County monitored roadway. Table 4 Background Traffic without Project (2018 - 2023) Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 AUIR Pk Hr, Pk Dir Background Traffic Volume (trips/hr) Projected Traffic Annual Growth Rate (%/yr)* Growth Factor 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Growth Factor** Trip Bank 2023 Projected Pk Hr, Peak Dir Background Traffic Volume w/out Project (trips/hr) Trip Bank*** Collier Blvd 34.0 Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 1,660 2.0% 1.1041 1,833 506 2,166 Collier Blvd 35.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd to US 41 1,900 2.0% 1.1041 2,098 338 2,238 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 75.0 Santa Barbara Blvd to Collier Blvd 530 2.0% 1.1041 586 170 700 Note(s): *Annual Growth Rate - from 2018 AUIR, 2% minimum. **Growth Factor = (1+Annual Growth Rate)5. 2023 Projected Volume= 2018 AUIR Volume x Growth Factor. ***2023 Projected Volume= 2018 AUIR Volume + Trip Bank. The projected 2023 Peak Hour – Peak Direction Background Traffic is the greater of the Growth Factor or Trip Bank calculation, which is underlined and bold as applicable. Existing and Future Roadway Network The existing roadway conditions are extracted from the Collier County 2018 AUIR and the project roadway conditions are based on the current Collier County 5-Year Work Program. Roadway improvements that are currently under construction or are scheduled to be constructed within the five-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) or Capital 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 10 Improvement program (CIP) are considered to be committed improvements. As no such improvements were identified in the Collier County 201 8 AUIR, the evaluated roadways are anticipated to remain as such through project build-out. The existing and future roadway conditions are illustrated in Table 5, Existing and Future Roadway Conditions. Table 5 Existing and Future Roadway Conditions Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 Roadway Condition Min. Standard LOS 2018 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume 2023 Roadway Condition 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Collier Blvd 34.0 Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 6D E 3,000 (NB) 6D 3,000 (NB) Collier Blvd 35.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd to US 41 6D E 3,200 (NB) 6D 3,200 (NB) Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 75.0 Santa Barbara Blvd to Collier Blvd 6D E 2,900 (WB) 6D 2,900 (WB) Note(s): 2U = 2-lane undivided roadway; 4D, 6D, 8D =4-lane, 6-lane, 8-lane divided roadway, respectively; LOS = Level of Service. Project Impacts to Area Roadway Network-Link Analysis The Collier County Transportation Planning Services developed Level of Service (LOS) volumes for the roadway links impacted by the project, which are evaluated to determine the project impacts to the area roadway network in the future horizon year 2023. The Collier County Transportation Planning Services guidelines have determined that a project will be considered to have a significant and adverse impact if both the percentage volume capacity exceeds 2% of the capacity for the link directly accessed by the project and for the link adjacent to the link directly accessed by the project; 3% for other subsequent links and if the roadway is projected to operate below the adopted LOS standard. Based on these criteria, this project does not create any significant and adverse impacts to the area roadway network. None of the analyzed links are projected to exceed the adopted LOS standard with or without the project at 2023 future build -out conditions. Table 6, Roadway Link Level of Service illustrates the LOS impacts of the project on the surrounding roadway network. As illustrated in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), Chapter 6.02.02 – M.2., once traffic from a development has been shown to be less than significant on any segment using the 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 11 Collier County TIS criterion, the development’s impact is not required to be analyzed further on any additional segments. Table 6 Roadway Link Level of Service (LOS) – With Project in the Year 2023 Roadway Link CC AUIR Link ID # Roadway Link Location 2018 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Capacity Volume Roadway Link, Peak Dir, Peak Hr (Project Vol Added)* 2023 Peak Dir, Peak Hr Volume w/Project** % Vol Capacity Impact by Project Min LOS exceeded without Project? Yes/No Min LOS exceeded with Project? Yes/No Collier Blvd 34.0 Davis Blvd to Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 3,000 (NB) N/A 2,166 0.0% No No Collier Blvd 35.0 Rattlesnake Hammock Rd to US 41 3,200 (NB) N/A 2,238 0.0% No No Rattlesnake Hammock Rd 75.0 Santa Barbara Blvd to Collier Blvd 2,900 (WB) N/A 700 0.0% No No Note(s): *N/A = not applicable; No additional trips are projected over what was previously approved. **2023 Projected Volume= 2023 background (refer to Table 4) + Project Volume added. Policy 5.1 of the Collier County Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) states that “the County Commission shall review all rezone petitions, SRA designation applications, conditional use petitions, and proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) affecting 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, or which significantly impacts a roadway segment or adjacent roadway segment that is currently operating and/or is proje cted to operate below an adopted Level of Service Standard within the five year AUIR planning period, unless specific mitigating stipulations are also approved.” As illustrated in Table 6 of this report there is available capacity on the analyzed surrounding roadway network to accommodate the proposed development. Therefore, the subject development is consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Collier County’s GMP. It is noted that Collier Boulevard and Rattlesnake Hammock Road facilities are Collier County designated hurricane evacuation routes as depicted in Collier County Transportation Element – Map TR - 7. For details refer to Appendix D. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 12 Site Access Turn Lane Analysis Proposed access points to the surrounding roadway network are depicted in the Conceptual Site Plan (refer to Appendix A: Project Conceptual Site Plan), and these access connections will be further described in future SDP, PPL or DO submittals, as applicable, to determine turn lane requirements as more accurate parameters become available. Connections to the subject project are proposed via an existing right-in/right-out access on westbound Rattlesnake Hammock Road, a proposed full movement access on westbound Rattlesnake Hammock Road and a proposed right-in/right-out access on northbound Collier Boulevard. Collier Boulevard (CR 951) is under Collier County Department of Transportation jurisdiction. This roadway is a north-south six-lane divided arterial roadway. This roadway has a posted legal speed of 50 mph and an assumed design speed of 50 mph in the vicinity of project. Based on FDOT Standard Plans Index #711-001, the minimum turn lane length is 240 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Rattlesnake Hammock Road (CR 864) is under Collier County Department of Transportation jurisdiction. This roadway is a four-lane divided no outlet roadway. This roadway has a posted legal speed of 40 mph and an assumed design speed of 45 mph in the vicinity of project. Based on FDOT Standard Plans Index #711-001, the minimum turn lane length is 185 feet (which includes a 50 foot taper) plus required queue. Project access is typically evaluated for turn lane warrants based on the Collier Count y Right-of- way Manual: (a) two-lane roadways – 40 vph for right-turn lane/20 vph for left-turn lane; (b) multi-lane divided roadways – right-turn lanes shall always be provided; and c) when median openings are permitted, they shall always include left-turn lanes. Turn lane lengths required at build-out conditions are analyzed based on the number of turning vehicles within the peak hour traffic. Rattlesnake Hammock Western Access: The proposed project is expected to generate 33 vph and 75 vph westbound right-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. A dedicated westbound right-turn lane is warranted at this location as it meets the multi-lane criterion. At the minimum, the right-turn lane should be 235 feet which includes a minimum 50 feet of storage. Rattlesnake Hammock Eastern Access: The proposed project is expected to generate 17 vph and 38 vph westbound right-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 13 respectively. A dedicated westbound right-turn lane is warranted at this location. At the minimum, the right-turn lane should be 210 feet which includes a minimum 25 feet of storage. The proposed project is expected to generate 66 vph and 150 vph eastbound left-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. A dedicated eastbound left -turn lane is warranted at this location as it meets the multi-lane criterion. At the minimum, the turn-lane should be 310 feet which includes a minimum 125 feet of storage. There is an existing approximately 350 foot left-turn lane at this location that is currently gore striped. Collier Boulevard Access: The proposed project is expected to generate 50 vph and 112 vph northbound right-turning movements during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. A dedicated northbound right-turn lane is warranted at this location as it meets the multi-lane criterion. At the minimum, the turn-lane should be 290 feet which includes a minimum 50 feet of storage. There is an existing approximately 410 foot right-turn lane available for this proposed access. A detailed evaluation of applicable access points – turn lane requirements will be performed at the time of site development permitting/platting when more specific development parameters will be made available. Improvement Analysis Based on the link analysis and trip distribution, the proposed project is not a significant and adverse traffic generator for the roadway network at this location. There is adequate and sufficient roadway capacity to accommodate the proposed development without adversely affecting adjacent roadway network level of service. The development shall be limited to a maximum of 577 two-way PM peak hour net external trips. These trips shall be calculated based on applicable land use codes as illustrated in the ITE Trip Generation Manual in effect at the time of future development order applications. Mitigation of Impact The developer proposes to pay the appropriate Collier County Road Impact Fee as building permits are issued for the project, as applicable. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 14 Appendix A Project Conceptual Site Plan 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 15 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 16 Appendix B Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 771 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 17 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 772 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 18 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 19 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 20 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 775 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 21 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 776 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 22 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 777 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 23 Appendix C ITE Trip Generation Calculations 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 778 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 24 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 779 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 25 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 780 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 26 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 781 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 27 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 28 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 783 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 29 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 30 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 31 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 32 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 33 Appendix D Collier County Transportation Element Map TR-7 – Excerpt 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 34 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 35 Appendix E Turning Movement Exhibits 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 36 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park – GMPA/PUDA – TIS – May 2019 Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA P a g e | 37 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Project No. 05TSC1438 HAMMOCK PARK COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL DATA REPORT Revised June 2019 Prepared For: Tract L Development, LLC 7742 Alico Road Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 208-4079 Prepared By: Passarella & Associates, Inc. 13620 Metropolis Avenue, Suite 200 Fort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 274-0067 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ....................................................................................................................................1 Environmental Data Authors .........................................................................................................1 Vegetation Descriptions .................................................................................................................2 Listed Species Survey ....................................................................................................................4 Native Vegetation Preservation .....................................................................................................4 References ......................................................................................................................................5 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) ii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Native and Non-Native Habitat Types and Vegetation Acreages ......................... 5 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) iii LIST OF EXHIBITS Page Exhibit 1. Project Location Map ......................................................................................... E1-1 Exhibit 2. Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands Map ........................................................ E2-1 Exhibit 3. Native Vegetation Map ...................................................................................... E3-1 Exhibit 4. Listed Species Survey ........................................................................................ E4-1 Exhibit 5. Aerial with Bald Eagle Nest and Protection Zones ........................................... E5-1 Exhibit 6. Aerial with On-Site and Adjacent Off-Site Preservation Areas ........................ E6-1 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 797 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 1 INTRODUCTION The following environmental data report is provided in support of the zoning application for Hammock Park (Project). The following information was prepared in accordance with the Collier County environmental data submittal requirements outlined in Chapter 3.08.00 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC). The Project totals 19.13± acres and is located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Exhibit 1). More specifically, the Project is located northeast of the intersection of Collier Boulevard (County Road 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The Project is bordered by the Good Turn Center project to the north, the McMullen Parcel to the east, Rattlesnake Hammock Road to the south, and Collier Boulevard to the west. The Project includes a modification to an existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as Hammock Park Commerce Center (Ordinance No. 07-30). The modification includes the addition of a potential mixed-use or residential component. South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) Permit No. 11-02130-P and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) Permit No. SAJ-1999-04926 were issued for the Project on October 10, 2002 and February 12, 2009, respectively. Additional modifications to the SFWMD permit were issued on February 8, 2008 and July 1, 2014 and to the COE permit on July 21, 2014. The majority of the Project site is comprised of previously cleared, disturbed land. The Project site contains a 1.63± acre Collier County native vegetation preserve along the northern portion boundary which was designated as part of Ordinance No. 7-30. This report includes details regarding the authors’ qualifications, vegetation descriptions for the various on-site habitats, results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) in October 2018, and the minimum native vegetation preservation requirement. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA AUTHORS This report was prepared by Heather Samborski and Bethany Brosious. They both satisfy the environmental credential and experience requirements, per Section 3.08.00(A)2 of the Collier County LDC. Ms. Samborski is an Ecologist with PAI, with four years of consulting experience in the environmental industry. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Studies from Eastern Connecticut State University and a Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from Florida Gulf Coast University. Ms. Brosious is an Ecologist with PAI, with 12 years of consulting experience in the environmental industry. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Animal Sciences from the University of Florida and a Master of Science degree in Environmental Sciences from Florida Gulf Coast University. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 2 VEGETATION DESCRIPTIONS The existing vegetative cover and land uses on the Project site include a combination of undeveloped, disturbed land and forested uplands and wetlands with varying degrees of exotic infestation. The vegetation associations for the property were delineated using December 2017 rectified color aerials (Scale: 1" = 100'). Groundtruthing was conducted in October 2018. These delineations were classified based on the nomenclature of the Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) Levels III and IV (Florida Department of Transportation 1999). Level IV FLUCFCS was utilized to denote disturbance and “E” codes were used to identify levels of exotic species invasion (i.e., melaleuca (Melaleuca quinquenervia), earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis), downy rose-myrtle (Rhodomyrtus tomentosa), and Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius)). AutoCAD Map 3D 2017 software was used to determine the acreage of each mapped polygon, produce summaries, and generate the final FLUCFCS map (Exhibit 2). A total of 12 vegetative associations and land uses (i.e., FLUCFCS codes) were identified on the property. The dominant habitat type on the property is Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401), accounting for 45.2 percent of the property (8.64± acres). Exotic vegetation documented on-site includes, but is not limited to, Brazilian pepper, earleaf acacia, torpedograss (Panicum repens), and melaleuca. The degree of exotic infestation ranges from 0 to nearly 100 percent cover. The Project site contains 13.59± acres of SFWMD and potential COE jurisdictional wetlands (Exhibits 2 and 3). The jurisdictional wetlands identified by FLUCFCS code include approximately 2.59± acres of Hydric Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E1); 1.89± acres of Hydric Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E4); 0.47± acre of Freshwater Marsh, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6419 E3); and 8.64± acres of Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401). The on-site wetland quality has been diminished by previously authorized site disturbance, a degraded regional hydrologic connection, and the infestation of exotic vegetation including Brazilian pepper, torpedograss, melaleuca, and earleaf acacia. The acreage and descriptions for each FLUCFCS classification are outlined below. Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4159 E1) The canopy contains slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and scattered cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto). The sub-canopy consists of slash pine, cabbage palm, wax myrtle (Morella cerifera), and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes gulfdune paspalum (Paspalum monostachyum), little blue maidencane (Amphicarpum muehlenbergianum), and torpedograss. Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 4159 E4) The canopy is similar to FLUCFCS Code 4159 E1. The sub-canopy consists of 76 to 100 percent cover by earleaf acacia, melaleuca, and Brazilian pepper. The ground cover includes torpedograss, spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), bushy bluestem (Andropogon glomeratus), and beaksedge (Rhynchospora microcarpa). 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 3 Cypress, Pine, Cabbage Palm, Disturbed and Drained (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6245 E4) The canopy consists of slash pine, cypress (Taxodium distichum), and Brazilian pepper. The sub- canopy was mostly open with scattered cabbage palm. The ground cover includes grapevine (Vitis sp.), caesarweed (Urena lobata), dog fennel (Eupatorium capillifolium), torpedograss, and spermacoce. Hydric Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E1) The canopy consists primarily of slash pine. The sub-canopy contains slash pine, wax myrtle, myrsine (Myrsine cubana), dahoon holly (Ilex cassine), and cypress. The ground cover includes sand cordgrass (Spartina bakeri), sawgrass (Cladium jamaicense), little blue maidencane, gulfdune paspalum, and spermacoce. Hydric Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6259 E4) The canopy consists of slash pine with some cabbage palm. The sub-canopy contains Brazilian pepper and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes torpedograss, spermacoce, bushy bluestem, and beaksedge. Freshwater Marsh, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) (FLUCFCS Code 6419 E3) The canopy is open with scattered cypress. The sub-canopy is open with scattered cypress, Brazilian pepper, and willow (Salix caroliniana). The ground cover includes pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), arrowhead (Sagittaria lancifolia), smartweed (Polygonum spp.), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), torpedograss, and fireflag (Thalia geniculata). Disturbed Land (FLUCFCS Code 740) The canopy and sub-canopy are open. The ground cover consists of torpedograss, spermacoce, bushy bluestem, and coastal foxtail (Setaria corrugata). Disturbed Land, Hydric (FLUCFCS Code 7401) The canopy and sub-canopy are open with scattered melaleuca. The ground cover includes torpedograss, spermacoce, dog fennel, beaksedge, and inundated beaksedge (Rhynchospora inundata). Spoil Areas (FLUCFCS Code 743) The canopy is open and the sub-canopy includes Brazilian pepper and earleaf acacia. The ground cover includes fennel (Eupatorium leptophyllum), torpedograss, spermacoce, and caesarweed. Road (FLUCFCS Code 814) This area consists of a paved road which occupies 0.01± acre or 0.1 percent of the property. Utilities (FLUCFCS Code 830) This is comprised of a pump station and accounts for 0.10± acre or 0.5 percent of the property. Electrical Transmission Lines (FLUCFCS Code 832) This area is occupied by Florida Power & Light powerlines and accounts for 0.30± acre or 1.6 percent of the property. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 4 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY A listed plant and wildlife species survey was conducted by PAI on the Project site on October 2, 2018. No listed wildlife species were observed during the listed species survey. The listed species survey methodology and results are provided as Exhibit 4. The Project has previously been reviewed by both the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as part of the state and federal permitting process. A biological opinion for the Project was issued by the USFWS on December 17, 2008 and addressed potential Project impacts to the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi). In addition, as part of a COE permit extension request, a USFWS concurrence letter was issued on March 20, 2014 and found that the Project “may affect but is not likely to adversely affect” the Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridanus). During a December 2018 site visit, a bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nest was documented approximately 20 feet north of the Project site. The nest is located in a live slash pine approximately 800± feet east of Collier Boulevard. An aerial depicting the location of the bald eagle nest and USFWS protection zones is included as Exhibit 5. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the developer will coordinate with Collier County, the USFWS, and the FWCC with respect to the newly identified bald eagle nest regarding applicable guidelines and permitting requirements as described in the FWCC Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook (FWCC 2010) and the USFWS National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007). NATIVE VEGETATION PRESERVATION Per PUD Ordinance 07-30, 15 percent of the on-site native vegetation was required to be preserved to meet the Collier County minimum native vegetation preservation requirement in accordance with Section 3.05.07.B.1 of the Collier County LDC. This resulted in a preservation requirement of 1.63± acres of native vegetation. A 1.63± acre Collier County native vegetation preserve, which satisfies the minimum native vegetation preservation requirement, was established on the northern boundary of the Project. The preserve is protected via a conservation easement granted to Collier County and the SFWMD. The preserve has been enhanced through the removal of exotic vegetation and supplemental plantings. The proposed zoning amendment application incudes the addition of a residential land use to the PUD. Per LDC Section 3.05.07.B.1, for a residential or mixed-use development that is less than 20 acres in size, the minimum preserve requirement is 15 percent of the native vegetation. The Project contains 7.14± acres of native vegetation. A utility easement which bisects the eastern portion of the property was not classified as native vegetation for this zoning amendment application. In addition, 2.22± acres area of Disturbed Land; 8.64± acres of Disturbed Land, Hydric; 0.37± acre of Spoil Areas; 0.01± acre of Road; 0.10± acre of Utilities; and 0.30± acre of Electrical Transmission Lines were classified as non-native vegetation. Also excluded was 0.35± acre of Freshwater Marsh (50-75% Exotics) located within the existing electrical powerline easement (Exhibit 3). 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 5 Table 1 provides a summary of the existing native vegetation communities on-site and the native vegetation preservation calculation. Table 1. Native and Non-Native Habitat Types and Vegetation Acreages FLUCFCS Code Description Native Acreage Non-Native Acreage 4159 E1 Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) 0.16 4159 E4 Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) 0.63 6245 E4 Cypress, Pine, Cabbage Palm, Disturbed and Drained (76-100% Exotics) 1.75 6259 E1 Hydric Pine, Disturbed (0-24% Exotics) 2.59 6259 E4 Hydric Pine, Disturbed (76-100% Exotics) 1.89 6419 E3 Freshwater Marsh, Disturbed (50-75% Exotics) 0.12 0.35 740 Disturbed Land 2.22 7401 Disturbed Land, Hydric 8.64 743 Spoil Areas 0.37 814 Road 0.01 830 Utilities 0.10 832 Electrical Transmission Lines 0.30 Total 7.14 11.99 Minimum Retained Native Vegetation Requirement Per Collier County Ordinance No. 07-30 1.63* *Per Collier County Ordinance No. 07-30, 15 percent of the on-site native vegetation was preserved. Please see the Master Concept Plan and Exhibit 6 for the preserve area location. The on-site preserve location and habitats were selected according to the priority criteria set forth in Sections 3.05.07(A)4 and 3.05.05(A)5 of the Collier County LDC. The on-site preserve maintained the highest quality native vegetation on-site, connects off-site preservation areas to the north, and is in close proximity to off-site adjacent preservation areas to the east (Exhibit 6). In addition, the preserve location will provide a buffer between the off-site bald eagle nest, located just north of the property boundary, and proposed future development activities on the Project site. Enhancement activities conducted within the preserve areas included the removal of exotic vegetation and supplemental planting. The preserve area is currently protected via a conservation easement granted to both Collier County and the SFWMD and will remain protected in perpetuity. REFERENCES Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Florida Land Use, Cover and Forms Classification System. Procedure No. 550-010-001-a. Second Edition. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 6 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2010. Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook. Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT LOCATION MAP 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) REVIEWED BY DRAWN BY REVISED DATE DATE DATECCHHAARRLLEEMMAAGGNNEEBBLLVVDD AAUUGG UUSS TT AA BBLLVVDDW HITA K ER R DWHITAKER R D LLAAKKEEWWOOOODDBBLLVVDDAALLBBIIRRDDVV EE RR OO NN AAWW AALLKK CC II RROOUU TT EE RR DD RR DDIIXX IIEE DD RR TTRREEVVIISSOOBBAAYYBBLLVVDDHHEENNLL EEYYDDRRG A I L B LV DGAIL B LV D GGAABBRRIIEELLCCIIRRCOUNTY BARN RDCOUNTY BARN RDN E W M A N D RNEWMAN D R NN OO RR TT HH RR DD TTEEXXAASSAAVVEEGE OR G I A A V EGEOR G I A A V E CO P E L NCOPE L N CR EW S R DCREWS R D PP OO LLLLYYAAVVEEPALM DRPALM DRLE BUFFS RDLE BUFFS RDBENFIELD RDBENFIELD RDMA RK LE Y AV EMARKLEY AV E TT HH OOMMAASSSSOONN DDRRCCOO RRSSOOBBEE LLLLOODDRRTT EE RR YYLLRRDDF L OR I D A N A V E F L OR I D A N A V E SMITH RDSMITH RDRR OO YYAA LLWWOOOODDBBLLVVDDLIVINGSTON RDLIVINGSTON RDWAS HBURN AV EWASHBURN AV E KKIINNGGSSWWAAYYCCOOUUNNTTRRYYSSIIDDEEDDRR BE C K B LV DBECK B LV D 33 22 NN DD AAVV EE SS WW BBAA RR EE FF OO OO T T WWI I LLLLI I AAMMSSRRDDNNAAPPLLEESSHHEERRIITTAAGGEE D DRR CC LL UU BB EE SSTTAATTEESSDDRRCCEERRRROO MM AARR DDRR WWIILLDDFFLLOOWWEERR WWAA YY LLEELLYYRREESSOORRTTBBLLVVDDCCEELLEESSTTEEDDRRGGLLEENNEEAAGGLLEEBBLLVVDD GGRRAAN N DDLLEE LLYYDDRR SSAAIINNTT AA NN DD RR EE WW SS BBLLVVDDWWHHIITTEELLAAKKEE BBLLVVDD KK IINN GG SS LLAAKKEEBBLLVVDDBLACKBURN RDBLACKBURN RD SANTA BARBARA BLVDSANTA BARBARA BLVDRA D IO R DRADIO R D RR AATT TT LL EE SS NN AAKK EE HH AAMM MM OO CC KK RR DD D AV IS B LV DDAVIS B LV D S A B AL PA L M R DSABAL PA L M R DCOLLIER BLVD (CR 951)COLLIER BLVD (CR 951)KKEENN TTDDRR LLAAMMBB TT OO NN LLNN BB EELLVVIILL LLEEBBLLVVDD (/41 ;3EXIT101 §¨¦75 Gulf of MexicoOL DUS41S AN MARCOD R OIL WELL R D EVERGLADES BLVD¿À951 ¿À858 ¿À837 ¿À839 ¿À846 ¿À29 (/41 §¨¦75 C O L L I E RCOLLIER L E ELEE ^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ MIAMI TAMPA NAPLES ORLANDO KEY WEST SARASOTA PENSACOLA FORT MYERS VERO BEACH LAKE PLACID PANAMA CITY GAINESVILLE TALLAHASSEE JACKSONVILLE DAYTONA BEACH FORT LAUDERDALE¶ PROJECT LOCATIONSEC 14, TWP 50 S, RNG 26 E EXHIBIT 1. PROJECT LOCATION MAP T.F. B.B. 10/8/18 10/8/18HAMMOCK PARK 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT 2 AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) P/L743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.04 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)740(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)~CR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~832(0.30 Ac.±)7401(0.28 Ac.±)6419E3(0.47 Ac.±)7401(0.21 Ac.±)740(0.12 Ac.±)6259E1(1.50 Ac.±)4159E1(0.16 Ac.±)4159E4(0.63 Ac.±)6245E4(0.15 Ac.±)740(2.05 Ac.±)814(0.01 Ac.±)6259E1(<0.01 Ac.±)6259E4(1.89 Ac.±)7401(6.96 Ac.±)7401(0.31 Ac.±)6245E4(1.60 Ac.±)~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~6259E1(1.09 Ac.±)830(0.05 Ac.±)7401(0.93 Ac.±)J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 2 Aerial with FLUCFCS and Wetlands 101618.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 10:14am Plotted by: TomFD.B.B.B.REVISIONS10/16/18DATEDATE10/16/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 100'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.FLUCFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM 1"=200' AERIALPHOTOGRAPHS AND LOCATIONS APPROXIMATED.HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAPEXHIBIT 2LEGEND:SFWMD AND COE WETLANDS(13.64 Ac.±)SURVEYED WETLAND LINEFLUCFCS PER FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER ANDFORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCFCS)(FDOT 1999).SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER VANESSE &DAYLOR DRAWING NO. PASS0318041.DWG DATEDMARCH 22, 2004.WETLAND LINES REVIEWED AND APPROVED BYSFWMD AS PART OF ERP NO. 11-02130-P.9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 807Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT 3 NATIVE VEGETATION MAP 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) P/L743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.04 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)740(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.01 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.03 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)743(0.05 Ac.±)743(0.02 Ac.±)~CR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~832(0.30 Ac.±)7401(0.28 Ac.±)7401(0.21 Ac.±)740(0.12 Ac.±)6259E1(1.50 Ac.±)4159E1(0.16 Ac.±)4159E4(0.63 Ac.±)6245E4(0.15 Ac.±)740(2.05 Ac.±)814(0.01 Ac.±)6259E1(<0.01 Ac.±)6259E4(1.89 Ac.±)7401(6.96 Ac.±)7401(0.31 Ac.±)6245E4(1.60 Ac.±)~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~6259E1(1.09 Ac.±)6419E3(0.35 Ac.±)6419E3(0.12 Ac.±)830(0.05 Ac.±)7401(0.93 Ac.±)J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 3 Native Vegetation Map 101618.dwg Tab: 17x11 Mar 26, 2019 - 10:15am Plotted by: TomFD.B.B.B.REVISIONS10/16/18DATEDATE10/16/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 100'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.FLUCFCS LINES ESTIMATED FROM 1"=200' AERIALPHOTOGRAPHS AND LOCATIONS APPROXIMATED.HAMMOCK PARKNATIVE VEGETATION MAPEXHIBIT 3LEGEND:NATIVE VEGETATION(7.14 Ac.±)SURVEYED WETLAND LINEELECTRICAL POWER LINEEASEMENTFLUCFCS PER FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER ANDFORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCFCS)(FDOT 1999).SURVEYED WETLAND LINES PER VANESSE &DAYLOR DRAWING NO. PASS0318041.DWG DATEDMARCH 22, 2004.WETLAND LINES REVIEWED AND APPROVED BYSFWMD AS PART OF ERP NO. 11-02130-P.9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 809Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT 4 LISTED SPECIES SURVEY 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) E4-1 HAMMOCK PARK LISTED SPECIES SURVEY Revised March 2019 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of the listed species survey conducted by Passarella & Associates, Inc. (PAI) on October 2, 2018 for the 19.13± acre Hammock Park (Project). The Project includes a proposed mixed-use commercial/residential development with associated infrastructure and stormwater management system. Listed species surveys for the Project were previously conducted in September 2006 and July 2012. The Project is located in Section 14, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County (Figure 1). More specifically, the Project is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Collier Boulevard (County Road 951) and Rattlesnake Hammock Road. The Project is bound by Good Turn Center to the north, the McMullen Parcel to the east, Rattlesnake Hammock Road to the south, and the 951 Canal and Collier Boulevard to the west. The Project site contains an on-site preservation area that is located on the northern boundary. The remainder of the Project site is comprised of undeveloped, partly forested land that has been invaded to various degrees by exotic vegetation. 2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD SURVEY METHODOLOGY A literature review and field survey was conducted to determine whether the Project site was being utilized by state and/or federally-listed species as identified by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as endangered, threatened, or species of special concern. In addition, the property was surveyed for plant species listed by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services and the USFWS as endangered, threatened, or commercially exploited or species included on the Collier County Rare and Less Rare plant lists (Land Development Code (LDC) Section 3.04.03). 2.1 Literature Review The literature review involved an examination of available information on listed species in the Project’s geographical region. The literature sources reviewed included the FWCC Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species (2017); Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies (Runde et al. 1991); USFWS Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region (1987); the Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan (Logan et al. 1993); the Landscape Conservation Strategy Map (Kautz et al. 2006); and USFWS and FWCC databases for telemetry locations of the Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis) (RCW), Florida black bear (Ursus americanus 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) E4-2 floridanus), Florida scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens), and wading bird rookeries (such as the wood stork (Mycteria americana)) in Collier County. The FWCC and USFWS database information is updated on a periodic basis and is current through different dates, depending on the species. The FWCC information that was reviewed is current through the noted dates for the following four species: Florida panther telemetry – September 2018; bald eagle nest locations – April 2016; black bear telemetry – December 2007; and RCW locations – August 2017. 2.2 Field Survey The field survey was conducted during daylight hours by qualified ecologists walking parallel belt transects across the Project site. Transects were spaced to ensure that sufficient visual coverage of ground and flora was obtained. Approximate transect locations and spacing are shown on Figure 2. At regular intervals the ecologists stopped, remained quiet, and listened for wildlife vocalizations. The survey was conducted with the aid of 8x or 10x power binoculars. The listed wildlife species surveyed for included, but were not limited to, gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi), RCW, wood stork, Big Cypress fox squirrel (Sciurus niger avicennia), and Florida panther. The listed plant species surveyed for included species typical to forested upland and wetland habitats in this geographical region, as well as listed epiphytes and terrestrial orchids common in Southwest Florida. 3.0 RESULTS 3.1 Literature Review The literature search found no documented occurrences for listed wildlife species on the Project site (Figure 3). The closest documented bald eagle nest is an unnumbered nest located approximately 20 feet north of the northern property boundary. The nest was discovered during a December 2018 site visit and is located in a live slash pine (Pinus elliottii) tree. The location of the nest and the USFWS eagle protection zones are depicted in Figure 4. Bald eagles are not a state or federally-listed species; however, they are protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. No RCW colonies or cavity trees are documented on the Project site, per the FWCC’s database (Figure 3). The closest documented RCW location is located approximately 0.25 mile west of the Project site. This location and the others documented west of Collier Boulevard are considered relic or historic locations, as there are no currently known active cavity trees west of Collier Boulevard, based on PAI’s survey experience in 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) E4-3 this region over the last 20 years. The RCW is a state and federally-listed endangered species. The Project site is located within the 30± kilometer (18.6± miles) Core Foraging Area (CFA) of one documented wood stork rookery (No. 619018) (Figure 5). The wetlands within the proposed development limits are predominantly infested with exotic vegetation including torpedograss (Panicum repens), spermacoce (Spermacoce verticillata), and earleaf acacia (Acacia auriculiformis). As such, the property’s foraging potential is rather poor. The wood stork is a state and federally-listed threatened species. No Florida panther telemetry is located on the Project site; however, panther telemetry points were documented in the immediate vicinity of the Project (Figure 3). The telemetry points were from Florida panther Nos. 148 and 219 and were recorded in August 2010 and December 2013, respectively. Both panthers have since died. The property is within the Florida panther Primary Zone (Kautz et al. 2006) (Figure 6). The Florida panther is a state- and federally-listed endangered species. The Project site is located within the USFWS Florida bonneted bat (Eumops floridana) Consultation Area but outside of the USFWS Florida bonneted bat Focal Area (Figure 7). The Florida bonneted bat is a state and federally-listed endangered species. 3.2 Field Survey The field survey was conducted on October 2, 2018. Weather conditions during the survey were partly cloudy skies, with 10 to 15 miles per hour easterly winds, and temperatures in the upper 80s to low 90s. The field survey identified no listed wildlife or plant species on the Project site (Figure 2). No listed species were documented utilizing the Project site during the October 2018 survey. During a December 2018 site visit, a bald eagle nest was discovered approximately 20 feet north of the northern property boundary (Figure 4). 4.0 SUMMARY The literature search and review of agency databases found no documented occurrences for listed species on the Project site. The Project site is located within the Primary Zone for the Florida panther and is located within one documented wood stork colony CFA. The Project is located within the consultation area for the RCW and the Florida bonneted bat. The October 2, 2018 field survey documented no listed species within the Project limits. In December 2018, an active bald eagle nest was documented approximately 20 feet north of the Project. This is a previously undocumented nest location. Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the developer will coordinate with Collier County, the USFWS, and the FWCC with respect to the newly identified bald eagle nest regarding applicable guidelines and permitting requirements as described in the FWCC Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook (FWCC 2010) and the USFWS National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines (USFWS 2007). 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) E4-4 5.0 REFERENCES Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2010. Bald Eagle Management Plan Handbook. Tallahassee, Florida. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2017. Florida’s Endangered and Threatened Species. Official Lists, Bureau of Non-Game Wildlife, Division of Wildlife. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Tallahassee, Florida. Kautz, R., R. Kawula, T. Hoctor, J. Comiskey, D. Jansen, D. Jennings, J. Kasbohm, F. Mazzotti, R. McBride, L. Richardson, K. Root. 2006. How much is enough? Landscape-scale conservation for the Florida panther. Biological Conservation, Volume 130, Issue 1, Pages 118-133 Logan, Todd, Andrew C. Eller, Jr., Ross Morrell, Donna Ruffner, and Jim Sewell. 1993. Florida Panther Habitat Preservation Plan South Florida Population. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Gainesville, Florida. Runde, D.E., J.A. Gore, J.A. Hovis, M.S. Robson, and P.D. Southall. 1991. Florida Atlas of Breeding Sites for Herons and Their Allies, Update 1986 - 1989. Nongame Wildlife Program Technical Report No. 10. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Habitat Management Guidelines for the Bald Eagle in the Southeast Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) REVIEWED BY DRAWN BY REVISED DAT E DAT E DAT ECCHHAARRLLEEMMAAGGNNEEBBLLVVDDAAUUGGUUSSTTAABBLLVVDDWHITAKER RDWHITAKER RD AALLBBIIRRDDVVEERR OONNAAWWAALL KK CCIIRROOUUTTEERR DDRR DDIIXXII EE DDRR HHEENNLL EEYYDDRRGAIL BLVDGAIL BLVD GGAABBRRIIEELLCCIIRRCOUNTY BARN RDCOUNTY BARN RDNEWMA N DRNEWMAN DR HHAARRDDEEEESSTTNORT H RDNORTH RD TTEEXXAASSAAVVEEGEOR GIA AVE GEOR GIA AVE COP E LNCOPE LN CREWS RDCREWS RDINDUSTRIAL BLVDINDUSTRIAL BLVDPP OO LLLLYYAAVVEEPALM DRPALM DRLE BUFFS RDLE BUFFS RDBENFIELD RDBENFIELD RDMARKLEY AVEMARKLEY AVE TT HHOOMM AASSSSOONN DDRRCCOORRSSOOBBEE LLLLOODDRRTTEERR YYLLRRDDFLORIDAN AVE FLORIDAN AVE SMITH RDSMITH RDRROO YYAA LLWWOOOODDBBLLVVDDLIVINGSTON RDLIVINGSTON RDWASHBURN AVEWASHBURN AVE KKIINNGGSSWWAAYYCCOOUUNNTTRRYYSSIIDDEEDDRRBBEECCKK BBLLVVDD 32 ND AVE SW32ND AVE SW BBAA RR EEFF OO OO TT WWI I LLLLII AAMMSSRRDDNNAAPPLLEESSHHEERRIITTAAGGEE DDRR CC LLUUBB EE SSTTAATTEESSDDRRCCEERRRROOMMAARR DDRR WWIILLDDFFLLOOWWEERRWW AA YY LLEELLYYRREESSOORRTTBBLLVVDDCCEELLEESSTTEEDDRRGGLLEENNEEAAGGLLEEBBLLVVDD GGRRAANNDDLLEELLYYDDRRSSAAIINNTTAANNDDRREEWWSSBBLLVVDD WWHHIITTEELLAAKKEEBBLLVVDD KKIINNGGSSLLAAKKEE BB LLVVDDBLACKBURN RDBLACKBURN RD SANTA BARBARA BLVDSANTA BARBARA BLVDRADIO RDRADIO RD RRAATTTTLLEESSNNAAKKEE HHAAMMMMOOCC KK RR DD DAV IS BLVDDAVIS BLVD SABAL PALM RDSABAL PALM RDCOLLIER BLVD (CR 951)COLLIER BLVD (CR 951)KKEENN TTDDRR LLAAMMBB TT OONN LLNN BB EELLVV IILL LLEEBBLLVV DD (/41 ;3EXIT101 §¨¦75 Gulf of Mexico OLDUS41SAN MARCOD R OIL W ELL R D EVERGLADES BLVD¿À951 ¿À858 ¿À837 ¿À839 ¿À846 ¿À29 (/41 §¨¦75 C O L L I E RCOLLIER L E ELEE ^^^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ ^^ ^ ^ MIAMI TAMPA NAPLES ORL ANDO KEY WEST SARASOTA PENSAC OL A FORT MY ERS VERO BEAC H LAKE PL ACID PANAMA C ITY GAIN ESVILLE TALLAHASSEE JAC KSON VI LLE DAYTONA BEACH FORT LAUD ERD ALE¶ PRO JE CT LOCATIONSEC 14, T WP 50 S, RNG 26 E FIGUR E 1. P ROJECT LOCATION MA P T.F. B.B. 10/8/18 10/8/18HAMMOCK PARK 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) P/L~SR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\LSS\Figure 2 Aerial with Survey Transects.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Oct 25, 2018 - 2:18pm Plotted by: ThoneST.F.B.B.REVISIONS10/1/18DATEDATE10/1/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 100'13620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Fort Myers, Florida 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BY HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH SURVEY TRANSECTSFIGURE 2NOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.LEGEND:SURVEY TRANSECTS9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 816Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) DRAWN BY REVIEW ED BY REVISED DATE DATE DATE                LEGEND  A  #* !H  !( A  0 0.5 1Miles ¶ FIGU RE 3. DOCUMENTED O CCURRENCES OF LISTED SPECIES D.B. R.F. 10/10/18 10/10/18HAMMOCK PARK A !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!( #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#*#* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H !H!H !H !H !H !H!H !H !H !H !H!H A A A A A A A A A A A A AA A BE CK BLV D SANTA BARBARA BLVDCOUNTY BARN RDRADIO RD RAT TLESNAKE H AMMOC K DAVIS BLVD ¿À951 (/41 §¨¦75 PROJECT LOCATION T.F.3/26/19 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) P/L~SR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\LSS\Figure 4 Aerial with Eagle Nest 011619.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 11:48am Plotted by: TomFT.F.B.B.REVISIONS10/1/18DATEDATE10/1/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 200'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'SOFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER RWA, INC. DRAWINGNo.501160003DM01.DWG DATED APRIL 2, 2008.HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH BALD EAGLE NEST AND PROTECTION ZONESFIGURE 4LEGEND:APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF BALD EAGLE NEST330' ZONE660' ZONE9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 818Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) DRAWN BY REVIEW ED BY REVISED DATE DATE DATE kj kjkj kj kj Gulf of Mexico BarronCollier 619018(Corkscrew) Sadie Cypress LI VI NGSTONRDLOGAN BLVDBIRDONRDTERRY S T CRAYTONRDR AD I O RDTHREEOAKSPKWYVANDERBILT DROI L WE L L G R A D E R D CAMP KEAIS RDD A V IS BLVDO L D US41 GOLD EN G A T E P K W Y GOODLETTEFRANKRDBO NITA BEACH RD ESTEROBLVD AIRPORT-PULLING RDGOLDE N G AT E B LV D SAN MARCO DROI L WE L L RD C OR K S C R EW RD EVERGLADES BLVD¿À849 ¿À850 ¿À951 ¿À858 ¿À837 ¿À846 ¿À29 (/41 §¨¦75 C O L L I E RCOLLIER L E ELEE 0 3 6Miles ¶         LEGEND  kj      FIGU RE 5. FLORIDA WOO D STORK NESTING COLONIES D.B. R.F . 10/9/18 10/9/18HAMMOCK PARK PROJECT LOCATION AND 18.6 MILE C ORE FO RAGING AREAS 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Gulf of Mexico (/41B (/27 (/41 C H A R L O T T ECHARLOTTE C O L L I E RCOLLIER G L A D E SGLADES H E N D R YHENDRYLEELEE M O N R O EMONROE §¨¦75 REVIEWED BY DRAWN BY REVISED DATE DATE DATE              FIGURE 6. PANTHER ZONES WITH PANTHER FOCU S AREA D.B. R.F. 10/9/18 10/9/18HAMMOCK PARK 0 5 10Miles ¶ LEGEND       PROJECT LOCATION 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT 5 AERIAL WITH BALD EAGLE NEST AND PROTECTION ZONES 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) P/L~SR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 5 Aerial with Eagle Nest 011619.dwg Tab: 17X11-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 10:19am Plotted by: TomFT.F.B.B.REVISIONS10/1/18DATEDATE10/1/18DATEDRAWING No.SHEET No.05TSC1438DATESCALE: 1" = 200'3620 Metropolis AvenueSuite 200Ft. Myers, FL 33912Phone (239) 274-0067Fax (239) 274-0069DRAWN BYDESIGNED BYREVIEWED BYNOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'SOFFICE WITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER RWA, INC. DRAWINGNo.501160003DM01.DWG DATED APRIL 2, 2008.HAMMOCK PARKAERIAL WITH BALD EAGLE NEST AND PROTECTION ZONESEXHIBIT 5LEGEND:APPROXIMATE LOCATIONOF BALD EAGLE NEST330' ZONE660' ZONE9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 822Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) EXHIBIT 6 AERIAL WITH ON-SITE AND ADJACENT OFF-SITE PRESERVE AREAS 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) P/LHAMMOCK PARKMCMULLENPARCELGOOD TURN CENTERHACIENDA LAKES~RATTLESNAKE HAMMOCK RD~~CR 951 (COLLIER BLVD)~J:\2005\05TSC1438\Hammock Park Commerce Center\2018\Environmental Data Report\Exhibit 6 Aerial with On-site and Off-site Preserve Areas.dwg Tab: 11X8-C TB Mar 26, 2019 - 10:21am Plotted by: TomF SCALE: 1" = 300'DRAWN BYREVIEWED BYREVISEDT.F.B.B.12/6/18DATEDATE12/6/18DATENOTES:AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS WERE ACQUIRED THROUGHTHE COLLIER COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICEWITH A FLIGHT DATE OF DECEMBER 2017.PROPERTY BOUNDARY PER WALDROP ENGINEERING INC.DRAWING No.18-23SR.DWG DATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2018.EXHIBIT 6. AERIAL WITH ON-SITE AND ADJACENT OFF-SITE PRESERVE AREASHAMMOCK PARKLEGEND:ON-SITE PRESERVE AREAOFF-SITE PRESERVE AREAS9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 824Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 SCHOOL IMPACT ANALYSIS 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 CONSERVATION EASEMENT 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 836 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 837 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 R-O-W DEED TO COUNTY 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 ACCESS EASEMENT 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 848 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 851 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 852 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 853 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 855 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 856 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 857 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 858 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 859 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 860 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 861 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 862 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 863 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 864 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 865 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 866 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 867 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 868 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 869 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 BRIDGE AND ENTRANCE DRIVE CONSTRUCTION AND EASEMENT AGREEMENT 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 870 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 871 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 872 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 873 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 874 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 875 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 876 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 877 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 878 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 879 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 880 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 881 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 882 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 883 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 884 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 885 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 886 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 ORDINANCE 2007-30 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 887 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 888 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 889 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 890 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 891 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 892 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 893 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 894 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) SECTION II PROJECT DEVELOPMENT 2.1 PURPOSE The purpose of this Section is to delineate and generally describe the project plan of development, relationships to applicable County ordinances, the respective land uses of the tracts included in the project, as well as other project relationships. 2.2 GENERAL A. Regulations for development of the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD shall be in accordance with the contents of this Document, CPUD - Commercial Planned Unit Development District, applicable sections and parts of the LDC and GMP in effect at the time of final local development order or building permit application. Where these regulations fail to provide developmental standards, then the provisions of the most similar district in the LDC shall apply. B. Unless otherwise noted, the definitions of all terms shall be the same as the definitions set forth in the LDC in effect at the date of adoption of this PUD. C. All conditions imposed and graphic material presented depicting restrictions for the development of the Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD shall become part of the regulations that govern the manner in which the CPUD site may be developed. D. Unless specifically waived through any variance or waiver provisions from any other applicable regulations, the provisions of those regulations not otherwise provided for this CPUD remain in full force and effect. 