CCPC Agenda 08/06/2020 - Revised
Collier County Planning Commission Page 1 Printed 8/4/2020
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
Edwin Fryer - 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 speak
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 8/4/2020
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
(June 11, 2020 and June 16, 2020 meeting minutes were approved at
the July2, 2020 meeting but were not listed on that Agenda. (This is for administrative
purposes only)
6. BCC Report - Recaps
7. Chairman's Report
8. Consent Agenda
9. Public Hearings
A. Advertised
1. 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 8/4/2020
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 PlannerPL20180003511: A Resolution of the Board of
Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida
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]
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: Raymond Bellows,
Planning Manager]
August 2020
Collier County Planning Commission Page 4 Printed 8/4/2020
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]
7. ***This item was continued from the June 16, 2020 meeting and the July 16, 2020 meeting; and
is further continued to the August 20, 2020 meeting, at the petitioner’s request.***
PL20190001052-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 to allow an air curtain
incinerator as a conditional use in the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District-Receiving Lands. The
subject property is located east of the Naples Landfill, north of I-75 in Section 31, Township 49
South, Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 3 acres of the 28.76± acre property;
and furthermore, directing transmittal of the adopted amendment to the Florida Department of
Economic Opportunity; providing for severability and providing for an effective date.
(Companion to PL20190000948) [Coordinator: Corby Schmidt, AICP, Principal Planner]
8. ***This item was continued from the June 16, 2020 meeting and the July 16, 2020 meeting; and
is further continued to the August 20, 2020 meeting, at the petitioner’s request.***
PL20190000948-A Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida,
amending Resolution No. 11-149 which provided for the establishment of a conditional use to
allow a collection and transfer site for resource recovery within an Agricultural (A) zoning
district, and within the Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Sending Lands Zoning Overlay and
within the North Belle Meade Zoning Overlay, pursuant to Subsection 2.03.01.A.1.c.12 of the
Collier County Land Development Code, to allow an air curtain incinerator as an accessory use
to the collection and transfer site for resource recovery use on 3± acres of the 28.76± acre
property located east of the Naples Landfill, north of I-75 in Section 31, Township 49 South,
Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida. (Companion PL20190001052) [Coordinator: Nancy
Gundlach, Principle Planner, AICP, Planner)
9. *** This item was continued from the July 16, 2020 CCPC meeting and is further continued to
the August 20, 2020 CCPC Meeting.*** PL20190000850-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 Map series by amending the
Urban Commercial District to add the Bay House Campus Commercial Subdistrict to allow
development of up to 160 hotel rooms and assisted living facilities at a floor area ratio of .45, and
up to 400 seats of Restaurant uses. The subject property is located in the Northwest quadrant of
the intersection of Tamiami Trail North, and Walkerbilt Road in Section 21, Township 48
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 8.97± acres. (Companion to
PL20190000) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner] (Adoption Hearing)
August 2020
Collier County Planning Commission Page 5 Printed 8/4/2020
10. *** This item was continued from the July 16, 2020 CCPC meeting and is further continued to
the August 20, 2020 CCPC Meeting.*** CPUD-PL20190000154-An Ordinance of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 13-65, the Bay
House Campus Commercial Planned Unit Development, to increase the maximum number of
hotel units from 50 to 160; to increase the height of principal structures to 75 feet zoned and 90
feet actual; to add assisted living facilities at a floor area ratio of .45 as a permitted use in
addition to the allowed 400 seats of restaurant/cocktail lounge uses and accessory uses to hotel
and restaurant uses on property located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of
Tamiami Trail North and Walkerbilt Road in Section 21, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County, Florida, consisting of 8.67 +/- acres; and by providing an effective date.
(Companion PL20190000850) [Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach, AICP, PLA, Principal Planner]
11. ***This item was continued from the July 16, 2020 CCPC meeting and is further continued to
the August 20, 2020 CCPC Meeting. *** PL20190000454: 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 Map Series by amending the
Urban Commercial district to add the Germain Immokalee Commercial subdistrict to allow
development of up to 80,000 square feet of C-1, commercial professional and general office
district and luxury automobile dealership uses. The subject property is located on the south side
of Immokalee Road, approximately .6 miles west of I-75, in Section 30, Township 48 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, consisting of 8.97± acres. (Companion to
PL20190000451) [Coordinator: Sue Faulkner, Principal Planner]
12. ***This item was continued from the July 16, 2020 CCPC meeting and is further continued to
the August 20, 2020 CCPC Meeting. *** PL20190000451-An Ordinance of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida amending Ordinance Number 2004-41, as amended,
the Collier County Land Development Code, which 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 to a Commercial Planned Unit
Development (CPUD) zoning district for the project to be known as Germain Immokalee CPUD,
to allow a new and used automotive dealership up to 80,000 square feet on the property located
on the south side of Immokalee Road approximately 0.6 miles west of Interstate 75, in Section
30, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, consisting of 8.97± acres; and by providing an effective
date. (Companion to PL20190000454) [Coordinator: Tim Finn, AICP, 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: 5.A
Item Summary: June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes
Meeting Date: 08/06/2020
Prepared by:
Title: Operations Analyst – Planning Commission
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:
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
5.A
Packet Pg. 6
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. 7 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. 8 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. 9 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. 10 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. 11 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. 12 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. 13 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. 14 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. 15 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. 16 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. 17 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. 18 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. 19 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. 20 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. 21 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. 22 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. 23 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. 24 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. 25 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. 26 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. 27 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. 28 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. 29 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. 30 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. 31 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. 32 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. 33 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. 34 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. 35 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. 36 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. 37 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. 38 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. 39 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. 40 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. 41 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. 42 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. 43 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. 44 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. 45 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. 46 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. 47 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. 48 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. 49 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. 50 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. 51 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. 52 Attachment: 06-11-20CCPC Meeting Minutes (12799 : June 11, 2020 CCPC Meeting Minutes)
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: Operations Analyst – Planning Commission
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:
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
5.B
Packet Pg. 53
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. 54 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. 55 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. 56 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. 57 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. 58 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. 59 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. 60 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. 61 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. 62 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. 63 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. 64 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. 65 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. 66 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. 67 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. 68 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. 69 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. 70 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. 71 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. 72 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. 73 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. 74 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. 75 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. 76 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. 77 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. 78 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. 79 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. 80 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. 81 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. 82 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. 83 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. 84 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. 85 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. 86 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. 87 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. 88 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. 89 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. 90 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. 91 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. 92 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. 93 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. 94 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. 95 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. 96 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. 97 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. 98 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. 99 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. 100 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. 101 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. 102 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. 103 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. 104 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. 105 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. 106 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. 107 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. 108 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. 109 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. 110 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. 111 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. 112 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. 113 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. 114 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. 115 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. 116 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. 117 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. 118 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. 119 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. 120 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. 121 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. 122 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. 123 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. 124 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. 125 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. 126 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. 127 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. 128 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. 129 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. 130 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. 131 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. 132 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. 133 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. 134 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. 135 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. 136 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. 137 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. 138 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. 139 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. 140 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.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:
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
9.A.1
Packet Pg. 141
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. 142 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. 143 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. 144 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. 145 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. 146 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. 147 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. 148 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. 149 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. 150 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. 151 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. 152 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. 153 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. 154 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. 155 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. 156 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. 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)
9.A.1.d
Packet Pg. 162 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. 163 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 164 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. 165 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. 166 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. 167 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. 168 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. 169 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. 170 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. 171 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 172Attachment: 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. 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 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. 174 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. 175 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. 176 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 177Attachment: 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. 178 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. 179 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. 180 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 181 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. 182 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. 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
PREPARED BY:
PENINSULA ENGINEERING
2600 GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY
NAPLES, FL 34105
SEPTEMBER 2019
_
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
2
BRUCE LAYMAN, CE, PWS
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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
10
P:\Active_Projects\P-HLST-006\002_ACOE_SFWMD_Permitting\Design_Permit\Submittals\SFWMD
TABLES
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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
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. 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
16
P:\Active_Projects\P-BCHD-003\001_Immokalee_Randal_Curve\Reports
FIGURE 1
Existing Conditions
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)
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. 201 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. 202 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. 203 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. 204 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
3
Parcel 1
Parcel 2
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
4
Parcel 3
Parcel 4
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 206 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. 207 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. 208 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. 209 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. 210 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. 211 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. 212 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. 213 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. 214 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. 215 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. 216 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. 217 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. 218 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. 219 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