2.3 PROJECT PLAN AND PROPOSED LAND USES A. The project Master Plan is illustrated graphically by Exhibit "A", CPUD Master Plan. B. Minor modifications to Exhibit "A" may be permitted at the time of Site Development Plan approval, subject to the provisions of the LDC, as amended, or as otherwise permitted by this CPUD Document. C. In addition to the various areas and specific items shown in Exhibit "A", easements such as utility, private and semi-public) shall be established and/or vacated within or along the properly, as may be necessary. Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page 4 of 16 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 895 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 2.4 LAND USE A. Exhibit "A", CPUD Master Plan, constitutes the required CPUD Development Plan. Except as otherwise provided within this CPUD Document, any division of the property and the development of the land shall be in compliance with the subdivision regulations and the platting laws of the State of Florida. B. Appropriate instruments will be provided at the time of infrastructure improvements regarding any dedications and the methodology for providing perpetual maintenance of common facilities. 2.5 NATIVE VEGETATION RETENTION REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to the LDC, as amended, 15% of the native vegetation on site shall be retained. The exact boundaries of the preserve may vary in order to accommodate final alignment of Rattlesnake Hammock Extension but a minimum of 1.63 acres of native preserve shall be provided for in accordance with the LDC. 2.6 SIGNS Signs shall be in accordance with the LDC, as amended. Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page 5 of 16 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 896 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 897 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 898 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 22. Insurance agents, brokers and service (Group 6411) 23. Membership organizations (Groups 8641, 8661) 24. Miscellaneous repair services (Groups 7622, 7623, 7629, 7631, 7641) (Group 7699 with approval of County Manager, or his designee, who shall be guided by the objective of allowing uses that are compatible with existing development.) All uses are prohibited within 500 feet of the easterly right-of- way line ofC.R. 951. 25. Miscellaneous retail (Groups 5912, 5921, 5932, 5941-5949, 5984, 5992, 5993, 5999) 26. Motion pictures (Groups 7832-7833) 27. Museum, art galleries (Group 8412) 28. Non-depository credit institutions (Groups 6141, 6159, 6162, 6163) 29. Offices (All Groups) 30. Personal services (Groups 7211-7212, 7215, 7219, 7221, 7231, 7241, 7251, 7291) 31. Restaurants (All Groups) 32. Real estate (Groups 6531, 6541, 6552) 33. Social services (Group 8351) 34. United States Postal Service (Group 4311) 35. Veterinarian's office (Group 0742, except no outside kenneling) 36. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. 3.4 ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES A. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted. B. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. 3.5 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page 8 of 16 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 899 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 900 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) J. Outside storage or display of merchandise is prohibited unless it is ancillary to a permitted use, and screened from view from adjacent public roadways. Outside storage may be approved by the County Manager, or his designee, as part of the approval of an SDP. K. The FP&L easement may be used for ancillary uses such as parking, storage, service drives, and water management, provided written authorization for those uses is obtained from FP&L and submitted with the application for SDP. Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD Page 10 of 16 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 901 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 902 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 903 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 904 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 905 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 906 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 907 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 908 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 909 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE – NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 910 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 911 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) May 16, 2019 RE: Vanderbilt Commons PUDA-PL20180003366 GMPA-PL20180003372 Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that Waldrop Engineering, P.A. on behalf of Vanderbilt Way Apartments, LLC has filed two (2) concurrent applications to Collier County. These applications seek approval of: (1) a PUD amendment for the Vanderbilt Commons Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) to remove the requirement to provide commercial uses on the first floor of the mixed-use building on Lots 5 and 6, and add one (1) deviation relating to building perimeter plantings; AND (2) a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) to allow residential uses on the first floor of buildings on Lots 5 and 6. The GMPA does not request to increase density or intensity and no changes made affect any other portion of the MPUD. The subject property totals 14.49+/- acres and is generally located immediately north of Vanderbilt Beach Road, approximately ¼ of a mile west of Collier Boulevard in unincorporated Collier County, Florida. In compliance with the Land Development Code requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to hear a presentation about this application and ask questions. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Monday, June 3rd, 2019 at 5:30 p.m. at the Greater Naples Fire Rescue Headquarters, 14575 Collier Blvd., Naples, FL 34119. Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me directly at (239) 405-7777 ext. 2232, or lindsay.robin@waldropengineering.com. Sincerely, WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A. Lindsay F. Robin, MPA Project Planner *Please note that Greater Naples Fire Rescue does not sponsor or endorse this program. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 912 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 1 NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME67205 VANDERBILT WAY LLC PTA-CS# 5406 PO BOX 320099 ALEXANDRIA, VA 22320---0ABREU, MILAGROS PO BOX 117 KEASBEY, NJ 08832---117ALLEN, MARCUS A & MARY L 7347 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---8091ANDREEV, BORISLAV VIOLETA ANDREEV 158 RANKIN CRES TORONTO M6P 4H9AVENOSO, DONALD G 7355 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0BARRIOS, HARVY E NUVIA AGUILERA DE BARRIOS 7029 AMBROSIA LN APT 606 NAPLES, FL 34119---9651BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD SUITE #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BCNMD INC 2600 S DOUGLAS ROAD #510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0BEADLE, RYAN J & TONYA 7359 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---1900BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC % CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CRDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BLACK BEAR RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC %CARDINAL PROPERTY MGMT 4670 CARDINAL WAY STE 302 NAPLES, FL 34112---0BNEI RIVKAH GROUP LLC 156 DUFFY AVENUE HICKSVILLE, NY 11801---0BOTIE, PHILIP KERRY MINER 4 RYDER AVE DIX HILLS, NY 11746---6107CARUS, CARLOS M & KAREM 7070 VENICE WAY #2903 NAPLES, FL 34119---0COLLIER CNTY % OFC OF COLLIER CNTY ATTORNEY 3299 TAMIAMI TRL E HARMON TURNER BLDG 8TH FL NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER CNTY % OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY 3299 TAMIAMI TRL E STE 800 NAPLES, FL 34112---5749COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER CNTY C/O REAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 3335 TAMIAMI TR E, STE 101 NAPLES, FL 34112---0COLLIER COUNTY 3301 TAMIAMI TRAIL E NAPLES, FL 34112---0CONTI FAMILY RES TRUST 20 NAUGHTON DRIVE RICHMOND HILL L4C 4M7CUBERO, ROY 1504 BAY ROAD #2408 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139---0DORGAN, CHRISTOPHER P FABRIENA A DORGAN 7367 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611DORSEY, STEPHEN M SUSAN SERRA DORSEY 17 TIFFANY PL SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12866---9059DUPRE, JAMES 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430EASTMAN TR, JULIE MAE 7050 AMBROSIA LN APT 3408 NAPLES, FL 34119---9630EBICADO LLC 250 SUNNY ISLES BLVD BLDG 3 APT 1905 SUNNY ISLES, FL 33160---0EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EDM INVESTMENT HOLDINGS LLC 3300 LAUREL OAK ST FT LAUDERDALE, FL 33312---6396EMERITUS INVESTMENTS INC 2600 S DOUGLAS RD SUITE 510 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134---0FALLS OF PORTOFINO MASTER HOA INC C/O ASSOC LAW GROUP P L 1200 BRICKELL AVENUE PH 2000 MIAMI, FL 33131---0FLYNN LIVING TRUST 6209 WINNEQUAH RD MONONA, WI 53716---3461FONTANA TR, BUDD & MARION BUDD & MARION FONTANA L/TRUST UTD 01/20/2011 4180 5TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1500FUCHS REVOCABLE TRUST 7351 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611GILMORE, BRUCE & CRISTINA 4281 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---0GIMENEZ, TEODORO-& MILDRED 5530 RIDGE XING HANOVER PARK, IL 60133---5369IGLESIAS, NARCISA 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430J & C L MAYNARD JT TRUST 7362 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0J L PHIPPS D D S LOVING TRUST 521 ERIE CT BOWLING GREEN, OH 43402---2745KEAGY, DOROTHY 7327 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0KERRY A NICI GIFTING TRUST 1185 IMMOKALEE RD STE 110 NAPLES, FL 34110---4806KUPEL, GEORGE W & MARIANNE K 7342 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0LANG, ANN WEBER & TIMOTHY W 4161 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1521LOT 3 VANDERBILT COMMONS LLC % WELSH CO FL INC 2950 N TRAIL STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0MANOO, HAROLD 1187 OLD COLONY ROAD OAKVILLE L6M1J1 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 913 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 2 MARTIN, ROBERT E MARY ELIZABETH ROGAN 7330 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0MAUSEN, JOHN C ROBERT E MAUSEN 1086 FOREST LAKES DR #303 NAPLES, FL 34105---0MAUSEN, ROBERT E & GEORGINA M 4355 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1525MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MCA PORTOFINO NAPLES LLC 5201 NW 77 AVENUE #400 MIAMI, FL 33166---0MENDAX, SCOTT 7371 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611MISSION HILLS STATION LLC 11501 NORTHLAKE DRIVE CINCINNATI, OH 45249---0NAZARIAN, CHRISTINE 7060 VENICE WAY APT 3104 NAPLES, FL 34119---9626NISTOR, JOHN J & DIANE E 4331 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1525NORBERTO JR, FRANK & DENNINE 7326 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610NOSSEN ROBERT P & FRANCES 7335 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---8091NUNES, NORBERTO A 3345 27TH AVE SW NAPLES, FL 34117---7141O'DONNELL, PAUL F 7358 ACORN WAY S NAPLES, FL 34119---0OZBAY, EREN 5361 CHERRY WOOD DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34119---0OZBAY, ERHAN 5361 CHERRY WOOD DRIVE NAPLES, FL 34119---0PIAZZA, SALVATORE & ANNA G 3765 HELMSMAN DR NAPLES, FL 34120---0POLLAK, LAURA E JEFFREY A PETRINITZ 7346 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0POPE FAMILY TRUST 7350 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610PRD OWNER LLC % PROFESSIONAL RESOURCE DEV PO BOX 768 EFFINGHAM, IL 62401---0PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 914 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 3 PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 915 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) PL20180003366500'5/7/2019Site: Vanderbilt Commons MPUD 4 PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430PRIME HOMES AT PORTOFINO FALLS 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430R J FAY & J D FAY REV/L/TRUST 4191 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1521REFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 1, THEREFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 2, THEREFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 5, THEREFERENCE ONLY FALLS OF PORTOFINO CONDOMINIUM NO 6, THEREYES, CRISTOBAL & LOYDA 110 9TH ST SW NAPLES, FL 34117---0SCHMADER, JOHN F VIRGINIA M ELLIOTT 7323 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9625SHALOM, YEHIEL SAR 4651 SHERIDAN ST STE 480 HOLLYWOOD, FL 33021---3430SUN, WEIYONG QIUYAN KONG 210 STOKES FARM RD FRANKLIN LAKES, NJ 07417---0SUNCOAST SCHOOLS FED CR UNION ATTN: CINDY CURTIS 6801 E HILLSBOROUGH AVE TAMPA, FL 33610---4110TABOR, DONALD J & AGNES H 4241 7TH AVE NW NAPLES, FL 34119---1523TERIMAKI LLC 175 SW 7TH STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0THE FALLS OF PORTOFINO LAND TRUST I 1615 S CONGRESS AVENUE STE 200 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33435---0UNIVERSAL PROPERTY LLC 175 SW 7 STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0UNIVERSAL PROPERTY LLC 175 SW 7 STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0UNIVERSAL PROPERTY LLC 175 SW 7TH STREET STE 1611 MIAMI, FL 33130---0VANDERBILT COMMONS OWNERS' ASSOCIATION INC 2950 TAMIAMI TRL N #200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT COMMONS I TRUST 2950 TAMIAMI TRAIL N #200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT COMMONS OWNERS ASSN INC 2950 9TH STREET NORTH NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT COMMONS OWNERS ASSN INC 2950 9TH STREET NORTH NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT WAY APARTMENTS LLC 2950 TAMIAMI TRL N STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VANDERBILT WAY APARTMENTS LLC 2950 TAMIAMI TRL N STE 200 NAPLES, FL 34103---0VASSAR, ROBERT A & ANGELA C 7343 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611VIGILANTE, ANTHONY KATHLEEN WHITE-VIGILANTE 7319 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0VIVAS, NEOMI FREDDY VIVAS JACOB AGAY 1669 DIPLOMAT DR MIAMI, FL 33179---6404WEILAND, JAY H & JOAN M 7338 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610WILLIAMS, SEAN S & TARA LEE 7363 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9611WITT, DAVID C & JOYCE E 7334 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---9610WOERZ, GARY F & ANNA G 7315 ACORN WAY NAPLES, FL 34119---0 POList_500_PL20180003366 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 916 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 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.#_____________________________________________________________________________________ WALDROP ENGINEERING, P.A. 2281189 Neighborhood Meeting Pub DatesMay 17, 2019 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) Sworn to and subscribed before meThis May 17, 2019 _______________________________________(Signature of affiant) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 917 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 14A z FRIDAY, MAY 17, 2019 z NAPLES DAILY NEWS + NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING The public is invited to attend a neighborhood information meeting held by Wa ldrop Engineering,P.A.on behalf of Va nderbilt Wa y Apartments,LLC at the following time and location: Monday,June 3,2019,at 5:30 p.m. Greater Naples Fire Rescue District Headquarters 14575 Collier Blvd,Naples,FL 34119 Please be advised that Va nderbilt Way Apartments,LLC has filed two (2) concurrent applications (PL20180003366 &PL20180003372)with Collier County.These applications are seeking approval of:(1)a PUD amendment for the Va nderbilt Commons Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD)to remove the requirement to provide commercial uses on the first floor of the mixed-use building on Lots 5 and 6,and add one (1)deviation relating to building perimeter plantings;AND (2)a Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA)to allow residential uses on the first floor of buildings on Lots 5 and 6.The GMPA does not request to increase density or intensity and no changes made affect any other portion of the MPUD. The existing MPUD consists of 14.49+/-acres and is generally located immediately north of Va nderbilt Beach Road,approximately ¼of a mile west of Collier Boulevard in unincorporated Collier County,Florida. WE VALUE YOUR INPUT Business and property owners and residents are welcome to attend the presentation and discuss the project with the owners’representatives and Collier County staff.If you are unable to attend this meeting,but have questions or comments,they can be directed to: Waldrop Engineering,P.A.c/o Lindsay Robin 28100 Bonita Grande Dr.,Suite 305,Bonita Springs,FL 34135 (239)405-7777,ext.2232 OR lindsay.robin@waldropengineering.com *Please note that Greater Naples Fire Rescue District does not sponsor or endorse this program. Summer Rate $38 Includes Green Fee and Cart Quail Run Golf Club 1 Forest Lakes Blvd Naples,FL 34105 239-261-3930 Call for Special Afternoon RatesCallforSpecialAfternoonRates Memberships AvailableMembershipsAvailable MEMB E R FOR A DAY! A HIDDEN JEWEL IN THE MIDDLE OF NAPLES! HindmanAuctions.com Compliment ar y Auction Estimates AMeissen Porcelain Pate sur Pate Four Piece Clock Garniture. Sold for 87,500. 8506th Avenue South Naples,Florida 34102 239.643.4448 naples@hindmanauctions.com hindmanauctions.com/naples SCHEDULE ACOMPLIMENTARY AUCTION ESTIMATE Hindmanspecialists in ourNaples of ficeare currentlyproviding complimentar yauction estimates foryourFineFurniture,Decorative Arts andSilver. Compliment ar y HAPPYHOUR $4 COCKTA ILS $6 APPETIZERS BAR 3PM -8PM 1DINNER PLUS 1GLASS OF WINE $14.99 10711 TA MIAMI TRL AC ROSS FROM TRADER JOE’S 239-260-1075ND-GCI0110434-01 SEAFOOD-STEAKS-PASTA Breakfast-Lunch-Dinner 643-2559 933 Airport Rd.S,Naples,FL 34104 3.5 blks.N.of Davis,1 blk S.of Naples Airport Open Sun 1-5pm •Mon.-Sat.10am-6pm all widths AAAA -EEEE custom fi tting by trained factory sales staff. We help consumers achieve pain-free walking by providing 5 star service, great selection,and superior quality comfort fashion footwear. NAOT,Mephisto,Ta ryn Rose,Helle Comfort,Wolky,Cole Haan, Thierry Rabotin,Beautifeel,Sperry,Ecco,Birkenstock,Florsheim, Finn Comfort,New Balance,SAS,Saucony,Asics,Sebago, Hushpuppy,Te va,Merrell,Fit Flop,Orthaheel,Acorn Slippers and many more... COUPONCOUPON www.shoewarehousenaples.com $25 OFF Must present Coupon at time of purchase. Not valid with any other offer. Expires 5/31/19 *Excludes SAS & Mephisto Kybun and Birkenstock Qual it y Co mfort and Service ND-GCI0177716-10 When Sergio Hostins moved from Maine to Saraso- ta in April of 2018, he planned to visit his aunt often. They talked on the phone every other day, and Hos- tins told Teresa Giani, 66, of West Palm Beach, he was looking forward to only being a few hours in the car away. However, Hostins, 55, was killed by a man he was having a relationship with — about six months after he moved to Florida. “Sergio was very friendly,” Giani said. “He liked to help friends and he helped his family a lot in Brazil. He worked here and all he thought about was his family back in Brazil.” Hostins moved to the U.S. as a child and worked at an Italian restaurant in Maine for 22 years. Then he accepted a job near Sarasota that was opening under the same ownership. “He used to do everything,” Giani said. “He would do plumbing, he was a good painter, he was a good waiter, he was a good electrician. He did it all at the restaurant.” Hostins often sent money to his mother and other family he left behind in Brazil , Giani said. “He was such a good person,” she said. “He was a very happy person, Sergio. He was al- ways making jokes.” On Tuesday, a jury found Daniel Da- venport, 31, of Sarasota, guilty of sec- ond-degree murder. Davenport killed Hostins in October 2018, stole his car and credit cards then dumped his carpet-wrapped body at a home in Naples Park, prosecutors said during the trial. The jury also found Davenport guilty of grand theft of a motor vehicle, 10 counts of fraudulent use of per- sonal identification information and unlawful posses- sion of four or fewer identities. Davenport was arrested in Orlando after eluding authorities for more than a week. He and Hostins met on a social media app for gay men, called Grindr, in September 2018 and developed a relationship. The last time Giani talked with her nephew it seemed like he knew he was in danger, she said. A few days before Hostins’ body was discovered at the home in the 700 block of 102nd Avenue North, he called Giani and asked for her address. Hostins told Giani he needed it so authorities would know to contact her in case something bad happened to him. Hostins was at the Department of Motor Vehicles and didn’t have time to explain what was going on. He told her he would call her back later, Giani said. “I gave the address to him, and those were the last words I heard from him,” Giani said. Hostins told a different family member he was fighting with his boyfriend, who kept asking him for money, Giani said. “What happened to Sergio with this guy, it was just for money,” Giani said. “He just wanted more and more money and then Sergio told him to get out because he needed money to pay his own bills.” It was hard for Giani to sit in the Sarasota courtroom for more than a week so close to her nephew’s killer, she said. “There was a lot, a lot of evidence,” Giani said. “They had so much evidence to prove he was guilty.” Twelfth Judicial Circuit Court Judge Stephen Walk- er deferred Davenport’s sentencing, pending a pre- sentence investigation. Everyone, from Hostins’ family to his boss loved him, Giani said. Homicide victim moved to Fla. shortly before his death Sergio Hostins is pictured inside the Italian restaurant he worked at near Sarasota. Hostins was killed about six months after he moved down to Florida from Maine.COURTESY OF TERESA GIANI Jake Allen Naples Daily News USA TODAY NETWORK - FLORIDA Davenport 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 918 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING SYNOPSIS 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 919 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 1 of 3 Memorandum To: Nancy Gundlach, PLA, AICP & Sue Faulkner From: Lindsay Robin cc: David Torres, Wilton Land Company, LLC Richard Yovanovich, Esq., Coleman, Yovanovich & Koester Date: June 27, 2019 Subject: Hammock Park PUDA & GMPA (PL20180002904 & PL20180002813) Neighborhood Information Meeting Synopsis Waldrop Engineering, P.A., and Collier County Staff conducted a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) on Wednesday, June 19, 2019. The meeting was held at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library at 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy., Naples, Florida 34113. The sign-in sheet is attached as Exhibit “A” and demonstrates 11 residents were in attendance. Handouts were distributed providing the project overview and development regulations. The handouts are attached as Exhibit “B”. Alexis Crespo (Agent) conducted the meeting with introductions of the consultant team and Staff, and an overview of the proposed GMPA and PUD amendment applications, including the location of the 19-acre subject property and the request to add a maximum of 265 multi-family (apartment) dwelling units, with a maximum of 148,500 square feet of commercial as an option for development. She also outlined the amendment processes and opportunities to provide input at public hearings. David Torres, the Applicant, also spoke about the project and provided input on details relating to the surrounding residential developments in proximity to the subject area, and the market demand to create a mixed-use project on this intersection. Following the Consultant’s presentation, the meeting was opened up to the attendees to make comments and ask the consultant team questions regarding the proposed development. The following is a summarized list of the questions asked and responses given. The Applicant’s representatives’ responses are shown in bold. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 920 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 2 of 3 Question/Comment 1: You’ve only reduced the commercial by a few thousand square feet. How does that equate to 265 multi-family units?  Response: The reduction of commercial does equate to the same number of trips as 265 multi-family units. Commercial uses produce significantly more trips than residential uses. [the project traffic engineer provided further explanation on the traffic study]. It was also pointed out that in reality, you will not be able to fit all of the residential and commercial on the property. Question/Comment 2: Will the residential element of this development be similar to residential developments the owner has constructed previously?  Response: It will use similar building designs, but with updated exteriors and façades. Question/Comment 3: What type of consumer and income groups are you trying to attract? Will this be apartments or condominiums?  Response: There were some zoning commitments relating to “Essential Service Provider” Housing that were attached to our previous residential developments on Lord’s Way that will not be committed to in this project. Question/Comment 4: So, you’re thinking apartments versus condominiums?  Response: Apartments. Even though the code defines multi-family as multi- family regardless of the use. Question/Comment 5: Is there enough demand for commercial uses such as restaurants?  Response: There’s currently not enough demand in the area yet. Adding apartments will create more demand. Question/Comment 6: Commissioner Fiala commented on the commercial branding that real estate agents are using to brand their developments in this area of Collier County as “South Naples”. She noted the residents are proud of the East Naples area and would like to keep that naming intact.  Response: We recognize the conditions out here. A lot of it goes back to large companies signing leases, and they are looking at the numbers. Being on the east side can hurt us because we are on the fringe. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 921 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 3 of 3 Question/Comment 7: What is the business “success” factor that would entice national restaurant brands to come to the area? Is the success rate of certain restaurants factored in?  Response: Absolutely, and it speaks well all the success on US 41, particularly the national chains like Outback and Carrabas. Sue Faulkner asked the Applicant to clarify if the dwelling units proposed are rental or “for sale” multi-family units. Alexis clarified that the zoning limits the multi-family units to rental apartments. There were no further questions or comments. Ms. Crespo thanked the attendees for coming and noted that their contact information is available for those who wished to reach out with any further questions. The meeting concluded at approximately 6:30 p.m. The meeting was recorded per the CD attached as Exhibit “C”. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 922 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Name Address E-Mail Address EXHIBIT "A" NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING HAMMOCK PARK MPUD PL20180002813 & PL20180002804 June 19, 2019@ 5:30p.m. PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY ***Please be ciclvtsecl*** The information on this sheet is to contact you regarding this project and future public meetings. Under Florida law, e-mail addresses, phone numbers and certain home addresses are public records once received by a government agency. If you do not want your e-mail address, phone number or home address released if the county receives a public records request, you can refrain from including such information on this sheet. You have the option of checking with the county staff on your own to obtain updates on the project as well as checking the county Web site for additional information. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 923 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD - PL20180002813 & PL20180002804 Neighborhood Information Meeting Wednesday, June 19, 2019 5:30 p.m. PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET Project Size: 19+/- Acres Future Land Use: Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict, Mixed Use Activity Center Current Zoning: Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) Proposed Zoning: Mixed-Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD) Approved Density/Intensity/Uses: 160,000 sq. ft. commercial uses Proposed Density/Intensity/Uses: 265 multi-family dwelling units and up to 148,500 sq. ft. of commercial uses Project Requests: (PL20180002804) a Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) for a site-specific text amendment to the Future Land Use Element, Mixed Use Activity Center #7, to allow up to 265 multi-family dwelling units within the Hammock Park project, along with the permitted commercial uses - (PL20180002813) PUD Amendment to the Hammock Park Commerce Centre Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) to add a maximum of 265 multi-family dwelling units as a permitted use; reduce the maximum intensity of non-residential uses from 160,000 sq. ft. to 148,500 sq. ft.; and to change the name of the CPUD from Hammock Park Commerce Centre CPUD to Hammock Park Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MPUD). EXHIBIT "B"9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 924 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Hammock Park MPUD PERMITTED USES AND STRUCTURES No building or structure or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: A. Permitted Principal Uses and Structures 1. Amusement and recreation services, Indoor only (Groups 7911-7941, 7991, 7993, 7997, 7999) 2. Apparel and accessory stores (Groups 5611, 5621, 5631, 5641, 5651, 5661, 5699) 3. Automotive repair, services and parking (Groups 7514, 7542) All uses are prohibited within 500 feet from the easterly right-of-way line of C.R. 951. 4. Auto and home supply stores (Group 5531) 5. Building construction - general contractors (groups 1521 -1542). 6. Building materials, hardware, garden supply (Groups 5231, 5251, 5261) 7. Business services (Groups 7311, 7323, 7334, 7335, 7336, 7338, 7352, 7359, 7371-7379, 7384, 7389) 8. Communications (Groups 4832, 4833) 9. Construction - special trade contractors (Groups 1711-1793, 1796, 1799) 10. Depository institutions (Groups 6011-6099) 11. Eating and drinking places (Groups 5812, 5813 except contract feeding, food service and industrial feeding) 12. Engineering, accounting and management (Groups 8711-8721, 8741, 8742, 8748) 13. Food stores (Groups 5411, 5421, 5441, 5451, 5461, 5499) 14. Funeral service and crematories (Group 7261) 15. Gasoline service stations (5541 subject to the provisions of the LDC) 16. General merchandise stores (Groups 5311, 5331, 5399) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 925 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 17. Hardware stores (5251) 18. Health services (Groups 8011-8059) 19. Home furniture, furnishings, and equipment stores (Groups 5712, 5713, 5714, 5719,5722,5731,5734,5735,5736) 20. Hospitals (Group 8062) 21. Hotels and motels (Group 7011) 22. Insurance agents, brokers and service (Group 6411) 23. Membership organizations (Groups 8641, 8661) 24. Miscellaneous repair services (Groups 7622, 7623, 7629, 7631, 7641) (Group 7699 with approval of County Manager, or his designee, who shall be guided by the objective of allowing uses that are compatible with existing development.) All uses are prohibited within 500 feet of the easterly right-of- way line of C.R. 951. 25. Miscellaneous retail (Groups 5912, 5921, 5932, 5941-5949, 5984, 5992, 5993, 5999) 26. Motion pictures (Groups 7832-7833) 27. Museum, art galleries (Group 8412) 28. Multi-family rental dwelling units. 298. Non-depository credit institutions (Groups 6141, 6159, 6162, 6163) 2930. Offices (All Groups) 310. Personal services (Groups 7211-7212, 7215, 7219, 7221, 7231, 7241, 7251, 7291) 321. Restaurants (All Groups) 323. Real estate (Groups 6531, 6541, 6552) 334.Social services (Group 8351) 345.United States Postal Service (Group 4311) 356. Veterinarian's office (Group 0742, except no outside kenneling) 367. Any other use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 926 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES A. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to uses permitted. B. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing uses may be permitted subject to the procedures set forth in the LDC, as amended. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (COMMERCIAL) A. Minimum lot area: Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. B. Minimum lot width: One hundred (100) feet. C. Minimum yard requirements: 1. Front yard: Twenty-five (25) feet. 2. Side yard: Zero for common or abutting walls, otherwise one-half the height of the building, but not less than ten (10) feet. 3. Rear yard: Twenty (20) feet. 4. Preserve: Twenty-five (25) feet D. Distance between principal structures: The distance between any two principal structures on the same parcel shall be fifteen (15) feet or a distance equal to one half the sum of their heights, whichever is greater. E. Minimum floor area of principal structure: Seven hundred (700) square feet per building on the ground floor. F. Landscaping and off-street parking shall be in accordance with the LDC, as amended. G. Maximum height: Fifty (50) feet. H. General application for setbacks: Front yard setbacks shall comply with the following: 1. If the parcel is served by a public or private right-of-way, the setback is measured from the adjacent right-of-way line. 2. If the parcel is served by a non-platted private drive, the setback is measured from the back of curb or edge of pavement. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 927 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 3. If the parcel is served by a platted private drive, the setback is measured from the road easement or property line. I. All buildings, landscaping and visible infrastructures shall be architecturally and aesthetically unified. Said unified architectural theme shall include a similar architectural design and similar use of materials and colors on all of the buildings to be erected on site. Landscaping and streetscape materials shall also be similar in design throughout the site. A conceptual landscape plan for the entire site shall be submitted concurrent with the first application for site development plan approval. J. Outside storage or display of merchandise is prohibited unless it is ancillary to a permitted use and screened from view from adjacent public roadways. Outside storage may be approved by the County Manager, or his designee, as part of the approval of an SDP. K. The FP&L easement may be used for ancillary uses such as parking, storage, service drives, and water management, provided written authorization for those uses is obtained from FP&L and submitted with the application for SDP. L. The two accessory tower structures described in Deviation 3 shall have a minimum PUD perimeter setback of ten (10) feet, and a maximum actual height of thirty (30) feet for the southern tower and maximum actual height of fifteen (15) feet for the northern most tower.2 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 928 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (RESIDENTIAL) PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MULTI-FAMILY Min. Lot Area 1 acre Min. Lot Width N/A Min. Lot Depth N/A Front Yard (1) 10 feet Side Yard 5 feet Min. Lake Maintenance Easement Tract Setback 0 feet Min. Setback from FPL Easement 0 feet Min. PUD Boundary Setback, excluding boundary abutting FPL Easement 25 feet Min. Distance Between Buildings 20 feet Rear Yard 10 feet Preserve 25 feet MAXIMUM HEIGHT Actual Zoned 60 feet 50 feet ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Front Yard SPS Side Yard SPS Rear Yard 5 feet Preserve 10 feet MAXIMUM HEIGHT Actual Zoned SPS SPS Footnotes: (1) Front setback is measured from the edge of pavement or back of curb except for public roads. (2) Approved in HEX decision 2016-42. GENERAL: Except as provided for herein, all criteria set forth below shall be understood to be in relation to individual parcel or lot boundary lines, or between structures. Condominium, and/or homeowners’ association boundaries shall not be utilized for determining development standards. 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 929 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) HAMMOCK PARK CPUD PUDA CCPC PACKAGE PL20180002813 SIGN POST AFFIDAVIT & PHOTOS 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 930 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 931 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 932 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.f Packet Pg. 933 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community ¯CR 951CR 951Rattlesnake Hammock Rd Hammock Park Net Density Exhibit Frame Time: 2018 9.A.3.g Packet Pg. 934 Attachment: Attachment F-Density Exhibit (rev2) 7-9-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 9.A.3.hPacket Pg. 935Attachment: Virtual Hearing Waiver 6-29-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD) 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 5.B Item Summary: June 16, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: Supervisor - Operations – Road Maintenance Name: Diane Lynch 06/29/2020 12:06 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 06/29/2020 12:06 PM Approved By: Review: Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 06/29/2020 12:06 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/01/2020 2:37 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 07/10/2020 12:22 PM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 07/11/2020 8:39 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/13/2020 3:14 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 9.A.4 Packet Pg. 936 COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN SMALL SCALE AMENDMENTS (ADOPTION HEARINGS) PL20190002017/CPSS-2019-12 CCPC: August 6, 2020 BCC: October 27, 2020 9.A.4.a Packet Pg. 937 Attachment: 00_CCPC COVER (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) TABLE OF CONTENTS CCPC August 6, 2020 Small Scale GMP Amendment Adoption PL20190002017/CPSS-2019-12 1) TAB: Adoption Staff Report DOCUMENTS: Staff Report: 2) TAB: Adoption Ordinance DOCUMENTS: Adoption Ordinance with Exhibit “A” text (and/or maps): 3) TAB: Project 20190002017/ DOCUMENT: Petition/Application Petition CPSS-2019-12 4) TAB: Legal Advertisement DOCUMENT: Advertisement 9.A.4.b Packet Pg. 938 Attachment: 00_Table of Contents_CCPC (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 1 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT/ZONING DIVISION, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING SECTION HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 2020 RE: PETITION PL20190002017/CPSS-2019-12, SMALL SCALE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (Companion to PUDA- PL20190002018) [ADOPTION HEARING] ELEMENT: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT (FLUE) AGENT/APPLICANT/OWNER(S): Agent: D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 Applicants: Stephan Verhaaren 1042 Jardin Drive Naples, FL 34104 Owners: Bratwurst Properties, LLC Stephan Verhaaren, Authorized Member 1042 Jardin Drive Naples, FL 34104 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 939 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 2 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject property comprises ±3.4-acres and on the northside of Beck Blvd. (triangular shape at the eastern end), lies just south of Interstate-75 and is approximately 7/8 mile east of the intersection of Collier Blvd. and Beck Blvd., in Sections 1 & 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, and Sections 35 & 36, Township 49 South, Range 26 East (South Naples Planning Community). REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant proposes a small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment (GMPA) of the Future Lane Use Element (FLUE), specifically to redesignate the subject 3.4+/- acre infill property to Interchange Activity Center #9 Subdistrict, and to include text referencing the property in the Future Land Use Element subsection titled “2. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict.” The applicant also proposes to amend the countywide Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and the Activity Center #9 Map. Approximately 2+/- acres of the westernmost portion of the property is currently located within the Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The easternmost 1.4+/- acres is located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands. The applicant seeks to re-designate the entirety of the property into a single future land use category in order to be able to rezone the property to allow light industrial or commercial uses. Proposed Subject Site 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 940 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 3 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 The proposed amended Subdistrict text is as follows: (Single underline text is added, single strike-through text is deleted, and is also reflected in the Ordinance Exhibit A). FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** 1. URBAN DESIGNATION *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** C. URBAN – COMMERCIAL DISTRICT *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** 2. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict *** *** *** *** *** *** *** TEXT BREAK *** *** *** *** *** *** Interchange Activity Center #9 (I-75 at Collier Boulevard) is subject to an Interchange Master Plan (IMP), which was adopted by Resolution by the Board of County Commissioners, and to the implementing provisions adopted into the Land Development Code. All new projects within Activity Center #9 are encouraged to have a unified plan of development in the form of a Planned Unit Development. However, the 3.7-acre property formerly utilized by the Florida Highway Patrol Headquarters located east of the Tollgate PUD/DRI may be split into 2 parcels and one of the parcels being 3.4 acres will be permitted to utilize conventional zoning. The mixture of uses allowed in Interchange Activity Center #9 shall include all land uses allowed in the Mixed Use Activity Centers; additionally, industrial uses shall be allowed in the northeast and southeast quadrants of I-75 and Collier Boulevard, and in the southwest quadrant of Collier and Davis Boulevards. The above allowed uses notwithstanding, commercial zoning shall not exceed 55% of the total acreage (632.5 635.9 ac.) of Interchange Activity Center #9. The actual mix of uses shall be determined during the rezoning process based on consideration of the same factors listed under the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, and based on the adopted IMP. 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 941 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 4 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of this small-scale Growth Management Plan Amendment is to redesignate the subject ±3.4-acre infill property to Urban Designation, Urban Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center #9, and to include text referencing the property in the Future Land Use Element subsection “2. Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict.” The applicant also proposes to amend the countywide “2012 – 2025 Future Land Use Map” (FLUM) and the “Activity Center #9” map. Interchange Activity Center #9’s boundary will be expanded to include the additional 3.4 acres. By amending the Growth Management Plan (GMP) to include the subject property in Interchange Activity Center #9, the companion zoning petition (PL20190002018) that is requesting rezoning from A, Agricultural and A, Agricultural (RFMUO-Sending) to I, Industrial Zoning District will be consistent with the GMP. The applicant is requesting to have industrial uses allowed on the subject property. SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION: Subject Property: The subject property is approximately ±3.4 acres and has two FLUE designations. Approximately 2+/- acres of the westernmost portion of the property is currently located within the Urban Designation, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The easternmost 1.4+/- acres is located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands. The property also has two separate zoning districts: A, Rural Agricultural, and A- RFMUO-Sending, Rural Agricultural-Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay-Sending. The subject property is currently developed with one building and parking lot which formerly served as a station for the Florida Highway Patrol. An existing communication tower, now excepted from the site, was originally approved by Conditional Use Ordinance 92-56 for a 300-foot tall tower, which was approved on the triangular shaped parcel in 1992. The State determined that the subject property was no longer necessary for use by the Highway Patrol and sold the 3.4+ acre site to the current property owner in 2017. The communications tower is retained by the State of Florida on a 0.27± acre parcel with a corresponding 20-foot wide ingress egress easement across the subject site connecting the tower site to Beck Boulevard. The tower and underlying State-owned property are not included in the companion zoning action. The proposed rezoning of the 3.4+ acre site will render it no longer part of the Conditional Use approved by Ordinance 92-56, leaving the Conditional Use approval only applicable to the 0.27+ acre parcel occupied by the existing tower. The 0.27- acre communications tower site is not part of the subject property. Activity Center #9 will allow for all land uses allowed in the Mixed Use Activity Centers; additionally, industrial uses shall be allowed in the northeast and southeast quadrants of I-75 and Collier Boulevard, and in the southwest quadrant of Collier and Davis Boulevards. The subject site would be located in the southeast quadrant. Industrial uses will be limited to manufacturing, warehousing, storage, and distribution uses. Surrounding Land Uses: North: Immediately to the north is I-75 and a toll booth at mile marker 101; designated: Urban Designation, Industrial District; Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 942 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 5 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 Subdistrict; and Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Industrial District and on the north side of I-75 it is zoned Activity Center #9 and the eastern portion is zoned Agriculture. East: Immediately adjacent to the east lies I-75 ROW. To the southeast designations include: Rural Fringe Mixed Use – Sending; Agricultural/Rural Designation; and Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Neutral Lands. The east parcels are zoned Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay – Sending lands; Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay – Neutral Lands; Toll Plaza RV Park; and East Toll Plaza PUD South: Immediately to the south (western portion) the land is designated Urban, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict. This portion is zoned Forest Glen Golf and Country Club. There is no development on this parcel, it is marked for preserve. To the southeast designations include: Rural Fringe Mixed Use – Sending; Agricultural/Rural Designation; and Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Neutral Lands. The east parcels are zoned Belle Meade Natural Resource Protection Area Overlay – Sending lands; Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay – Neutral Lands; Toll Plaza RV Park, also known as Naples RV Resort; and East Toll Plaza PUD. West: Immediately adjacent to the west of the subject site is designated Urban, Urban Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center #9 Subdistrict. The zoning is Tollgate Commercial Center PUD. A Drainage/Preserve Tract (+17.85 acres) within Tollgate Commercial Center PUD/DRI which extends to Collier Boulevard and is approved for 348,600 commercial square feet & 550,000 industrial square feet. STAFF ANALYSIS: Background and Considerations: The subject site is a small triangular shaped property that was not included in the original boundary of the Interchange Activity Center (IAC) #9. Geographically speaking, the proposal to designate the subject site to the IAC #9 makes sense – especially since this small acreage (±3.4 acres) is currently divided into two FLUE designations and two zoning districts. Approximately 1.99 acres of the subject site are located in the Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and 1.44± acres are located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Sending. The zoning petition to Rezone to an Industrial zoning district would be inconsistent with the current FLU designations; therefore, the applicant has submitted this small- scale GMPA to amend the Future Land Use designations. The small scale GMPA proposes to redesignate the subject property to Urban Designation, Urban Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center #9, which will bring the property into a single future land use category that will allow the applicant’s request to rezone to Industrial zoning district. This GMPA has an accompanying zoning companion (PL20190002018) to rezone the 3.4 acres of the subject property from A, Agricultural and A, Agricultural (RFMUO-Sending) with a Condition Use to I, Industrial Zoning District. As described above under ‘Subject Property,’ in the middle of the 3.4-acre subject site, there is a communications tower that is retained by the State of Florida on a 0.27-acre parcel with a corresponding 20-foot wide ingress egress easement across the subject site connecting the tower site to Beck Boulevard. The tower and underlying State-owned property are not included in this GMPA or the rezoning request. The proposed rezoning of the 3.4-acre site will 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 943 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 6 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 render the subject property to no longer be a part of the Conditional Use approved by Ordinance 92- 56; therefore, leaving the Conditional Use approval applicable to only the 0.27-acre parcel occupied by the existing tower. Interchange Activity Center #9 allows for all land uses allocated to the Mixed Use Activity Centers; additionally, industrial uses are allowed in the northeast and southeast quadrants of I-75 and Collier Boulevard, and in the southwest quadrant of Collier and Davis Boulevards. The subject site would be located in the southeast quadrant of I-75 and Collier Boulevard. Industrial uses will be limited to manufacturing, warehousing, storage, and distribution uses. Interchange Activity Center #9 (I-75 at Collier Boulevard) is subject to an Interchange Master Plan (IMP), which was adopted by Resolution by the Board of County Commissioners, and to the implementing provisions adopted into the Land Development Code. The actual mix of uses shall be determined during the rezoning process based on consideration of the same factors listed under the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, and based on the adopted IMP. Compatibility: There are existing uses that are similar to those proposed in the existing IAC #9. The subject property seems to be compatible, given the mixed-use nature of this neighborhood. The pattern in the vicinity of the site is varied with the large residential Forest Glen of Naples PUD to the southwest, Interstate 75 (I-75) to the north and east, the Toll Gate PUD/DRI industrial and commercial project to the west and two Recreational Vehicle parks to the south (Toll Plaza RV Park PUD and East Toll Plaza PUD). Travel trailer recreational vehicle parks are considered commercially zoned in the Land Development Code. The location is transitional in nature, evidenced by the split Future Land Use and zoning designations that exist on the site. This demonstrates that the site is situated where both the more urban characteristics to the west and traditionally rural characteristics to the east converge. In staff’s opinion, because there are similar uses that already exist with very little impact to the surrounding area, it appears to co-exist well with all the neighboring uses. Justifications for Proposed Amendment: Given the mixed-use nature of this neighborhood, which includes transient lodging, restaurants and commercial uses; and the site’s proximity to I-75 and size of the site, adding more industrial zoning uses seems like a good fit. The proposed small-scale Growth Management Plan Amendment redesignating the Future Land Use designation to Interchange Activity Center #9. The uses of the subject property will be the same or lower intensity industrial, or commercial zoning district as the existing zoning district that adjoins the subject site. FLUE Policy 5.3: All rezonings must be consistent with this Growth Management Plan. For properties that are zoned inconsistent with the Future Land Use Designation Description Section but have nonetheless been determined to be consistent with the Future Land Use Element, as provided for in Policies 5.9 through 5.13, the following provisions apply: 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 944 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 7 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 b. For such industrially-zoned properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower intensity industrial, or commercial, zoning district as the existing zoning district, and provided the overall intensity of industrial land use allowed by the existing zoning district is not exceeded in the new zoning district. The TIS submitted in the application indicates that the proposed Industrial use will generate approximately +/- 27 PM peak hour, two-way trips on the adjacent roadway links. Based on the TIS, this is a very low intensity project. The roadway infrastructure has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project at this time. Identification and Analysis of the Pertinent Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria in Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3187: Process for adoption of small scale comprehensive plan amendment. 1) A small scale development amendment may be adopted under the following conditions: (a) The proposed amendment involves a use of 10 acres or fewer and: [The subject site comprises ±8.67 acres.] (b) The proposed amendment does not involve a text change to the goals, policies, and objectives of the local government’s comprehensive plan, but only proposes a land use change to the future land use map for a site-specific small scale development activity. However, text changes that relate directly to, and are adopted simultaneously with, the small scale future land use map amendment shall be permissible under this section. [This amendment does include a text change to the Comprehensive Plan and those text changes are directly related to the proposed future land use map amendment.] (c) The property that is the subject of the proposed amendment is not located within an area of critical state concern, unless the project subject to the proposed amendment involves the construction of affordable housing units meeting the criteria of s. 420.0004(3), and is located within an area of critical state concern designated by s. 380.0552 or by the Administration Commission pursuant to s. 380.05(1). [The subject property is not located within an Area of Critical State Concern.] (2) Small scale development amendments adopted pursuant to this section require only one public hearing before the governing board, which shall be an adoption hearing as described in s. 163.3184(11). [This project will be heard with only one public adoption hearing.] (3) If the small scale development amendment involves a site within a rural area of opportunity as defined under s. 288.0656(2)(d) for the duration of such designation, the 10-acre limit listed in subsection (1) shall be increased by 100 percent to 20 acres. The local governmen t approving the small scale plan amendment shall certify to the state land planning agency that the plan amendment furthers the economic objectives set forth in the executive order issued under s. 288.0656(7), and the property subject to the plan amendment shall undergo public review to ensure that all concurrency requirements and federal, state, and local environmental permit requirements are met. [This amendment does not involve a site within a rural area of opportunity.] 