18
APPENDICIES
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 220 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. 221 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. 222 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. 223 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. 224 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. 225 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. 226 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. 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 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. 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 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. 229 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. 230 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. 231 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 9
Figure 2 – Project Distribution by Percentage and by PM Peak Hour
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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 16
Appendix A:
Project Parcel Aerial
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 | 17
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 | 18
Appendix B:
Trip Generation Calculations ITE 10th
Edition
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 | 19
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 | 20
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 | 21
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 | 22
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 | 23
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 | 24
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 | 25
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 | 26
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 | 27
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 | 28
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 – GMPA – TIS – September 2019
Trebilcock Consulting Solutions, PA Page | 29
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 260 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. 261 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. 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)
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
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. 268 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. 269 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 270 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. 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)
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 291 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. 292 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. 293Attachment: 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. 294Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
2/7/2020
1/1
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 296 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. 297 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. 298 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. 299 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates
4
Location Map 9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 300 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. 301 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. 302 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. 303 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. 304 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. 305 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. 306 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. 307 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. 308 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. 309 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. 310 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. 311 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. 312 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. 313 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. 314 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. 315 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. 316 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. 317 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. 318 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. 319 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. 320 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. 321 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. 322 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.e
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.ePacket Pg. 324Attachment: 03_Application-Petition_CP-2018-4 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.fPacket Pg. 325Attachment: 04_CCPC Ad as posted 7.20.20 (12063 : Immokalee Road Rural Estates Subdistrict)
9.A.1.g
Packet Pg. 326 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.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
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
9.A.2
Packet Pg. 327
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. 328 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. 329 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. 330 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. 331 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. 332 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. 333 Attachment: 01_CCPC Adoption Staff Report_CP-2018-8 Hammock Park (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)
9.A.2.d
Packet Pg. 337 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. 338 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. 339 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. 340 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. 341 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. 342 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. 343 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. 344 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. 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)
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 347 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. 348 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. 349 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. 350 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. 351 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. 352 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. 353 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. 354 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. 355 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. 356 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. 357 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. 358 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. 359 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. 360 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. 361 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. 362 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. 363 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. 364 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. 365 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. 366 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. 367 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. 368 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. 369 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. 370 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. 371 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. 372 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. 373 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. 374 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 375 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. 376 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. 377 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. 378 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. 379 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. 380 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. 381 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. 382 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. 383 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. 384 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. 385 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. 386 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. 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)
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 391 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. 392 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. 393 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. 394 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. 395 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. 396 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. 397 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. 398 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. 399 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. 400 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. 401 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
EXHIBIT 1
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 402 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. 403 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
EXHIBIT 2
AERIAL WITH FLUCFCS AND WETLANDS MAP
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 404 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. 405Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
EXHIBIT 3
NATIVE VEGETATION MAP
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 406 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. 407Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
EXHIBIT 4
LISTED SPECIES SURVEY
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 408 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. 409 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. 410 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. 411 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. 412 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. 413 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. 414Attachment: 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. 415 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. 416Attachment: 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. 417 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. 418 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. 419 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. 420Attachment: 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. 421 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. 422Attachment: 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. 423 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. 424 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. 425 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. 426 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. 427 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. 428 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. 429 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. 430 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. 431 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. 432 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. 433 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. 434 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. 435 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. 436 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. 437 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
8
Source: Collier County Comprehensive Planning Section
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 438 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. 439 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. 440 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. 441 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. 442 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. 443 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. 444 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. 445 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. 446 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. 447 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. 448 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
19
APPENDICIES
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
20
Appendix A
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
21
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
22
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
23
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
24
Appendix B
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
25
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
26
Appendix C
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 456 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. 457 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. 458 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. 459 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. 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
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. 461 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. 462 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. 463 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
LOCATION MAP
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 464 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. 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)