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 945 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 8 of 10 Zoning Division ● 2800 North Horseshoe Drive ● Naples, FL 34104 ● 239-252-2400 (4) Comprehensive plans may only be amended in such a way as to preserve the internal consistency of the plan pursuant to s. 163.3177. Corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan shall not, for the purposes of this act, be deemed to be amendments. [This amendment preserves the internal consistency of the plan and is not a correction, update, or modification of current costs which were set out as part of the comprehensive plan.] Environmental Impacts and Historical and Archaeological Impacts: This is a small scale growth management amendment for property located on Beck Blvd. The property is 3.4 Acres. The applicant proposes to add the parcels to Interchange Activity Center #9 in order to rezone to light industrial or commercial use. No EAC required. BrownCraig 01/24/2020 Public Facilities Impacts: Eric Fey, Senior Project Manager with Collier County Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division, completed his review and approved this petition in April 6, 2020. Transportation Impacts: Michael Sawyer, Project Manager with Collier County Transportation Planning, completed his review and approved this petition, without any conditions, in April 6, 2020. NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM) SYNOPSIS: A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), as required by Land Development Code (LDC) Section 10.03.05 A, was duly advertised, noticed, and held on March 9, 2020 at 5:30 p.m. at the South Regional Library, 8065 Lely Cultural Parkway Naples, Fl 34113. This NIM was advertised, noticed, and held jointly for this small scale GMP amendment and the companion Rezone (RZ) petition. The applicant’s team gave a presentation and then responded to questions. See applicant’s NIM transcript included in the companion RZ packet. A total of 2 members of the public signed in along with approximately 3 members of the applicant’s team and 3 County staff attended the NIM. The consultant explained that there were two separate applications: a small-scale amendment for the Growth Management Plan (amend the FLUE designations) and a zoning action to rezone from A, Agricultural and A, Agricultural (RFMUO-Sending) with a Condition Use to I, Industrial Zoning District. The public asked questions about the project details, especially about what noises and traffic might be generated. The meeting ended at approximately 5:45 p.m. [synopsis prepared by Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Comprehensive Planning Section] 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 946 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED BY STAFF: Comprehensive Planning staff has not received any correspondence concerning this project. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS: • The reason for this GMPA and companion PUDA zoning petition is to allow an Industrial zoning district. • There are no adverse environmental impacts as a result of this petition. • No historic or archaeological sites are affected by this amendment. • There are no utility-related concerns as a result of this petition. • There are no concerns for impacts upon other public infrastructure • There are no transportation concerns as a result of this petition. • The site’s uses (existing as well as permitted by existing zoning) will create very low impacts. The site was previously a Florida Highway Patrol Headquarters with quite a bit of traffic. The Traffic Impact Analysis stated that the Industrial uses will generate approximately +/- 27 PM peak hour, two-way trips on the adjacent roadway links. • The use is generally compatible with surrounding development based upon the high- level review conducted for a GMP amendment. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office on July 23 2020. The criteria for GMP amendments to the Future Land Use Element are in Sections 163.3177(1)(f) and 163.3177(6)(a)2, Florida Statutes. The criteria for changes to the Future Land Use Map is in Section 163.3177(6)(a)8, Florida Statutes [HFAC] STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition PL20190002017/CPSS-2019-12 to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation to approve (adopt) and transmit to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity. 9.A.4.c Packet Pg. 947 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.d Packet Pg. 948 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 070620 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.d Packet Pg. 949 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 070620 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.d Packet Pg. 950 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 070620 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.d Packet Pg. 951 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 070620 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.d Packet Pg. 952 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 070620 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.d Packet Pg. 953 Attachment: 02_Adoption Ordinance - 070620 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com 3205 Beck Boulevard Small-Scale Amendment to Interchange Activity Center #9 (PL20190002017) Application and Supporting Documents August 6, 2020 CCPC Hearing 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 954 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 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 December 13, 2019 Mr. David Weeks Principal Planner 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 Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) Application 3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017), Submittal 1 Dear Mr. Weeks: A Collier County Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) application for properties located on the north side of Beck Boulevard at the eastern terminus is being filed electronically for review. The small-scale plan amendment proposes to add the subject 3.4+/- acre infill property to Interchange Activity Center #9, and to include text referencing the property in the Future Land Use Element subsection for Interchange Activity Center #9. The map and text exhibits are found in Exhibits IV.B and Exhibit IV.D. Presently, the property is within two Future Land Use Categories. Approximately 2+/- acres of the westernmost portion of the property is located within the Urban Mixed Use, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The easternmost 1.4+/- acres is within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Neutral land use designation. The applicant seeks to re-designate the entirety of the property into a single future land use category in order to rezone the property for light industrial or commercial use. The GMPA is supported with a companion rezone. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP c: Stephan Verhaaren GradyMinor File 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 955 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 1 APPLICATOIN NUMBER: PL20190002017 DATE RECEIVED: ______________________________ PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE DATE: September 16, 2019 DATE SUFFICIENT: ______________________________________________________________________ This application, with all required supplemental data and information, must be completed and accompanied by the appropriate fee, and returned to the Growth Management Department, Zoning Division, Comprehensive Planning Section, 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104. 239-252- 2400. The application must be reviewed by staff for sufficiency within 30 calendar days following the filing deadline before it will be processed and advertised for public hearing. The applicant will be notified in writing, of the sufficiency determination. If insufficient, the applicant will have 30 days to remedy the deficiencies. For additional information on the processing of the application, see Resolution 97-431 as amended by Resolution 98-18 (both attached). If you have any questions, please contact the Comprehensive Planning Section at 239-252-2400. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS I. GENERAL INFOMRATION A. Name of Applicant Stephan Verhaaren Company Not Applicable Address 1042 Jardin Drive City Naples State Florida Zip Code 34104 Phone Number 239-269-3199 Fax Number ________________________________ B. Name of Agent * D. Wayne Arnold, AICP • THIS WILL BE THE PERSON CONTACTED FOR ALL BUSINESS RELATED TO THE PETITION. Company Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Address 3800 Via Del Rey City Bonita Springs State Florida Zip Code 34134 Phone Number 239-947-1144 Fax Number ___________________________ C. Name of Owner (s) of Record Same as Applicant Address _________________________________________________________________________ City ___________________________ State ___________________ Zip Code ________ Phone Number _______________________ Fax Number ______________________________ D. Name, Address and Qualifications of additional planners, architects, engineers, environmental consultants and other professionals providing information contained in this application. Exhibit I.D. II. Disclosure of Interest Information: A. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, Tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary). 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 956 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 2 Name and Address Percentage of Ownership Stephan Verhaaren 100 1042 Jardin Drive, Naples FL 34104 _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ B. If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. Name and Address Percentage of Stock N. A. _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ C. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. Name and Address Percentage of Interest N. A. _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ D. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership N. A. _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ E. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. Name and Address Percentage of Ownership __________________________________________ _________________________ N. A. _________________________ __________________________________________ _________________________ Date of Contract: __________________ F. If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. Name and Address ________________________________________________________ N. A. G. Date subject property acquired (01/2018) leased ( ):________Term of lease______yrs./mos. If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate date of option:______________ and date 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 957 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3 option terminates: ______________, or anticipated closing: _______________________. H. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: A. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THOSE PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 1 AND 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, AND THOSE PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 35 AND 36, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCE AT AN IRON PIPE MARKING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1; THENCE SOUTH 00°20’19” WEST, 58.28 FEET ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 1 FOR A POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89°57’41” EAST, 785.56 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY EXISTING LIMITED ACCESS R/W LINE OF STATE ROAD 93 (INTERSTATE 75), AND THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 11,621.16 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°41’08”, THE CHORD FOR WHICH BEARS NORTH 77°00’15” WEST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AND R/W LINE A DISTANCE OF 1,153.18 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°45’01” WEST, 100.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°02’19” EAST, 260.48 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°57’41” EAST, 437.45 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. LESS AND EXCEPT: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1; THENCE SOUTH 62°26’54” WEST, 89.68 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 88°09’02” EAST, 69.88 FEET; THENCE NORTH 04°37’14” EAST, 112.94 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°08’04” WEST, 112.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°00’44” EAST, 90.68 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87°44’43" EAST, 34.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01°11’03” WEST, 20.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAVING AND RESERVING A 20.00-FOOT-WIDE INGRESS/EGRESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT LYING 10.00 FEET ON EACH SIDE OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED CENTERLINE: COMMENCE AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 1; THENCE SOUTH 62°26’54” WEST, 89.68 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°09’02” EAST, 10.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE CENTERLINE; THENCE SOUTH 01°50’58” WEST, 16.50 FEET TO THE NORTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 84 AND THE POINT OF TERMINATION OF SAID CENTERLINE. B. GENERAL LOCATION North side of Beck Boulevard at the eastern terminus____ C. PLANNING COMMUNITY Rural Estates D. TAZ 233 E. SIZE IN ACRES 3.43+/- F. ZONING A, Agricultural G. SURROUNDING LAND USE PATTERN RV Resorts, Preserve, water management and highway H. FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION(S) Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 958 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 4 IV. TYPE OF REQUEST: A. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN ELEMENT (S) TO BE AMENDED: _______ Housing Element _______ Recreation/Open Space _______ Traffic Circulation Sub-Element _______ Mass Transit Sub-Element _______ Aviation Sub-Element _______ Potable Water Sub-Element _______ Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element _______ NGWAR Sub-Element _______ Solid Waste Sub-Element _______ Drainage Sub-Element _______ Capital Improvement Element _______ CCME Element X Future Land Use Element _______ Golden Gate Master Plan _______ Immokalee Master Plan B. AMEND PAGE (S) 61 OF THE Future Land Use ELEMENT AS FOLLOWS: (Use Strike-through to identify language to be deleted; Use Underline to identify language to be added). Attach additional pages if necessary: Exhibit IV.B C. AMEND FUTURE LAND USE MAP(S) DESIGNATION FROM Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict TO Urban Designation, Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict D. AMEND OTHER MAP(S) AND EXHIBITS AS FOLLOWS: (Name & Page #) Activity Center #9, Exhibit IV.D E. DESCRIBE ADDITINAL CHANGES REQUESTED: N.A. V. REQUIRED INFORMATION: NOTE: ALL AERIALS MUST BE AT A SCALE OF NO SMALLER THAN I”=400’. At least one copy reduced to 8- 1/2 x 11 shall be provided of all aerials and/or maps. A. LAND USE Exhibit V.A. Provide general location map showing surrounding developments (PUD, DRI’s, existing zoning) with subject property outlined. Exhibit V.A. Provide most recent aerial of site showing subject boundaries, source, and date. Exhibit V.A. Provide a map and summary table of existing land use and zoning within a radius of 300 feet from boundaries of subject property. B. FUTURE LAND USE AND DESIGNATION Exhibits V.B.1 and V.B.2 Provide map of existing Future Land Use Designation(s) of subject property and adjacent lands, with acreage totals for each land use designation on the subject property. C. ENVIRONMENTAL Exhibit V.C. Provide most recent aerial and summary table of acreage of native habitats and soils occurring on site. HABITAT IDENTIFICATION MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FDOT-FLORIDA LAND USE, COVER AND FORMS CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (FLUCCS CODE). NOTE: THIS MAY BE INDICATED ON SAME AERIAL AS THE LAND USE AERIAL IN “A” ABOVE. Exhibit V.C. Provide a summary table of Federal (US Fish & Wildlife Service) and State (Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission) listed plant and animal species known to occur on the site and/or known to inhabit biological communities similar to the site (e.g. panther or black bear range, avian rookery, bird migratory route, etc.).Identify historic and/or 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 959 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 5 archaeological sites on the subject property. D. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Reference F.A.C. Chapter 163-3177 and Collier County’s Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.1.2 (Copies attached). 1. INSERT “Y” FOR YES OR “N” FOR NO IN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING: No Is the proposed amendment located in an Area of Critical State Concern? IF so, identify area located in ACSC. No Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Development of Regional Impact pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. ? Yes (Exhibit V.D), No Is the proposed amendment directly related to a proposed Small Scale Development Activity pursuant to Subsection 163.3187 (1)(c), F.S. ? Does the proposed amendment create a significant impact in population which is defined as a potential increase in County-wide population by more than 5% of population projections? (Reference Capital Improvement Element Policy 1.1.2). If yes, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. Yes, Exhibit V.D Does the proposed land use cause an increase in density and/or intensity to the uses permitted in a specific land use designation and district identified (commercial, industrial, etc.) or is the proposed land use a new land use designation or district? If so, provide data and analysis to support the suitability of land for the proposed use, and of environmentally sensitive land, ground water and natural resources. E. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: Exhibit V.E. Potable Water Exhibit V.E. Sanitary Sewer Exhibit V.E.1 Arterial & Collector Roads; Name specific road and LOS Beck Boulevard Collier Boulevard (CR 951) Davis Boulevard Exhibit V.E. Drainage Exhibit V.E. Solid Waste Exhibit V.E. Parks: Community and Regional If the proposed amendment involves an increase in residential density, or an increase in intensity for commercial and/or industrial development that would cause the LOS for public facilities to fall below the adopted LOS, indicate mitigation measures being proposed in conjunction with the proposed amendment. (Reference Capital Improvement Element Objective 1 and Policies) 2. Exhibit V.E.2 Provide a map showing the location of existing services and public facilities that will serve the subject property (i.e. water, sewer, fire protection, police protection, schools and emergency medical services. 3. Exhibit V.E. Document proposed services and public facilities, identify provider, and describe the effect the proposed change will have on schools, fire protection and emergency medical services. F. OTHER Identify the following areas relating to the subject property: N.A. Flood zone based on Flood Insurance Rate Map data (FIRM). 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 960 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 6 N.A. Location of wellfields and cones of influence, if applicable. (Identified on Collier County Zoning Maps) N.A. Traffic Congestion Boundary, if applicable N.A. Coastal Management Boundary, if applicable N.A. High Noise Contours (65 LDN or higher) surrounding the Naples Airport, if applicable (identified on Collier County Zoning Maps). G. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION N.A. $16,700.00 non-refundable filing fee made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Provided $9,000.00 non-refundable filing fee for a Small Scale Amendment made payable to the Board of County Commissioners due at time of submittal. (Plus proportionate share of advertising costs) Exhibit V.G3 Proof of ownership (copy of deed) Exhibit V.G4 Notarized Letter of Authorization if Agent is not the Owner (See attached form) Filed Electronically 1 Original and 5 complete, signed applications with all attachments including maps, at time of submittal. After sufficiency is completed, 25 copies of the complete application will be required. * If you have held a pre-application meeting and paid the pre-application fee of $250.00 at the meeting, deduct that amount from the above application fee amount when submitting your application. All pre-application fees are included in the total application submittal fee. Otherwise the overage will be applied to future proportionate share advertising costs. * Maps shall include: North arrow, name and location of principal roadways and shall be at a scale of 1”=400’ or at a scale as determined during the pre-application meeting. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 961 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 7 SEE EXHIBIT V.G4 FOR EXECUTED DOCUMENT LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN I hereby authorize Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. (Name of Agent) to serve as my Agent in a request to amend the Collier County Growth Management Plan affecting property identified in this Application. Signed: ________________________________________ Date: _________________________ Stephan Verhaaren I hereby certify that I have the authority to make the foregoing application, and that the application is true, correct and complete to the best of my knowledge. ______________________________________ Signature of Applicant Stephan Verhaaren Name - Typed or Printed STATE OF ( ) COUNTY OF ( ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this ____________day of _____________________, 2019______ by ________________________________ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: Notary Public CHOOSE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: _______ who is personally known to me, _______ who has produced _____________________________as identification and _______ did take an Oath _______ did not take and Oath NOTICE - BE AWARE THAT: Florida Statute Section 837.06 - False Official Law states that: “Whoever knowingly makes a false statement in writing with the intent to mislead a public servant in the performance of his official duty shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided by a fine to a maximum of %500.00 and/or maximum of a sixty day jail term.” 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 962 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 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 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 963 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 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 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 964 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) $ 250,000 $ 146,630 $ 118,803 $ 265,433 $ 265,433 $ 265,433 $ 265,433 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Summary Parcel No 00298560103 SiteAddress*Disclaimer 3205 BECKBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34114 Name / Address VERHAAREN, STEPHAN 1042 JARDIN DR City NAPLES State FL Zip 34104 Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 4B36 000100 004 04B36 36 49 26 3.41 Legal 36 49 26 THAT PORTION OF SEC 35 & 36 AS DESC IN OR 5469 PG 2037 Millage Area 287 Millage Rates   *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 17 - OFFICE BLDG, NON-PROF, ONE STORY 5.083 6.3071 11.3901 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 01/22/18 5469-2037  2019 Preliminary Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+) Improved Value (=) Market Value (=) Assessed Value (=) School Taxable Value (=) Taxable Value If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after theFinal Tax Roll   9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 965 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Aerial Parcel No 00298560103 SiteAddress*Disclaimer 3205 BECKBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34114 Open GIS in a New Window with More Features. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 966 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 967 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Pre-App PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd (CPUD) & PL20190002017 (GMPA) – Wayne Arnold, agent; Nancy Gundlach, planner. SUE Monday, September 16, 2019 9:00 AM-10:00 AM & 10:00 AM-11:00 AM. Conf. Rm. C. Requested by: Sharon Umpenhour of Q. Grady Minor & Assoc. Phone: 239-947-1144; Email: SUmpenhour@gradyminor.com Representing: XXXXX [per PAO GIS, owner: Stephen Verhaaren] Folio #: 00298560103; Zoning: A, Rural Agricultural, and A-RFMUO Sending Lands (Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay) Location: N. side of Beck Blvd., S. side of I-75, +0.9 mi. E. of Collier Blvd. (CR 951), in 35&36-49-26 Project Description: Rezone to CPUD and GMPA to allow commercial and/or light industrial uses. [per PAO GIS, 3.41 acs.] Existing Application Name: xxx (per PAO GIS: site was purchased from the State in 2018 & contains an office building, built in 1991) POST PRE-APP COMMENTS: XXXXX [FLUM designation is Urban Residential Subdistrict (in Sec. 35) and Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands (in Sec. 36).] Meeting Notes: • May submit rezone petition for a conventional zoning district (perhaps C-5) with use limitations. Don’t expect retail uses. • Due to site size, shape, outparcel enclave, and abutting roadways, don’t expect significant building s.f. • IAC #9 map will need to be amended to expand the boundary to include subject parcel, and text amended to adjust the acreage of the IAC; and, countywide FLUM will need to be amended to change the parcel from Ag/Rural, RFMUD Sending Lands to Urban. • Data & Analysis – Will likely assert the site is de facto commercial, note surrounding uses and conditions, provide site history, etc. Advised that staff generally concurs with this approach. • Staff advised: need to address compatibility, and address Section 163.3177(1)(f), F.S. and Section 163.3177(6)(a)2. and 8., F.S. • Staff to provide to agent the draft GMPA text of Collier Blvd/I-75 Innovation Zone Overlay. • $500.00 pre-app fee paid. Notes by: David Weeks, AICP, Growth Management Manager 9-16-19 Beck Blvd. pre-app notes G:\CDES Planning Services\Comprehensive\Comp Planning GMP DATA\Comp Plan Amendments\2019 Cycles and Smalls\pre-app meetings in 2019\9-16-19 Beck Blvd. Coml dw/9-17-19 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 968 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Blvd (PL20190002017) Exhibit I.D. Professional Consultants February 12, 2020 Page 1 of 1 3205BBZ-19 Exhibit ID.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com Planning/Project Management: D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 239.947.1144 239.947.0375 fax warnold@gradyminor.com Transportation: James M. Banks, P.E., President JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. 4711 7th Avenue SW Naples, FL 34119 239.919.2767 jmbswte@msn.com Environmental: Marco A. Espinar – Biologist, President Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. 3880 Estey Avenue Naples, Florida 34104 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 969 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Principal, Director of Planning Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Civil Engineers  Surveyors  Land Planners  Landscape Architects Education  Master of Urban Planning, University of Kansas, Lawrence  Bachelor of Science, Urban and Regional Planning/Geography, Missouri State University Professional Registrations/ Affiliations  American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP)  American Planning Association (APA)  Leadership Collier, Class of 2000  Bonita Springs Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee  Collier County Jr. Deputy League, Inc., Board of Directors President  City of Naples Planning Advisory Board 2010-2014 Mr. Arnold is a Principal and co-owner of the firm and serves as the Secretary/Treasurer and Director of Planning. As Director of Planning, Mr. Arnold is responsible for and oversees services related to plan amendments, property re-zonings, expert witness testimony, ROW Acquisition, public participation facilitation, and project management. Mr. Arnold previously served as the Planning Services Director at Collier County, where he oversaw the County’s zoning, comprehensive planning, engineering, platting and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) functions. Mr. Arnold also has prior Florida planning experience with Palm Beach County Government and the South Florida Water Management District. Mr. Arnold has been accepted as an expert in land planning matters in local and state proceedings. RELEVANT PROJECTS  Collier County Growth Management Plan  Immokalee Airport Master Plan  Collier County Land Development Code  Logan Boulevard Right-of-Way Acquisition Planning Analysis  U.S. 41 Right-of-Way Expansion Planning Analysis  Copeland Zoning Overlay  Collier County Government Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI)  Pine Ridge/Goodlette Road Commercial Infill District  Henderson Creek Planned Development/Growth Management Plan Amendment  Mercato Mixed Use Planned Development  Diamond Oaks Village  Imperial Landing MPD  Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project ROW Analysis  Dean Street MPD  Bonita Exchange MPD  Collier County Public Schools Transportation Ancillary Plant 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 970 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. Key Personnel - James M. Banks, P.E., President JAMES M. BANKS, P.E., PRESIDENT Certifications & Positions Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering - University of Kentucky, 1986 Professional Engineer - State of Florida – Reg. No. 43860, 1991 to Present JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc., President/Owner – 2007 to Present Q & E Overview Mr. Banks has been actively involved in the fields of traffic/transportation engineering and planning since 1987. During the past 30 years, he has developed a comprehensive knowledge within these disciplines and is regarded as an expert within his profession. Mr. Banks has represented a wide range of clientele in both the public and private sectors. Public sector clients include airport authorities & FAA, local and state municipalities, county commissions, public school boards, city councils, planning boards, and city/county attorneys. Private sector clients have been land planners, land use attorneys, right-of-way acquisition attorneys, engineers, surveyors, architects and developers. Corridor Planning Mr. Banks has conducted a significant number of roadway corridor studies for both the public and private sectors. His work efforts included developing a comprehensive and strategic corridor improvement plan to meet the long term transportation objectives for the area. By forecasting area- wide long range traffic demands, Mr. Banks developed transportation needs plans in order to ensure adequate roadway capacity. Example projects are Alico Road Six-Laning, Lee Boulevard Improvements, Southwest International Airport’s Transportation Needs Plan, Bonita Beach Road Access Management Plan, and Fort Myers Beach - Time Square Traffic Circulation Study. Transportation Design Mr. Banks has been engineer of record on numerous transportation design projects; such as, complex intersection design, signalization, street lighting, maintenance of traffic plans, signing and pavement marking plans, vehicular accident analysis, major roadway improvement design, traffic calming plans, railroad crossing design, and access management plans. Projects include Colonial Boulevard Improvements, Immokalee Road Widening Project, Lee Boulevard Six-Laning, Bonita Beach Road and Alico Road Widening. Traffic Impact Statements & Site Access Studies Mr. Banks has prepared countless Traffic Impact Statements & Site Access Studies for privately funded, publicly funded and public utilities projects. Types of projects that he has worked on include 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 971 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. Key Personnel - James M. Banks, P.E., President all size of commercial/medical/airport projects and every possible type and size residential and mixed-use developments, including projects that were deemed Developments of Regional Impact (DRI's). Governmental agencies have used reports that were prepared by Mr. Banks as "guidelines" that have been distributed to other professionals for their consideration when producing their work products. Mr. Banks has a earned reputation with the private sector of having the skills necessary to navigate through the permitting process with ease . Expert Witness Mr. Banks has provided expert witness testimony at numerous court proceedings and public hearings regarding traffic/transportation related matters. He has testified in various forums; such as, county commission meetings, hearing examiner reviews, courts of law, public workshops, port authority meetings, and peer review functions. Types of issues that Mr. Banks provided testimony for were right-of-way acquisition cases; zoning and land use amendments, land development projects, corridor studies, roadway improvement projects, transportation improvement projects, and airport construction projects. Selected Project Experience Colonial Boulevard Improvements for Lee County DOT -Engineer of Record/Project Manager for the preparation of at-grade and interchange signalization plans, signing & pavement markings plans, street lighting and complex maintenance of traffic plans. Also, provided right-of-way acquisition services to the Lee County Attorney's office. SWFIA Expansion/Treeline Avenue Extension for FAA & Lee County Government - Engineer of Record for the Transportation Demand/Needs Study that was used as the basis for the ultimate design and construction. Prepared signalization plans and intersection geometry plans for complex intersections. Immokalee Road Improvements for Collier County DOT - Engineer of Record/Project Manager for the preparation of signalization, signing & pavement markings, street lighting plans. Alico Road Six Laning - Engineer of Record for the Corridor Study that was used as the basis for the ultimate design and construction. Prepared signalization plans, maintenance of traffic plans, railroad crossing, provided peer review/QC for road design plans. Lee Boulevard - Engineer of Record for the Corridor Study & Access Management Plan that was used as the basis for the ultimate design and construction. Prepared signalization plans, maintenance of traffic plans, and provided peer review/QC. State Road 80 - FDOT - Design Engineer for the widening and drainage improvements of S.R. 80 from I-75 to Buckingham Road, in Lee County. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 972 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) RESUME Marco A. Espinar Bilingual: English & Spanish 3211 68th St SW Office: 239-263-2687 Naples, Fl 34105 Home 239-263-2747 EDUCATION Cardinal Mooney High School Diploma 1980 Sarasota, Florida Manatee Junior College AA Degree 1982 Bradenton, Florida Biology University of South Florida BS Degree 1990 Tampa, Florida Biology Completed USF Cooperative Education Program April 1988 USF Undergraduate Research - USF 1985 Apalachicola Archaeological Expedition & Research - Lab Coordinator of Fauna Identification from Archeological Sites - Studies of Seagrass Beds (Thalassia testudinum) in Upper Tampa Bay, Florida - Growth Rates of Marine Algae (Gracilaria tikvahiae, G. verrucosa, G. deblis ) Port Manatee, Florida EMPLOYMENT HISTORY & EXPERIENCE Collier Environmental Consultants Inc. Owner & Environmental Planning / Naples, Florida 2/96 - Present Biologist Environmental Permitting, Planning Exotic Plant Removal / Poisoning Vegetation Inventory Mitigation Plantings Mitigation & Monitoring Plans Jurisdictional Determination Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Environmental Impact Statements Licensed Agent Gopher Tortoise Permitting, Red Cockaded Woodpecker Survey Testing, Relocation UMAM Analysis BP- Natural Resource Advisor - Deepwater Horizon MS Canyon 252 Oil Spill Gulfport, Mississippi - Dauphin Island, Alabama - Pensacola, Florida 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 973 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Turrell & Associates, Inc. Senior Environmental Planner Naples, Florida 2/94 - 12/95 Environmental Permitting, Planning Supervision of Staff Threatened and Endangered Species Survey Review Staff Reports Environmental Impact Statements South Florida Water Management District Environmental Analyst Fort Myers, Florida 2/93 - 8/93 Dredge & Fill Permit Review Surface Water Permit Review Collier County Government, Development Services Environmental Specialist II Naples, Florida 10/90 – 2/93 Site Development Plan Compliance Landscape Inspections Planned Unit Development Compliance Environmental Enforcement Site Drainage Inspections Southwest Florida Water Management District Field Services Technician Tampa, Florida 9/87 – 10/90 As-Built Inspections of Storm Water System - Engineering, Survey Surface and Ground Water Permit Compliance Well Construction & Abandonment Inspections Southwest Florida Water Management District (CO-OP) Environmental Scientists 1 Brooksville, Florida 1/86 - 9/87 Wetland Vegetation Studies At Major Well Fields Water Quality Sampling & Testing PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS Southwest Florida Association of Environmental Professionals, Member Elected to very First Governing Board and served 2 terms, served on founding association – Bylaws Committee Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Served on the Collier County Environmental Advisory Board Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Currently Serving on the Development Services Advisory Committee 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 974 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Currently Serving on the Land Development Code Sub-Committee Appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and Served on Conservation Collier Land Acquisition Advisory Committee 6 years Served as Chairman of the Conservation Collier Lands Evaluation and Management Sub- Committee, Award for Ten (10) years of my Voluntary Service to Collier County By the Board of County Commissioners - January 2010 Awarded Outstanding Advisory Board Member Award - February 2009 by Collier County Board of County Commissioners Gopher Tortoise Management and Mitigation Professional Training Program Successful Completion 9/01 REFERENCES UPON REQUEST 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 975 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 www.GradyMinor.com Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 SITE URBAN DESIGNATION, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT = 3.43± ACRES 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 976 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard CONVENTIONAL ZONING GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 SITE URBAN DESIGNATION, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT, ACTIVITY CENTER #9 = 3.43± ACRES 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 977 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 0 300'150' SCALE: 1" = 300' WHEN PLOTTED @ 8.5" X 11" SUBJECT PROPERTY - 3.43± ACRES EXISTING ZONING:A, AGRUCULTURAL EXISTING FLUE:URBAN DESIGNATION, MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT (1.99 ± ACRES) AND AGRICULTURAL / RURAL DESIGNATION, RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT, SENDING LANDS (1.44 ± ACRES) EXISTING USE:FORMER FHP STATION ADJACENT PROPERTY NORTH ZONING:A, AGRICULTURAL USE:ALLIGATOR ALLEY (I-75) TOLL PLAZA, OFFICES AND ROW SOUTH ZONING:FOREST GLEN OF NAPLES PUD, TOLL PLAZA RV PARK PUD AND EAST TOOL PLAZA PUD USE:BECK BOULEVARD ROW, PRESERVE AND RV RESORT EAST ZONING:A, AGRICULTURAL USE:ALLIGATOR ALLEY (I-75) ROW WEST ZONING:TOLLGATE PUD/DRI USE:WATER MANAGEMENT/WETLANDS 300 FOOT RADIUS ZONED: TOLL PLAZA RV PARK PUD USE: RV RESORTSZONED: FOREST GLEN OF NAPLES PUD USE: PRESERVE ZONED: A USE: ALLIGATOR ALLEY (I-75)ZONED: TOLLGATE PUD/DRIUSE: WATER MANAGEMENT/WETLANDSZONED: EAST TOLL PLAZA PUD USE: RV RESORT BECK BOULEVARD INTERSTATE 75 (I-75) I-75 TOLL BOOTH AND OFFICES REVISED: 02/14/2020 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 978 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 SITE URBAN DESIGNATION, MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT = 1.99± ACRES AGRICULTURAL/RURAL DESIGNATION, RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT, SENDING LANDS = 1.44± ACRES 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 979 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GradyMinor Civil Engineers ●Land Surveyors ●Planners ●Landscape Architects Cert. of Auth. EB 0005151 Cert. of Auth. LB 0005151 Business LC 26000266 Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, Florida 34134 Bonita Springs: 239.947.1144 ZZZ.GradyMinor.coP Fort Myers: 239.690.4380 SITE URBAN DESIGNATION, MIXED USE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT = 1.99± ACRES AGRICULTURAL/RURAL DESIGNATION, RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTRICT, SENDING LANDS = 1.44± ACRES 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 980 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard 3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.C. Environmental Page 1 of 13 November 22, 2019 3205BBZ-19 Exh VC Cvr Pg.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 981 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 982 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 983 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 984 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 985 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 986 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 987 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 988 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 989 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 990 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 991 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 992 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 993 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard Subdistrict (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.D Growth Management February 12, 2020 Page 1 of 4 3205BBZ-19 Exh VD Growth Management-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 small-scale plan amendment proposes to add the subject 3.4+/- acre infill property to Interchange Activity Center #9, and to include text referencing the property in the Future Land Use Element subsection for Interchange Activity Center #9. The addition of the property would increase the Activity Center from 632.5 acres to 635.9 acres. The map and text exhibits are found in Exhibits IV.B and Exhibit IV.D. Presently, the property is within two Future Land Use Categories. Approximately 2+/- acres of the westernmost portion of the property is located within the Urban Mixed Use, Urban Residential Subdistrict. The easternmost 1.4+/- acres is within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Sending land use designation. The applicant seeks to re-designate the entirety of the property into a single future land use category in order to rezone the property for light industrial or commercial use. The site was formerly utilized as the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) Headquarters, and a State- owned 300’ tall cellular communications tower. The State declared that portion of the site utilized for the FHP headquarters, and the surrounding undeveloped portion of the property as surplus. The applicant purchased the property from the State of Florida. The subject property is the only property located on the north side of Beck Boulevard that is not included in Interchange Activity Center #9. It appears that the split between the Future Land Use categories bisects the property just east of the existing cellular tower parcel. The overall parcel is a triangular shape and that portion of the property located within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Neutral designation is undeveloped; however, it has been impacted due to the adjacent I-75 and toll booth construction, as well as driveway connections linking Beck Boulevard to the parking lot serving the I-75 toll booth. Chapter 163.3167 Scope of act.— (9) Each local government shall address in its comprehensive plan, as enumerated in this chapter, the water supply sources necessary to meet and achieve the existing and projected water use demand for the established planning period, considering the applicable plan developed pursuant to s. 373.709. The project is provided potable water service by Collier County. No capacity issues exist or are anticipated in the service area. Chapter 163.3177 (6) (a) 2. The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including: a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth. b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area. c. The character of undeveloped land. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 994 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard Subdistrict (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.D Growth Management February 12, 2020 Page 2 of 4 3205BBZ-19 Exh VD Growth Management-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 d. The availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services. e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community. f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations. g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and consistent with s. 333.02. h. The discouragement of urban sprawl. i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will strengthen and diversify the community’s economy. j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions. Adding this small infill parcel to Interchange Activity Center #9 is a logical land use change given the nature and character of the property, which has previously been developed with non- residential or agricultural uses. Collier County has acknowledged the importance of this Activity Center as having the potential to support economic development and has created a new overlay for most of the properties located in Activity Center #9 to be part of the Collier Boulevard/Interstate I-75 Innovation Zone. The County has established this innovation area in order to accelerate this area’s development for targeted businesses. This designation will provide for additional industrial land uses, and the County will utilize tax increment financing to support an economic trust fund for use in implementing the County’s economic plan. The subject property has direct access to Beck Boulevard and has physical building improvements in place. The site is served by Collier County Utilities and has both potable water and sanitary sewer service available to the site. The current agricultural zoning does not conform to the surrounding area and represents a non-conforming parcel size for agriculture in Collier County. A rezoning to another non-residential use is not permitted under the current Future Land Use Designation; thereby, warranting the proposed small-scale amendment. The property is not suitable for residential development. Given the small parcel size, proximity to I-75, and adjacency to an industrial development of regional impact, residential development is not feasible or a compatible land use relationship. The highest and best use economically and from a planning perspective is for commercial or industrial development, consistent with the proposed land use amendment. Chapter 163.3177 8. Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following analyses: a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services. b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 995 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard Subdistrict (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.D Growth Management February 12, 2020 Page 3 of 4 3205BBZ-19 Exh VD Growth Management-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 c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements of this section. Accompanying the small-scale amendment is a map exhibit (IV.E., Proposed AC9 Map), which is a revision to the existing Interchange Activity Center #9 Map. The site is undeveloped and the applicant’s consulting team has not identified any soil, topography or natural resource constraints for development. The 3.4± acres of land represents the entirety of the lands in the vicinity of the project site north of Beck Boulevard that are not within the Activity Center. Potable water and wastewater service will be provided by Collier County Public Utilities. 163.3184 Process for adoption of comprehensive plan or plan amendment. This section of the statute outlines the process and authority for agency review of plan amendments. The applicant understands that regional and state reviewing agencies will be responsible for review of any comprehensive plan amendments per the requirements of Chapter 163.3184 F.S. The applicant’s experts are of the opinion that there are no regional or state impacts associated with the small-scale amendment application. Project Justification Without the proposed small-scale amendment, the parcel can only be utilized for minimal agricultural uses, or a small number of conditional uses for uses such as churches, child care, private schools, and similar uses. Given the proximity of the site to developed industrial and heavy commercial uses, and the irregular size of the parcel, it is unlikely that any of the afore- mentioned uses would be viable candidates to occupy the site. The site qualifies for a single residential dwelling unit under the current Future Land Use Designations. The portion of the site within the RFMU-Sending district is not eligible for density blending due to the small size of the parcel. Residential uses are not a viable use on the subject property. The County Commission has acknowledged the importance of this area for future economic development, by designating the adjoining property and most other properties located within Activity Center #9 as part of the Innovation Zone Overlay. The County anticipates capturing revenues from tax increment financing, to assist in implementing the County’s economic development plan. The infill parcel is ideal for expanded economic opportunities due to the proximity to other industrial uses, and the location with easy access to I-75 and Collier Boulevard. The applicant has prepared an environmental assessment of the subject property. While a portion of the site does contain native vegetation, the vegetation is not unique to the area, and does not abut any other adjacent vegetated area. A portion of the native vegetation will be 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 996 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard Subdistrict (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.D Growth Management February 12, 2020 Page 4 of 4 3205BBZ-19 Exh VD Growth Management-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 retained on-site consistent with the County’s Conservation and Coastal Management Element requirement for native vegetation preservation. A traffic analysis has been prepared in support of the small-scale amendment and companion rezoning applications. No LOS issues related to transportation have been identified. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 997 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis February 14, 2020 Page 1 of 3 3205BBZ-19 Exh VE Public Facilities-rev1.docx Provide the existing Level of Service Standard (LOS) and document the impact the proposed change will have on the following public facilities: The subject 3.4± acre property is currently developed with a 3,500± square foot building which has formerly utilized as the Florida Highway Patrol headquarters. The companion rezoning anticipates a maximum of 40,000 square feet of industrial use on the property. Water and sewer service is available at the property. The small-scale plan amendment proposes to add the property to Activity Center #9. The public facilities analysis evaluates the project impacts on potable Water, wastewater, drainage, parks, schools, roadways, fire/EMS, and solid waste. The source for the LOS information is the 2019 AUIR. Potable Water The property is located within the regional potable water service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District. The County has existing plant capacity of approximately 52.75 MGD (FY 2020) and a required plant capacity of 42.52 MGD (FY 2020). The system has a required treatment capacity of 51.43 MGD in 2029. The proposed addition of 40,000 square feet of general industrial uses will not create any LOS issues in the 5-year planning horizon. This Project will have no impact on the potable water system and capacity is available in Collier County and no residential development is proposed in the sub-district, which is the basis for determining LOS impacts. Non-residential development does not facilitate population growth and is therefore not analyzed as part of the AUIR. Sanitary Sewer The subject project is located within the south wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District with standards for Sanitary Sewer established in the Capital Improvement Element of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. Permitted operational capacity in 2020 is 16 MGD and required treatment capacity in FY 2029 is 16 MGD. This Project will have no impact on the Collier County Wastewater Treatment System. There are no residential uses proposed; therefore, there is not an LOS impact to the sanitary sewer system. Non-residential development does not facilitate population growth. Arterial and Collector Roads 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 998 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis February 14, 2020 Page 2 of 3 3205BBZ-19 Exh VE Public Facilities-rev1.docx Please refer to the Traffic Impact Statement (Exhibit V.E.1) for discussions of the project’s impact on level of service for arterial and collector roadways within the project’s radius of development influence. No adverse impacts result from changing the FLU category to include the parcel in Activity Center #9. Drainage The County has adopted a LOS standard for private developments which requires development to occur consistent with water quantity and quality standards established in Ordinances 74-50, 90-10, 2001-27, and LDC Ordinance 2004-41, as may be amended. An environmental Resource Permit (ERP) issued by the South Florida Water Management District will be required, which has established criteria for the volume of water stored on site as well as the quality of the water which may be discharged from the site. The development will be consistent with the County LOS standards. Solid Waste The adopted LOS for solid waste is two years of lined cell capacity at the previous 3-year average tons per year disposal rate and 10 years of permittable landfill capacity of the disposal rate. There are no current capacity issues, and none are anticipated through the year 2067. The LOS is based on a per capita basis, therefore, the proposed industrial uses will have no impact on the LOS. Existing: Vacant non-residential Proposed: Industrial 40,000 x 5 lbs/1,000 sq ft = 200 lbs/day x 365 = 73,00 lbs/year or 36.5 tons/year Current landfill capacity in 2019 is anticipated to be 18,062,901 tons. Total Permitted Landfill Capacity Remaining, 2019 13,547,175 Tons Total Lined Cell Capacity Remaining, 2019 575,700 Tons Estimated Life of Landfill 2,061 Tons Source: Collier County 2019 AUIR Cal Recycle, estimated solid waste generating rates Parks: Community and Regional Parks impact fees are not assessed for commercial development or schools. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 999 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.E Public Facilities Level of Service Analysis February 14, 2020 Page 3 of 3 3205BBZ-19 Exh VE Public Facilities-rev1.docx No adverse impacts to Community or Regional Parks result from the amendment of the subdistrict. Schools School impact fees are not assessed for commercial development or schools. No adverse impacts to schools result from the creation of the subdistrict. Fire Control and EMS The proposed project lies within the Greater Naples Fire Rescue District. No significant impacts to Fire Control level of service are anticipated due to the proposed project. Estimated impact fees for EMS and fire would be determined at time of SDP based on each unit. Sheriff, Fire Protection and EMS Services location/address of facilities intended to serve the project are; Greater Naples Fire Rescue Station #72 3820 Beck Boulevard Collier County EMS Station #75 4590 Santa Barbara Boulevard Collier County Sheriff's Office - District 3 8075 Lely Cultural Parkway 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1000 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 EXHIBIT V.E.1 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1001 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1002 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1003 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1004 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1005 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1006 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1007 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1008 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1009 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1010 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1011 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1012 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1013 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1014 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1015 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1016 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1017 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1018 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1019 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1020 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1021 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1022 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Golden Gate Fire Station 75 Golden Gate Fire Station 72 Golden Gate Fire Station 70 Physicians Regional - Collier Blvd Golden Gate Substation Dist 2 Medic 25 Medic 70 Medic 75 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community ´3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.E.2 Public Facilities Map SUBJECT PROPERTY 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,0001,000 Feet Legend Hospital / Medical Center Police Substation Fire Station EMS Stations Subject Property East Naples Sub Station Dist 3 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1023 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.G3 Deed Page 1 of 4 October 21, 2019 3205BBZ-19 Exh VG3 Cvr Pg.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1024 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1025 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1026 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1027 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 3205 Beck Boulevard (PL20190002017) Exhibit V.G4 Authorizations October 21, 2019 Page 1 of 3 3205BBZ-19 Exh VG4 Cvr Pg.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1028 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 2 of 3 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1029 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Page 3 of 3 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1030 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1031 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 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 20, 2020 RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM); Petition PL20190002017, 3205 Beck Boulevard Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) and Petition PL20190002018 3205 Beck Boulevard Rezone Dear Property Owner: A Neighborhood Information Meeting hosted by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., representing Stephan Verhaaren (Applicant) will be held on March 9, 2020, 5:30 pm at the South Regional Library, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy, Naples, FL 34113. Stephan Verhaaren submitted formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment and Standard Rezone. These applications propose to include the entire property into Activity Center #9, which will bring the property into a singular future land use category and rezone the property from A, Agricultural and A, Agricultural with RFMU-Sending Overlay to I, Industrial. The subject property (Parcel Number 00298560103) is comprised of 3.4± acres, located near the eastern terminus of Beck Boulevard in Section 1 and 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed to Sharon Umpenhour, Senior Planning Technician, Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134, sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375. The Collier County Public Library does not sponsor or endorse this program. PROJECT LOCATION MAP 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1032 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 1NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 LEGAL1 LEGAL2 LEGAL3 LEGAL4 FOLIOARH DEVELOPMENT LLC 2827 SILVERLEAF LNNAPLES, FL 34105---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 2081790004801BLUE PARROT PROPERTIES LLC 3579 ADMIRALS WAYDELRAY BEACH, FL 33483---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 481790004487BOT TIIF C/O DEP DIV OF STATE LANDS 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL STATION 108 TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---3000 35 49 26 THAT PORTIONS OF SEC 1 & 2 TWP 50 RNG 26 AND SEC'S 35 & 36 DESC AS:COMM AT NW CNR SEC 1, S 58.28FT TO POB, N89 00298440100BOT TIIF C/O DEP DIV OF STATE LANDS 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL STATION 108 TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---3000 1 50 26 COMM NW CNR, S 200FT, E 1328.06FT TO POB, CONT E 657.35FT, S 1265.52FT, W 658FT, N 1291.6FT TO POB 00397120004COLLIER COUNTY 3335 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST STE 101NAPLES, FL 34112---0 36 49 26 BEG NW CNR SEC 36 S 89 DEG 50'08"E FOR 2,648.50 FT, THEN S 00DEG 27'21"E FOR 2653.60FT, THEN S 00DEG 26' 00298480005COLLIER COUNTY 3301 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34112---0 36 49 26 PARC 3 NOW I-75 + ACCESS RD NO 1#00298560006EVERYDAY HOLDINGS LLC 5835 YOUNG QUIST RDFORT MYERS, FL 33912---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 281790004445FOREST GLEN GOLF & CC MASTER ASSN INC 3855 FOREST GLEN BLVDNAPLES, FL 34114---2516 FOREST GLEN OF NAPLES TRACT P-132720000361H & W VENTURES LLC 3500 SHEARWATER STNAPLES, FL 34117---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 2181790004827H&S NAPLES LLC 4270 MIDDLETOWN ROADORGONIA, OH 45054---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1381790004665JGPINEDA LLC 3585 33RD AVE NENAPLES, FL 34120---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 181790004429KENNETH D CARTER REV TRUST3890 7TH AVE NWNAPLES, FL 34120---1645 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1981790004788NAPLES INDUSTRIAL LLC 3518 PLOVER AVENAPLES, FL 34117---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 381790004461SHIRWIN INC PO BOX 7129NAPLES, FL 34101---0 1 50 26 FROM S1/4 CNR SEC 1, N 3975FT, S88 DEG W 1316FT FOR POB, S88 DEG W 658FT, N 1536.8 FT, N80DEG E 657.85FT, S1525.5 00396360001STORE MASTER FUNDING X LLC %RAYMOND BLDG SUPPLY, LLC 1900 LARSEN RDGREEN BAY, WI 75219---0 TOLLGATE COMMERCIAL CENTER PHASE THREE TRACT 3876885101145STORE MASTER FUNDING X LLC %RAYMOND BLDG SUPPLY, LLC 1900 LARSEN RDGREEN BAY, WI 75219---0 TOLLGATE COMMERCIAL CENTER PHASE THREE TRACT 3976885101161STRUCTURE MEDICAL LLC 9935 BUSINESS CIRCLENAPLES, FL 34112---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1481790004681STRUCTURE MEDICAL LLC 9935 BUSINESS CIRCLENAPLES, FL 34112---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1581790004704SUN CLUB NAPLES LLC 27777 FRANKLIN RD STE 200SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034---8205 1 50 26 FROM S1/4 CNR SEC 1, N 3975FT, S88DEG W 1974FT TO POB S88DEG W 666.5FT, N 1548.3FT, N89DEG E 669.65FT, S 1536.8FT 00396320009TOLL GATE COMMERCIAL CENTE% A M PAPINEAU 1165 CLAM CT APT 13NAPLES, FL 34102---564 TOLLGATE COMMERCIAL CENTER PHASE THREE TRACT D (DRAINAGE/CONSERVATION/ PRESERVE) 76885100557VERHAAREN, STEPHAN 1042 JARDIN DRNAPLES, FL 34104---0 36 49 26 THAT PORTION OF SEC 35 & 36 AS DESC IN OR 5469 PG 203700298560103WHITE LAKE COMMONS ASSN IN % SENTRY MANAGEMENT INC 2180 WEST SR 434 #5000LONGWOOD, FL 32779---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 TRACT A (CONSER AREA)81790004364WHITE LAKE COMMONS ASSOC I% SENTRY MANAGEMENT INC 2180 WEST SR 434 #5000LONGWOOD, FL 32779---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 TRACT R (ROAD R/W)81790004403Notice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.Petition: PL20190002017, PL20190002018 | Buffer: 1000' | Date: 2/10/2020 | Site Location: 00298560103POList_1000.xls9.A.4.ePacket Pg. 1033Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1034 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1035 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 1 of 9 Wayne: We’re on? All right. Well, good evening, I’m Wayne Arnold, I’m a professional planner with Q. Grady Minor & Associates and this is Sharon Umpenhour, she is recording our meeting and, uh, this Jim Banks our traffic engineer and Laura DeJohn, who you just met, she is, um, a private sector person, but she and her company are doing some reviews for the county to alleviate some more workload and Sue Faulkner is with the Comprehensive Planning Section from, uh, Collier County. So, welcome, uh, we’re here for two, uh, applications that are pending before the county; one is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to take the – what was the former highway patrol headquarter, uh, space and add that to activity center #9. And activity center #9 is all of the area that’s around the intersection of Davis and I-75, the county has identified, um, several activity centers and that’s where you’re supposed to put new commercial activities, new industrial activity, et cetera. We’re also here to then rezone the property to, uh, industrial. It’s currently zoned agriculture and it’s – it’s kind of odd that a portion of the site near the – the, uh, toll booth is designated as part of the rural plans mixed-used designation and all the property is under agriculture and, uh, the state put this property in, uh, its surplus property a couple of, uh, three years ago now, and the current property owner purchased it from the state of Florida. And so, he’s — Candy: I’m sorry, it was purchased from the State of Florida? Wayne: – yes, it was. It was purchased by the state – from the state and so this is a location exhibit and you can see it’s identified in yellow, everything west of the property on Beck Boulevard is part of Tollgate PUD; everything to the east is outside the urban area and we have obviously some neighbors that are the RV to the southeast and then we’re separated from Forest Wind by a large preserve area. But our intent is to go ahead and add this to the activity center and just start from this one, you can see that everything outlined in purple on this exhibit, it’s the existing activity center #9, we’re the little triangular piece that says subject property and it is just outside the activity center. And we’ve talked to staff about creating our own unique subdistrict for ourselves and I think we all agreed that if we’re gonna bring this in for nonagricultural use, it was just as easy to expand the activity center boundary by 3.4 acres and to address it that way. So, that’s what we’re doing, we’re technically amending 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1036 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 2 of 9 the activity center boundary by expanding it for the – the property, it’s about – just under three and a half acres and then we would rezone that same three and a half acres to industrial. That’s – shows the highlighted area to the right, a tiny little piece added to the activity center boundary and then it’s really in a nutshell, what we’re doing – the zoning for industrial is just that, it’s – it’s not like a PUD that you may be familiar with, um, the industrial is, we’re using the industrial zoning district that’s in the land development code as it’s written and, uh, the owner doesn’t have a specific end user, but he’s been approached by a number of different users that end up being sort of the heavy commercial or light industrial type users. Um, he’s got a survey company that’s been very interested, he’s been approached from contractors who want easy access to I-75. Uh, the property is pretty unique, given its location and former use of the highway patrol headquarters. The, um, I think there was – I had some call earlier about, woops, wrong direction, whether or not the property is going to have direct access to I-75, and it will not. I mean you can see on the far-right image that we have on the location is that there’s a – a driveway, that the highway patrolmen utilized. Candy: Right. Wayne: And, um, but that’s – we don’t have any ingress egress rights to I- 75 so the presumption is we — Candy: We would cut off that – that road front that highway patrol uses? Wayne: – I don’t know. I know that, um, the day I was out here visiting, there were some highway patrol cars actually parked in the parking lot, probably just as they used to, doing whatever, you know, paperwork that they have to do. So, I don’t know about that, but, um, don’t really have an answer for that. Do y’all have any other questions about what we’re doing and how we’re doing it? Candy: Well, what specific you’re saying, um, industrial, do you know – you said light commercial, heavy commercial? Wayne: Yeah, there’s — Candy: That kind of range is really broad. Wayne: – it is a broad range and the county’s land development code for 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1037 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 3 of 9 industrial that we’re – we’re using, allows everything from office type uses to manufacturing of things, um, I you know, things of – industrial things are changing rapidly, we do a lot more that, you know, probably under the county’s code would have been a heavy industrial use years ago, that is something that you can do easily in a – a setting that’s an office type setting, whether it’s testing and laboratory type work et cetera. Again, he doesn’t have any specific end user here, but we’re asking for like 40,000 square feet of, um, space on the 3.4 acre piece of property. Candy: What about — Sharon: Can I ask one question of you first please? What was your name? Candy: My name’s Candy. Sharon: Candy. Jim: Yeah, we need it for the record. Sharon: And your first name? Julie: Julie. Sharon: Julie? Julie: Mm-hmm. Sharon: Thank you. Candy: Uh, the utilities, now I know they do not have county sewer there, but there’s a lift station. Wayne: Mm-hmm. Candy: How does that affect – if you’re going to put in industrial, how does that affect the whole area that doesn’t have county sewer, that’s all on lift station? Wayne: It does have county sewer available at Tollgate. So, the – the water and sewer can be extended just immediately to the east to service the property. Candy: Okay. Wayne: Mm-hmm. Which, that’s again why it makes sense to, you know, it 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1038 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 4 of 9 doesn’t even meet the minimum size criteria for agricultural properties in the county so I think – I think most of us acknowledge that it’s probably not the appropriate fit to have this odd little ag – and a very oddly shaped piece of property to begin with, so we’re trying to get some utility out of it for the property owner so he can maybe add on. I know that, um, the highway patrol actually had plans to build a garage and I don’t know if it was a service garage. I didn’t see work bays in it, but they just abandoned the idea to even expand this building so I think, you know, he’s building plans to show another addition to the – it’s roughly a 3,500 square foot building that exists, to expand on it. But you can just give the – the narrowness of the site, a lot of that will end up being utilized for just open space and water management because, you know, — Candy: Yeah, and you’re right over on the, uh, the top – the north, uh, portion there is going right over the – the waterway there. Correct? Wayne: – correct and that’s – that’s, uh, yeah, it’s canal that obviously goes under I-75 — Candy: Canal does, right. Wayne: – there are no easements that exist for the state to cross the property oddly enough, so I’m not sure exactly, you know, I’m – I’m not even sure we can fill in the portions of that to even, you know, fill over it to – to build anything over it, you’re gonna put some parking or something? That’s something we’re gonna work on. And just to be clear, the cell tower is not part of this application, — Candy: Right. Wayne: – it’s separately owned, I just wanted to make sure that that’s known. Yes, ma'am? Julie: So, um, why rezone this to agri – or to industrial? Is the county going to have mandates, not sure what the industrial is going to be, — Wayne: Mm-hmm. Julie: – obviously I’m thinking, you know, having worked in industrial myself, commercial, heavy equipment and all, are they going to have hours of operations or sound and traffic coming and going if 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1039 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 5 of 9 they’re going to potentially have larger trucks that will, um, be – be more of a nuisance to the neighbors? Or will they be able to come and go at any hours of the day and night? Laura: I mean the nature — Wayne: Laura, do you wanna go ahead and answer that? Laura: – of this request is that it’s rezoning to the industrial category. So, it’s not got any special conditions that would be attached because the industrial zoning district of the code would be what governs activity on the site. Wayne: – right. And — Laura: There’s no negotiated — Julie: So, then we have to find out what the code says to find out if we – if it’s a 24 hour – if it could be a 24 hour — Wayne: Well, the code clearly doesn’t – the code, in general, does not set hours of operation for any business use. And, you know, given the proximity to the interchange, I know that some of the other uses out there are probably 24-hour activities, whether it’s a convenience store or somebody else that’s out there. Candy: Yeah, but a convenience store doesn’t have like, uh, dye stamping machines or, — Wayne: Mm-hmm. Candy: – light industrial machines that, you know, could possibly be making noise all night — Wayne: Sure. Candy: – when they have doors open and, — Wayne: Yeah, understood. Candy: – you know, disturbing the neighbors. Wayne: And – and to be clear, the county doesn’t see too many conventional zoning district applications, this is, uh, one of the few that I’m aware of that are circulating through the county right now. And the county attorney does allow the board of county 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1040 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 6 of 9 commissioners to put limitations on conventional zoning. Candy: Okay. Wayne: The county did that on several properties years ago when they reevaluated almost every property, to be consistent with the new comprehensive plan. So, it can be done, they’re probably not going to be wanting a huge exhaustive list, but if it’s something that’s reasonable and a protection for the neighbors, that’s certainly something I know our owner would consider if, you know, and then subject to the county commission on staff saying, that yes, you can actually do that. Sue: And there’s a noise ordinance that limits the decibel levels — Jim: Right. Sue: – it could be generated from any – but that’s, you know, it’s up to you or me playing music at our house and – and industrial activity — Julie: Sure. Sue: – gonna be — [Inaudible – crosstalk] Candy: Well, the reason I ask is because if you go up to Walmart at the corner of 951 and Davis, right around that area is a light industrial and that’s all, um, uh, machinery and, you know, they have some – some places open their doors and let the machinery run 24/7 and you can hear that. Click, click, click, click, pop, pop, pop, pop, kind of thing so that’s why I’m asking that. Wayne: Okay. And it’s a fair question. Candy: Mm-hmm. Candy: What about the, um, the eagles that – that roost up there along that area and hang out around that area? Will that – will they – obviously the trees are gonna come down and they’ll be affected by all of that. Wayne: Yeah, I mean most of the trees that are on the little triangular piece of property are not high-quality trees and the environmental staff’s — 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1041 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 7 of 9 Candy: They don’t care. Wayne: – been out there. No, they don’t, but the — Julie: They are eagles. Candy: They are – they care to hang out right there, yeah. Wayne: – the county makes us. Yeah, well the county makes us remove any exotic vegetation that’s on site regardless and the county and other places, I mean there are numerous eagle’s nests around the community and you have workarounds because you can only do work during certain months of the year and — Candy: Mm-hmm. Wayne: – you have to cease. So, if you’re within so many feet of an eagle nest and — Julie: Will the whole area in the triangle be leveled and just be concrete or what’s the owner’s plan? Wayne: No, we have open space requirements, then we also have, um, landscape buffer requirements. We’re gonna have to put in water management so no, we won’t be paving all of the site. Anything else? Julie: So right now, until the – the county approves it, the residents close by have no idea what the industrial will be? Jim: Yes. Wayne: That’s correct, yeah. We do not today, but you know, this will go through this – the neighborhood information meeting is a required step in the review process. This is required any time after we have our first review by staff and prior to public hearing. We don’t have any public hearing dates scheduled yet, but I’m sure you’ve driven around the county and you see the big 4 by 8 signs that go up on the site? Julie: Mm-hmm. Wayne: You’ll have sign or two when – how many will be posted on this site announcing the planning commission hearing date and then the board of county commissioners. So, the planning commission will 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1042 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 8 of 9 hear it and make a recommendation to the board. And the planning commission is probably the place, if you’re interested in talking about limitations or any kind of restrictions, it’s probably a good place for you. If you can’t be there to at least, you know, write an email to staff or something expressing, you know, any thoughts you have or requests that you have. Or call us and, you know, we can do that too. Julie: Okay. Wayne: Got some information, I think the last slide of our contact information. Candy: I think I had it on, uh, your flyer too here. Wayne: Oh, yeah. You have that and our – so, — [Inaudible – crosstalk] Wayne: – feel free to email Sharon, that’s her information, she gets that. Candy: Okay, thank you I appreciate, uh, all the information. Wayne: Yeah, I’m sorry we don’t have more, but that’s kind of the nature of what we’re doing. Candy: That’s why we’re here, to find out what we can. Wayne: Right, right, exactly. Candy: So, and — Wayne: Well, — Candy: – things aren’t really we appreciate the direct conversation. Wayne: Well, thank you all for coming out. We appreciate it. Candy: Absolutely. Julie: Thank you, appreciate it. Candy: Absolutely. Wayne: Well, I guess we’re adjourned. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1043 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 9 of 9 Candy: Do we – one more question I wanted — Wayne: Oh, sure. Candy: – to ask you. Do you have a time line of – of when you think that this might come to fruition? Wayne: Well, let’s see, it’s March now, I mean I think the best possible case would be April, but I’m not sure that’s even likely, given the current planning commission schedules, which means it could be May for planning commission and then possibly June for the county commission. My goal would be to get it approved in June, if it’s gonna be approved, because otherwise you have to wait until September because they don’t hear land use items in the country in July or August, they take vacation from the board of county commissioners. So, you know, I’d hate for the client to have to wait another two or three months, potentially, that he could be earning some income off of his investments. Candy: Okay. Wayne: All right? Candy: Thank you for the — Wayne: Thank you again. Julie: Thanks. Wayne: Good night. Jim: We have one county staff here. [End of Audio] Duration: 14 minutes 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1044 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) Petitions:PL20190002017, 3205 Beck Boulevard Small-Scale Plan Amendment and;PL20190002018, 3205 Beck Boulevard Rezone March 9, 2020 Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1045 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck •Stephan Verhaaren –Applicant •D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, Professional Planner –Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. •James M. Banks, PE, Traffic Engineer –JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. •Marco A. Espinar, Environmental Planning/Biologist –Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2 Project Team 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1046 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck 3 Location Map •Source: ESRI, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1047 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Existing Future Land Use:Urban Designation,Mixed Use District,Urban Residential Subdistrict and Agricultural/Rural Designation,Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands Proposed Future Land Use:Urban Designation,Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict Current Zoning:A,Agricultural and A,Agricultural (RFMUO-Sending) Project Acreage:3.4+/-acres 4 Project Information 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1048 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck •Small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment proposes to include the entire property into Activity Center #9, which will bring the property into a singular future land use category •Including the property in Activity Center #9 will permit the property to be rezoned for industrial uses, consistent with other properties located within the Activity Center •Activity Center #9 provides for both heavy commercial and industrial land uses to be permitted on the subject property •Rezone the property to I,Industrial to allow a maximum of 40,000 square feet of building area •Rezoning to I,Industrial is consistent with the Activity Center Subdistrict and is consistent with uses permitted in the adjacent Toll Gate PUD/DRI 5 Proposed Request 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1049 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION ************************************ URBAN DESIGNATION ************************************ C. Urban Commercial District ************************************ 2. Interchange Activity Center ************************************ All new projects within Activity Center #9 are encouraged to have a unified plan of development in the form of a Planned Unit Development. However, the 3.4±acre property located east of the Tollgate PUD/DRI and formerly utilized as the Florida Highway Patrol Headquarters shall be permitted to utilize conventional zoning.The mixture of uses allowed in Interchange Activity Center #9 shall include all land uses allowed in the Mixed Use Activity Centers; additionally, industrial uses shall be allowed in the northeast and southeast quadrants of I-75 and Collier Boulevard, and in the southwest quadrant of Collier and Davis Boulevards. The above allowed uses notwithstanding, commercial zoning shall not exceed 55% of the total acreage (632.5635.9 ac.) of Interchange Activity Center #9. The actual mix of uses shall be determined during the rezoning process based on consideration of the same factors listed under the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, and based on the adopted IMP. 6 Proposed Subdistrict Language 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1050 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck 7 Existing Activity Center #9 Subject Property 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1051 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck 8 Proposed Activity Center #9 SITE: URBAN DESIGNATION, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT, ACTIVITY CENTER #9 = 3.43±ACRES 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1052 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck 9 Conclusion Documents and information can be found online: •Gradyminor.com/Planning •Collier County GMD Public Portal: cvportal.colliergov.net/cityviewweb Next Steps •Hearing sign(s) posted on property advertising Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and Board of County Commissioner (BCC) hearing dates. 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1053 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1054 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.e Packet Pg. 1055 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is horoby given that lhe Collie. County Plannin! Commi$lon will hold a public meeting on August I,2,20 commoocing at &m Air. in tho Board ot County Commissione6 Chamb€r, Third Floor, County Gov€mment Cont6r, 3299 East Tamiami Trali, Naples. FL- The purpos6 of the hea ng isldconsider: AN OBOIT{ANCE OF THE BOAFD OF COUNTY COT'MISSIONEBS OF COLLIEN COU TY, FLOBIDA AMENDING ONDINANCE NO, OE.Os, AS AT{ENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN FOB THE UNINCORFORATED AFEA OF COLLIEA COU'{w' FLORIDA, SPECIFICALLY AMENDII{G THE FUTURE LANO USE ELEMENT AND FUTI'NE LANO USE MAP AI{D MAP SERIES BY CHANGING THE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY FNOM THE URBAI{ DESIGNATION, URAAN MIXED USE DIS]BICT, FESIDENTIAL SUBDISTRICT AND THE AGRICULTURAURURAL DESIGNATION, RURAL FRINGE MIXED USE DISTBICT-SENDING LANDS TO THE URBAr{ DESTGNATTON, COMI|EECTAL DrSTRrCr, INTERCHANGE ACTMTY CEI{TER 'O TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF COiIMERCIAL AT{O II{DUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE SUEJECT PFOPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NONTH SIDE OF BECK BOULEVAND I{EAR IHE TERMINUS OF BECK BOULEVARO IN S€CNO S 35 AND 36, TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, BANGE 20 EASI AND SECTTONS I AND 2, 'OWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CO STSTTNG OF 3rr3 ACRESi AND FURTHERMORE, nEcolrlt ENDlilG TRANAMITAL OF Tl'lE ADOPIEO AITENDMENT TO THE FLORIoA DEPAFTiTENT OF ECONOMIC OPPOntUNITY| PRovlDlNG FOR SEVERAaILIY At{D PROVIDIT.IG FOR AN EFFECTTVE DATE. IPL2019OM14 & AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOAND OF COUNTY COr|MISSIONERS OF GOLLIER COU}'ITY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2O04.4I, AS Ai'EIDED, THE COLLIEB COUT{TY LAND DEVELOPIIENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE COUPAEHE}.IS]VE ZOI{ING FEGULATIONS FOR THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLIIEB COUNTY, FLORIDA EY AMETIDI G THE APPROPR| TE ZONING ATLAS MAP OR MAPS BY CHAI{GII{O THE ZOI'III{G CLASSIFICAT|o OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED NEAL PROPEBTY FROM AN AGFICULTIJRAL (AI ZOI{ING OISTRICT AND AN AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICTwTHABUBALFnIIGE MIXED USEDlsTnlcT-SEr{Dlt'lc LANOSZONINGOVERLAY(A-nFMUO- SET{DI}{G LANDS) TO AN INOUSTRIAL IO zONING OISTRICT FOR THE PBOPERTY LOCATED ON THE NOFIH SIDE OF BECK BOUI.EVAND tlEAB THE TERMIIIUS OF BECX BOULEVARD II{ SECTIOIS 35 AND 30, TOwtlSHlP rl0 SOUIH, RANGE 26 EAST, ANO SECfiO S I ANO 2, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, CONSISTING OF 3./tS ACRES; pBOVIDING FOR PABIIAL REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 92-56, A CONOITIONAL USE FOR A TELECOMMUNICATTOII TOWER, AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTTVE DATE. tPulot9ctxt20r8l J @ Eo Beck BLVD o All i orosLd panies a.s lnvlted to appoar ard bo hoard. Copie6 of the poposed OnDl),lAt{CE(S} will be mad€ awihble lor in3pec,tion al th6 GMD Zonino Divitlon, Comprrh€nsiv€ Planning S6ction,2800 N. Hors€shoe Dr, Naples, botwoon lhe houB ol8l)0 AM. and 5:00 PM., Molday through Fridey. Furthemore, the malorigls will bo mado avallable br lnsp€ction et lho Collls County Clolk's Otlice, Foudh noor, Collior County Govemment Center, 3209 East T.miaml TEil, Suito 401 Nsples, one w6ok prior to the schedulod headng. Any questions p€ataininO to tho documonb shoold bo dlEctod to lho GMD Zoning Dlvision, Compr6h6nsiv6 Planning Section. Wdli€ comlnents liled with tho Clerk lo lho Boadb Ofilco prior to augugt 0, 20a0, will be r6.d and considerod Et tl|€ public hoaring. Ag part ol an ongoing initiatlve to pmmoto locial distancing during th6 COVIO- 19 pandornic, the public will have lho oppoftrnfty to povido publlo oomments ,9mot6l, as well as ln p€rson. dudng this proceeding. lnalividuals who wouH like to psrticlpate Bftololy, 3hould logistor any timo aftor th6 agonda is poslod on tho Counv wob€ito whlch ie I days bsfo.s lhe mgstlrlg &ough tho llnk provial€d on the tront pa96 ol the County websiie at uM\i.colli6rEoonM.o6v. lndfuHuels who rrgistor will rocoive En omail in advance of lho prrblic hearing delailing hor lh6y cen panicipsto Ernotoly in lhls moding. For additional intormalion about lhe meetino, pleaso call Thomas Clarko at (239) 252-2526 or omailio @ Any porson who decid€s io appGal any doclllon ol lho Colllgl Courtv Plenning CommirBbn will neod a rocord ol the procoedhos portalnlng th6rrto adt $orsfore, may no€d to en6ura thst a verb€tirn racord of lho proceodings Ir r[do, f,trk$ rocord includB tle tdlnlony 6'|d ovftlorco upon whlch thg app€sl is bas€d. l, !,0u ar6 a p€llod wilh a disabllity wto ,rrads any accorinodstkrn in odsr to paiicipats in this gocsoding, you all endtled, al no co€t to you, to tho prwidon ot cedain eralaLnco. Plaa!€ cortacl the Colll€r County Facilities trLnao€m€nt Dlvlsion, loc.t€d at gl3li Tdmlemi Treil Eest, Suhe 101. N6ples, FL 34112-5356, (239) 252-S380, at least lwo d€ys pdor lo th€ mo€tirE. As6hrt€d listonlng devices tor tha he€dng imp6iEd ere availgble in lho Bo6rd ot Counly commis8|olloas Olfico. Edwin Fryer, Chakman Coliier CounV Plannino Commission July 17,2020 IOA I FRIDAY, JULY 17,2020 I }IAPLIS DAILY TIEWS 9.A.4.f Packet Pg. 1056 Attachment: 04_CCPC Ad as Posted 7.17.20 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 9.A.4.g Packet Pg. 1057 Attachment: 05_CCPC-BCC Hybrid Meeting Waiver - executed (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA) 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 9.A.5 Item Summary: PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE: An Ordinance of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, which established 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 descr ibed real property from an Agricultural (A) zoning district and an Agricultural zoning district with a Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Sending Lands zoning overlay (A-RFMUD-Sending Lands) to an Industrial (I) zoning district for the property located on the north side of Beck Boulevard near the terminus of Beck Boulevard in Sections 35 and 36, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, and Sections 1 and 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 3.43 acres; providing for partial repeal of Ordinance No. 92-56, a conditional use for a telecommunication tower, and by providing an effective date.(Companion to PL20190002017) [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, Principal Planner] Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: – Zoning Name: Laura DeJohn 07/09/2020 1:02 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 07/09/2020 1:02 PM Approved By: Review: Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/10/2020 5:28 PM Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 07/13/2020 10:26 AM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 07/15/2020 1:43 PM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 07/16/2020 10:25 AM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/20/2020 9:52 AM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 9.A.5 Packet Pg. 1058 Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 1 of 13 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DIVISION OF PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 2020 SUBJECT: PL20190002018; 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE (COMPANION TO SMALL SCALE GMPA-PL20190002017) PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: Owner: Agent(s): Stephan Verhaaren D. Wayne Arnold, AICP 1042 Jardin Drive Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. Naples, FL 34104 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs, FL 34134 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider a rezone of the subject 3.4+ acre site from the Rural Agricultural (A) and Rural Agricultural-Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay-Sending (A-RFMUO-Sending) zoning districts to the Industrial (I) zoning district. A companion small scale Growth Management Plan (GMP) Amendment proposes to amend the Future Land Use Map designation for the site from Urban Designation, Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District- Sending Lands to Urban Designation, Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center #9. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The property is located at 3205 Beck Boulevard in Section 35 & 36, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida and Sections 1 and 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. (See location map on the following page.) 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1059 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 2 of 13 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1060 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 3 of 13 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property is a 3.4± acre parcel located at 3205 Beck Boulevard, near the eastern terminus of Beck Boulevard. Interstate I-75 and the Alligator Alley tollbooth abut the property to the north. The site is zoned A, Rural Agricultural, and A-RFMUO-Sending, Rural Agricultural- Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay-Sending. The request is to rezone the property to the I, Industrial, zoning district. The site has an existing building and parking lot which formerly served as a station for the Florida Highway Patrol. An existing communication tower, now not included in the site, was originally approved by Conditional Use Ordinance 92-56 for a 300-foot tall tower, which was approved on the triangular-shaped parcel in 1992 (see Attachment B). The State determined that the property was no longer necessary for use by the Highway Patrol and sold the 3.4+ acre site to the current property owner in 2017. The communications tower is retained by the State of Florida on a 0.27± acre parcel with a corresponding 20-foot wide ingress egress easement across the subject site connecting the tower site to Beck Boulevard (see Attachment C). The tower and underlying State- owned property are not included in this zoning action. The proposed rezoning of the 3.4+ acre site will render it no longer part of the Conditional Use approved by Ordinance 92-56, leaving the Conditional Use approval only applicable to the 0.27+ acre parcel occupied by the existing tower. The site is located within two Future Land Use (FLU) categories. Approximately 1.99 acres are located in the Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and 1.44± acres are located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Sending. The proposed Industrial zoning designation would be inconsistent with the current FLU designations; therefore, the applicant has submitted a companion small scale Amendment (GMPA-PL20190002017) to amend the Future Land Use designations per the GMP. The companion small scale GMP Amendment proposes to add the subject property to Interchange Activity Center #9, which will bring the property into a single future land use category that allows the proposed permitted uses of the Industrial zoning district. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING: North: I-75 Right-Of-Way including toll gate to the northeastern portion of the parcel. East: I-75 Right-Of-Way including toll gate to the northeastern portion of the parcel. South: Preserve for Forest Glen Golf and Country Club (generally approved for 1.26 residential units per acre and 100,000 square feet of commercial); Toll Plaza RV Park PUD also known as Naples RV Resort (Built Out); East Toll Plaza PUD also known as Panthers Walk RV Resort (Closed Out) West: Drainage/Preserve Tract (+17.85 acres) within Tollgate Commercial Center PUD/DRI which extends to Collier Boulevard and is approved for 348,600 commercial square feet & 550,000 industrial square feet 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1061 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 4 of 13 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The western portion of the subject property (approximately 1.99-acres) is designated Urban, Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict, and the eastern portion of the subject site (approximately 1.44 acres) is designated Rural/Agricultural, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Sending Lands as identified on the Future Land Use Map of the GMP. The current designations do not allow the uses that are permitted within the Industrial zoning district. The application is companion to a small scale GMP Amendment to incorporate the 3.4 + acre parcel within Interchange Activity Center #9. Activity Center #9 allows for all land uses allocated to the Mixed-Use Activity Centers; additionally, industrial uses are allowed in the northeast and southeast quadrants of I-75 and Collier Boulevard, and in the southwest quadrant of Collier and Davis Boulevards. The subject site would be located in the southeast quadrant of I-75 and Collier Boulevard. The FLUE description of the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict provides that allowances for industrial uses, limited to manufacturing, warehousing, storage, and distribution, shall be reviewed during the rezone process to determine if it will be compatible with existing and approved land uses. The description states (bold added for emphasis): The Planned Unit Development and/or rezoning ordinance shall contain specific language regarding the permitted Industrial land uses, compatibility requirements, and development standards consistent with the following conditions. Site-specific development details will be reviewed during the Site Development Plan review process. Subject Site 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1062 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 5 of 13 a. Landscaping, buffering and/or berming shall be installed along the Interstate; b. Fencing shall be wooden or masonry; c. Wholesale and storage uses shall not be permitted immediately adjacent to the right-of-way of the Interstate; d. Central water and sewage systems shall be required; e. Ingress and egress shall be consistent with State Access Management Plans, as applicable; f. No direct access to the Interstate right-of-way shall be permitted; g. Joint access and frontage roads shall be established when frontage is not adequate to meet the access spacing requirements of the Access Control Policy, Activity Center Access Management Plan provisions, or State Access Management Plans, as applicable; h. Access points and median openings shall be designed to provide adequate turning radii to accommodate truck traffic and to minimize the need for U- turn movements; i. The developer shall be responsible to provide all necessary traffic improvements to include traffic signals, turn lanes, deceleration lanes, and other improvements deemed necessary ‒ as determined through the rezoning process; and, j. A maximum floor area ratio (FAR) for the designated Industrial land uses component of the projects shall be established at 0.45. The rezoning may be deemed consistent with the FLUE subject to the applicable conditions if the companion GMP Amendment petition is adopted. Transportation Element (TE): Staff reviewed the petitioner’s Traffic Impact Statement for consistency with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) using the 2019 Annual Update and Inventory Reports (AUIR). The TIS submitted in the petition indicates that the proposed Industrial use will generate approximately +/- 27 PM peak hour, two-way trips on the adjacent roadway links. Based on the current 2019 AUIR, the adjacent road network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed rezone within the five-year planning period. Therefore, the petition can be found consistent with Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat). Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME): Environmental staff has evaluated the petition. The property is 3.43 acres; the project has been found cons istent with the goals, objectives and policies of the CCME. GMP Conclusion: Staff finds the petition may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element subject to conditions outlined in the GMP if the companion GMP Amendment is adopted. STAFF ANALYSIS: 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1063 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 6 of 13 Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition including the criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically noted in LDC Subsection 10.02.08.F, Nature of Requirements of Planning Commission Report (referred to as “Rezone Findings”), which establish the legal basis to support the CCPC’s recommendation. The CCPC uses 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. This evaluation is completed as part of the Zoning and Land Development Review provided below. In addition, staff offers the following analyses: Environmental Review: Environmental Planning staff has reviewed this petition. Preservation is not required for the proposed rezoning petition. Industrial properties with a native vegetation requirement of 2 acres or less are exempt from preservation of native vegetation in accordance with LDC section 3.05.07.B.2.h. The site contains approximately +1.53 acres of native vegetation, which equates to a preserve requirement of 0.15 acres (1.53 x 10% = 0.15), and therefore is exempt. 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 Department Staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and is recommending approval. The TIS submitted in the petition indicates that the proposed Industrial use will generate approximately +/- 27 PM peak hour, two- way trips on the adjacent roadway links. Based on the current 2019 AUIR, the adjacent road network has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed rezone within the five-year planning period. Operational impacts will be addressed at time of first development order (SDP or Plat). Utility Review: The project lies within the regional potable water service area and the south wastewater service area of the Collier County Water-Sewer District (CCWSD). Water and wastewater services are readily available via connections to existing infrastructure within adjacent right-of-way. Sufficient water and wastewater treatment capacities are available. Zoning Review: The land use pattern in the local area contains a mix of industrial, commercial, preserve, recreational vehicle parks and public uses. The site is positioned between a highway, a collector road, and a large commerce center immediately to the west. In light of these adjacencies, the 3.4+ acre site is proposed to be incorporated in the boundary of Interchange Activity Center #9 through a companion GMP Amendment. The result will be continuity of industrial and commercial uses along the north side of Beck Boulevard. To the south of the site are two existing PUDs approved and operating as Recreational Vehicle Parks. These parks are commercial for zoning purposes; however, occupants use the RV Park for short term or longer-term living accommodations. The Industrial (I) zoning district purpose and intent is stated in LDC Section 2.03.04.A: …to provide lands for manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution. Service and commercial activities that are related to manufacturing, processing, storage and warehousing, wholesaling, and distribution 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1064 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 7 of 13 activities, as well as commercial uses relating to automotive repair and heavy equipment sales and repair are also permissible in the I district. The I district corresponds to and implements the industrial land use designation on the future land use map of the Collier County GMP. The mix of uses allowed in Interchange Activity Center #9 includes all land uses allowed in the Mixed-Use Activity Centers; additionally, industrial uses are allowed in the southeast quadrant of I-75 and Collier Boulevard, where the subject site is located. The Activity Center #9 Overlay Zoning District is established in LDC Section 2.03.07.K and is applicable to properties identified in the Land Use Map of the Activity Center #9 Interchange Master Plan. Therefore, the Overlay Zoning District and associated design standards for architecture, landscaping and lighting in LDC Section 4.02.23 are applicable to the subject site. The applicant proposes any of the 57 uses permitted in the Industrial zoning district as allowable for the site, which range from eating places to outdoor storage yards, wholesale trade, and vocational schools. The applicant’s submittal identifies proposed uses for the subject site as industrial/manufacturing/warehousing with a building area of 40,000 square feet for traffic analysis purposes. Maximum building height in the Industrial zoning district is 50 feet. The petitioner’s proposed building area of 40,000 square feet equates to Floor Area Ratio of 0.27 for the subject site. Staff’s recommendation includes conditions to limit uses and square feet as proposed and evaluated in the petitioner’s request. The site was formerly used as a Florida Highway Patrol station, a use that generated traffic and could have extended operating hours. The proposed industrial use of the site with up to 40,000 square feet of building area has potential to generate more traffic, noise and glare than the former use. Staff’s recommendation includes a condition to limit hours of operations to address these potential impacts on the occupants of the RV Parks across Beck Boulevard. The site was also developed with a communications tower, which was approved on what was then a 3.7+ acre triangular shaped site by Conditional Use Ordinance 92-56. Since the disposition of the 3.4+ acres of the State’s property to the petitioner in 2017, the tower is now on a State-owned 0.27+ acre parcel that connects to Beck Boulevard by a 20-foot wide ingress-egress easement. The Conditional Use approval for the tower will be retained on the 0.27+ acre parcel, however the area considered the tower’s potential fall zone as contemplated in LDC Section 5.05.09 is now on the petitioner’s property. To address this, staff recommends a condition that no buildings can be constructed within the critical separation distance identified for adjacent properties in LDC Section 5.05.09.G.7.b. This critical separation is half the height of the tower and antennas, or the tower's certified collapse area, whichever distance is greater. CONCURRENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS: Except for the companion GMPA, there are no concurrent land use applications under review at the present time. 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1065 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 8 of 13 Rezone Findings: LDC Subsection 10.03.05.I. states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable” (Staff’s responses to these criteria are provided in bold font): 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, & policies of the Future Land Use Map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan. The property is currently subject to two future land use categories, the Urban Mixed - Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Sending. The rezoning application is a companion small scale GMP amendment to bring the 3.4+ acre site within Interchange Activity Center #9, which would allow for both commercial and industrial uses. Comprehensive Planning staff has indicated the petition may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element of the GMP if the companion GMP Amendment is adopted. 2. The existing land use pattern; The pattern in the vicinity of the site is varied with the large residential Forest Glen of Naples PUD to the southwest, Interstate 75 (I-75) to the north and east, the Toll Gate PUD/DRI industrial and commercial project to the west and two Recreational Vehicle parks to the south (Toll Plaza RV Park PUD and East Toll Plaza PUD). It should be noted per the LDC, travel trailer recreational vehicle parks are considered commercially zoned. The location is transitional in nature, evidenced by the split Future Land Use and zoning designations that exist on the site. This demonstrates that the site is situated where both the more urban characteristics to the west and traditionally rural characteristics to the east converge. The proposed Industrial property is separated from the nearest residential dwellings at Forest Glen by an extensive preserve that is over 2,500 feet in width. Considering the prior use of the site for a Highway Patrol station and the ongoing use of a communication tower situated in the midst of the site, the proposed rezoning to a single zoning district of Industrial is in keeping with the existing land use pattern. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts; The subject site is immediately adjacent to Toll Gate Plaza PUD/DRI which allows commercial, light industrial and institutional uses as part of Interchange Activity Center #9. The proposed Industrial zoning designation and proposed incorporation of the site in the Interchange Activity Center brings the property into alignment with the adjacent district. 4. Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn in relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change. 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1066 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 9 of 13 Existing district boundaries currently result in a split of the site between two districts: A, Rural Agricultural, and A-RFMUO-Sending, Rural Agricultural-Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay-Sending. Resolving the split zoning with a single designation of I, Industrial zoning is logical for future use of the site. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed rezoning necessary. The parcel was developed as a Florida Highway Patrol station and sold as surplus property to the current owner. The allowance for law enforcement use in the Agricultural zoned district is established by LDC Section 2.01.03.E, Essential Services. The current zoning designations of A, Rural Agricultural, and A-RFMUO-Sending, Rural Agricultural-Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay-Sending are not practical given that the developed condition of the site is not conducive with permitted uses by a private party in the A and A-RFMUO-Sending districts. Rezoning to a more conducive zoning district is appropriate. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood; The property has been occupied with non-residential uses for over 20 years as a Florida Highway Patrol station and a communication tower. Proposed uses for the subject site were identified as industrial/manufacturing/ warehousing with a building area of 40,000 square feet for traffic analysis purposes. The proposed intensification of the site from a public purpose facility to an industrial use with up to 40,000 square feet of building area has potential to generate more traffic, noise and glare than the former use. Given the uses proposed for analysis purposes, staff’s recommendations include limiting certain uses and limiting hours of operations to address these potential impacts on the occupants of the RV Parks across Beck Boulevard. Buffers that meet the requirements of the LDC will be provided. 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 TIS submitted in the application indicates that the proposed Industrial use will generate approximately +/- 27 PM peak hour, two-way trips on the adjacent roadway links. The roadway infrastructure has sufficient capacity to serve the proposed project at this time. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The action of rezoning in and of itself does not create a drainage problem. The proposed future development of the site will require review and approval of a surface water management system in accordance with South Florida Water Management District criteria associated with the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) process; and the 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1067 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 10 of 13 County will require a Site Development Plan that is designed to meet stormwater attenuation and treatment standards. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas; The LDC provides for adequate building setbacks and buffering to ensure adjacent areas will not be negatively impacted by the proposed development. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area; The site has been developed with a Highway Patrol station and a communication tower. The proposed rezoning from Agricultural districts to Industrial district will allow for a greater range of uses and thus a greater value attributable to the site. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations; Development of adjacent properties has occurred over time per applicable PUD approvals, and development or improvement will be able to continue undeterred. Immediately south across Beck Boulevard form the subject site, Toll Plaza RV Park PUD (also known as Naples RV Resort) is a Built-Out PUD, meaning that no future development is proposed to occur. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasting with the public welfare; The owner/petitioner has adhered to the procedural due process established by the County for rezoning. The rezoning decision is based on evaluations and recommendations considering the welfare of the public. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning; The parcel was developed as a Florida Highway Patrol station and sold as surplus property to the current owner. The allowance for law enforcement use in the Agricultural zoned district is established by LDC Section 2.01.03.E, Essential Services. The site is now owned by a private party. The current zoning designations of A, Rural Agricultural, and A-RFMUO-Sending, Rural Agricultural-Rural Fringe Mixed Use Overlay-Sending, are not practical given that the developed condition of the site is not conducive with the nature of permitted uses by a private party in the A and A-RFMUO- Sending districts. Rezoning to a more conducive zoning district is appropriate. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the County; 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1068 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 11 of 13 The subject site is 3.4+ acres adjacent to an Interstate Interchange. The proposed rezoning will bring a more consistent pattern of zoning to the local area. Staff’s recommendation includes limiting size of future development to the building size of 40,000 square feet proposed by the petitioner for analysis purposes. This yields a floor area ratio of 0.27, which is not out of scale with the surrounding suburban character. 15. Whether is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the County for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. Other industrially zoned sites exist in the County that could accommodate the uses proposed. The position of the site in proximity to the In terstate Interchange and the proposed inclusion of the site in the Interchange Activity Center #9 are circumstances specific to this site that make it appropriate to consider rezoning to Industrial. 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. The property is an unusually shaped narrow triangle parcel with utilities available and direct access to Beck Boulevard. The site has been developed with a Highway Patrol station and parking lot, which can be improved consistent with the Industrial zoning district uses and standards as proposed and conditioned. Staff’s recommended conditions to limit building size and uses and to meet separation standards for buildings from the existing communication tower are proposed to make the parcel usable for the potential uses of the Industrial zoning district as conditioned. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, as amended. There are adequate roadways and utilities available at the site. Collier County Water and Sewer District serves the site, and there are adequate water and wastewater treatment capacities available to future development as proposed by thi s petition. The roadway infrastructure is sufficient to serve the proposed project, as noted in the Transportation Element consistency review. Operational impacts will be addressed at 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. The proposed development must comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations when development approvals, including but not limited to any plats and or si te development plans, are sought. 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. 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1069 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 12 of 13 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): A neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on March 9, 2020 at the South Regional Library. Two members of the public were in attendance. The agent provided a PowerPoint presentation and described the companion petitions for Rezoning and for small scale Amendment to the GMP. The following questions and comments were raised over the course of the meeting, which lasted approximately 14 minutes: • A question was asked about the specific end user. The agent responded by describing the uses allowed in the Industrial Zoning District but stated no specific end user had been identified. • The agent acknowledged the 40,000 square foot building could be considered the maximum potential development. • Hours of operation were a topic of discussion. An attendee voiced concern based on another manufacturing facility that conducts 24-hour activities and the potential for associated noise to impact occupants of the RV Park south of Beck Boulev ard. The agent stated that the LDC does not limit on hours of operations, but in the past conventional rezoning approvals have included conditions, and that the owner would consider limitation on hours of operation if imposed by the County. • An attendee asked if the entire triangle site would be paved over. The agent explained the facility was subject to water management, buffer requirements and open space requirements. • The agent encouraged the public to attend the Planning Commission hearing to discuss any type of restrictions on the future facility. The NIM Sign-In Sheet and Meeting Summary are included in Attachment D. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report on July 6, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition PL20190002018 Beck Boulevard Rezone to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of approval, subject to approval and effective date of the companion GMP Amendment petition, and subject to the following conditions: 1. The following conditions apply as stated under the Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict within the Future Land Use Element: a. Landscaping, buffering and berming standards applicable to Activity Center #9 of LDC Section 4.02.23.D shall apply; b. Fencing shall be wooden or masonry; c. Wholesale and storage uses shall not be permitted immediately adjacent to the right-of-way of the Interstate; d. Central water and sewage systems are required; 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1070 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Beck Boulevard Rezone, PL20190002018 August 6, 2020 CCPC Revised: July 9, 2020 Page 13 of 13 e. Ingress and egress shall be consistent with State Access Management Plans, as applicable; f. No direct access to the Interstate right-of-way shall be permitted; g. Joint access and frontage roads shall be established when frontage is not adequate to meet the access spacing requirements of the Access Control Policy, Activity Center Access Management Plan provisions, or State Access Management Plans, as applicable; h. Access points and median openings shall be designed to provide adequate turning radii to accommodate truck traffic and to minimize the need for U- turn movements; i. The developer shall be responsible to provide all necessary traffic improvements to include traffic signals, turn lanes, deceleration lanes, and other improvements deemed necessary; and, j. Maximum gross floor area of buildings is 40,000 square feet. 2. The following uses on the permitted use list in LDC Section 2.03.04.A.1.a. for the I, Industrial, zoning district are prohibited: 4. ) Automotive repair, service and parking (7513-7549) 11.) Crematories (7261) 13.) Eating places (5812), except lunchtime mobile food service is allowed. 50.) Transportation by air (4512-4581) 51.) Transportation services (4789) 3. The maximum total daily trip generation for the rezoned property shall not exceed 27 two- way PM peak hour net trips based on the use codes in the ITE Manual on trip generation rates in effect at the time of application for SDP/SDPA or subdivision plat approval. 4. Hours of operation shall be limited to the hours between 6:00 AM and 10:00 PM. 5. No buildings shall be constructed within the critical separation distance of half the height of the adjacent communication tower and antennas, or the tower's certified collapse area, whichever distance is greater per the provisions for separation of LDC Sec. 5.05.09.G.7.b. 6. Conditional Use approval for a communication tower granted by Ordinance 92-56 is extinguished from the subject property and is retained on the 0.27± acre tower parcel owned by the State of Florida. The tower and underlying State-owned parcel are not included in this zoning action. The 20-foot wide ingress egress easement described in O.R. Book 5469, Page 2039 shall remain reserved across the subject site providing access from Beck Boulevard to the tower parcel. Attachments: A. Proposed Ordinance B. Ordinance 92-56 approving Conditional Use for Communication Tower C. Quitclaim Deed with reservation of 20’ ingress/egress and utility easement for Communication Tower D. Application/Backup Material Tentatively scheduled for the October 27, 2020 Board of County Commissioners Meeting 9.A.5.a Packet Pg. 1071 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.b Packet Pg. 1072 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Proposed Ordinance - 070620(1) (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.b Packet Pg. 1073 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Proposed Ordinance - 070620(1) (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.b Packet Pg. 1074 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Proposed Ordinance - 070620(1) (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.b Packet Pg. 1075 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Proposed Ordinance - 070620(1) (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.b Packet Pg. 1076 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Proposed Ordinance - 070620(1) (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1077 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1078 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1079 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1080 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1081 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1082 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1083 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.c Packet Pg. 1084 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.d Packet Pg. 1085 Attachment: ATTACHMENT C - Quit Claim reserving ingress egress to tower parcel (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD 9.A.5.d Packet Pg. 1086 Attachment: ATTACHMENT C - Quit Claim reserving ingress egress to tower parcel (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD 9.A.5.d Packet Pg. 1087 Attachment: ATTACHMENT C - Quit Claim reserving ingress egress to tower parcel (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com 3205 Beck Boulevard Rezone (PL20190002018) Application and Supporting Documents August 6, 2020 CCPC Hearing 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1088 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 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 December 13, 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: Application for Public Hearing, 3205 Beck Boulevard Rezone PL20190002018, Submittal 1 Dear Ms. Gundlach: A Collier County application for Public Hearing for a Rezone for properties located at 3205 Beck Boulevard is being filed electronically for review. This application proposes to rezone the 3.43+/- acre parcel to allow industrial uses. A companion Growth Management Plan Amendment (PL20190002017) will be filed simultaneously to add the subject 3.4+/- acre infill property to Interchange Activity Center #9, and to include text referencing the property in the Future Land Use Element subsection for Interchange Activity Center #9. Documents filed with submittal 1 include the following: 1. Completed Application 2. Pre-Application meeting notes 3. Evaluation Criteria 4. Affidavit of Authorization 5. Addressing Checklist 6. Property Ownership Disclosure Form 7. Utility Dedication Statement 8. Signed and Sealed Survey 9. Warranty Deeds 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1089 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Mr. Nancy Gundlach, AICP RE: Application for Public Hearing, 3205 Beck Boulevard Rezone PL20190002018, Submittal 1 December 13, 2019 Page 2 of 2 10. Environmental Data 11. Aerial photograph 12. Traffic Impact Statement Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Sincerely, D. Wayne Arnold, AICP c: Stephan Verhaaren GradyMinor File 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1090 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/2017 Page 1 of 8 STANDARD REZONE APPLICATION LDC Section 10.02.08 Chapter 3 H. of the Administrative Code PROJECT NO PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED 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: ____________________________________________________________________ PROPERTY INFORMATION Provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application, if space is inadequate, attach on separate page: x 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; x 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 x 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: ___________________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ To be completed by staff and 35 & 36 /49 /26 Stephan Verhaaren Stephan Verhaaren 1042 Jardin Drive Naples FL 34104 239-269-3199 stephan283@hotmail.com D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey Bonita Springs FL 34134 239-947-1144 warnold@gradyminor.com 1 & 2 50 26 N.A. N.A.N.A. N.A. N.A.00298560103 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1091 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/217 Page 2 of 8 Size of Property: ________ft. x ________ ft. = _________ Total Sq. Ft. Acres: ________ Address/ General Location of Subject Property: __________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 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: (If space is inadequate, attach on separate page) Section/Township/Range: / / Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: ________________________________________________________ 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 subject property: __________________________________ Be aware that Collier County has lobbyist regulations. Guide yourself accordingly and ensure that you are in compliance with these regulations. Irregular 149,410+/-Irregular 3.43+/- 3205 Beck Boulevard A, Agricultural Alligator Alley (I-75) Toll Plaza and ROW Forest Glen of Naples PUD, Toll Plaza RV Park PUD and East Toll Plaza PUD Beck Boulevard ROW, Preserve and RV Resort A, Agricultural Alligator Alley (I-75) ROW Tollgate PUD/DRI Water Management/Wetlands N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.N.A. N.A. N.A.N.A. N.A. A and A (RFMUO-Sending)I, Industrial Former FHP Station Industrial land uses 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1092 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/217 Page 3 of 8 ASSOCIATIONS Requirement: 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: ______ EVALUATION CRITERIA Pursuant to LDC section 10.02.08, staff’s 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, please provide a narrative statement describing the rezone request with specific reference to the criteria noted below. Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request. 1. Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies, future land use map and elements of the Growth Management Plan. 2. The existing land use pattern. 3. The possible creation of 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 for the proposed change. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment (rezone) when necessary. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. N.A. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1093 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/217 Page 4 of 8 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. 10. Whether the proposed change will seriously affect property values in the adjacent area. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. 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. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [Code Ch. 106, art. II], as amended]. 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. Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions; however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected by existing deed restrictions. Previous land use 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. No 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1094 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/217 Page 5 of 8 STATEMENT OF UTILITY PROVISIONS FOR STANDARD REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Applicant(s): _______________________________________________________________ Address: _________________________________ City: ___________ State: ________ ZIP: _______ Telephone: ____________________ Cell: _____________________ Fax: ______________________ E-Mail Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Address of Subject Property (If available): ______________________________________________ City: _______________ State: _________ ZIP: __________ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Section/Township/Range: / / Lot: Block: Subdivision: ___________________________________________________ Plat Book: Page #: Property I.D. Number: ____________________________________ Metes & Bounds Description: _________________________________________________________ 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 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: ____________ and 35 & 36 /49 /26 40,000 sf Industrial @1 empl per 1,000 sf = 40 empl Assume 2 bays ADF = 40 empl x 15 gpd/empl + 2 bays x 100 gpd/bay = 800 gpd MDF = 1.35 x 800 gpd = 1080 gpd Stephan Verhaaren 1042 Jardin Drive Naples FL 34104 239-269-3199 stephan283@hotmail.com 3205 Beck Boulevard 1 & 2 50 26 N.A. N.A.N.A. N.A. N.A.00298560103 See Boundary Survey 40,000 S.F. Industrial Uses (warehouse) 1512 GPD 1120 GPD 1080 GPD 800 GPD ✔ ✔ 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1095 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/217 Page 6 of 8 If proposing to be connected to Collier County Regional Water System, please provide the date service is expected to be required: ____________________________________________________ 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. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS This land use petition requires a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), pursuant to Chapter 3 H. 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 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. N.A. Existing facility Existing facility 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1096 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/217 Page 7 of 8 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: Standard Rezone Chapter 3 H. 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 time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) 1 Pre-Application meeting notes 1 Project Narrative 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed and notarized 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Utility Provisions Statement with sketches 1 Signed and Sealed Survey 1 Conceptual Site Plan 1 Architectural Rendering List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 1 Warranty Deeds 1 Environmental Data Requirements, pursuant to LDC section 3.08.00 1 Listed Species Survey; less than 12 months old. Include copies of previous surveys 1 Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with project boundary and, if vegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend included on aerial. Historical Survey or waiver request 1 Traffic Impact Statement, with applicable fees 1 School Impact Analysis Application – residential projects only 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans 1 *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement 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.” ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1097 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 09/28/217 Page 8 of 8 Planners: Indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following additional reviewers: Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Historical Review City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Immokalee Water/Sewer District: Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams and David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or EMS: Artie Bay School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Other: Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00 (Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the last pre-application meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre-application meeting will be required) Rezone Petition (regular): $6,000.00 plus $25.00 an acre (or fraction thereof) o Additional Fee for 5th and subsequent reviews: 20% of original fee Comprehensive Planning Consistency Review: $750.00 Listed/Protected Species Survey: $1,000.00 Estimated Legal Advertising: o CCPC- $1,125.00 o BCC- $500.00 Transportation Fee: o Methodology Review: $500.00 (Additional fees to be determined at Methodology meeting) School Concurrency Review: If required, 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. 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. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department Planning and Regulation ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Applicant/Owner Name (please print) X X X X X XX X ATTN: 2800 Nor Nap D. Wayne Arnold, AICP February 18, 2020 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1098 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1099 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1100 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1101 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1102 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1103 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1104 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1105 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1106 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1107 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1108 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1109 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1110 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1111 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1112 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1113 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1114 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1115 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1116 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1117 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1118 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1119 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1120 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone (PL20190002018) Evaluation Criteria February 12, 2020 Page 1 of 4 3205BBZ-19 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 section 10.02.08, staff’s 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. Narrative The subject property, 3205 Beck Boulevard, is a 3.4± acre parcel located near the terminus of Beck Boulevard and zoned A, Agricultural. This rezone proposes to rezone the property to I, Industrial. The site is located within two Future Land Use Categories. 1.99± acres are located in the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and 1.44± acres are located within the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Sending. The companion Small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment proposes to include the entire property into Activity Center #9, which will bring the property into a singular future land use category. The subdistrict provides for both heavy commercial and industrial land uses to be permitted on the subject property, with a maximum of 40,000 square feet of building area. The rezoning to I, Industrial is consistent with the proposed subdistrict and is consistent with uses permitted in the adjacent Toll Gate PUD/DRI. 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. A companion small-scale plan amendment has been filed, which will include the property into Activity Center #9, which will permit approximately 40,000 square feet of building area. The property is currently split by two future land use categories, the Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict and the Agricultural/Rural Designation, Rural Fringe Mixed Use District – Sending. Including the property in Activity Center #9 will permit the property to be rezoned for industrial uses, consistent with other properties located within the Activity Center. 2. The existing land use pattern. The subject property is located at the northeast end of Beck Boulevard, adjacent to Interstate 75 (I-75). The properties located to the west are zoned PUD/DRI and is a portion of the preserve for the Toll Gate PUD/DRI. Properties to the south are zoned Forest Glen of Naples PUD, Toll Plaza RV Park PUD and East Toll Plaza PUD. The properties to the north and east are Zoned A, Agriculture and are developed with the I-75 ROW and Alligator Alley tollbooth. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1121 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone (PL20190002018) Evaluation Criteria February 12, 2020 Page 2 of 4 3205BBZ-19 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 has an existing building on-site which served as the headquarters for the Florida Highway Patrol. The State determined that the property was no longer necessary for use by the Highway Patrol and sold as surplus property to the current property owner. The site is adjacent to I-75 and the Alligator Alley tollbooth. A 300’ tall cellular communications tower was approved on approximately 0.27± acres of the property in 1992 for the State of Florida. The cellular tower and underlying property are not included in this zoning action as it remains under ownership of the State of Florida Department of Health. The project will be required to provide buffers and building setbacks per the Land Development Code. Based on the environmental analysis, the easternmost portion of the site is vegetation and the minimum preservation area will likely be located across from the Toll Plaza RV Park. It should be noted that under the definitions of the County’s LDC, travel trailer recreational vehicle parks are considered to be zoned commercially. The proposed Industrial property is separated from the nearest residential dwellings at Forest Glen by an extensive preserve that is over 2,500 feet in width. 3. The possible creation of an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts. While the property is not adjacent to conventional industrial zoning, it is immediately adjacent to an industrial PUD, Toll Gate Plaza PUD/DRI. The 3.4± acre parcel is not eligible to be rezoned to a PUD due to its size; however, the proposed industrial zoning is consistent with the Interstate Activity Center #9 standards of the Future Land Use Element which authorizes zonings for heavy commercial or industrial uses. 4. 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. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The property is currently zoned Agricultural and RFMU-Sending Overlay, which does not permit the proposed industrial uses; therefore, a zoning change is required. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1122 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone (PL20190002018) Evaluation Criteria February 12, 2020 Page 3 of 4 3205BBZ-19 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 has been utilized for non-residential uses for over 20 years as the Highway Patrol headquarters and 300 feet tall cellular tower. Access will be on Beck Boulevard, which is accessible to Collier Boulevard via a signalized intersection. The trips associated with the 3.4± acres of industrial land will have no LOS impacts. Buffers that meet the requirements of the LDC will be provided. 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. A traffic impact analysis has been submitted in support of the proposed rezone. No level of service issues have been identified. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The property will be required to obtain an environmental resource permit which does regulate surface water management. 9. Whether the proposed change will seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas. Given the proposed building setbacks, and buffering, there will be no reduction in light or air for adjacent properties. 10. Whether the proposed change will adversely affect property values in the adjacent area. The use should have no adverse impact to property values. 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. The proposed zoning change will not be a detriment to the development or adjacent property. The property immediately abuts the Alligator Alley toll booth and parking lot. 12. Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. Every property owner has the right to apply to change the zoning on their property. This does not grant a special privilege. The zoning change will have no impact on public welfare. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1123 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone (PL20190002018) Evaluation Criteria February 12, 2020 Page 4 of 4 3205BBZ-19 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 13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accordance with existing zoning. The property is zoned A, Agricultural and RFMU-Sending Overlay and has been developed with a building and improvements that support the former Highway Patrol headquarters and a 300- foot cellular tower. The tower site is not included in the rezoning. The site as zoned does not permit what the owner believes is the highest and best use of the site which is commercial/industrial uses. 14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or the county. The proposed rezone is in scale with the needs of the neighborhood and Collier County and represents the only land available adjacent to the activity center boundary. 15. Whether it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county for the proposed use in districts already permitting such use. There are other sites that are zoned industrial. 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. The subject property is developed with a former Florida Highway Patrol facility and has water and sewer available. 17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance [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. 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. The project is consistent with the proposed small-scale Growth Management Plan and it is compatible with surrounding development. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1124 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1125 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1126 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1127 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 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 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1128 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 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 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1129 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) $ 250,000 $ 146,630 $ 118,803 $ 265,433 $ 265,433 $ 265,433 $ 265,433 Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Summary Parcel No 00298560103 SiteAddress*Disclaimer 3205 BECKBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34114 Name / Address VERHAAREN, STEPHAN 1042 JARDIN DR City NAPLES State FL Zip 34104 Map No.Strap No.Section Township Range Acres  *Estimated 4B36 000100 004 04B36 36 49 26 3.41 Legal 36 49 26 THAT PORTION OF SEC 35 & 36 AS DESC IN OR 5469 PG 2037 Millage Area 287 Millage Rates   *Calculations Sub./Condo 100 - ACREAGE HEADER School Other Total Use Code 17 - OFFICE BLDG, NON-PROF, ONE STORY 5.083 6.3071 11.3901 Latest Sales History (Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality) Date Book-Page Amount 01/22/18 5469-2037  2019 Preliminary Tax Roll (Subject to Change) Land Value (+) Improved Value (=) Market Value (=) Assessed Value (=) School Taxable Value (=) Taxable Value If all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after theFinal Tax Roll   9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1130 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Collier County Property AppraiserProperty Aerial Parcel No 00298560103 SiteAddress*Disclaimer 3205 BECKBLVD Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note 34114 Open GIS in a New Window with More Features. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1131 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1132 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT  GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT  www.colliergov.net  2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE  NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104  (239) 252‐2400 FAX: (239) 252‐6358  Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3        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      Stephan Verhaaren, 1042 Jardin Drive, Naples FL 34104 100          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       N.A.           c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the  percentage of interest:    Name and % of Ownership       N.A.                 PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM  9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1133 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT  GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT  www.colliergov.net  2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE  NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104  (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       N.A.     e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation,  Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the  officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners:  Name and Address % of Ownership       N.A.   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      N.A.          g. Date subject property acquired 01/2018    Leased: Term of lease  years /months    If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:    Date of option:        Date option terminates:    , or  Anticipated closing date:          Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form.  Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether  individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest‐holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County  AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION  9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1134 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT  GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT  www.colliergov.net  2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE  NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104  (239) 252‐2400 FAX: (239) 252‐6358  Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3        immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing.    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.    The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to:  Growth Management Department  ATTN: Business Center  2800 North Horseshoe Drive  Naples, FL 34104                    February 3, 2020   Agent/Owner Signature       Date    D. Wayne Arnold, AICP        Agent/Owner Name (please print)  9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1135 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1136 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.ePacket Pg. 1137Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.ePacket Pg. 1138Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.ePacket Pg. 1139Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1140 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1141 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1142 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1143 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1144 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1145 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1146 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1147 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1148 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1149 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1150 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1151 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1152 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1153 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1154 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) I75 Beck BLVDCollier BLVDWhite Lake BLVD Plover AVE Shaw BLVDBRENNAN DRShearwater STJAY LE BUFFS RDPeriwinkle WAYCITY GATE BLVD S Sunrise BLVDDavis BLVD Tollhouse DR Tollgate BLVDBUSINESS CIRBedzel CIRCITY GATE DR KINGFISHER CIRINCOME LNSource: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community ´ 3205 Beck Boulevard Location Map I75 Beck BLVD White Lake BLVD JAY IBISSunrise BLVDLE BUFFS RDLOVEBIRD LN H ERON ORIOLE LN Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community SUBJECT PROPERTY SUBJECT PROPERTY 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1155 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1156 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1157 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1158 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1159 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1160 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1161 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1162 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1163 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1164 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1165 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1166 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1167 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1168 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1169 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1170 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1171 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1172 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1173 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1174 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1175 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1176 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1177 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone (PL20190002018) Zoning Exhibit February 12, 2020 Page 1 of 1 3205BBZ-19 Zoning Exhibit.docx Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134  239-947-1144  engineering@gradyminor.com  www.gradyminor.com SUBJECT PROPERTY: 3.43± Acres Zoned: Agricultural 1.99+/- acres Zoned: Agricultural (RFMUO-Sending) 1.44+/- acres 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1178 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1179 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 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 20, 2020 RE: Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM); Petition PL20190002017, 3205 Beck Boulevard Small-Scale Growth Management Plan Amendment (GMPA) and Petition PL20190002018 3205 Beck Boulevard Rezone Dear Property Owner: A Neighborhood Information Meeting hosted by D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., representing Stephan Verhaaren (Applicant) will be held on March 9, 2020, 5:30 pm at the South Regional Library, 8065 Lely Cultural Pkwy, Naples, FL 34113. Stephan Verhaaren submitted formal applications to Collier County, seeking approval of a Small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment and Standard Rezone. These applications propose to include the entire property into Activity Center #9, which will bring the property into a singular future land use category and rezone the property from A, Agricultural and A, Agricultural with RFMU-Sending Overlay to I, Industrial. The subject property (Parcel Number 00298560103) is comprised of 3.4± acres, located near the eastern terminus of Beck Boulevard in Section 1 and 2, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. Project information is posted online at www.gradyminor.com/planning. If you have questions or comments, they can be directed to Sharon Umpenhour, Senior Planning Technician, Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., 3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, Florida 34134, sumpenhour@gradyminor.com, phone 239-947-1144, fax 239-947-0375. The Collier County Public Library does not sponsor or endorse this program. PROJECT LOCATION MAP 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1180 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 1NAME1 NAME2 NAME3 NAME4 NAME5 NAME6 LEGAL1 LEGAL2 LEGAL3 LEGAL4 FOLIOARH DEVELOPMENT LLC 2827 SILVERLEAF LNNAPLES, FL 34105---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 2081790004801BLUE PARROT PROPERTIES LLC 3579 ADMIRALS WAYDELRAY BEACH, FL 33483---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 481790004487BOT TIIF C/O DEP DIV OF STATE LANDS 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL STATION 108 TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---3000 35 49 26 THAT PORTIONS OF SEC 1 & 2 TWP 50 RNG 26 AND SEC'S 35 & 36 DESC AS:COMM AT NW CNR SEC 1, S 58.28FT TO POB, N89 00298440100BOT TIIF C/O DEP DIV OF STATE LANDS 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL STATION 108 TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399---3000 1 50 26 COMM NW CNR, S 200FT, E 1328.06FT TO POB, CONT E 657.35FT, S 1265.52FT, W 658FT, N 1291.6FT TO POB 00397120004COLLIER COUNTY 3335 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST STE 101NAPLES, FL 34112---0 36 49 26 BEG NW CNR SEC 36 S 89 DEG 50'08"E FOR 2,648.50 FT, THEN S 00DEG 27'21"E FOR 2653.60FT, THEN S 00DEG 26' 00298480005COLLIER COUNTY 3301 TAMIAMI TRL ENAPLES, FL 34112---0 36 49 26 PARC 3 NOW I-75 + ACCESS RD NO 1#00298560006EVERYDAY HOLDINGS LLC 5835 YOUNG QUIST RDFORT MYERS, FL 33912---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 281790004445FOREST GLEN GOLF & CC MASTER ASSN INC 3855 FOREST GLEN BLVDNAPLES, FL 34114---2516 FOREST GLEN OF NAPLES TRACT P-132720000361H & W VENTURES LLC 3500 SHEARWATER STNAPLES, FL 34117---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 2181790004827H&S NAPLES LLC 4270 MIDDLETOWN ROADORGONIA, OH 45054---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1381790004665JGPINEDA LLC 3585 33RD AVE NENAPLES, FL 34120---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 181790004429KENNETH D CARTER REV TRUST3890 7TH AVE NWNAPLES, FL 34120---1645 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1981790004788NAPLES INDUSTRIAL LLC 3518 PLOVER AVENAPLES, FL 34117---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 381790004461SHIRWIN INC PO BOX 7129NAPLES, FL 34101---0 1 50 26 FROM S1/4 CNR SEC 1, N 3975FT, S88 DEG W 1316FT FOR POB, S88 DEG W 658FT, N 1536.8 FT, N80DEG E 657.85FT, S1525.5 00396360001STORE MASTER FUNDING X LLC %RAYMOND BLDG SUPPLY, LLC 1900 LARSEN RDGREEN BAY, WI 75219---0 TOLLGATE COMMERCIAL CENTER PHASE THREE TRACT 3876885101145STORE MASTER FUNDING X LLC %RAYMOND BLDG SUPPLY, LLC 1900 LARSEN RDGREEN BAY, WI 75219---0 TOLLGATE COMMERCIAL CENTER PHASE THREE TRACT 3976885101161STRUCTURE MEDICAL LLC 9935 BUSINESS CIRCLENAPLES, FL 34112---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1481790004681STRUCTURE MEDICAL LLC 9935 BUSINESS CIRCLENAPLES, FL 34112---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 LOT 1581790004704SUN CLUB NAPLES LLC 27777 FRANKLIN RD STE 200SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034---8205 1 50 26 FROM S1/4 CNR SEC 1, N 3975FT, S88DEG W 1974FT TO POB S88DEG W 666.5FT, N 1548.3FT, N89DEG E 669.65FT, S 1536.8FT 00396320009TOLL GATE COMMERCIAL CENTE% A M PAPINEAU 1165 CLAM CT APT 13NAPLES, FL 34102---564 TOLLGATE COMMERCIAL CENTER PHASE THREE TRACT D (DRAINAGE/CONSERVATION/ PRESERVE) 76885100557VERHAAREN, STEPHAN 1042 JARDIN DRNAPLES, FL 34104---0 36 49 26 THAT PORTION OF SEC 35 & 36 AS DESC IN OR 5469 PG 203700298560103WHITE LAKE COMMONS ASSN IN % SENTRY MANAGEMENT INC 2180 WEST SR 434 #5000LONGWOOD, FL 32779---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 TRACT A (CONSER AREA)81790004364WHITE LAKE COMMONS ASSOC I% SENTRY MANAGEMENT INC 2180 WEST SR 434 #5000LONGWOOD, FL 32779---0 WHITE LAKE CORPORATE PARK PHASE 3 TRACT R (ROAD R/W)81790004403Notice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.Petition: PL20190002017, PL20190002018 | Buffer: 1000' | Date: 2/10/2020 | Site Location: 00298560103POList_1000.xls9.A.5.ePacket Pg. 1181Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1182 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1183 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 1 of 9 Wayne: We’re on? All right. Well, good evening, I’m Wayne Arnold, I’m a professional planner with Q. Grady Minor & Associates and this is Sharon Umpenhour, she is recording our meeting and, uh, this Jim Banks our traffic engineer and Laura DeJohn, who you just met, she is, um, a private sector person, but she and her company are doing some reviews for the county to alleviate some more workload and Sue Faulkner is with the Comprehensive Planning Section from, uh, Collier County. So, welcome, uh, we’re here for two, uh, applications that are pending before the county; one is a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to take the – what was the former highway patrol headquarter, uh, space and add that to activity center #9. And activity center #9 is all of the area that’s around the intersection of Davis and I-75, the county has identified, um, several activity centers and that’s where you’re supposed to put new commercial activities, new industrial activity, et cetera. We’re also here to then rezone the property to, uh, industrial. It’s currently zoned agriculture and it’s – it’s kind of odd that a portion of the site near the – the, uh, toll booth is designated as part of the rural plans mixed-used designation and all the property is under agriculture and, uh, the state put this property in, uh, its surplus property a couple of, uh, three years ago now, and the current property owner purchased it from the state of Florida. And so, he’s — Candy: I’m sorry, it was purchased from the State of Florida? Wayne: – yes, it was. It was purchased by the state – from the state and so this is a location exhibit and you can see it’s identified in yellow, everything west of the property on Beck Boulevard is part of Tollgate PUD; everything to the east is outside the urban area and we have obviously some neighbors that are the RV to the southeast and then we’re separated from Forest Wind by a large preserve area. But our intent is to go ahead and add this to the activity center and just start from this one, you can see that everything outlined in purple on this exhibit, it’s the existing activity center #9, we’re the little triangular piece that says subject property and it is just outside the activity center. And we’ve talked to staff about creating our own unique subdistrict for ourselves and I think we all agreed that if we’re gonna bring this in for nonagricultural use, it was just as easy to expand the activity center boundary by 3.4 acres and to address it that way. So, that’s what we’re doing, we’re technically amending 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1184 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 2 of 9 the activity center boundary by expanding it for the – the property, it’s about – just under three and a half acres and then we would rezone that same three and a half acres to industrial. That’s – shows the highlighted area to the right, a tiny little piece added to the activity center boundary and then it’s really in a nutshell, what we’re doing – the zoning for industrial is just that, it’s – it’s not like a PUD that you may be familiar with, um, the industrial is, we’re using the industrial zoning district that’s in the land development code as it’s written and, uh, the owner doesn’t have a specific end user, but he’s been approached by a number of different users that end up being sort of the heavy commercial or light industrial type users. Um, he’s got a survey company that’s been very interested, he’s been approached from contractors who want easy access to I-75. Uh, the property is pretty unique, given its location and former use of the highway patrol headquarters. The, um, I think there was – I had some call earlier about, woops, wrong direction, whether or not the property is going to have direct access to I-75, and it will not. I mean you can see on the far-right image that we have on the location is that there’s a – a driveway, that the highway patrolmen utilized. Candy: Right. Wayne: And, um, but that’s – we don’t have any ingress egress rights to I- 75 so the presumption is we — Candy: We would cut off that – that road front that highway patrol uses? Wayne: – I don’t know. I know that, um, the day I was out here visiting, there were some highway patrol cars actually parked in the parking lot, probably just as they used to, doing whatever, you know, paperwork that they have to do. So, I don’t know about that, but, um, don’t really have an answer for that. Do y’all have any other questions about what we’re doing and how we’re doing it? Candy: Well, what specific you’re saying, um, industrial, do you know – you said light commercial, heavy commercial? Wayne: Yeah, there’s — Candy: That kind of range is really broad. Wayne: – it is a broad range and the county’s land development code for 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1185 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 3 of 9 industrial that we’re – we’re using, allows everything from office type uses to manufacturing of things, um, I you know, things of – industrial things are changing rapidly, we do a lot more that, you know, probably under the county’s code would have been a heavy industrial use years ago, that is something that you can do easily in a – a setting that’s an office type setting, whether it’s testing and laboratory type work et cetera. Again, he doesn’t have any specific end user here, but we’re asking for like 40,000 square feet of, um, space on the 3.4 acre piece of property. Candy: What about — Sharon: Can I ask one question of you first please? What was your name? Candy: My name’s Candy. Sharon: Candy. Jim: Yeah, we need it for the record. Sharon: And your first name? Julie: Julie. Sharon: Julie? Julie: Mm-hmm. Sharon: Thank you. Candy: Uh, the utilities, now I know they do not have county sewer there, but there’s a lift station. Wayne: Mm-hmm. Candy: How does that affect – if you’re going to put in industrial, how does that affect the whole area that doesn’t have county sewer, that’s all on lift station? Wayne: It does have county sewer available at Tollgate. So, the – the water and sewer can be extended just immediately to the east to service the property. Candy: Okay. Wayne: Mm-hmm. Which, that’s again why it makes sense to, you know, it 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1186 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 4 of 9 doesn’t even meet the minimum size criteria for agricultural properties in the county so I think – I think most of us acknowledge that it’s probably not the appropriate fit to have this odd little ag – and a very oddly shaped piece of property to begin with, so we’re trying to get some utility out of it for the property owner so he can maybe add on. I know that, um, the highway patrol actually had plans to build a garage and I don’t know if it was a service garage. I didn’t see work bays in it, but they just abandoned the idea to even expand this building so I think, you know, he’s building plans to show another addition to the – it’s roughly a 3,500 square foot building that exists, to expand on it. But you can just give the – the narrowness of the site, a lot of that will end up being utilized for just open space and water management because, you know, — Candy: Yeah, and you’re right over on the, uh, the top – the north, uh, portion there is going right over the – the waterway there. Correct? Wayne: – correct and that’s – that’s, uh, yeah, it’s canal that obviously goes under I-75 — Candy: Canal does, right. Wayne: – there are no easements that exist for the state to cross the property oddly enough, so I’m not sure exactly, you know, I’m – I’m not even sure we can fill in the portions of that to even, you know, fill over it to – to build anything over it, you’re gonna put some parking or something? That’s something we’re gonna work on. And just to be clear, the cell tower is not part of this application, — Candy: Right. Wayne: – it’s separately owned, I just wanted to make sure that that’s known. Yes, ma'am? Julie: So, um, why rezone this to agri – or to industrial? Is the county going to have mandates, not sure what the industrial is going to be, — Wayne: Mm-hmm. Julie: – obviously I’m thinking, you know, having worked in industrial myself, commercial, heavy equipment and all, are they going to have hours of operations or sound and traffic coming and going if 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1187 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 5 of 9 they’re going to potentially have larger trucks that will, um, be – be more of a nuisance to the neighbors? Or will they be able to come and go at any hours of the day and night? Laura: I mean the nature — Wayne: Laura, do you wanna go ahead and answer that? Laura: – of this request is that it’s rezoning to the industrial category. So, it’s not got any special conditions that would be attached because the industrial zoning district of the code would be what governs activity on the site. Wayne: – right. And — Laura: There’s no negotiated — Julie: So, then we have to find out what the code says to find out if we – if it’s a 24 hour – if it could be a 24 hour — Wayne: Well, the code clearly doesn’t – the code, in general, does not set hours of operation for any business use. And, you know, given the proximity to the interchange, I know that some of the other uses out there are probably 24-hour activities, whether it’s a convenience store or somebody else that’s out there. Candy: Yeah, but a convenience store doesn’t have like, uh, dye stamping machines or, — Wayne: Mm-hmm. Candy: – light industrial machines that, you know, could possibly be making noise all night — Wayne: Sure. Candy: – when they have doors open and, — Wayne: Yeah, understood. Candy: – you know, disturbing the neighbors. Wayne: And – and to be clear, the county doesn’t see too many conventional zoning district applications, this is, uh, one of the few that I’m aware of that are circulating through the county right now. And the county attorney does allow the board of county 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1188 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 6 of 9 commissioners to put limitations on conventional zoning. Candy: Okay. Wayne: The county did that on several properties years ago when they reevaluated almost every property, to be consistent with the new comprehensive plan. So, it can be done, they’re probably not going to be wanting a huge exhaustive list, but if it’s something that’s reasonable and a protection for the neighbors, that’s certainly something I know our owner would consider if, you know, and then subject to the county commission on staff saying, that yes, you can actually do that. Sue: And there’s a noise ordinance that limits the decibel levels — Jim: Right. Sue: – it could be generated from any – but that’s, you know, it’s up to you or me playing music at our house and – and industrial activity — Julie: Sure. Sue: – gonna be — [Inaudible – crosstalk] Candy: Well, the reason I ask is because if you go up to Walmart at the corner of 951 and Davis, right around that area is a light industrial and that’s all, um, uh, machinery and, you know, they have some – some places open their doors and let the machinery run 24/7 and you can hear that. Click, click, click, click, pop, pop, pop, pop, kind of thing so that’s why I’m asking that. Wayne: Okay. And it’s a fair question. Candy: Mm-hmm. Candy: What about the, um, the eagles that – that roost up there along that area and hang out around that area? Will that – will they – obviously the trees are gonna come down and they’ll be affected by all of that. Wayne: Yeah, I mean most of the trees that are on the little triangular piece of property are not high-quality trees and the environmental staff’s — 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1189 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 7 of 9 Candy: They don’t care. Wayne: – been out there. No, they don’t, but the — Julie: They are eagles. Candy: They are – they care to hang out right there, yeah. Wayne: – the county makes us. Yeah, well the county makes us remove any exotic vegetation that’s on site regardless and the county and other places, I mean there are numerous eagle’s nests around the community and you have workarounds because you can only do work during certain months of the year and — Candy: Mm-hmm. Wayne: – you have to cease. So, if you’re within so many feet of an eagle nest and — Julie: Will the whole area in the triangle be leveled and just be concrete or what’s the owner’s plan? Wayne: No, we have open space requirements, then we also have, um, landscape buffer requirements. We’re gonna have to put in water management so no, we won’t be paving all of the site. Anything else? Julie: So right now, until the – the county approves it, the residents close by have no idea what the industrial will be? Jim: Yes. Wayne: That’s correct, yeah. We do not today, but you know, this will go through this – the neighborhood information meeting is a required step in the review process. This is required any time after we have our first review by staff and prior to public hearing. We don’t have any public hearing dates scheduled yet, but I’m sure you’ve driven around the county and you see the big 4 by 8 signs that go up on the site? Julie: Mm-hmm. Wayne: You’ll have sign or two when – how many will be posted on this site announcing the planning commission hearing date and then the board of county commissioners. So, the planning commission will 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1190 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 8 of 9 hear it and make a recommendation to the board. And the planning commission is probably the place, if you’re interested in talking about limitations or any kind of restrictions, it’s probably a good place for you. If you can’t be there to at least, you know, write an email to staff or something expressing, you know, any thoughts you have or requests that you have. Or call us and, you know, we can do that too. Julie: Okay. Wayne: Got some information, I think the last slide of our contact information. Candy: I think I had it on, uh, your flyer too here. Wayne: Oh, yeah. You have that and our – so, — [Inaudible – crosstalk] Wayne: – feel free to email Sharon, that’s her information, she gets that. Candy: Okay, thank you I appreciate, uh, all the information. Wayne: Yeah, I’m sorry we don’t have more, but that’s kind of the nature of what we’re doing. Candy: That’s why we’re here, to find out what we can. Wayne: Right, right, exactly. Candy: So, and — Wayne: Well, — Candy: – things aren’t really we appreciate the direct conversation. Wayne: Well, thank you all for coming out. We appreciate it. Candy: Absolutely. Julie: Thank you, appreciate it. Candy: Absolutely. Wayne: Well, I guess we’re adjourned. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1191 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Transcript PL20190002018 3205 Beck Blvd Rezone March 9, 2020 NIM Page 9 of 9 Candy: Do we – one more question I wanted — Wayne: Oh, sure. Candy: – to ask you. Do you have a time line of – of when you think that this might come to fruition? Wayne: Well, let’s see, it’s March now, I mean I think the best possible case would be April, but I’m not sure that’s even likely, given the current planning commission schedules, which means it could be May for planning commission and then possibly June for the county commission. My goal would be to get it approved in June, if it’s gonna be approved, because otherwise you have to wait until September because they don’t hear land use items in the country in July or August, they take vacation from the board of county commissioners. So, you know, I’d hate for the client to have to wait another two or three months, potentially, that he could be earning some income off of his investments. Candy: Okay. Wayne: All right? Candy: Thank you for the — Wayne: Thank you again. Julie: Thanks. Wayne: Good night. Jim: We have one county staff here. [End of Audio] Duration: 14 minutes 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1192 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) Petitions:PL20190002017, 3205 Beck Boulevard Small-Scale Plan Amendment and;PL20190002018, 3205 Beck Boulevard Rezone March 9, 2020 Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1193 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : •Stephan Verhaaren –Applicant •D. Wayne Arnold, AICP, Professional Planner –Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A. •James M. Banks, PE, Traffic Engineer –JMB Transportation Engineering, Inc. •Marco A. Espinar, Environmental Planning/Biologist –Collier Environmental Consultants, Inc. 2 Project Team 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1194 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : 3 Location Map •Source: ESRI, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1195 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : Existing Future Land Use:Urban Designation,Mixed Use District,Urban Residential Subdistrict and Agricultural/Rural Designation,Rural Fringe Mixed Use District, Sending Lands Proposed Future Land Use:Urban Designation,Commercial District, Interchange Activity Center Subdistrict Current Zoning:A,Agricultural and A,Agricultural (RFMUO-Sending) Project Acreage:3.4+/-acres 4 Project Information 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1196 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : •Small-scale Growth Management Plan amendment proposes to include the entire property into Activity Center #9, which will bring the property into a singular future land use category •Including the property in Activity Center #9 will permit the property to be rezoned for industrial uses, consistent with other properties located within the Activity Center •Activity Center #9 provides for both heavy commercial and industrial land uses to be permitted on the subject property •Rezone the property to I,Industrial to allow a maximum of 40,000 square feet of building area •Rezoning to I,Industrial is consistent with the Activity Center Subdistrict and is consistent with uses permitted in the adjacent Toll Gate PUD/DRI 5 Proposed Request 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1197 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION SECTION ************************************ URBAN DESIGNATION ************************************ C. Urban Commercial District ************************************ 2. Interchange Activity Center ************************************ All new projects within Activity Center #9 are encouraged to have a unified plan of development in the form of a Planned Unit Development. However, the 3.4±acre property located east of the Tollgate PUD/DRI and formerly utilized as the Florida Highway Patrol Headquarters shall be permitted to utilize conventional zoning.The mixture of uses allowed in Interchange Activity Center #9 shall include all land uses allowed in the Mixed Use Activity Centers; additionally, industrial uses shall be allowed in the northeast and southeast quadrants of I-75 and Collier Boulevard, and in the southwest quadrant of Collier and Davis Boulevards. The above allowed uses notwithstanding, commercial zoning shall not exceed 55% of the total acreage (632.5635.9 ac.) of Interchange Activity Center #9. The actual mix of uses shall be determined during the rezoning process based on consideration of the same factors listed under the Mixed Use Activity Center Subdistrict, and based on the adopted IMP. 6 Proposed Subdistrict Language 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1198 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : 7 Existing Activity Center #9 Subject Property 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1199 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : 8 Proposed Activity Center #9 SITE: URBAN DESIGNATION, COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, INTERCHANGE ACTIVITY CENTER SUBDISTRICT, ACTIVITY CENTER #9 = 3.43±ACRES 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1200 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : 9 Conclusion Documents and information can be found online: •Gradyminor.com/Planning •Collier County GMD Public Portal: cvportal.colliergov.net/cityviewweb Next Steps •Hearing sign(s) posted on property advertising Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) and Board of County Commissioner (BCC) hearing dates. 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1201 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1202 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 1 of 3 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 Bratwurst Properties LLC, 1042 Jardin Drive, Naples FL 34104 Stephan Verhaaren, Authorized Member 100 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 N.A. c. If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest: Name and % of Ownership N.A. PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1203 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (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 N.A. e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners: Name and Address % of Ownership N.A. 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 N.A. g. Date subject property acquired 01/2018 Leased: Term of lease years /months If, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following: Date of option: Date option terminates: , or Anticipated closing date: Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form. Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1204 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT www.colliergov.net 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3 immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition’s final public hearing. 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. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 July 9, 2020 Agent/Owner Signature Date D. Wayne Arnold, AICP Agent/Owner Name (please print) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1205 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 1042 JARDIN DR NAPLES, FL 34104 Current Principal Place of Business: Current Mailing Address: 1042 JARDIN DR NAPLES, FL 34104 Entity Name: BRATWURST PROPERTIES LLC DOCUMENT# L16000004124 FEI Number: 81-1513239 Certificate of Status Desired: Name and Address of Current Registered Agent: CANNON, THOMAS G 5089 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL NAPLES, FL 34113 US The above named entity submits this statement for the purpose of changing its registered office or registered agent, or both, in the State of Florida. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Registered Agent Date Authorized Person(s) Detail : I hereby certify that the information indicated on this report or supplemental report is true and accurate and that my electronic signature shall have the same legal effect as if made under oath; that I am a managing member or manager of the limited liability company or the receiver or trustee empowered to execute this report as required by Chapter 605, Florida Statutes; and that my name appears above, or on an attachment with all other like empowered. SIGNATURE: Electronic Signature of Signing Authorized Person(s) Detail Date FILED Jan 20, 2020 Secretary of State 5727642766CC STEPHAN VERHAAREN AMBR 01/20/2020 2020 FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ANNUAL REPORT No Title AMBR Name VERHAAREN, STEPHAN G Address 1042 JARDIN DR City-State-Zip:NAPLES FL 34104 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1206 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1207 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1208 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.e Packet Pg. 1209 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 9.A.5.f Packet Pg. 1210 Attachment: CCPC-BCC Hybrid Meeting Waiver - executed - 7-13 CAO accepted (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE) 08/06/2020 COLLIER COUNTY Collier County Planning Commission Item Number: 5.A Item Summary: June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes Meeting Date: 08/06/2020 Prepared by: Title: Supervisor - Operations – Road Maintenance Name: Diane Lynch 06/29/2020 12:05 PM Submitted by: Title: Manager - Planning – Zoning Name: Ray Bellows 06/29/2020 12:05 PM Approved By: Review: Road Maintenance Diane Lynch Review item Completed 06/29/2020 12:05 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/01/2020 2:35 PM Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Donna Guitard Review Item Completed 07/10/2020 12:22 PM Growth Management Department James C French Review Item Completed 07/11/2020 8:39 PM Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 07/13/2020 3:15 PM Planning Commission Mark Strain Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM 9.A.6 Packet Pg. 1211 Page 1 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: AUGUST 6, 2020 SUBJECT: PDI-PL20190002553, ROCKEDGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) PROPERTY OWNER: Waterman at Rockedge Naples, LLC 265 Sevilla Avenue Coral Gables, FL 33134 APPLICANT/AGENT: Applicant: Agent: D.R. Horton, Inc. Mr. Kenrick S. Gallander, AICP 10541 Ben C. Pratt Six Mile Cypress Parkway RWA, Inc. Fort Myers, FL 33966 6610 Willow Park Drive Naples, FL 34109 REQUESTED ACTION: The petitioner requests that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) approve an insubstantial change to Ordinance Number 16-03, the Rockedge Planned Unit Development by revising the Master Plan to relocate and reconfigure the recreational area tract, the residential tract, the water management lake tracts, the internal roadway network, and the future bicycle and pedestrian interconnection; and by removing a development standard related to providing a wall on the southern boundary of the recreational tract. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The subject 106.44± acre property is located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Sabal Palm Road and Collier Boulevard in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. (See Location Map on page 2.) 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1212 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 2 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1213 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 3 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1214 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 4 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1215 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 5 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The Rockedge RPUD was originally approved in Ordinance Number 06-31 on June 6, 2006. It was amended in Ordinance Number 16-03 on February 9, 2016. (See Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03.) The Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance allows for up to 266 multi-family and single- family residential units at a density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre (DUA). The subject property is currently undeveloped. The purpose of this Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) request is to make the following changes to the Master Plan: - Amend the location and area of the Recreational Area (RA) Tract; - Amend the locations and area of the Residential Tract; - Amend the locations and area of the Water Management Lake (L) Tracts; - Amend the location of the potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection; and - Amend the location of the internal roadway network. The petitioner is also removing a development standard footnote related to providing a wall on the southern boundary of the recreational tract. The footnote would no longer be applicable in the proposed RA Tract location. For further information, please see Attachment A- Proposed Resolution. SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING North: Amity Road and scattered residential with a zoning designation of Rural Agriculture (A), Naples RV Resort with a zoning designation of (TTRVC), Johns Road, preserve with a zoning designation of Collier Regional Medical Center PUD, and Hacienda Lakes with a zoning designation of MPUD/DRI (Mixed-use and Development of Regional Impact), and a density of 0.78 DUA; East: Scattered residential development and a nursery with a zoning designation of (A), and partially developed residential development with a density of 0.78 DUA, and a zoning designation of Hacienda Lakes MPUD/DRI; South: Scattered residential development with a zoning designation of (A), a landscape nursery with a zoning designation of (A), Winding Cypress with a zoning designation of PUD, and a density of 1.4 DUA, and Sabal Palm Road. West: Lely Resort with a zoning designation of PUD, and a zoning density of 3.10 DUA, and C.R. 951 (Collier Boulevard), scattered residences with a zoning designation of (A), and a landscape nursery with a zoning designation of (A). 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1216 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 6 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 AERIAL PHOTO STAFF ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Planning: The proposed PDI is consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). See Attachment C-FLUE Consistency Review. Conservation and Coastal Management Element: Environmental staff has evaluated the proposed changes to the PUD documents. No revisions to environmental portions of the PUD are proposed with this petition. Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the petition for compliance with the GMP and the LDC and recommends approval of the request. CONCURRENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS: There was a pre-application meeting held on October 30, 2018 for a Plans and Plat review. There has not been a submittal to date. SUBJECT SITE 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1217 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 7 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE CRITERIA: There are three types of changes to a PUD Ordinance: Substantial, Insubstantial, and Minor. An insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or minor change. An insubstantial change to an approved PUD Ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1. LDC Section 10.02.13.E.1 Criteria: a. Is there a proposed change in the boundary of the Planned Unit Development (PUD)? No, there is no proposed change in the boundary of the PUD. b. Is there a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development? No, there is no proposed increase in the number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development. c. Is there a proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development in excess of five (5) percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or five (5) acres in area? No, there is no proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within the development as designated on the approved Master Plan. d. Is there a proposed increase in the size of areas used for non -residential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation or open space), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses? No, the requests do not impact the size of non-residential areas or proposed to relocate such areas within the PUD boundary. e. Is there a substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities? No, there are no substantial impacts resulting from this amendment. f. Will the change result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers? The proposed amendment would not result in land use activities that generate higher levels of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1218 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 8 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 g. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or otherwise increase stormwater discharge? No, the proposed changes will not impact or increase stormwater retention or increase stormwater discharge. h. Will the proposed change bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use? No. There will be no incompatible relationships with abutting land uses. i. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other elements of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density of intensity of the permitted land uses? No. Comprehensive Planning staff determined the proposed changes to the PUD Document would be consistent with the FLUE of the GMP. Both environmental and transportation planning staff reviewed this petition, and no changes to the PUD Document are proposed that would be deemed inconsistent with the CCME or the Transportation Element of the GMP. This petition does not propose any increase in density or intensity of the permitted land uses. j. The proposed change is to a PUD District designated as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to Chapter 380.06, Florida Statues, where such change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to Sec. 380.06 (19), F.S. Any change that meets the criterion of Sec. 380.06 (19)(e)2., F.S., and any changes to a DRI/PUD Master Plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under Section 10.02.13 of the LDC. Due to the limited nature of this request, a determination and public hearing under F.S. 380.06(19) will not be required. k. Are there any modifications to the PUD Master Plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under Section(s) 10.02.13 E.? Based on the analysis provided above, the proposed change is not deemed to be substantial. LDC Section 10.02.13.E.2 Criteria: Does this petition change the analysis of the findings and criteria used for the original application? No, the proposed changes do not affect the original analysis and findings for the original application. (See Attachment D-Rezone Findings and Findings for PUD.) 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1219 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 9 of 9 Rockedge RPUD, PDI-PL20190002553 July 20, 2020 NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM): The NIM was held on March 10, 2020, at Shepard of the Glades Church, 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, Florida. For further information, please see Attachment E-NIM Summary. COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: This Staff Report was reviewed by the County Attorney’s office on July 20, 2020. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission approve Petition PDI- PL20190002553, Rockedge RPUD. Attachments: Attachment A-Proposed CCPC Resolution Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 Attachment C-FLUE Consistency Review. Attachment D-Rezone Findings and Findings for the PUD Attachment E-NIM Summary Attachment F-Application 9.A.6.a Packet Pg. 1220 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.b Packet Pg. 1221 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed CCPC Resolution - 072220 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.b Packet Pg. 1222 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed CCPC Resolution - 072220 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.b Packet Pg. 1223 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed CCPC Resolution - 072220 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.b Packet Pg. 1224 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed CCPC Resolution - 072220 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.b Packet Pg. 1225 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed CCPC Resolution - 072220 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) ORDINANCE NO. 16- 03 AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-41, AS AMENDED, THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH ESTABLISHED 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 THE AGRICULTURAL (A) ZONING DISTRICT AND THE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT TO A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RPUD) ZONING DISTRICT FOR A 106.44± ACRE PARCEL TO BE KNOWN AS THE ROCKEDGE RPUD TO ALLOW UP TO 266 DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY LOCATED NEAR THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF SABAL PALM ROAD AND COLLIER BOULEVARD IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 06-31, THE FORMER ROCKEDGE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. [PETITION PUDR-PL20150002246] WHEREAS, Patrick Vanasse, AICP of RWA, Inc. and Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire of COLEMAN YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, P.A. representing Waterman at Rockedge Naples, LLC, (hereinafter "owner" or "developer) petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning classification of the herein described property. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: SECTION ONE: ZONING CHANGE. The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida is changed from the Agricultural (A) zoning district and the Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district to a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) zoning district for a 106.44± acre parcel to be known as the Rockedge RPUD in accordance with Exhibits A through H attached hereto and 15-CPS-01429/1233094/1] 128 1 oft Rockedge PUDA/PUDA-PL20140002246 1/13/16 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1226 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) incorporated by reference herein. The appropriate zoning atlas map or maps, as described in Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended, the Collier County Land Development Code, is/are hereby amended accordingly. SECTION TWO: REPEAL OF ORDINANCE. Ordinance No. 06-31 is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION THREE: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County bCommissionersofCollierCounty, Florida, this day of re. (IA Gu'2016. ATTEST: \i:',;. P , ,;BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIG E';BROCIc CLERK COLL R COUNTY, FLORIDA ja:ceeL, Y A Y i eu t 'Cier DONNA FIALA, ChairwomanAesohattmans sign ature d iI Appro ed as to form and le ality: A v 1k Hei i Ashton-Cicko k Managing Assistant County Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A—Permitted Uses Exhibit B—Development Standards Exhibit C—Master Plan Exhibit D—Legal Description Exhibit E—List of Requested Deviations Exhibit F—List of Developer Commitments This ordinance filed with the rotary of State's Office theExhibitG—Archaelogical Site Locations day of -, i 24911() Exhibit H—Typical Section 50' R.O.W. Qnd acknowledgement of that filing received this .....111-41LL_ doy of . _..•.i. , = • , ,,, By >> • 0- 15-CPS-01429/1233094/1] 128 2 of 2 1RockedgePUDA/PUDA-PL20140002246 l 1/13/16 Clc,,,,!, 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1227 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT A Rockedge Planned Unit Development Regulations for development of the Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) shall be in accordance with the contents of this RPUD Ordinance and applicable sections of the Land Development Code (LDC) and Growth Management Plan (GMP) in effect at the time of approval of each development order. Where this RPUD Ordinance does not provide development standards, then the provisions of the specific sections of the LDC that are otherwise applicable shall apply. MAXIMUM DENSITY: There shall be no more than 266 residential dwelling units permitted on the± 106.44 gross acres, resulting in a maximum density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre. This PUD allows a base density of 1.5 units per acre or 160 dwelling units, and pursuant to the Urban Residential Fringe Subdistrict provisions of the Growth Management Plan, an additional 106 units are derived from Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). Redemption of TDR credits shall be per LDC Section 2.03.07.D.4(g). PERMITTED USES: No building or structure, or part thereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land used, in whole or in part, for other than the following: I.GENERAL PERMITTED USES Guardhouses, gatehouses, access control structures, clock towers, fences, walls, columns, decorative hardscaping or architectural embellishments associated with the project's entrance features are permitted within the "R" designated area abutting the project's entrance,or within the private roadway as depicted on the PUD Master Plan,and shall have no required setbacks; however, such structures cannot be located where they create vehicular stacking or sight distance issues for motorists and pedestrians,and cannot exceed 35' in actual height. II. RESIDENTIAL A. Principal Uses: 1. Single family, detached 2. Single family, attached 3. Single family, zero lot line 4. Townhouse Page 1 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1228 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT A Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development 5. Multi-family 6. Temporary model homes 7. Model sales center 8. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals BZA") or Hearing Examiner, as applicable. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Accessory uses and structures customarily associated with the permitted principal uses and structures, including, but not limited to swimming pools, spas, screen enclosures, private garages, and other recreational facilities. 2. Gatehouses and other access control structures. 3. Utility and water management facilities 4. Walls, berms, and signs. 5. Project sales, construction and administrative offices that may occur in residential and/or temporary structures. 6. Passive open space uses and structures, such as but not limited to landscaped areas, gazebos,park benches and walking trails. 7. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted accessory uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals BZA") or Hearing Examiner, as applicable. III. RECREATION AREA A. Principal Uses: 1. Structures intended to provide social and recreational space for the private use of the residents and their guests. 2. Outdoor recreation facilities, such as a community swimming pool, tennis and basketball courts, playgrounds, pedestrian/bicycle pathways, and water features. Page 2 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 1 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1229 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT A Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development 3. Passive open space uses and structures, such as but not limited to landscaped areas, gazebos,park benches and walking trails. 4. Any other principal use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted principal uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals BZA") or Hearing Examiner, as applicable. B. Accessory Uses: 1. Community maintenance areas,maintenance structures and community storage areas. 2. Any other accessory use which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted accessory uses, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals BZA") or Hearing Examiner, as applicable. IV. PRESERVE AREA A. Permitted Uses: 1. Native preserves 2. Uses and structures that will not reduce the native preservation requirements, such as boardwalks, nature trails, gazebos, benches and viewing platforms, subject to approval by the permitting agencies and in accordance with the LDC. 3. Drainage and water management structures that will not reduce the native preservation requirement. 4. Any other conservation use or structure which is comparable in nature with the foregoing list of permitted uses, within a preserve, as determined by the Board of Zoning Appeals ("BZA") or Hearing Examiner, as applicable. 5. Activities in the archaeological areas within the Preserve shall be in accordance with Exhibit F and the LDC. Page 3 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 S 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1230 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT B Rockedge Planned Unit Development DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Exhibit B sets forth the development standards for the RPUD Residential Subdistrict and Recreation Area Subdistrict. Standards not specifically set forth herein shall be those specified in applicable sections of the LDC in effect as of the date of the applicable development order. DEVELOPMENT SINGLE SINGLE DUPLEX& TOWNHOUSE MULTI- RECREATION STANDARDS FAMILY FAMILY TWO- FAMILY DETACHED8 ATTACHED & FAMILY8 SINGLE FAMILY ZERO LOT LINES PRINCIPAL STRUCTURES MINIMUM LOT AREA 4,000 S.F.3,500 S.F. 3,500 S.F. 1,600 S.F. PER N/A N/A PER UNIT UNIT MIN. LOT WIDTH / 40 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 16 FEET N/A N/A MIN. FRONT YARD 2.3 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET 15 FEET MIN. SIDE YARD 5 FEET 0 OR10 FEET 0 AND 5 FEET 0 AND 5 FEET 10 FEET 1/2 BH MIN. REAR YARD e7 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET 25 FEET MIN. DISTANCE BETWEEN 10 FEET 10 FEET 0 OR 10 FEET 0 OR 10 FEET 20 FEET 1/2 sum of the BH STRUCTURES MAX. ZONED BUILDING 35 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 45 FEET 35 FEET HEIGHT MAX.ACTUAL BUILDING 40 FEET 40 FEET 40 FEET 40 FEET 55 FEET 40 FEET HEIGHT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MIN. FRONT YARD SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS MIN. SIDE YARD4 SPS SPS SPS5 SPS5 SPS SPS MIN. REAR YARD e.7 5 FEET 5 FEET 5 FEET 5 FEET 5 FEET 0 FEET MIN. PRESERVE SETBACK 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET 10 FEET MAX. ZONED BUILDING 35 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET 35 FEET HEIGHT MAX.ACTUAL BUILDING 40 FEET 40 FEET 40 FEET 40 FEET 40 FEET 40 FEET HEIGHT BH: Building Height(zoned height) SPS:Same as Principal Structure Page 4 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 e4(..) 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1231 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT B Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development 1. The minimum lot width may be reduced by 20% on pie-shaped lots„ provided the minimum lot area requirement shall be maintained. 2. For multi-family product the front yard setbacks shall be measured from back of curb,or edge of pavement if not curbed. For all other unit types, front yard setbacks shall be measured from ROW line. The minimum 15' front yard setback may be reduced to 1 2'where the unit has a recessed or side-entry garage. Front-loading garages shall be set back a minimum of 23 feet from edge of sidewalk. 3. For corner lots, only 1 front yard setback shall be required. The yard that does not contain the driveway shall provide a minimum 1 2' setback. 4. The minimum distance between accessory buildings may be reduced to 0' where attached garages are provided. However, the principal structures shall maintain a 10'minimum separation. 5. Accessory pool cage setbacks may be reduced to 0 feet when attached to a common privacy wall. 6. If single family development is pursued through the County's plat process,LMEs and LBEs will be platted as separate tracts. 7. When a lot abuts a lake maintenance easement (LME) or landscape buffer easement (LBE),the minimum rear yard shall be measured from the easement.Otherwise,the minimum rear yard shall be measured from the parcel boundaries. 8. In order to support a canopy tree with a minimum 20-foot crown spread as required in LDC Section 4.06.05, individual lots must accommodate enough space for the entire 20-foot canopy to be located wholly within the lot boundaries,except where the lot is adjacent to a lake maintenance easement and/or landscape buffer easement,in which case,a portion of the required 20-foot canopy may protrude into such area. 9. For the southern boundary of the RA tract excluding the area encumbered by an FPL easement,a 6-foot wall shall be provided in combination with the required 15-foot type B landscape buffer.For the southern boundary of the RA tract encumbered by the FPL easement, a 15-foot type B landscape buffer shall be required to the eastern edge of the paved area of owner's parking lot,subject to FPL approval. Page 5 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1232 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT C Rockedge Planned Unit Development ROCKEDGE LEGEND ZONING:TTRVC RPUD MASTER PLAN R RESIDENTIAL CURRENT LAND USE:RV PARK RECREATIONAL IOTA"8AGAD 1 RA AREA J-- r P PRESERVE PROPERTY r)1 TRAFFIC FLOW I BOUNDARY I PATTERN 15'TYPE A,I II 1,5j DEVIATIONS ZONING: B"BUFFER .- I WATER A-AGRICULTURAL I^ 20' I Z' I MANAGEMENT LAKE SCATTERED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) 1; L i S ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREA 20'AMITY RD EWE.& -5'DRAINAGE SWALE MIT. I I PRESERVE MAINT AGREEMENT MAIM.AGREEMENT O.R. I MARKER 1 OR 2826 PG.2485 2826 PG.2485 I I BOUNDARY t ..1 s y—t I Q u,ME 15"TYPE I I D"BUFFER D"BUFFER R p LAND USE SUMMARY 1 ' PRLYA773 RIGHT OF WAY w TRACT LAND USE ACREAGE 15'TYPE I' B'PUFFER 1 RA ozi TRACT"R" RESIDENTIAL 58.43+F AC p Iil R 1 w TRACT"P' PRESERVE 24.20+/-AC M R- -'.__. s j m TRACT"NA"RECREATION AREA 0.91+/-AC I I Z TRACT"L" LAKE/WATER MANAGEMENT 10.26+/-ACG7ZONING:A•AGRICULTURE ACCESS DRIVE!R.O W. 12.0+/-AC Q z v TOTAL 106.44.1-AC wp I I J CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILY F y_ RESIdENTIAL,VACANT LAND tomw I.1.I I MAXIMUM DENSITYY w 15'TYPE PROPERTY BOUNDARY-- n I(! 4" B"BUFFER 286 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS g 1- 5 ,', I 160 DWELLING UNITS DERIVED FROM 5` IQ R R °858 TYPE 4 DENSITY;106 FROM TDR'S 1.1 I RPUD MASTER.PLAN NOTES TYPE I PROPERTY EASEMENT I 1•WITHIN THE RPUD BOUNDARIES THERE WILL BE BUFFER.,-- BOUNDARY oi678__-1~ A MINIMUM OF 60%OPEN SPACE. R Ir T PG.1765 8 I I i ZONING:A- 2.THE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN I, AGRICULTURE ON THIS PUD MASTER PLAN SHALL BE 20. . L CURRENT LAND USE: CONSIDERED CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE. LME SINGLE FAMILY G RESIDENTIAL,VACANT 3.THE DESIGN,LOCATION,AND CONFIGURATION LAND 1 OF THE LAND IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE 1 DEFINED AT EITHER PRELIMINARY 11 SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL,OR 10'TYPE 15'TYPE 1 CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND PLAT APPROVAL. A"BUFFER "B-BUFFER w 15'TYPE .1 N. I./ POTENTIAL FUTURE D-BUFFER - 4.REQUIRED PRESERVE:2129 AC(25%OF 85.17 INTERCONNECTION AC OF EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION. R PRESERVE PROVIDED:2420 AC AGRICULTURAL i 5. BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION(S)TOIt—` CURRENT LAND USE: I THE MULTI-USE PATH ALONG COLLIER V 10'TYPE NURSERY 30 RI'W II BOULEVARD A"BUFFER ` O.A 321 MAY BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF PPL OR SDP. PG.259 II PROPERTY PROPERTY BOUNDARY EASEMENT J 6. MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING BOUNDARY ZONING:A•AGRICULTURAL/MELROSE ROW TD REMAIN II REQUIREMENTS MAY BE MET WITH EXISTING CURRENT LAND USE:NURSERY I PRESERVE.WHERE THE PRESERVE DOES NOT SARAL MIA(ROAD p MEET THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING ZONING:PUD,WINDING CYPRESS 1 REQUIREMENTS,PLANTING TO MEET THESE CURRENT LAND USE:RESIDENTIAL,VERONA D REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE REQUIRED. 4,. ni e"" WATERI#NAT ROCKEDGE ROCKLDGE I r;a.s:ow NAPLES,LLC RPUD 2 ma RDF.,A@[UMT,0.AAKI[R SP:W 1 .5 EN0INEEEI226 ="' d 01fmUY m,[ N1. 1: 22112.12.13.1241:22112.12.13:22112.12.13.1241Y.1.41222 MASTER P ur WA U Spi SI! r.,.,..,.some......••..,...1.,.........«.•...."..,,.... uoemnu.``reloNw i'a: Page 6 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 eeiC) 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1233 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT C Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development ROCKEDGE ZONING:PUD,COLLI REGIONAL RPUD MASTER PLAN CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILYCENTERY J E CURRENT LAND USE:PRESERVE RESIDENTIAL SUB-DIVISION I. 4*— 130 ROADWAY a 15 TYPE EASEMENT OR 635 I • - - - - - ° -E BUFFER R Er BUFFER ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE , ° ° °•°•° •°D BUFFER- r ° CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE 1 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R ZONING MPUD, r y °..°° .°.p .°.W.°.° HACIENDA LAKES•LI 15'TYPE f ( - * - ° " CURRENT LAND USE 36'WIDE, I - I R ' B"BUFFER O y ° " ° ' * °) SINGLE FAMILY I (EASEMENT 1 RESIDENTIAL OA 3476 I SUBDIVISION 1632 \' c i i. I .R1115, ` PG.10061 I ''\` O r\.W., 10;i0.14::,;‘,*: y *v* .PROPERTY R 91 j':' iP.-e " y`. / BOUNDARY 584' . I TO BE I I I i 0i ir Ill. .` . ZONING.A- VACATED I 1- ,,p ,0'..i' ° i.iQ." AGRICULTUREIILI 111 i 4• '- . ;`r ....`4ti , . ° CURRENT LAND I I I I"`p.. I.Yoc, o, O. e0, 9..e USE:SINGLE LME i1i4ili • • • • • W FAMILYe ivf 411.'`'1$ RESIDENTIAL p. w'I R W- - -r .- -.- - -. . I A-AGRICULTURE y PRIVATE MORTOPWAY! O. ',si•",-• CU VACANT LAND DD8 I- e i ii n.*i* - -I"-15'TYPE 15'TYPE 1) N..•d,.•O.,', - - - - - . . . d' Cr BUFFER B'BUFFER 11 ' 4:::,A,44.4 W „ ° W , , 4 , ° „W •. „ i ZONINO:A-AGRICULTURE " PROPERTY BOUNDARY CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILY f R I RESIDENTIAL,VACANT LAND I POTENTIAL FUTURE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN INTERCONNECTION UcE III ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE PROPERTY BOUNDARY j/ J CURRENT LAND USE:NURSERY(SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL f pl4 __ —R f I °B 15' BUFfER LEGEND 1 15'TYPE V"BUFFER R RESIDENTIAL f N R 8'BUU R I RA RECREATIONAL R / I PROPERTY BOUNDARY AREA p PRESERVE V L/20' Z`„ ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE — TRAFFIC FLOW B BUffER CURRENT LAND USE: — PATTERN 15.7 DEVIATIONS B"BUFFER 1r4 t 1 WATER IIt PROPERTY BOUNDARY C= ,-1 MANAGEMENT LAKE MEI ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE ARCHAEOLOGICAL 7 I t';,-: 1-- .: CURRENT LAND UBE:AREA If i I° VACANT LAND r,',1 PRESERVE u 15'TYPE r b'BUFFERu E BOUNDARY p,TYPE V BAMLTALM ROAD.... MARKER D'BUFFER c:+v,aw WATERMEN AT LLCKEDGE ROC RPUDNAPLESucRPUD W wtt nt .1 1NY11 IN0041e MG 1* aT :ru sea F. ...n: USnu4.101, - I PC 07M115 - w.. MASTER VKAN W` unV}oO`I'.lw r,.••• `n is u.. c•K•. ., , tx.i Y..., SM ,. 1101.0.04•:~MO RAN >} } A Page 7 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1234 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT D Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTER OF SECTION 23,TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH,RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE N89°01'58"E FOR 664.25 FEET ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 23 TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF TRACT "Fl" OF THE PLAT OF ESPLANADE AT HACIENDA LAKES AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 55, PAGE 1, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE S01°14'38"W FOR 675.75 FEET ON SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT "F1" TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT"F1"; THENCE S01°14'14"W ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER(SW-1/4)OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23 FOR 675.73 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID FRACTION; THENCE S89°42'08"W ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 662.30 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH EAST LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4466, PAGE 3476, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FIVE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE EAST AND SOUTH LINES OF SAID PARCEL: 1. S01°09'56"W FOR 617.91 FEET; 2. N89°34'54"W FOR 300.19 FEET; 3. S01°09'09"W FOR 435.95 FEET; 4. N89°34'09"W FOR 150.16 FEET; 5. N89°38'05"W FOR 210.56 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/2)OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER(SE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER(SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°05'19"E ON SAID WEST LINE FOR 43.72 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF(S-1/2)OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°48'02"W ON SAID NORTH LINE FOR 15.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF PARCEL 1 AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4970, PAGE 3362, SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FOUR BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE SOUTH,WEST AND NORTH LINES OF SAID PARCEL 1: 1. S01°05'19"W ON SAID EAST LINE FOR 303.80 FEET; 2. N89°37'28"W FOR 645.47 FEET; 3. N01°01'07"E FOR 302.01 FEET Page 8 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 cA 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1235 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT D Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development 4. S89°47'35"E FOR 30.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND RECORDED IN IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4466, PAGE 3476, SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FIVE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL: 1. N01°01'01"E FOR 218.98 FEET; 2. N52°35'40"E FOR 646.23 FEET; 3. N40°29'08"W FOR 30.05 FEET; 4. N49°40'54"E FOR 22.10 FEET; 5. THENCE N36°22'15"E FOR 436.44 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE-1/4)OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S89°42'08"W ON SAID SOUTH LINE FOR 785.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°01'01"E FOR 332.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S89°32'04"W FOR 994.18 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S00°54'12"W FOR 329.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°42'08"E FOR 331.15 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S00°56'29"W FOR 660.13 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°57'42"W FOR 330.68 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S00°54'12"W FOR 329.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; Page 9 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 C,q 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1236 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT D Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development THENCE N89°47'35"W ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 230.44 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 100 FEET EAST OF (AS MEASURED ON A PERPENDICULAR)AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N00°51'53"E ON SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR 1642.03 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER(NW-1/2)OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER(SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°22'01"E FOR 894.88 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N00°58'45"E FOR 662.08 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER(NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER(SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°01'58"E FOR 996.40 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF(E-1/2)OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER(NE-1/4)OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S01°05'30"W ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 328.19 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 328.19 FEET SOUTH OF (AS MEASURED ON A PERPENDICULAR)AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION; THENCE N89°01'53"E ON SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR 663.85 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°10'3 8"E ON SAID EAST LINE FOR 328.19 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. LESS THAT PART OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY CONTAINED IN DEED RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 321, PAGE 259, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PARCEL CONTAINS 106.44 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. BEARINGS HEREINABOVE MENTIONED ARE BASED ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST TO BEAR NORTH 89°01'58" EAST. Page 10 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1237 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT E Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development LIST OF DEVIATIONS Deviation#1 seeks relief from LDC,Section 6.06.01.N which requires minimum local street right- of-way width of 60 feet,to allow a 50' right-of-way width for the private internal streets. Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.03.02.C, which permits a maximum wall height of 6' in residential zoning districts, to allow a maximum wall height of 8' along the perimeter of the project, and allow a 12' tall wall/berm combination where abutting an existing public roadway. Deviation #3 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.06.A.3.e, which allows temporary signs on residentially zoned properties up to 4 square feet in area or 3 feet in height, to allow a temporary banner sign up to a maximum of 32 square feet in area. The temporary banner sign shall be limited to maximum of 90 days per calendar year during season defined as November 1 to April 30 . This deviation will remain in force until the project is sold out. Deviation #4 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.5, which requires on-premises directional signs to be setback a minimum of 10' from edge of roadway,to allow a setback of 5' from the edge of a private roadway/drive aisle. Deviation #5 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.06.02.B.14,which allows one (1)boundary marker sign or monument structure at each property corner with a sign face no more than 24 square feet, to allow the option of one(1)monument sign along C.R. 951 with a sign face of 64 square feet, rather the two (2)boundary markers that would be allowed per code. Deviation #6 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.02.04.D.1, which prohibits doors and windows on the zero lot line portion of a dwelling unit,to allow windows. Deviation #7 seeks relief from LDC Section 6.06.01.) which requires cul-de-sac lengths not to exceed 1,000 feet,to allow 2,500 feet for the one cul-de-sac street identified on the RPUD Master Plan Deviation #8 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.04.04.B.3.e which limits temporary use permits for model homes to 3 years, to allow a temporary use permit of 5 years without the need to request approval of a Conditional Use petition. Deviation #9 seeks relief from LDC Section 3.05.07.H.3.a., which requires a minimum 25' preserve setback for all principal structures to allow a 12.5' side yard setback from preserves for principal structures where identified on the RPUD Master Plan. The reduced setback is allowed in combination with a structural buffer as allowed by the SFWMD. Deviation #10 seeks relief from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.4, which requires a 20' Type D buffer along perimeter boundaries abutting a right-of-way for all developments of 15 acres or more,to a allow a 15' Type D buffer adjacent to right-of-ways where identified on the RPUD Master Plan Page 11 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1238 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT F Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development DEVELOPMENT COMMITMENTS PUD MONITORING: One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until close- out of the PUD, and this entity shall also be responsible for satisfying all PUD commitments until close-out of the PUD. At the time of this PUD approval, the Managing Entity is Watermen at Rockedge Naples,LLC or its assigns. Should the Managing Entity desire to transfer the monitoring and commitments to a successor entity,then it must provide a copy of a legally binding document that needs to be approved for legal sufficiency by the County Attorney. After such approval, the Managing Entity will be released of its obligations upon written approval of the transfer by County staff, and the successor entity shall become the Managing Entity. As Owner and Developer sell off tracts, the Managing Entity shall provide written notice to County that includes an acknowledgement of the commitments required by the PUD by the new owner and the new owner's agreement to comply with the Commitments through the Managing Entity, but the Managing Entity shall not be relieved of its responsibility under this Section. When the PUD is closed-out, then the Managing Entity is no longer responsible for the monitoring and fulfillment of PUD commitments. Commencing with submittal of the first development order that utilizes TDR credits, a TDR calculation sheet shall be submitted documenting that the owner has acquired all TDR credits needed for that portion of the development. The calculation sheet tracks the chronological assignment of TDR credits with respect to all subsequent development orders until the maximum density allowed by the utilization of TDR credits has been reached (all TDR credits allowing residential development reach a zero balance). TRANSPORTATION: A. At the request of Collier County, a Collier Area Transit (CAT) bus stop with shelter will be installed by the developer at no cost to the County.The exact location will be determined during site development plan review;however,every effort shall be made for co-utilization of the CAT stop for a school bus pick-up and drop-off. This shall be coordinated with the Collier County School District. If co-utilization is determined not to be feasible, then a site for school bus drop-off and pick-up shall be provided internal to the site. B. The owner, and its successors or assigns will be responsible a proportionate share of signalization and intersection improvements at Sabal Palm Road and Collier Boulevard CR 951), when warranted. C. The Rockedge PUD Transportation Impact Study was based on a development scenario of 266 single-family detached units. The total trip generation was estimated in the TIS to be 253 PM peak hour two-way external trips based on ITE trip generation rates. The development scenario of 266 single-family detached units may change. However, the Project's estimated trip generation will not exceed a maximum of 253 PM peak hour two- way external trips. Page 12 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1239 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT F Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development D. At the time of the first Site Development Plan,at locations where potential future vehicular and/or non-vehicular interconnection/interconnection points are indicated on the PUD Master Plan, owner shall provide vehicular and/or non-vehicular interconnectivity with abutting roadways and between adjoining sites, when feasible. If interconnection efforts are unsuccessful,the owner shall provide, as part of the SDP submittal, all correspondence between the parties involved to sufficiently document efforts to obtain interconnections. ENVIRONMENTAL: A. Project has 81.81 acres of native vegetation. 