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 470 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. 471 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. 472 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. 473 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. 474 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. 475 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. 476 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. 477 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. 478 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. 479 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. 480 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. 481 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. 482 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. 483 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. 484 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. 485 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. 486 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. 487 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. 488 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. 489 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. 490 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. 491 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. 492 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. 493 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. 494 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. 495 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. 496 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. 497 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. 498 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. 499 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. 500 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. 501 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. 502 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. 503 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. 504 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. 505 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. 506 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. 507 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. 508 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. 509 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. 510 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. 511 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. 512 Attachment: 03_Application_Petition Hammock Park (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 513 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. 514 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. 515 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. 516 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. 517 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. 518 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. 519 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 identification 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 different family member he was
fighting 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. 520 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. 521 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. 522 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. 523 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. 524 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. 525 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. 526 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. 527 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. 528 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. 529 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. 530 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. 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)
9.A.2.e
Packet Pg. 533 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. 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 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. 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 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. 536 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. 537 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 545 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. 546 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. 547 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. 548 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. 549 Attachment: 06_Transmittal Resolution 2020-016 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
F1DSOHV'DLO\1HZ)ULGD\ˆˆ3DJH$
9.A.2.i
Packet Pg. 550 Attachment: 07_CCPC Adoption Ad as posted 2.17.20 (12028 : Hammock Park Adoption)
9.A.2.jPacket Pg. 551Attachment: 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.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
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
9.A.3
Packet Pg. 552
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. 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 2 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 3 of 14
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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 565 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. 566 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. 567 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. 568 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.b
Packet Pg. 569 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. 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.b
Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: Attachment A-Proposed Ordinance - 021319(1) (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.c
Packet Pg. 616 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.cPacket Pg. 617Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 618 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. 619 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. 620 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. 621 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. 622 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. 623 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. 624 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. 625 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. 626 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. 627 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. 628 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. 629 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. 630 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. 631 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. 632 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. 633 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. 634 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. 635 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. 636 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. 637 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. 638 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. 639Attachment: 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. 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)
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 642 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT "A"
Page 1 of 6
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 643 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT "A"
Page 2 of 6
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 644 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT "A"
Page 3 of 6
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 645 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT "A"
Page 4 of 6
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 646 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT "A"
Page 5 of 6
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 647 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT "A"
Page 6 of 6
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 648 Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT "B" Page 1 of 29.A.3.cPacket Pg. 649Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park
EXHIBIT "B" Page 2 of 29.A.3.cPacket Pg. 650Attachment: Attachment B-Previous Ordinances and Resolutions (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park
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)
9.A.3.c
Packet Pg. 653 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. 654 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. 655 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. 656 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. 657 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. 658 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. 659 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. 660 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. 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 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. 662 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. 663 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. 664 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. 665 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. 666 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. 667 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. 668 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. 669 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. 670 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. 671 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. 672 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. 673 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 677 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. 678 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. 679 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. 680 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. 681 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. 682 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 687 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. 688 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 689 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. 690 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. 691 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. 692 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. 693 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. 694 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. 695 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. 696 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. 697 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. 698 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. 699 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. 700 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. 701 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. 702 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. 703 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. 704 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 722 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. 723 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 724 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 728 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. 729 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. 730 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. 731 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 732 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. 733 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. 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
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. 735 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. 736 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. 737 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
LOCATION MAP
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 738 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 744 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. 745 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. 746 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. 747 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. 748 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.fPacket Pg. 749Attachment: 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. 750 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. 751 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. 752 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. 753 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. 754 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. 755 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. 756 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 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. 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 | 14
Appendix A
Project Conceptual Site Plan
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 | 15
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 | 16
Appendix B
Initial Meeting Checklist (Methodology Meeting)
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 | 17
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 | 18
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 | 19
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 | 20
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 | 21
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 | 22
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 | 23
Appendix C
ITE Trip Generation Calculations
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 | 24
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 | 25
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 | 26
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 | 27
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 | 28
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 | 29
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 | 30
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 | 31
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 | 32
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 | 33
Appendix D
Collier County Transportation Element
Map TR-7 – Excerpt
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 | 34
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 | 35
Appendix E
Turning Movement Exhibits
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 | 36