3.36 acres of non-native area have been included in the native vegetation preserve requirements due to a past clearing violation by previous owners. Native vegetation requirement is based on the 81.81 acres plus the 3.36 acres or 85.17 acres total. 25% of 85.17 results in a preserve requirement of 21.29 acres. The project is preserving 24.2 acres which is more than required. ARCHAEOLOGICAL: In 2014, a Phase I cultural resource assessment of the site was conducted by Robert S. Carr, M.S., of the Archeological and Historical Conservancy, Inc. This assessment (A Phase I Cultural Resource Assessment of the Rockedge Parcel, AHC Technical Report #1024) is a revised and expanded phase of work that follows a 2003 assessment of a portion of the Rockedge parcel. Seven previously recorded sites (CR726, CR873, CR874, CR875, CR896, CR897, CR898) and two previously unrecorded sites (CR1371, CR1372) were documented. Based on the discovery of CR1371,a small black earth midden,a Phase II assessment was completed and the report(A Phase II Cultural Resource Assessment of Rockedge #2, Site 8CR1371,AHC Technical Report #1044). Letters concurring with the findings,results,and recommendations(including Phase III mitigation) of the two reports were received on 12/31/15 and 3/04/15 respectively. In accordance with the Phase 1 assessment: A. Prior to any clearing or grubbing activities within 100 feet of the archaeological preserves labeled "to be preserved" or "designated for Phase 3 mitigation" on the Archaeological Site Locations Map, a temporary construction fence shall be placed around the preserve areas and around the site labeled "designated for Phase 3 mitigation" if that site has not already been mitigated. B. Any clearing of exotic vegetation within the archaeological preserve labeled"to be preserved" or "designated for Phase 3 mitigation", if not already mitigated, on the Archaeological Site Locations Map shall be conducted by hand.No mechanical equipment shall be used within the archaeological preserves for clearing or debris removal. C. All activities of clearing, grubbing, and subsurface alterations such as digging for utilities ditches, water management lakes, roads and the like that are located within 90 feet of the archaeological preserves labeled "to be preserved" or"designated for Phase 3 mitigation" on the Archaeological Site Locations Map and archaeological sites labeled "not eligible to be preserved" on the Archaeological Site Locations Map shall be subject to archaeological monitoring. Page 13 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1240 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT F Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development D. The site plan shows archaeological areas within the preserves labeled "to be preserved" or designated for Phase 3 mitigation"on the Archaeological Site Locations Map. No storage of fill, equipment or supplies shall be placed in the archaeological areas within the native vegetation preserve. E. Should any replanting or landscaping be permitted or required within the archaeological preserves labeled "to be preserved" or "designated for Phase 3 mitigation" on the Archaeological Site Locations Map, such activity shall be coordinated with and monitored by an archaeologist. F. If any archaeological features or artifacts are discovered during construction or development activities in the Rockedge RPUD, all development and construction activities shall cease at that location until the site has been examined by an archaeologist and necessary efforts to protect and/or document such resources have been implemented. G. If additional human remains are discovered within the Rockedge RPUD, then the provisions of Florida Statutes Section 872.05—laws governing the treatment of unmarked human burials—shall apply. Page 14 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 cq 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1241 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT G Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development ROCKEDGE s-,90 P726 rR1372 RR>S yy V 1 r,'a D a t(?8t71 m w a SABAL PALM ROAD PROJECT BOUNDARY 1 CR874— CR726 LEGEND CR875 CR873 NOT ELIGIBLE TO BE PRESERVEDCR896 —TO BE PRESERVED CR1372CR897 CR898_ A ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE CR1371—DESIGNATED FOR PHASE 3 MITIGATION A:. VV ions LE'T WATERMEN AT ROCKEDGE 1'=500'NAPLES, LLC AWN er TITLE: ENGINEERING MDA 6610 ABIlow Batt Drive,Suite 2001 Naples,Florida 34103 ofy aBC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE LOCATIONS 239)597 BC0575FAX(239)597 0578 B WON consult rv.e.rom fo MY WA p9OfECT Florida Certificates of Authorization EB 7663196952 505 26F NUMBER. 120030.00.04 NUMBER 1 OF 1 NUMBER. O•etrr A IOU RV AO£1IDTUOMORW.Rddw MO m:••*W U aVMM•••11.(gMil140014 11.01.mNMMOUW(aA'At mn•• Page 15 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 6 CJ 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1242 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT H Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development tglt a E 2 2 IN ' s, 1 a u 9 2 I L- 9 offrol,..,,,-,... s,!.,, ', , 0 va-,::'2;,,, 1,:-.:",,A " ''" ' ':.-';'";:i-r7 -.-Ii W f ,..:.:1",. t:-....,,„,„..., :-.,; " -- .--;-:-!..:' ...;,PW r 0xbTrAr40LnIl'llom"-, `', r1., ,A r,;;4 I, WI " .1 5 0 5 l'154,t.;:;. -__.', "---:":r" .,14i >05 tAR.42.,, 1 i Z iCL. I , 6 h z g 5 IR i I a I 1 1 1 I Z 1 Al A. Page 16 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 1( 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1243 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) FLORIDA DEPARTMENT Of STATE RICK SCOTT KEN DETZNER Governor Secretary of State February 11, 2016 Honorable Dwight E. Brock Clerk of the Circuit Court Collier County Post Office Box 413044 Naples,Florida 34101-3044 Attention: Martha S. Vergara, BMR Senior Clerk Dear Mr. Brock: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 125.66, Florida Statutes,this will acknowledge receipt of your electronic copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 16-03,which was filed in this office on February 11, 2016. Sincerely, Ernest L. Reddick Program Administrator ELR/lb R. A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street • Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 Telephone: (850) 245-6270 • Facsimile: (850) 488-9879 www.dos.state.fl.us 9.A.6.c Packet Pg. 1244 Attachment: Attachment B-Ordinance Number 16-03 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) ‒ 1 ‒ Growth Management Department Zoning Division C O N S I S T E N C Y R E V I E W M E M O R A N D U M To: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA # 1244, Principal Planner Zoning Division, Zoning Services Section From: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner, Principal Planner Comprehensive Planning Section, Zoning Division Date: March 26, 2020 Subject: Future Land Use Element (FLUE) Consistency Review Insignificant Changes to the Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development PETITION NUMBER: PDI-PL20190002553 Review 3 PETITION NAME: Rockedge Insignificant Changes to Residential Planned Unit Development (PDI) REQUEST: To amend the existing Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD), including: 1) Amend the location and area of the Recreational Area (RA) Tract on the Master Plan, 2) Amend the locations and area of the Residential (R) Tract on the Master Plan, 3) Amend the locations and area of the Water Management Lake (L) Tracts on the Master Plan, 4) Amend the location of the potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection; and 5) Amend the location of the internal roadway network. Rockedge RPUD was most recently amended via Ordinance #16-03, and is proposed here as insignificant changes to the RPUD. Submittal 2 included a revised Master Plan with the 30’ easement (previously shown) removed and a buffer deviation added. Submittal 3 amended the PUD documents. LOCATION: The Rockedge PUD is located on the east side of Collier Boulevard (CR 951), north of Sabal Palm Road and south of John’s Road, within Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING COMMENTS: The ±106.44-acre subject property is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Subdistrict, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and addressed in the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP). The applicable provisions of the URF Subdistrict found in the FLUE are listed below, followed by staff analysis in [bold text]. The purpose of the URF Subdistrict is to provide transitional densities between the Urban Designated Area and the Agricultural/Rural Area. The URF Subdistrict allows a residential density of 1.5 dwelling units per acre (DU/A) – along with associated recreational uses and essential services ‒ and up to 6.0 additional DU/A by providing affordable housing. This bonus density is specifically addressed in URF Subdistrict subsection b. and describes a portion of the Rockedge subject site. The current PUD is not approved using this density bonus. The existing RPUD is approved for a maximum density of 2.5 DU/A. 9.A.6.d Packet Pg. 1245 Attachment: Attachment C-FLUE Consistency Review 3-27-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) ‒ 2 ‒ The URF Subdistrict allows a residential density of 1.5 DU/A, and up to 2.5 DU/A via use of Transfer of Development Right (TDR) credits [and the same recreational uses and essential services. This PUD is approved for the maximum eligible density/dwelling units utilizing TDR credits. 160 dwelling units without use of TDR Credits (106.44 ac. x 1.5 DU/A = 159.66 → 160 DUs) and 266 DUs with use of TDR credits (106.44 ac. x 1 DU/A = 106.44 → 106 DUs; 160 DUs + 106 DUs = 266 DUs). A maximum of 266 DUs is consistent with the most recently amended Rockedge RPUD Ordinance #16-03. [The PDI changes: The PUD boundary and area (±106.44 acres) will remain unchanged with this PDI. These are the changes: • The Recreational Area (RA) has been relocated from the northeastern part of the subject site to the southwestern part of the site. The RA is also increased from 0.91 acres to 2.33 acres. • Residential (R) areas have been relocated to the north with the shift of the RA to the south and one of southern lakes areas is now R. The Residential area is slightly less acres 58.12 instead of the previous 58.43 acres. • The lake/water management area decreased from 10.26 acres to 9.30 acres. • The right-of-way/access drive acreage has decreased slightly from 12.64 acres to 12.49. • The Preserve acreage has remained unchanged. • The Potential Future Bicycle/Pedestrian Interconnection has been relocated a little further to the south on the site and is now located much closer to the RA area.] 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 leaves this determination to the Zoning Services staff as part of their review of the petition in its entirety.] FLUE Objective 7 and Relevant Policies: Given the nature of this petition and the minor changes proposed (no changes in permitted uses, densities, or intensities), staff is of the opinion that a re-evaluation of FLUE policies under Objective 7 (pertaining to access, interconnections, walkability, etc.) is not necessary. CONCLUSION Based upon the above analysis, staff concludes the proposed insignificant changes to the Residential Planned Unit Development (PDI) may be deemed consistent with the Future Land Use Element. PETITION ON CITYVIEW cc: Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager, Zoning Services Section Anita Jenkins, AICP, Community Planning Manager, Zoning Division G: Comp\Consistency Reviews\2020 PUDA-PL2019-2553 Rockedge R3.docx 9.A.6.d Packet Pg. 1246 Attachment: Attachment C-FLUE Consistency Review 3-27-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Rockedge PUDR – PL20140002246 November 23, 2015 Page 18 of 25 REZONE FINDINGS: LDC Subsection 10.02.08 F. states, “When pertaining to the rezoning of land, the report and recommendations to the planning commission to the Board of County Commissioners…shall show that the planning commission has studied and considered proposed change in relation to the following when applicable.” Additionally, Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County LDC requires the Planning Commission to make findings as to the PUD Master Plans' compliance with the additional criteria as also noted below: Rezone findings are designated as RZ and PUD findings are designated as PUD. (Staff’s responses to these criteria are provided in non-bold font): 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 Department has indicated that the proposed PUD amendment is consistent with all applicable elements of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP) with the following conditions: 1. Exhibit C, RPUD Master Plan: An additional Master Plan Note is necessary to clearly indicate that non-vehicular interconnection will be pursued and provided at locations where vehicular interconnection is pursued and will not be provided. Correct the present labeling near the arrow symbol now appearing at the end of the hammerhead cul-de-sac in the tract adjacent to Collier Boulevard to read, “POTENTIAL FUTURE “INTERCONNECTION”. 2. Exhibit F, Development Commitments: Add language to, at the time of the first Site Development Plan involving interconnectivity, at locations where potential future vehicular and/or non-vehicular interconnection/interconnection points are indicated on the RPUD Master Plan, for providing, to the maximum extent feasible, vehicular and/or non-vehicular interconnectivity with abutting roadways and between adjoining sites. This commitment will indicate that the developer shall provide to staff all correspondence between the parties so as to document efforts to interconnect. 2. The existing land use pattern. As described in the “Surrounding Land Use and Zoning” portion of this report and discussed in the zoning review analysis, the neighborhood’s existing land use pattern can be characterized as residential, undeveloped agriculture, trailer park, and landscape nursery. The residential land uses proposed in this PUD petition should not create incompatibility issues. 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. 9.A.6.e Packet Pg. 1247 Attachment: Attachment D-Rezone Findings and Findings for the PUD (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Rockedge PUDR – PL20140002246 November 23, 2015 Page 19 of 25 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 above. 5. Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amendment necessary. The proposed change is not necessary, per se; but it is being requested in compliance with the LDC provisions to seek such changes because the petitioner wishes to add additional land and revise the density and residential use types. 6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The overall density and intensity of residential land uses allowed by the current PUD are not exceeded in the proposed PUD rezone. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed change will not adversely impact the living conditions in the neighborhood. 7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion or create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses, because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including activity during construction phases of the development, or otherwise affect public safety. The roadway infrastructure has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. The project’s development must also comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations and operational improvements when development approvals are sought at time of Site Development Plan (SDP) or Subdivision Platting (PPL) review. 8. Whether the proposed change will create a drainage problem. The proposed development 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. 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. 9.A.6.e Packet Pg. 1248 Attachment: Attachment D-Rezone Findings and Findings for the PUD (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Rockedge PUDR – PL20140002246 November 23, 2015 Page 20 of 25 11. Whether the proposed change will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations. Most of the property surrounding the subject site is developed or undergoing construction. The basic premise underlying all of the development standards in the Land Development Code is that their sound application, when combined with the site development plan approval process and/or subdivision process, gives reasonable assurance that a change in zoning will not 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 proposed development will comply with the Growth Management Plan which is a public policy statement supporting zoning actions when they are consistent with said Comprehensive Plan. In light of this fact, the proposed change 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 existing zoning. 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. 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 own 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. Any development anticipated by the PUD document would require site alteration and these sites will undergo evaluation relative to all federal, state, and local development regulations during the building permit process. 9.A.6.e Packet Pg. 1249 Attachment: Attachment D-Rezone Findings and Findings for the PUD (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Rockedge PUDR – PL20140002246 November 23, 2015 Page 21 of 25 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 development will have to meet all applicable criteria set forth in the LDC regarding Adequate Public Facilities. The project must also be consistent with all applicable goals and objectives of the GMP regarding adequate public facilities. This petition has been reviewed by county staff that is responsible for jurisdictional elements of the GMP as part of the rezoning pr ocess, and that staff has concluded that the developer has provided appropriate commitments so that the impacts of the Level of Service will be minimized. 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 Subsection 10.02.13.B.5 states that, “In support of its recommendation, the Planning Commission shall make findings as to the PUD Master Plan’s compliance with the following criteria:” 1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities. The nearby area is developed or is approved for development of a similar nature. The petitioner will be required to comply with all county regulations regarding drainage, sewer, water and other utilities. 2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be made for the continuing operatio n and maintenance of such areas and facilities that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Documents submitted with the application, which were reviewed by the County Attorney’s Office, demonstrate unified control of the property. Additionally, the development will be required to gain platting and/or site development plan 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.6.e Packet Pg. 1250 Attachment: Attachment D-Rezone Findings and Findings for the PUD (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Rockedge PUDR – PL20140002246 November 23, 2015 Page 22 of 25 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 incl ude restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and buffering and screening requirements. The currently approved development, landscaping and buffering standards were determined to be compatible with the adjacent uses and with the use mixture within the project itself when the PUD was approved. 5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve the development. The existing open space set aside for this project meets the minimum 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. 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. The project’s development must also comply with all other applicable concurrency management regulations and operational improvements when development approvals are sought at time of Site Development Plan (SDP) review. 7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate expansion. If “ability” implies supporting infrastructure such as wastewater disposal system, potable water supplies, characteristics of the property relative to hazards, and capacity of roads, then the subject property does have the ability to support expansion. 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. Not applicable. As previously stated, the changes are to add additional land and an access road into the PUD boundary. 9.A.6.e Packet Pg. 1251 Attachment: Attachment D-Rezone Findings and Findings for the PUD (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 1 of 5 K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0004 Neighborhood Information Meeting\NIM Summary.docx DATE: March 13, 2020 TO: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner Collier County – Growth Management Department: Zoning Division FROM: Kenrick Gallander, AICP Director of Planning RWA, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Rockedge RPUD – PDI (PL20190002553) SUBJECT: Neighborhood Information Meeting – Summary A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on March 10, 2020, at 5:30 pm at the Shepherd of the Glades Church, 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, FL 34112. Attendees are as follows: • Kenrick Gallander, AICP, Director of Planning – RWA, Inc. • Jane Eichhorn, Permitting Manager – RWA, Inc. • Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner – Collier County General Public Attendees: • Please see attached Sign-In Sheet. Summary The meeting started at approx. 5:30 p.m. Mr. Gallander introduced himself, the Project Team, parameters of the information meeting, and Ms. Gundlach, Principal Planner with Collier County, parameters of the meeting and overview of the presentation. MEMORANDUM 9.A.6.f Packet Pg. 1252 Attachment: Attachment E-NIM Summary 4-3-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 2 of 5 Mr. Gallander provided a brief overview of the current approved Rockedge RPUD. He then further specified that the applicant’s petition is a request for a PUD Insubstantial Change to seek approval for amending specific aspects of the approved residential planned development, which were also outlined in the mailer. The proposed amendments are as follows: • Amend the location and area of the Recreational Area (RA) Tract on the Master Plan; • Amend the locations and area of the Residential (R) Tract on the Master Plan; • Amend the locations and area of the Water Management Lake (L) Tracts on the Master Plan; • Amend the location of the potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection on the Master Plan; and • Amend the location of the internal roadway network on the Master Plan. After the conclusion of describing and identifying the amendments to those in attendance, Mr. Gallander then opened the floor to a question and answer/comment and input session with the audience. Questions/Comments/Concerns asked or offered at the meeting: Q: When the project is built, how will the water be managed so as to not impact the surrounding property, specifically my property that basically will likely become a “swimming pool” due to its lower elevation? Mr. Gallander: Explained that under this application, the details and specifics as to how to address the water management within the development and to any historical flows for the surrounding property will be addressed during the next level of review for the project – the site development plan. The intent is to ensure no negative impacts to the existing systems and what improvements need to be made. Those details and the design plans are handled through review by county staff and the South Florida Water Management District. We will help him coordinate with our design engineers to help ensure his concerns are met as the project works through the next level of development services review. Q: The preserve area, the area designated with a “P”, will that stay “untouched” and “stay the same?” Mr. Gallander: That area will not necessarily be untouched or stay the same as it exists today because there are maybe invasive species that may need to be removed. He further explained that the preserve area is not to be built on/developed. Q: What does “RA” mean, “recreational area?” Mr. Gallander: “RA” is the designation for where the amenity area will be. This would be the clubhouse, pool, etc., that are provided to support the residential development. Q: Wanting to know if that is the only recreational area being moved to that area? Mr. Gallander: Yes. This is the only recreational area proposed and being moved to the new area next to the entrance to the development along Sabal Palm Road. Q: Is this a gated community? Mr. Gallander: Yes. 9.A.6.f Packet Pg. 1253 Attachment: Attachment E-NIM Summary 4-3-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 3 of 5 Q: What does the “archeological area” mean? Mr. Gallander: These are designated areas that were identified as having some historical aspects that either are to be preserved or some level of mitigation. Q: What type of buildings? Mr. Gallander: This is a residential development, which could be a mix of different types of single-family, townhomes, and multi-family, but the likelihood is moving toward single-family detached. Q: Are easements going to stay in place? Mr. Gallander: Those as identified on the Master Plan are proposed to remain in place. Q: What happens to the power lines? Mr. Gallander: At this stage of amending the zoning approval, we are unable to say specifically what is going to happen to the overhead power lines. The power will be maintained to surrounding users. Q: Regarding the preserve area, how long will it be maintained? Mr. Gallander: Don’t recall if it is in perpetuity. Ms. Gundlach indicated that yes, per code, would be required to be maintained and further emphasized, by Ms. Eichhorn, that through a preserve management plan developed in the permitting process that would detail the requirements for how the preserve area is to be managed. Q: There are lakes that are going to be put in and are they going to use dynamite to create them? Concerned with using dynamite (blasting), which is how it was done in other surrounding developments , specifically Hacienda Lakes. Also, not only is there concern with affecting property, there are people that have animals (horses, donkeys, etc.) nearby that they are concerned will be affected. Mr. Gallander: At this stage of the review process, we do not know exactly how the construction of the lakes will be handled. A member of the audience did provide some knowledge of prior experience to coordinate with developers as to what steps to take to ensure if blasting is conducted to help ensure properties surrounding the development are not damaged or what to do if they are. Mr. Gallander emphasized there are methods in place that can be used to work through these concerns, and will ensure the applicant/client is aware so when moving to construction the concerns and efforts to mitigate the effects of blasting, if used, will be done. Mr. Gallander also helped the audience understand the next steps of the review process for this application. Once found sufficient by staff, the application is heard by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. This provides the public further opportunity to provide input. Q: Is it set in stone if there are going to be townhomes or big apartment buildings? Mr. Gallander: Again, the likelihood of having big apartment buildings is not the movement (direction) that the development is headed. The planned development zoning does allow for multi-family residential but again, that isn’t the direction they are planning; current plan is for single-family detached product. 9.A.6.f Packet Pg. 1254 Attachment: Attachment E-NIM Summary 4-3-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 4 of 5 Q: Clarify where 951 is and the entrance is off of Sabal Palm Road? Does that mean there will be a traffic light? Mr. Gallander: A traffic light at the intersection of Sabal Palm Road and 951 is yet to be determined. Not planned. Warrant studies would have to be done to make that determination. Q: Will project be on city water, county? Mr. Gallander: The development will be connected to public utilities. Q: Would residents along Sabal Palm be able to be hooked up to water and sewer? Mr. Gallander: The connection to serve the development will come from Collier Blvd./CR 951. Q: At the property lines, will there be a wall? Mr. Gallander: Walls are allowed and natural vegetation as part of the buffering requirements. Q: Is it set in stone that the entrance is off Sabal Palm? There’s no other entrance? Mr. Gallander: Yes, the entrance is off Sabal Palm and no other entrances are proposed. To clarify it’s set in stone in accordance with this master plan. If the desire to add or alter the entrances, then it would go through another amendment process. Q: What does the “D” buffer mean? Mr. Gallander: This represents the type of buffer that is required per the code for that portion of the property. Ms. Gundlach provided further details as to what spacing would be required for trees and hedges in the buffer would be and if they want to provide a wall that is allowed as well. Q: What is the timeframe for this? Mr. Gallander: Unable to say for certain, but for this process, we are currently looking to be heard by the Planning Commission in the May timeframe. As for the development review plan, it is in the initial stages of review, and that is likely a 9-month process as well. Then it’s necessary to take into consideration the market conditions as to whether they want to break ground. Q: Who would I reach out to for the specific questions in the future such as the elevations, grading, drainage, etc. Mr. Gallander: Start with me and I’ll guide you to the appropriate engineer of record in our firm working on the project. Further discussions focused again on a property owner’s original concern as to where the water from his property is going to go once this development goes in. We will ensure we coordinate with him on this with the engineering professionals working on the development design. 9.A.6.f Packet Pg. 1255 Attachment: Attachment E-NIM Summary 4-3-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 5 of 5 Q: What is the distance from Collier Blvd to the entrance to the project? And that is going to be the only way in and out? Mr. Gallander: Can’t say for certain based on these maps, but best estimate would be approximately ¾’s of a mile. Yes, this is the only entrance to the project. Q: Understanding the northeast, south, and east will be natural barriers. Mr. Gallander: Yes, that is understanding as well. Q: Reading note from the master plan that the maximum density is 266 residential dwelling units and 160 dwelling units derived from base density. Again, you anticipate single-family homes? Mr. Gallander: That is identifying the process using Transfer of Development Rights to get additional units beyond the base allowed, but again the overall maximum number of units approved is 266. Yes, the developer intends to provide single-family homes. Q: Name of the development is going to be “Rockedge?” Mr. Gallander: It is going to be “Tamarindo.” Mr. Sean Martin, property owner’s representative, provided some added historical information that the original approval years ago provided a higher number of units that could be built using affordable housing allowances, but changed in 2016 to now the maximum of 266 market rate units. Mr. Gallander concluded with again speaking to the next step of the application review process heading to the Planning Commission hopefully in the near future after being found sufficient by staff. The meeting concluded around 6:05 p.m. 9.A.6.f Packet Pg. 1256 Attachment: Attachment E-NIM Summary 4-3-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 1 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\PDI Submittal #1 Working Docs 11-04-19\FINAL Docs for Submittal\00 Cover Letter.docx December 19, 2019 Intake Department Growth Management Division, Planning and Regulation 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Subject: Rockedge RPUD (aka Tamarindo) – Submittal #1 Insubstantial Change to a PUD (PDI) Application PL20190002553 Intake Team: Pursuant to the pre-application meeting held on November 20, 2019, RWA, Inc. is pleased to submit, on behalf of our client and applicant, D.R. Horton, this PUD Insubstantial Change (PDI) application for the Rockedge RPUD. The PDI petition is requesting the following: 1. Amend the location and area of the Recreational Area (RA) Tract on the Master Plan; 2. Amend the locations and area of the Residential (R) Tract on the Master Plan; 3. Amend the locations and area of the Water Management Lake (L) Tracts on the Master Plan; 4. Amend the location of the potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection; and 5. Amend the location of the internal roadway network. The following items are included pursuant to the pre-application meeting checklist and are submitted electronically: 00. Cover Letter 01. PDI Application with a. Folio Number Attachment 02. Pre-Application Meeting Notes 03. Project Narrative and Detail of Request 04. Current Master Plan 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1257 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 2 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\PDI Submittal #1 Working Docs 11-04-19\FINAL Docs for Submittal\00 Cover Letter.docx 05. Revised Master Plan 06. Warranty Deeds 07. Legal Description 08. a. Affidavits of Authorization, signed w/Sunbiz – Watermen at Rockedge Naples LLC b. Affidavits of Authorization, signed w/Sunbiz – D.R. Horton, Inc. 09. Addressing Checklist – Re-Verified 10. Property Ownership Disclosure Form 11. Location Map • List identifying Owner & all parties of Corporation See Affidavit of Authorization/Sunbiz • Review Fee - PDI Review fees will be paid upon receipt of Payment Slip We look forward to your review and are available to answer questions related to this petition. Sincerely, RWA, Inc. Kenrick S. Gallander, AICP Director of Planning 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1258 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 1 of 4 INSUBSTANTIAL CHANGE TO A PUD (PDI) LDC subsection 10.02.13 E & Code of Laws section 2-83 – 2-90 Ch. 3 G.3 of the Administrative Code Pursuant to LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.2, a PUD insubstantial change includes any change that is not considered a substantial or a minor change. A PUD insubstantial change to an approved PUD ordinance shall be based upon an evaluation of LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1 and shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner’s approval shall be based on the findings and criteria used for the original application . PETITION NO PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED 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: ________________________________________________________________ DETAIL OF REQUEST On a separate sheet, attached to the application, describe the insubstantial change request. Identify how the request does not meet the PUD substantial change criteria established in LDC subsection 10.02.13 E.1. To be completed by staff 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1259 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 2 of 4 PROPERTY INFORMATION PUD NAME: _______________________ ORDINANCE NUMBER: ________________________ FOLIO NUMBER(S): _____________________________________________________________ Provide a legal (if PUD is recorded) or graphic description of area of amendment (this may be graphically illustrated on Amended PUD Master Plan). If applying for a portion of the PUD, provide a legal description for subject portion. Attach on a separate sheet, a written description of the map or text change. Does amendment comply with the Growth Management Plan? Yes No If no, please explain: _______________________________________________________ Has a public hearing been held on this property within the last year? Yes No If yes, in whose name? _____________________________________________________ Has any portion of the PUD been SOLD and/or DEVELOPED? Are any changes proposed for the area sold and/or developed? Yes No If yes, please describe on an attached separate sheet. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1260 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 3 of 4 Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for: PUD Insubstantial Change Chapter 3 G.3 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 the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below, with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # OF COPIES REQUIRED NOT REQUIRED Completed Application (download current form from County website) 1 Pre-Application Meeting notes 1 Project Narrative, including a detailed description of proposed changes and why amendment is necessary 1 Detail of request 1 Current Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Master Plan & 1 Reduced Copy 1 Revised Text and any exhibits PUD document with changes crossed through & underlined PUD document as revised with amended Title Page with Ordinance # Warranty Deed Legal Description 1 Boundary survey, if boundary of original PUD is amended If PUD is platted, include plat book pages List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation 1 Affidavit of Authorization, signed & notarized 1 Completed Addressing Checklist 1 Property Ownership Disclosure Form 1 Copy of 8 ½ in. x 11 in. graphic location map of site 1 Electronic copy of all documents and plans *Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. *If located in Immokalee or seeking affordable housing, include an additional set of each submittal requirement. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: •Following the completion of the review process by County Review staff, the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. •Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. NOT PLATTED - N/A 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1261 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 www.colliergov.net (239) 252-2400 FAX: (239) 252-6358 Revised 3/27/2018 Page 4 of 4 PLANNERS – INDICATE IF THE PETITION NEEDS TO BE ROUTED TO THE FOLLOWING REVIEWERS: School District (Residential Components): Amy Lockheart Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: Executive Director Utilities Engineering: Eric Fey Parks and Recreation: Barry Williams and David Berra Emergency Management: Dan Summers Naples Airport Authority: Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Johnson Other: City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director Other: FEE REQUIREMENTS  PUD Amendment Insubstantial (PDI): $1,500.00  Pre-Application Meeting: $500.00  Estimated Legal Advertising fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: $1,125.00 Same fee applies if the petition is referred to the Collier County Planning Commission, where the CCPC serves as the deciding authority instead of the HEX. 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. 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. All checks payable to: Board of County Commissioners. The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to: Growth Management Department Planning and Regulation ATTN: Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 ____________________________________________ ____________ Agent/Owner Signature Date ____________________________________________ Applicant/Owner Name (please print) X X X 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1262 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 1 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\PDI Submittal #1 Working Docs 11-04-19\FINAL Docs for Submittal\01a Folio Number(s) Attachment.docx The Rockedge RPUD Insubstantial Change to A PUD (PDI) FOLIO NUMBERS 1. 00433040006 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 2. 00433120007 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 3. 00433160009 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC)) 4. 00433480006 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 5. 00433800000 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 6. 00433880004 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 7. 00434840001 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 8. 00435400000 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 9. 00436360000 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 10. 00436440001 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 11. 00436520002 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 12. 00436600003 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 13. 00436760008 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 14. 00436800104 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 15. 00436800201 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 16. 00436800308 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1263 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE N89°01'58"E FOR 664.25 FEET ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 23 TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF TRACT "F1" OF THE PLAT OF ESPLANADE AT HACIENDA LAKES AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 55, PAGE 1, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE S01°14'38"W FOR 675.75 FEET ON SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT "F1" TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT “F1”; THENCE S01°14'14"W ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23 FOR 675.73 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID FRACTION; THENCE S89°42'08"W ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 662.30 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH EAST LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4466, PAGE 3476, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FIVE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE EAST AND SOUTH LINES OF SAID PARCEL: 1. S01°09'56"W FOR 617.91 FEET; 2. N89°34'54"W FOR 300.19 FEET; 3. S01°09'09"W FOR 435.95 FEET; 4. N89°34'09"W FOR 150.16 FEET; 5. N89°38'05"W FOR 210.56 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/2) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°05'19"E ON SAID WEST LINE FOR 43.72 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S-1/2) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE- 1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°48'02"W ON SAID NORTH LINE FOR 15.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF PARCEL 1 AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4970, PAGE 3362, SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1264 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) THENCE THE FOLLOWING FOUR BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE SOUTH, WEST AND NORTH LINES OF SAID PARCEL 1: 1. S01°05'19"W ON SAID EAST LINE FOR 303.80 FEET; 2. N89°37'28"W FOR 645.47 FEET; 3. N01°01'07"E FOR 302.01 FEET 4. S89°47'35"E FOR 30.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND RECORDED IN IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4466, PAGE 3476, SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FIVE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL: 1. N01°01'01"E FOR 218.98 FEET; 2. N52°35'40"E FOR 646.23 FEET; 3. N40°29'08"W FOR 30.05 FEET; 4. N49°40'54"E FOR 22.10 FEET; 5. THENCE N36°22'15"E FOR 436.44 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S89°42'08"W ON SAID SOUTH LINE FOR 785.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°01'01"E FOR 332.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE- 1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S89°32'04"W FOR 994.18 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S00°54'12"W FOR 329.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°42'08"E FOR 331.15 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE- 1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S00°56'29"W FOR 660.13 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE- 1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°57'42"W FOR 330.68 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1265 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) THENCE S00°54'12"W FOR 329.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°47'35"W ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 230.44 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 100 FEET EAST OF (AS MEASURED ON A PERPENDICULAR) AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N00°51'53"E ON SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR 1642.03 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/2) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°22'01"E FOR 894.88 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N00°58'45"E FOR 662.08 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°01'58"E FOR 996.40 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S01°05'30"W ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 328.19 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 328.19 FEET SOUTH OF (AS MEASURED ON A PERPENDICULAR) AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION; THENCE N89°01'53"E ON SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR 663.85 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°10'38"E ON SAID EAST LINE FOR 328.19 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 106.44 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. LESS THAT PART OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY CONTAINED IN DEED RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 321, PAGE 259, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEARINGS HEREINABOVE MENTIONED ARE BASED ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST TO BEAR NORTH 89°01'58" EAST. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1266 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 1 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\PDI Submittal #1 Working Docs 11-04-19\FINAL Docs for Submittal\03 Project Narrative and Detail of Request.docx The Rockedge RPUD Insubstantial Change to A PUD (PDI) Project Narrative and Detail of Request December 19, 2019 Background: This is a proposed amendment utilizing the PUD Insubstantial Change (PDI) Application process to the existing Rockedge RPUD approved February 9, 2016, through Ordinance No. 16-03. The existing RPUD allows a maximum of 266 dwelling units on 106.44± acres. The overall subject property remains undeveloped and is generally located northeast of the intersection of County Road 951 (Collier Blvd.) and Sabal Palm Road in Section 23, Township 50, Range 26 East, Collier County. The RPUD is designated Urban Mixed Use District – Urban Residential Fringe (URF) Sub-district on the Future Land Use Map of the Collier County Growth Management Plan. The project’s density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre is derived from the URF base density of 1.5 units per acre (160 units), and 1.0 units per acre per the URF Sub-district provisions of the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP), an additional 106 units are obtained from Transfer of Development Rights (TDR). Staying in accordance with Ordinance No. 16-03, redemption of the TDR credits shall be per Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 2.03.07.D.4(g). Request: This PDI petition is requested to address the following modification to the existing approved Master Plan: 1. Amend the location and area of the Recreational Area (RA) Tract on the Master Plan; 2. Amend the locations and area of the Residential (R) Tract on the Master Plan; 3. Amend the locations and area of the Water Management Lake (L) Tracts on the Master Plan; 4. Amend the location of the potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection; and 5. Amend the location of the internal roadway network. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1267 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 2 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com LDC Section 10.02.13.E.1 Compliance: The following analysis identifies that the proposed request does not meet the PUD substantial change criteria per LDC Section 10.02.13.E.1: a. A proposed change in the boundary of the PUD; The PUD boundary has not changed. b. A proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use or height of buildings within the development; There is no increase in the total number of existing approved dwelling units (266). c. A proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation or open space areas within the development not to exceed 5 percent of the total acreage previously designated as such, or 5 acres in area; There is no decrease by more than 5 percent or 5 acres in area for the preservation, conservation, recreation or open space areas based on the following: EXISTING MASTER PLAN AMENDED MASTER PLAN PRESERVE AREA 24.20 acres 24.20 acres RECREATION AREA 0.91 acres 2.33 acres TOTAL AREA 25.11 acres 26.53 acres d. A proposed increase in the size of areas used for nonresidential uses, to include institutional, commercial and industrial land uses (excluding preservation, conservation or open spaces ), or a proposed relocation of nonresidential land uses; There are no proposed nonresidential uses within the Rockedge RPUD. e. A substantial increase in the impacts of the development which may include, but are not limited to, increases in traffic generation; changes in traffic circulation; or impacts on other public facilities; There is no increase in the impacts of the proposed development. Density and unit count (266 dwelling units) remain consistent per Ordinance No. 16-03. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1268 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 3 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com f. A change that will result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic based upon the Trip Generation Manual published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; No change is proposed that will result in land use activities that generate a higher level of vehicular traffic. The land use activities proposed remain consistent with those per approved under Ordinance No. 16-03. g. A change that will result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or will otherwise increase stormwater discharges; Based on the conceptual nature of the master plan and the proposed changes, there is no result in the requirement for increased stormwater retention or increased stormwater discharge. h. A change that will bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use; There is no change proposed that will bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be incompatible with an adjacent land use. i. Any modification to the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which is inconsistent with the Future Land Use Element or other element of the Growth Management Plan or which modification would increase the density or intensity of the permitted land uses; There is no modification or amendment to the PUD ordinance that would increase the approved density of 2.5 units per acre. The number of proposed dwelling units remains the same at 266 units for the 106.44+/- acre property, which equates to 2.5 units per acre. The proposed residential planned unit development remains compatible and complementary to existing and future surrounding land uses as required in Policy 5.6 of the Growth Management Plan’s (GMP) Future Land Use Element (FLUE). Compatibility is achieved through maintaining the proposed residential land uses, the placement of land use buffers, and the proposed development standards as currently approved. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1269 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 4 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com The proposed relocation of the Recreational Area (RA) from a more centralized location within the subject property to the main entrance off Sabal Palm Road does not impact the existing compatibility of the overall planned unit development. The relocated RA land use tract will be north of the Sabal Palm Road right-of-way and west of vacant agriculturally zoned land, which is proposed to be developed by the Greater Naples Fire District for an essential services facility. j. The proposed change is to a PUD district designated as a development of regional impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to F.S. § 380.06, where such change requires a determination and public hearing by Collier County pursuant to F.S. § 380.06(19). Any change that meets the criterion of F.S. § 380.06(19)(e)2, and any changes to a DRI/PUD master plan that clearly do not create a substantial deviation shall be reviewed and approved by Collier County under this LDC section 10.02.13; or This criterion is not applicable as the Rockedge RPUD is not a “development of regional impact (DRI) and approved pursuant to F.S. § 380.06., and the proposed modifications/amendment do not meet the criterion of F.S. § 380.06(19)(e)2. k. Any modification in the PUD master plan or PUD document or amendment to a PUD ordinance which impact(s) any consideration deemed to be a substantial modification as described under this LDC section 10.02.13. Based on the analysis of the criteria described above that establishes “substantial modification” per LDC Section 10.02.13.E.1, there is no modification proposed that is deemed substantial. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1270 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1271 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1272 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1273 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1274 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1275 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1276 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1277 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1278 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1279 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1280 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1281 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1282 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1283 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1284 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1285 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1286 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Justin A. Robbins 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1287 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1288 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Department of State /Division of Corporations /Search Records /Detail By Document Number / Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Last Event Event Date Filed Event Effective Date Detail by Entity Name Foreign Profit Corporation D. R. HORTON, INC. Filing Information P36059 75-2386963 10/24/1991 DE ACTIVE CORPORATE MERGER 12/23/2002 01/01/2003 Principal Address 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Changed: 04/20/2019 Mailing Address 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Changed: 04/20/2019 Registered Agent Name & Address CT CORPORATION SYSTEM 1200 S. PINE ISLAND ROAD PLANTATION, FL 33324 Name Changed: 02/24/1992 Address Changed: 02/24/1992 Officer/Director Detail Name & Address Title VP & RP ROMANOWSKI, PAUL J. 12602 Telecom Drive Tampa, FL 33637 DIVISION OF CORPORATIONSFlorida Department of State Page 1 of 3Detail by Entity Name 12/11/2019http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1289 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Title EVP & CFO WHEAT, BILL W. 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Title Director & Chairman HORTON, DONALD R. 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Title VP & S MONTANO, THOMAS B. 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Title AVP & AS Dagley, Ashley 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Title President & CEO AULD, DAVID V. 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Title EVP & COO MURRAY, MICHAEL J. 1341 HORTON CIRCLE ARLINGTON, TX 76011 Title VP & DP Roca, Rafael J. 6123 Lyons Road Suite 100 Coconut Creek, FL 33073 Title VP & DP Robbiins, Justin A. 10541 Ben C Pratt Six Mile Cypress Pkwy Fort Myers, FL 33966 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2018 01/09/2018 Page 2 of 3Detail by Entity Name 12/11/2019http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1290 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 2018 01/11/2018 2019 04/20/2019 Document Images 04/20/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/11/2018 -- AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/09/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/30/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/08/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 05/20/2015 -- AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/22/2015 -- AMENDED ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/07/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/27/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/14/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/05/2012 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/29/2011 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/13/2010 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/21/2009 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/12/2008 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/19/2007 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/19/2006 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/07/2005 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/18/2004 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/03/2003 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 12/23/2002 -- Merger View image in PDF format 05/15/2002 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/23/2001 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 05/02/2000 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/23/1999 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 02/23/1998 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 01/15/1997 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/05/1996 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/26/1995 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 10/24/1991 -- Filings Prior to 1995 View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Page 3 of 3Detail by Entity Name 12/11/2019http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1291 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Department of State /Division of Corporations /Search Records /Detail By Document Number / Document Number FEI/EIN Number Date Filed State Status Detail by Entity Name Florida Limited Liability Company WATERMEN AT ROCKEDGE NAPLES, LLC Filing Information L12000149388 80-0870393 11/29/2012 FL ACTIVE Principal Address 265 SEVILLA AVENUE CORAL GABLES, FL 33134 Mailing Address 265 SEVILLA AVENUE CORAL GABLES, FL 33134 Registered Agent Name & Address GARCIA, EDDY 265 SEVILLA AVENUE CORAL GABLES, FL 33134 Authorized Person(s) Detail Name & Address Title MGR GARCIA, EDDY 931 UNIVERSITY DR CORAL GABLES, FL 33134 Title MGR FAJARDO-GARCIA, KASSANDRA 931 UNIVERSITY DR CORAL GABLES, FL 33134 Annual Reports Report Year Filed Date 2017 03/29/2017 2018 03/02/2018 2019 03/06/2019 DIVISION OF CORPORATIONSFlorida Department of State Page 1 of 2Detail by Entity Name 12/11/2019http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1292 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Document Images 03/06/2019 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/02/2018 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/29/2017 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/11/2016 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 03/24/2015 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/15/2014 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 04/08/2013 -- ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format 11/29/2012 -- Florida Limited Liability View image in PDF format Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations Page 2 of 2Detail by Entity Name 12/11/2019http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/CorporationSearch/SearchResultDetail?inquirytype=Entit... 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1293 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1294 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1295 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1296 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1297 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1298 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1299 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1300 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1301 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1302 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1303 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1304 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1305 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1306 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1307 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1308 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1309 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1310 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1311 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1312 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1313 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1314 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1315 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1316 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1317 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1318 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1319 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1320 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1321 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1322 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1323 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1324 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1325 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1326 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1327 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1328 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1329 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1330 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1331 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1332 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1333 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1334 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1335 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1336 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1337 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1338 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1339 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1340 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1341 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1342 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1343 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1344 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1345 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1346 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1347 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1348 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 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 S23 T50 R26 (Not approved at this time.) (Not approved at this time.) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1349 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 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 433800000 For the rest see attached. 11/04/2019 12/18/2019 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1350 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 1 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\PDI Submittal #1 Working Docs 11-04-19\01a Folio Number(s) Attachment.docx The Rockedge RPUD Insubstantial Change to A PUD (PDI) FOLIO NUMBERS 1. 00433040006 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 2. 00433120007 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 3. 00433160009 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC)) 4. 00433480006 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 5. 00433800000 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 6. 00433880004 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 7. 00434840001 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 8. 00435400000 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 9. 00436360000 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 10. 00436440001 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 11. 00436520002 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 12. 00436600003 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 13. 00436760008 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 14. 00436800104 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 15. 00436800201 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 16. 00436800308 (Owner: Watermen at Rockedge Naples, LLC) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1351 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE N89°01'58"E FOR 664.25 FEET ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 23 TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF TRACT "F1" OF THE PLAT OF ESPLANADE AT HACIENDA LAKES AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 55, PAGE 1, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE S01°14'38"W FOR 675.75 FEET ON SAID WEST LINE OF TRACT "F1" TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT “F1”; THENCE S01°14'14"W ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23 FOR 675.73 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID FRACTION; THENCE S89°42'08"W ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 662.30 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH EAST LINE OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4466, PAGE 3476, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FIVE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE EAST AND SOUTH LINES OF SAID PARCEL: 1. S01°09'56"W FOR 617.91 FEET; 2. N89°34'54"W FOR 300.19 FEET; 3. S01°09'09"W FOR 435.95 FEET; 4. N89°34'09"W FOR 150.16 FEET; 5. N89°38'05"W FOR 210.56 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/2) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°05'19"E ON SAID WEST LINE FOR 43.72 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF (S-1/2) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE- 1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°48'02"W ON SAID NORTH LINE FOR 15.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF PARCEL 1 AS RECORDED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4970, PAGE 3362, SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1352 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) THENCE THE FOLLOWING FOUR BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE SOUTH, WEST AND NORTH LINES OF SAID PARCEL 1: 1. S01°05'19"W ON SAID EAST LINE FOR 303.80 FEET; 2. N89°37'28"W FOR 645.47 FEET; 3. N01°01'07"E FOR 302.01 FEET 4. S89°47'35"E FOR 30.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL OF LAND RECORDED IN IN OFFICIAL RECORDS BOOK 4466, PAGE 3476, SAID PUBLIC RECORDS; THENCE THE FOLLOWING FIVE BEARINGS AND DISTANCES ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL: 1. N01°01'01"E FOR 218.98 FEET; 2. N52°35'40"E FOR 646.23 FEET; 3. N40°29'08"W FOR 30.05 FEET; 4. N49°40'54"E FOR 22.10 FEET; 5. THENCE N36°22'15"E FOR 436.44 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S89°42'08"W ON SAID SOUTH LINE FOR 785.71 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°01'01"E FOR 332.01 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE- 1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S89°32'04"W FOR 994.18 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S00°54'12"W FOR 329.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°42'08"E FOR 331.15 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE- 1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S00°56'29"W FOR 660.13 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE- 1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°57'42"W FOR 330.68 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1353 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) THENCE S00°54'12"W FOR 329.09 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°47'35"W ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 230.44 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 100 FEET EAST OF (AS MEASURED ON A PERPENDICULAR) AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N00°51'53"E ON SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR 1642.03 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/2) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°22'01"E FOR 894.88 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N00°58'45"E FOR 662.08 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N89°01'58"E FOR 996.40 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/2) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE S01°05'30"W ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID FRACTION FOR 328.19 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE 328.19 FEET SOUTH OF (AS MEASURED ON A PERPENDICULAR) AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID FRACTION; THENCE N89°01'53"E ON SAID PARALLEL LINE FOR 663.85 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE EAST HALF (E-1/4) OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE-1/4) OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW-1/4) OF SAID SECTION 23; THENCE N01°10'38"E ON SAID EAST LINE FOR 328.19 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL CONTAINS 106.44 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. LESS THAT PART OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY CONTAINED IN DEED RECORDED IN O.R. BOOK 321, PAGE 259, PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. BEARINGS HEREINABOVE MENTIONED ARE BASED ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST TO BEAR NORTH 89°01'58" EAST. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1354 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) SABAL PALM ROADMELROSE LANE JOHNS ROADCOLLIER BLVD (CR951)PROPERTY BOUNDARYPROPERTY BOUNDARYROCKEDGE RPUDFeet0150300RGE:TWP:SEC:DATE:TITLE: CLIENT: PROJECT:OFPROJECT NO.:SHEET NUMBER:DESIGNED:DRAWN:Florida Certificates of Authorization EB 7663 LB 6952 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200 | Naples, FL 34109 Office: 239.597.0575 Fax: (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com DATEREVISION#DRAWN 0December 17, 2019 10:54 AM K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\CAD\1200300202 LM.dwgROCKEDGE RPUD PDI   D.R. HORTON, INC.  11120030.02.02DEC.,20192350S26ERWADLP75150300LOCATION MAP 9.A.6.gPacket Pg. 1355Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT C Rockedge Planned Unit Development ROCKEDGE LEGEND ZONING:TTRVC RPUD MASTER PLAN R RESIDENTIAL CURRENT LAND USE:RV PARK RECREATIONAL IOTA"8AGAD 1 RA AREA J-- r P PRESERVE PROPERTY r)1 TRAFFIC FLOW I BOUNDARY I PATTERN 15'TYPE A,I II 1,5j DEVIATIONS ZONING: B"BUFFER .- I WATER A-AGRICULTURAL I^ 20' I Z' I MANAGEMENT LAKE SCATTERED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) 1; L i S ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREA 20'AMITY RD EWE.& -5'DRAINAGE SWALE MIT. I I PRESERVE MAINT AGREEMENT MAIM.AGREEMENT O.R. I MARKER 1 OR 2826 PG.2485 2826 PG.2485 I I BOUNDARY t ..1 s y—t I Q u,ME 15"TYPE I I D"BUFFER D"BUFFER R p LAND USE SUMMARY 1 ' PRLYA773 RIGHT OF WAY w TRACT LAND USE ACREAGE 15'TYPE I' B'PUFFER 1 RA ozi TRACT"R" RESIDENTIAL 58.43+F AC p Iil R 1 w TRACT"P' PRESERVE 24.20+/-AC M R- -'.__. s j m TRACT"NA"RECREATION AREA 0.91+/-AC I I Z TRACT"L" LAKE/WATER MANAGEMENT 10.26+/-ACG7ZONING:A•AGRICULTURE ACCESS DRIVE!R.O W. 12.0+/-AC Q z v TOTAL 106.44.1-AC wp I I J CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILY F y_ RESIdENTIAL,VACANT LAND tomw I.1.I I MAXIMUM DENSITYY w 15'TYPE PROPERTY BOUNDARY-- n I(! 4" B"BUFFER 286 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS g 1- 5 ,', I 160 DWELLING UNITS DERIVED FROM 5` IQ R R °858 TYPE 4 DENSITY;106 FROM TDR'S 1.1 I RPUD MASTER.PLAN NOTES TYPE I PROPERTY EASEMENT I 1•WITHIN THE RPUD BOUNDARIES THERE WILL BE BUFFER.,-- BOUNDARY oi678__-1~ A MINIMUM OF 60%OPEN SPACE. R Ir T PG.1765 8 I I i ZONING:A- 2.THE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN I, AGRICULTURE ON THIS PUD MASTER PLAN SHALL BE 20. . L CURRENT LAND USE: CONSIDERED CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE. LME SINGLE FAMILY G RESIDENTIAL,VACANT 3.THE DESIGN,LOCATION,AND CONFIGURATION LAND 1 OF THE LAND IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE 1 DEFINED AT EITHER PRELIMINARY 11 SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL,OR 10'TYPE 15'TYPE 1 CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND PLAT APPROVAL. A"BUFFER "B-BUFFER w 15'TYPE .1 N. I./ POTENTIAL FUTURE D-BUFFER - 4.REQUIRED PRESERVE:2129 AC(25%OF 85.17 INTERCONNECTION AC OF EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION. R PRESERVE PROVIDED:2420 AC AGRICULTURAL i 5. BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION(S)TOIt—` CURRENT LAND USE: I THE MULTI-USE PATH ALONG COLLIER V 10'TYPE NURSERY 30 RI'W II BOULEVARD A"BUFFER ` O.A 321 MAY BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF PPL OR SDP. PG.259 II PROPERTY PROPERTY BOUNDARY EASEMENT J 6. MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING BOUNDARY ZONING:A•AGRICULTURAL/MELROSE ROW TD REMAIN II REQUIREMENTS MAY BE MET WITH EXISTING CURRENT LAND USE:NURSERY I PRESERVE.WHERE THE PRESERVE DOES NOT SARAL MIA(ROAD p MEET THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING ZONING:PUD,WINDING CYPRESS 1 REQUIREMENTS,PLANTING TO MEET THESE CURRENT LAND USE:RESIDENTIAL,VERONA D REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE REQUIRED. 4,. ni e"" WATERI#NAT ROCKEDGE ROCKLDGE I r;a.s:ow NAPLES,LLC RPUD 2 ma RDF.,A@[UMT,0.AAKI[R SP:W 1 .5 EN0INEEEI226 ="' d 01fmUY m,[ N1. 1: 22112.12.13.1241:22112.12.13:22112.12.13.1241Y.1.41222 MASTER P ur WA U Spi SI! r.,.,..,.some......••..,...1.,.........«.•...."..,,.... uoemnu.``reloNw i'a: Page 6 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 eeiC) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1356 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT C Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development ROCKEDGE ZONING:PUD,COLLI REGIONAL RPUD MASTER PLAN CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILYCENTERY J E CURRENT LAND USE:PRESERVE RESIDENTIAL SUB-DIVISION I. 4*— 130 ROADWAY a 15 TYPE EASEMENT OR 635 I • - - - - - ° -E BUFFER R Er BUFFER ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE , ° ° °•°•° •°D BUFFER- r ° CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE 1 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R ZONING MPUD, r y °..°° .°.p .°.W.°.° HACIENDA LAKES•LI 15'TYPE f ( - * - ° " CURRENT LAND USE 36'WIDE, I - I R ' B"BUFFER O y ° " ° ' * °) SINGLE FAMILY I (EASEMENT 1 RESIDENTIAL OA 3476 I SUBDIVISION 1632 \' c i i. I .R1115, ` PG.10061 I ''\` O r\.W., 10;i0.14::,;‘,*: y *v* .PROPERTY R 91 j':' iP.-e " y`. / BOUNDARY 584' . I TO BE I I I i 0i ir Ill. .` . ZONING.A- VACATED I 1- ,,p ,0'..i' ° i.iQ." AGRICULTUREIILI 111 i 4• '- . ;`r ....`4ti , . ° CURRENT LAND I I I I"`p.. I.Yoc, o, O. e0, 9..e USE:SINGLE LME i1i4ili • • • • • W FAMILYe ivf 411.'`'1$ RESIDENTIAL p. w'I R W- - -r .- -.- - -. . I A-AGRICULTURE y PRIVATE MORTOPWAY! O. ',si•",-• CU VACANT LAND DD8 I- e i ii n.*i* - -I"-15'TYPE 15'TYPE 1) N..•d,.•O.,', - - - - - . . . d' Cr BUFFER B'BUFFER 11 ' 4:::,A,44.4 W „ ° W , , 4 , ° „W •. „ i ZONINO:A-AGRICULTURE " PROPERTY BOUNDARY CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILY f R I RESIDENTIAL,VACANT LAND I POTENTIAL FUTURE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN INTERCONNECTION UcE III ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE PROPERTY BOUNDARY j/ J CURRENT LAND USE:NURSERY(SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL f pl4 __ —R f I °B 15' BUFfER LEGEND 1 15'TYPE V"BUFFER R RESIDENTIAL f N R 8'BUU R I RA RECREATIONAL R / I PROPERTY BOUNDARY AREA p PRESERVE V L/20' Z`„ ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE — TRAFFIC FLOW B BUffER CURRENT LAND USE: — PATTERN 15.7 DEVIATIONS B"BUFFER 1r4 t 1 WATER IIt PROPERTY BOUNDARY C= ,-1 MANAGEMENT LAKE MEI ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE ARCHAEOLOGICAL 7 I t';,-: 1-- .: CURRENT LAND UBE:AREA If i I° VACANT LAND r,',1 PRESERVE u 15'TYPE r b'BUFFERu E BOUNDARY p,TYPE V BAMLTALM ROAD.... MARKER D'BUFFER c:+v,aw WATERMEN AT LLCKEDGE ROC RPUDNAPLESucRPUD W wtt nt .1 1NY11 IN0041e MG 1* aT :ru sea F. ...n: USnu4.101, - I PC 07M115 - w.. MASTER VKAN W` unV}oO`I'.lw r,.••• `n is u.. c•K•. ., , tx.i Y..., SM ,. 1101.0.04•:~MO RAN >} } A Page 7 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1357 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 1 6610 Willow Park Drive Suite 200 Naples, FL 34109 | (239) 597-0575 | Fax (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0004 Neighborhood Information Meeting\NIM Mailer and Advertisement Approved by County\NIM Mailer.docx February 17, 2020 Subject: Neighborhood Information Meeting Rockedge RPUD Insubstantial Change Amendment Application (PL20190002553) Dear Property Owner: Please be advised that a formal application has been submitted to Collier County seeking approval of a request to amend the Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD). The Rockedge RPUD subject property is 106.4 ± acres located on the north side of Sabal Palm Road approximately 1400’ east of Collier Blvd (C.R. 951), and on Collier Blvd. (C.R. 951) 400’ north of Sabal Palm Road in Section 23, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. The Petitioner is asking the County to approve an insubstantial change amendment application to address the following: 1. Amend the location and area of the Recreational Area (RA) Tract on the Master Plan; 2. Amend the locations and area of the Residential (R) Tract on the Master Plan; 3. Amend the locations and area of the Water Management Lake (L) Tracts on the Master Plan; 4. Amend the location of the potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection on the Master Plan; and 5. Amend the location of the internal roadway network on the Master Plan. In compliance with the Administrative Code for Land Development requirements, a Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held to provide you an opportunity to become fully aware of the intended development and to give you an opportunity to ask questions and provide input. The Neighborhood Information Meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 10, 2020, at 5:30 pm. The meeting will be held at the Shepherd of the Glades Church, 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, FL 34112 Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please contact me. Sincerely, RWA, Inc. Kenrick S. Gallander, AICP Director of Planning KSG/ 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1358 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) Page 2 | 2 Project Location 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1359 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1360 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1361 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1362 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1363 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1364 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1365 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1366 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1367 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1368 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1369 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1370 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1371 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1372 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1373 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1374 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1375 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1376 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1377 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1378 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1379 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1380 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.gPacket Pg. 1381Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT C Rockedge Planned Unit Development ROCKEDGE LEGEND ZONING:TTRVC RPUD MASTER PLAN R RESIDENTIAL CURRENT LAND USE:RV PARK RECREATIONAL IOTA"8AGAD 1 RA AREA J-- r P PRESERVE PROPERTY r)1 TRAFFIC FLOW I BOUNDARY I PATTERN 15'TYPE A,I II 1,5j DEVIATIONS ZONING: B"BUFFER .- I WATER A-AGRICULTURAL I^ 20' I Z' I MANAGEMENT LAKE SCATTERED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) 1; L i S ARCHAEOLOGICAL AREA 20'AMITY RD EWE.& -5'DRAINAGE SWALE MIT. I I PRESERVE MAINT AGREEMENT MAIM.AGREEMENT O.R. I MARKER 1 OR 2826 PG.2485 2826 PG.2485 I I BOUNDARY t ..1 s y—t I Q u,ME 15"TYPE I I D"BUFFER D"BUFFER R p LAND USE SUMMARY 1 ' PRLYA773 RIGHT OF WAY w TRACT LAND USE ACREAGE 15'TYPE I' B'PUFFER 1 RA ozi TRACT"R" RESIDENTIAL 58.43+F AC p Iil R 1 w TRACT"P' PRESERVE 24.20+/-AC M R- -'.__. s j m TRACT"NA"RECREATION AREA 0.91+/-AC I I Z TRACT"L" LAKE/WATER MANAGEMENT 10.26+/-ACG7ZONING:A•AGRICULTURE ACCESS DRIVE!R.O W. 12.0+/-AC Q z v TOTAL 106.44.1-AC wp I I J CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILY F y_ RESIdENTIAL,VACANT LAND tomw I.1.I I MAXIMUM DENSITYY w 15'TYPE PROPERTY BOUNDARY-- n I(! 4" B"BUFFER 286 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS g 1- 5 ,', I 160 DWELLING UNITS DERIVED FROM 5` IQ R R °858 TYPE 4 DENSITY;106 FROM TDR'S 1.1 I RPUD MASTER.PLAN NOTES TYPE I PROPERTY EASEMENT I 1•WITHIN THE RPUD BOUNDARIES THERE WILL BE BUFFER.,-- BOUNDARY oi678__-1~ A MINIMUM OF 60%OPEN SPACE. R Ir T PG.1765 8 I I i ZONING:A- 2.THE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN I, AGRICULTURE ON THIS PUD MASTER PLAN SHALL BE 20. . L CURRENT LAND USE: CONSIDERED CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE. LME SINGLE FAMILY G RESIDENTIAL,VACANT 3.THE DESIGN,LOCATION,AND CONFIGURATION LAND 1 OF THE LAND IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE 1 DEFINED AT EITHER PRELIMINARY 11 SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL,OR 10'TYPE 15'TYPE 1 CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND PLAT APPROVAL. A"BUFFER "B-BUFFER w 15'TYPE .1 N. I./ POTENTIAL FUTURE D-BUFFER - 4.REQUIRED PRESERVE:2129 AC(25%OF 85.17 INTERCONNECTION AC OF EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION. R PRESERVE PROVIDED:2420 AC AGRICULTURAL i 5. BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION(S)TOIt—` CURRENT LAND USE: I THE MULTI-USE PATH ALONG COLLIER V 10'TYPE NURSERY 30 RI'W II BOULEVARD A"BUFFER ` O.A 321 MAY BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF PPL OR SDP. PG.259 II PROPERTY PROPERTY BOUNDARY EASEMENT J 6. MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING BOUNDARY ZONING:A•AGRICULTURAL/MELROSE ROW TD REMAIN II REQUIREMENTS MAY BE MET WITH EXISTING CURRENT LAND USE:NURSERY I PRESERVE.WHERE THE PRESERVE DOES NOT SARAL MIA(ROAD p MEET THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING ZONING:PUD,WINDING CYPRESS 1 REQUIREMENTS,PLANTING TO MEET THESE CURRENT LAND USE:RESIDENTIAL,VERONA D REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE REQUIRED. 4,. ni e"" WATERI#NAT ROCKEDGE ROCKLDGE I r;a.s:ow NAPLES,LLC RPUD 2 ma RDF.,A@[UMT,0.AAKI[R SP:W 1 .5 EN0INEEEI226 ="' d 01fmUY m,[ N1. 1: 22112.12.13.1241:22112.12.13:22112.12.13.1241Y.1.41222 MASTER P ur WA U Spi SI! r.,.,..,.some......••..,...1.,.........«.•...."..,,.... uoemnu.``reloNw i'a: Page 6 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 eeiC) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1382 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) EXHIBIT C Rockedge Residential Planned Unit Development ROCKEDGE ZONING:PUD,COLLI REGIONAL RPUD MASTER PLAN CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILYCENTERY J E CURRENT LAND USE:PRESERVE RESIDENTIAL SUB-DIVISION I. 4*— 130 ROADWAY a 15 TYPE EASEMENT OR 635 I • - - - - - ° -E BUFFER R Er BUFFER ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE , ° ° °•°•° •°D BUFFER- r ° CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE 1 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R ZONING MPUD, r y °..°° .°.p .°.W.°.° HACIENDA LAKES•LI 15'TYPE f ( - * - ° " CURRENT LAND USE 36'WIDE, I - I R ' B"BUFFER O y ° " ° ' * °) SINGLE FAMILY I (EASEMENT 1 RESIDENTIAL OA 3476 I SUBDIVISION 1632 \' c i i. I .R1115, ` PG.10061 I ''\` O r\.W., 10;i0.14::,;‘,*: y *v* .PROPERTY R 91 j':' iP.-e " y`. / BOUNDARY 584' . I TO BE I I I i 0i ir Ill. .` . ZONING.A- VACATED I 1- ,,p ,0'..i' ° i.iQ." AGRICULTUREIILI 111 i 4• '- . ;`r ....`4ti , . ° CURRENT LAND I I I I"`p.. I.Yoc, o, O. e0, 9..e USE:SINGLE LME i1i4ili • • • • • W FAMILYe ivf 411.'`'1$ RESIDENTIAL p. w'I R W- - -r .- -.- - -. . I A-AGRICULTURE y PRIVATE MORTOPWAY! O. ',si•",-• CU VACANT LAND DD8 I- e i ii n.*i* - -I"-15'TYPE 15'TYPE 1) N..•d,.•O.,', - - - - - . . . d' Cr BUFFER B'BUFFER 11 ' 4:::,A,44.4 W „ ° W , , 4 , ° „W •. „ i ZONINO:A-AGRICULTURE " PROPERTY BOUNDARY CURRENT LAND USE:SINGLE FAMILY f R I RESIDENTIAL,VACANT LAND I POTENTIAL FUTURE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN INTERCONNECTION UcE III ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE PROPERTY BOUNDARY j/ J CURRENT LAND USE:NURSERY(SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL f pl4 __ —R f I °B 15' BUFfER LEGEND 1 15'TYPE V"BUFFER R RESIDENTIAL f N R 8'BUU R I RA RECREATIONAL R / I PROPERTY BOUNDARY AREA p PRESERVE V L/20' Z`„ ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE — TRAFFIC FLOW B BUffER CURRENT LAND USE: — PATTERN 15.7 DEVIATIONS B"BUFFER 1r4 t 1 WATER IIt PROPERTY BOUNDARY C= ,-1 MANAGEMENT LAKE MEI ZONING:A-AGRICULTURE ARCHAEOLOGICAL 7 I t';,-: 1-- .: CURRENT LAND UBE:AREA If i I° VACANT LAND r,',1 PRESERVE u 15'TYPE r b'BUFFERu E BOUNDARY p,TYPE V BAMLTALM ROAD.... MARKER D'BUFFER c:+v,aw WATERMEN AT LLCKEDGE ROC RPUDNAPLESucRPUD W wtt nt .1 1NY11 IN0041e MG 1* aT :ru sea F. ...n: USnu4.101, - I PC 07M115 - w.. MASTER VKAN W` unV}oO`I'.lw r,.••• `n is u.. c•K•. ., , tx.i Y..., SM ,. 1101.0.04•:~MO RAN >} } A Page 7 of 16 12-09-2015 Rockedge RPUD PL#2014.2246 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1383 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 30' R/W O.R. 321 PG. 259 ESMT. TO REMAIN POTENTIAL FUTURE INTERCONNECTION 20' LME ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, VACANT LAND 170' FPL EASEMENT OR. 678 PG. 1765 ZONING: TTRVC CURRENT LAND USE: RV PARK JOHN'S ROAD SABAL PALM ROAD PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAY COLLIER BLVD (CR 951)PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAYZONING:PUD, LELY RESORTCURRENT LAND USE: RESIDENTIALZONING: A - AGRICULTURAL CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY ZONING:A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, VACANT LAND ZONING: A - AGRICULTURAL (SCATTERED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING:PUD, WINDING CYPRESS CURRENT LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL, VERONA WALK ZONING: A - AGRICULTURAL/MELROSE ROW CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY L L R R R R R 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER 5' DRAINAGE SWALE ESMT. & MAINT. AGREEMENT O.R. 2826 PG. 2485 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 20' TYPE "D" BUFFER 20' LME 20' AMITY RD ESMT. & MAINT. AGREEMENT OR 2826 PG. 2485 MELROSE LANESCALE: RGE:TWP:SEC: DATE: TITLE: CLIENT: DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: PROJECT SHEET FILE NUMBER:NUMBER:NUMBER:OF 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200 | Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 597-0575 FAX: (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com Florida Certificates of Authorization EB 7663 LB 6952 February 11, 2020 2:12 PM K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\CAD\1200300202 MCP.dwg D.R. HORTON, INC.   ROCKEDGE RPUD MASTER PLAN   FEB.,2020 1" = 300' DLP RWA 23 50S 26E 120030.02.02 1 2 1200300202 MCP MAXIMUM DENSITY: 266 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 160 DWELLING UNITS DERIVED FROM BASE DENSITY; 106 FROM TDR's LEGEND RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL AREA DEVIATIONS BOUNDARY MARKER ARCHEOLOGICAL AREA WATER MGMT LAKE PRESERVE/CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA PRESERVE TRAFFIC FLOW PATTERN 5 R RA P LAND USE SUMMARY TRACT LAND USE ACRES TRACT "R"RESIDENTIAL 58.12 TRACT "RA"RECREATIONAL AREA 2.33 TRACT "L"LAKE / WATER MANAGEMENT AREA 9.30 RIGHT OF WAY/ ACCESS DRIVE 12.49 TRACT "P"PRESERVE AREA 24.20 TOTAL AREA 106.44 RPUD MASTER PLAN NOTES: 1.WITHIN THE RPUD BOUNDARIES THERE WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 60% OPEN SPACE. 2.THE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS PUD MASTER PLAN SHALL BE CONSIDERED CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE. 3.THE DESIGN, LOCATION, AND CONFIGURATION OF THE LAND IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE DEFINED AT EITHER PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL, OR CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND PLAT APPROVAL. 4.REQUIRED PRESERVE: 21.29 AC. (25% OF THE 85.17 AC OF EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION. PRESERVE PROVIDED: 24.20 AC.) 5.BICYCLE / PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION(S) TO THE MULTI-USE PATH ALONG COLLIER BLVD MAY BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF PPL OR SDP. 6.MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS MAY BE MET WITH EXISTING PRESERVE. WHERE THE PRESERVE DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS, PLANTING TO MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE REQUIRED. L 5 7 3 2 10 10 MATCH LINE (SEE SHEET 2 OF 2)± ± ± ± ± ± 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1384 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER BUFFER PER LDC POTENTIAL FUTURE BICYCLE/ PEDESTRIAN INTERCONNECTION ZONING:A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, VACANT LAND R 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER SABAL PALM ROAD PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAY PRI V A T E RI G H T OFWAY15' TYPE "B" BUFFER ZONING: PUD, COLLIER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER CURRENT LAND USE: PRESERVE ZONING:A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING:MPUD, HACIENDA LAKES CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUB-DIVISION A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: VACANT LAND ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY / SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: VACANT LAND ZONING: MPUD, HACIENDA LAKES CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION R RR R R R R R R R R R R RA P P 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER BUFFER PER LDC 20' LME 20' LME 30' ROADWAY ESMT OR. 635 PG. 1273 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER MELROSE LANE20' TYPE "D" BUFFER PROPERTY BOUNDARY SCALE: RGE:TWP:SEC: DATE: TITLE: CLIENT: DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: PROJECT SHEET FILE NUMBER:NUMBER:NUMBER:OF 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200 | Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 597-0575 FAX: (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com Florida Certificates of Authorization EB 7663 LB 6952 February 11, 2020 2:12 PM K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\CAD\1200300202 MCP.dwg D.R. HORTON, INC.   ROCKEDGE RPUD MASTER PLAN   FEB.,2020 1" = 300' DLP RWA 23 50S 26E 120030.02.02 2 2 1200300202 MCP 2 10 10 9 9 9 LEGEND RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL AREA DEVIATIONS BOUNDARY MARKER ARCHEOLOGICAL AREA WATER MGMT LAKE PRESERVE/CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA PRESERVE TRAFFIC FLOW PATTERN 5 R RA P LMATCH LINE (SEE SHEET 1 OF 2)9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1385 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 30' R/W O.R. 321 PG. 259 ESMT. TO REMAIN POTENTIAL FUTURE INTERCONNECTION 20' LME ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, VACANT LAND 170' FPL EASEMENT OR. 678 PG. 1765 ZONING: TTRVC CURRENT LAND USE: RV PARK JOHN'S ROAD SABAL PALM ROAD PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAY COLLIER BLVD (CR 951)PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAYZONING:PUD, LELY RESORTCURRENT LAND USE: RESIDENTIALZONING: A - AGRICULTURAL CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY ZONING:A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, VACANT LAND ZONING: A - AGRICULTURAL (SCATTERED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING:PUD, WINDING CYPRESS CURRENT LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL, VERONA WALK ZONING: A - AGRICULTURAL/MELROSE ROW CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY L L R R R R R 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER 10' TYPE "A" BUFFER 5' DRAINAGE SWALE ESMT. & MAINT. AGREEMENT O.R. 2826 PG. 2485 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 20' TYPE "D" BUFFER 20' LME 20' AMITY RD ESMT. & MAINT. AGREEMENT OR 2826 PG. 2485 MELROSE LANESCALE: RGE:TWP:SEC: DATE: TITLE: CLIENT: DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: PROJECT SHEET FILE NUMBER:NUMBER:NUMBER:OF 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200 | Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 597-0575 FAX: (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com Florida Certificates of Authorization EB 7663 LB 6952 February 11, 2020 2:12 PM K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\CAD\1200300202 MCP.dwg D.R. HORTON, INC.   ROCKEDGE RPUD MASTER PLAN   FEB.,2020 1" = 300' DLP RWA 23 50S 26E 120030.02.02 1 2 1200300202 MCP MAXIMUM DENSITY: 266 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS 160 DWELLING UNITS DERIVED FROM BASE DENSITY; 106 FROM TDR's LEGEND RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL AREA DEVIATIONS BOUNDARY MARKER ARCHEOLOGICAL AREA WATER MGMT LAKE PRESERVE/CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA PRESERVE TRAFFIC FLOW PATTERN 5 R RA P LAND USE SUMMARY TRACT LAND USE ACRES TRACT "R"RESIDENTIAL 58.12 TRACT "RA"RECREATIONAL AREA 2.33 TRACT "L"LAKE / WATER MANAGEMENT AREA 9.30 RIGHT OF WAY/ ACCESS DRIVE 12.49 TRACT "P"PRESERVE AREA 24.20 TOTAL AREA 106.44 RPUD MASTER PLAN NOTES: 1.WITHIN THE RPUD BOUNDARIES THERE WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 60% OPEN SPACE. 2.THE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THIS PUD MASTER PLAN SHALL BE CONSIDERED CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE. 3.THE DESIGN, LOCATION, AND CONFIGURATION OF THE LAND IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE DEFINED AT EITHER PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL, OR CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND PLAT APPROVAL. 4.REQUIRED PRESERVE: 21.29 AC. (25% OF THE 85.17 AC OF EXISTING NATIVE VEGETATION. PRESERVE PROVIDED: 24.20 AC.) 5.BICYCLE / PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION(S) TO THE MULTI-USE PATH ALONG COLLIER BLVD MAY BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF PPL OR SDP. 6.MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS MAY BE MET WITH EXISTING PRESERVE. WHERE THE PRESERVE DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS, PLANTING TO MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE REQUIRED. L 5 7 3 2 10 10 MATCH LINE (SEE SHEET 2 OF 2)± ± ± ± ± ± 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1386 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY BOUNDARY 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER BUFFER PER LDC POTENTIAL FUTURE BICYCLE/ PEDESTRIAN INTERCONNECTION ZONING:A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, VACANT LAND R 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER SABAL PALM ROAD PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAY PRI V A T E RI G H T OFWAY15' TYPE "B" BUFFER ZONING: PUD, COLLIER REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER CURRENT LAND USE: PRESERVE ZONING:A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING:MPUD, HACIENDA LAKES CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUB-DIVISION A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: VACANT LAND ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY / SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: NURSERY ZONING: A - AGRICULTURE CURRENT LAND USE: VACANT LAND ZONING: MPUD, HACIENDA LAKES CURRENT LAND USE: SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION R RR R R R R R R R R R R RA P P 15' TYPE "D" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER BUFFER PER LDC 20' LME 20' LME 30' ROADWAY ESMT OR. 635 PG. 1273 15' TYPE "B" BUFFER MELROSE LANE20' TYPE "D" BUFFER PROPERTY BOUNDARY SCALE: RGE:TWP:SEC: DATE: TITLE: CLIENT: DRAWN BY: DESIGNED BY: PROJECT SHEET FILE NUMBER:NUMBER:NUMBER:OF 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200 | Naples, Florida 34109 (239) 597-0575 FAX: (239) 597-0578 www.consult-rwa.com Florida Certificates of Authorization EB 7663 LB 6952 February 11, 2020 2:12 PM K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0002 PDI Application Preparation\CAD\1200300202 MCP.dwg D.R. HORTON, INC.   ROCKEDGE RPUD MASTER PLAN   FEB.,2020 1" = 300' DLP RWA 23 50S 26E 120030.02.02 2 2 1200300202 MCP 2 10 10 9 9 9 LEGEND RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL AREA DEVIATIONS BOUNDARY MARKER ARCHEOLOGICAL AREA WATER MGMT LAKE PRESERVE/CONSERVATION EASEMENT AREA PRESERVE TRAFFIC FLOW PATTERN 5 R RA P LMATCH LINE (SEE SHEET 1 OF 2)9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1387 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 1 of 5 K:\2012\120030.02.02 Rockedge - PDI\0004 Neighborhood Information Meeting\NIM Summary.docx DATE: March 13, 2020 TO: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner Collier County – Growth Management Department: Zoning Division FROM: Kenrick Gallander, AICP Director of Planning RWA, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Rockedge RPUD – PDI (PL20190002553) SUBJECT: Neighborhood Information Meeting – Summary A Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on March 10, 2020, at 5:30 pm at the Shepherd of the Glades Church, 6020 Rattlesnake Hammock Road, Naples, FL 34112. Attendees are as follows: • Kenrick Gallander, AICP, Director of Planning – RWA, Inc. • Jane Eichhorn, Permitting Manager – RWA, Inc. • Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner – Collier County General Public Attendees: • Please see attached Sign-In Sheet. Summary The meeting started at approx. 5:30 p.m. Mr. Gallander introduced himself, the Project Team, parameters of the information meeting, and Ms. Gundlach, Principal Planner with Collier County, parameters of the meeting and overview of the presentation. MEMORANDUM 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1388 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 2 of 5 Mr. Gallander provided a brief overview of the current approved Rockedge RPUD. He then further specified that the applicant’s petition is a request for a PUD Insubstantial Change to seek approval for amending specific aspects of the approved residential planned development, which were also outlined in the mailer. The proposed amendments are as follows: • Amend the location and area of the Recreational Area (RA) Tract on the Master Plan; • Amend the locations and area of the Residential (R) Tract on the Master Plan; • Amend the locations and area of the Water Management Lake (L) Tracts on the Master Plan; • Amend the location of the potential future bicycle/pedestrian interconnection on the Master Plan; and • Amend the location of the internal roadway network on the Master Plan. After the conclusion of describing and identifying the amendments to those in attendance, Mr. Gallander then opened the floor to a question and answer/comment and input session with the audience. Questions/Comments/Concerns asked or offered at the meeting: Q: When the project is built, how will the water be managed so as to not impact the surrounding property, specifically my property that basically will likely become a “swimming pool” due to its lower elevation? Mr. Gallander: Explained that under this application, the details and specifics as to how to address the water management within the development and to any historical flows for the surrounding property will be addressed during the next level of review for the project – the site development plan. The intent is to ensure no negative impacts to the existing systems and what improvements need to be made. Those details and the design plans are handled through review by county staff and the South Florida Water Management District. We will help him coordinate with our design engineers to help ensure his concerns are met as the project works through the next level of development services review. Q: The preserve area, the area designated with a “P”, will that stay “untouched” and “stay the same?” Mr. Gallander: That area will not necessarily be untouched or stay the same as it exists today because there are maybe invasive species that may need to be removed. He further explained that the preserve area is not to be built on/developed. Q: What does “RA” mean, “recreational area?” Mr. Gallander: “RA” is the designation for where the amenity area will be. This would be the clubhouse, pool, etc., that are provided to support the residential development. Q: Wanting to know if that is the only recreational area being moved to that area? Mr. Gallander: Yes. This is the only recreational area proposed and being moved to the new area next to the entrance to the development along Sabal Palm Road. Q: Is this a gated community? Mr. Gallander: Yes. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1389 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 3 of 5 Q: What does the “archeological area” mean? Mr. Gallander: These are designated areas that were identified as having some historical aspects that either are to be preserved or some level of mitigation. Q: What type of buildings? Mr. Gallander: This is a residential development, which could be a mix of different types of single-family, townhomes, and multi-family, but the likelihood is moving toward single-family detached. Q: Are easements going to stay in place? Mr. Gallander: Those as identified on the Master Plan are proposed to remain in place. Q: What happens to the power lines? Mr. Gallander: At this stage of amending the zoning approval, we are unable to say specifically what is going to happen to the overhead power lines. The power will be maintained to surrounding users. Q: Regarding the preserve area, how long will it be maintained? Mr. Gallander: Don’t recall if it is in perpetuity. Ms. Gundlach indicated that yes, per code, would be required to be maintained and further emphasized, by Ms. Eichhorn, that through a preserve management plan developed in the permitting process that would detail the requirements for how the preserve area is to be managed. Q: There are lakes that are going to be put in and are they going to use dynamite to create them? Concerned with using dynamite (blasting), which is how it was done in other surrounding developments , specifically Hacienda Lakes. Also, not only is there concern with affecting property, there are people that have animals (horses, donkeys, etc.) nearby that they are concerned will be affected. Mr. Gallander: At this stage of the review process, we do not know exactly how the construction of the lakes will be handled. A member of the audience did provide some knowledge of prior experience to coordinate with developers as to what steps to take to ensure if blasting is conducted to help ensure properties surrounding the development are not damaged or what to do if they are. Mr. Gallander emphasized there are methods in place that can be used to work through these concerns, and will ensure the applicant/client is aware so when moving to construction the concerns and efforts to mitigate the effects of blasting, if used, will be done. Mr. Gallander also helped the audience understand the next steps of the review process for this application. Once found sufficient by staff, the application is heard by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. This provides the public further opportunity to provide input. Q: Is it set in stone if there are going to be townhomes or big apartment buildings? Mr. Gallander: Again, the likelihood of having big apartment buildings is not the movement (direction) that the development is headed. The planned development zoning does allow for multi-family residential but again, that isn’t the direction they are planning; current plan is for single-family detached product. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1390 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 4 of 5 Q: Clarify where 951 is and the entrance is off of Sabal Palm Road? Does that mean there will be a traffic light? Mr. Gallander: A traffic light at the intersection of Sabal Palm Road and 951 is yet to be determined. Not planned. Warrant studies would have to be done to make that determination. Q: Will project be on city water, county? Mr. Gallander: The development will be connected to public utilities. Q: Would residents along Sabal Palm be able to be hooked up to water and sewer? Mr. Gallander: The connection to serve the development will come from Collier Blvd./CR 951. Q: At the property lines, will there be a wall? Mr. Gallander: Walls are allowed and natural vegetation as part of the buffering requirements. Q: Is it set in stone that the entrance is off Sabal Palm? There’s no other entrance? Mr. Gallander: Yes, the entrance is off Sabal Palm and no other entrances are proposed. To clarify it’s set in stone in accordance with this master plan. If the desire to add or alter the entrances, then it would go through another amendment process. Q: What does the “D” buffer mean? Mr. Gallander: This represents the type of buffer that is required per the code for that portion of the property. Ms. Gundlach provided further details as to what spacing would be required for trees and hedges in the buffer would be and if they want to provide a wall that is allowed as well. Q: What is the timeframe for this? Mr. Gallander: Unable to say for certain, but for this process, we are currently looking to be heard by the Planning Commission in the May timeframe. As for the development review plan, it is in the initial stages of review, and that is likely a 9-month process as well. Then it’s necessary to take into consideration the market conditions as to whether they want to break ground. Q: Who would I reach out to for the specific questions in the future such as the elevations, grading, drainage, etc. Mr. Gallander: Start with me and I’ll guide you to the appropriate engineer of record in our firm working on the project. Further discussions focused again on a property owner’s original concern as to where the water from his property is going to go once this development goes in. We will ensure we coordinate with him on this with the engineering professionals working on the development design. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1391 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 6610 Willow Park Drive, Suite 200, Naples, Florida 34109 • (239) 597-0575, fax: (239) 597-0578 • www.consult-rwa.com Page 5 of 5 Q: What is the distance from Collier Blvd to the entrance to the project? And that is going to be the only way in and out? Mr. Gallander: Can’t say for certain based on these maps, but best estimate would be approximately ¾’s of a mile. Yes, this is the only entrance to the project. Q: Understanding the northeast, south, and east will be natural barriers. Mr. Gallander: Yes, that is understanding as well. Q: Reading note from the master plan that the maximum density is 266 residential dwelling units and 160 dwelling units derived from base density. Again, you anticipate single-family homes? Mr. Gallander: That is identifying the process using Transfer of Development Rights to get additional units beyond the base allowed, but again the overall maximum number of units approved is 266. Yes, the developer intends to provide single-family homes. Q: Name of the development is going to be “Rockedge?” Mr. Gallander: It is going to be “Tamarindo.” Mr. Sean Martin, property owner’s representative, provided some added historical information that the original approval years ago provided a higher number of units that could be built using affordable housing allowances, but changed in 2016 to now the maximum of 266 market rate units. Mr. Gallander concluded with again speaking to the next step of the application review process heading to the Planning Commission hopefully in the near future after being found sufficient by staff. The meeting concluded around 6:05 p.m. 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1392 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1393 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1394 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.g Packet Pg. 1395 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.h Packet Pg. 1396 Attachment: Virtual Hearing Waiver Letter to CAO 2020-07-08_DRHorton (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.iPacket Pg. 1397Attachment: Sign Posting Affidavit and photos 7-15-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.i Packet Pg. 1398 Attachment: Sign Posting Affidavit and photos 7-15-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD) 9.A.6.i Packet Pg. 1399 Attachment: Sign Posting Affidavit and photos 7-15-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)