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 792 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. 793 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. 794 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. 795 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. 796 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. 797 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. 798 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. 799 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. 800 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. 801 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. 802 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. 803 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. 804 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT 1
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 805 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. 806 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. 807 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. 808Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT 3
NATIVE VEGETATION MAP
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 809 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. 810Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
EXHIBIT 4
LISTED SPECIES SURVEY
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 811 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. 812 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. 813 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. 814 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. 815 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. 816 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. 817Attachment: 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. 818 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. 819Attachment: 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. 820 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. 821 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. 822 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. 823Attachment: 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. 824 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. 825Attachment: 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. 826 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 827 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 842 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 848 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 870 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 887 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 895 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. 896 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 899 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. 900 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 901 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 910 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. 911 Attachment: Attachment E-Application 7-10-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 912 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. 913 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. 914 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. 915 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. 916 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. 917 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. 918 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 identification 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 different family member he was
fighting 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. 919 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. 920 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. 921 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. 922 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. 923 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. 924 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. 925 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. 926 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. 927 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. 928 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. 929 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. 930 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. 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)
9.A.3.f
Packet Pg. 934 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. 935 Attachment: Attachment F-Density Exhibit (rev2) 7-9-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
9.A.3.hPacket Pg. 936Attachment: Virtual Hearing Waiver 6-29-20 (12193 : PL20180002813 Hammock Park MPUD)
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
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
9.A.4
Packet Pg. 937
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. 938 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. 939 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. 940 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. 941 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. 942 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. 943 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. 944 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. 945 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. 946 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. 947 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. 948 Attachment: 01_Staff Report CPSS-19-12 Beck blvd GMPA_FNL (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)
9.A.4.d
Packet Pg. 954 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. 955 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. 956 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. 957 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. 958 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. 959 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. 960 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. 961 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. 962 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. 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
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. 964 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. 965 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. 966 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. 967 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA)
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 968 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. 969 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. 970 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. 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
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. 972 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. 973 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. 974 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. 975 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. 976 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. 977 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. 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
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. 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
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. 981 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. 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)
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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 997 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1000 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. 1001 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. 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)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1023 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. 1024 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. 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)
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1028 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. 1029 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA)
Page 2 of 3
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1030 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA)
Page 3 of 3
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1031 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA)
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1032 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. 1033 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. 1034Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1035 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA)
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 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. 1037 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. 1038 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. 1039 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. 1040 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. 1041 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. 1042 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. 1043 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. 1044 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. 1045 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. 1046 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. 1047 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. 1048 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. 1049 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. 1050 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. 1051 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck
7
Existing Activity Center #9
Subject
Property
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1052 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. 1053 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. 1054 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1055 Attachment: 03_Petition-Application_PL20190002017_CCPC_Backup (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA)
9.A.4.e
Packet Pg. 1056 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. 1057 Attachment: 04_CCPC Ad as Posted 7.17.20 (12668 : 3205 Beck Boulevard GMPA)
9.A.4.g
Packet Pg. 1058 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: Raymond Bellows, Planning Manager]
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
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
9.A.5
Packet Pg. 1059
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. 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 2 of 13
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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1071 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. 1072 Attachment: 07-07-20 - Beck-Staff Report Rezone updated per CAO review (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.b
Packet Pg. 1077 Attachment: ATTACHMENT A - Proposed Ordinance - 070620(1) (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 BOULEVARD REZONE)
9.A.5.c
Packet Pg. 1082 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK
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.c
Packet Pg. 1085 Attachment: ATTACHMENT B - Ordinance 92-56 for Conditional Use Tower (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE)
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
9.A.5.d
Packet Pg. 1088 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. 1089 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. 1090 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. 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
09/28/2017 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1098 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. 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)
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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1124 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. 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)
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
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. 1129 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. 1130 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. 1131 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. 1132 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE)
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 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. 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 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. 1135 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. 1136 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE)
9.A.5.e
Packet Pg. 1137 Attachment: 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.ePacket Pg. 1140Attachment: 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)
9.A.5.e
Packet Pg. 1155 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. 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)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 3FFE0738-1051-49C6-82F1-F936053CFAA7
9.A.5.e
Packet Pg. 1178 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. 1179 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE)
9.A.5.e
Packet Pg. 1180 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. 1181 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. 1182Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205
9.A.5.e
Packet Pg. 1183 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE)
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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1192 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. 1193 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. 1194 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. 1195 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. 1196 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. 1197 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. 1198 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. 1199 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 :
7
Existing Activity Center #9
Subject
Property
9.A.5.e
Packet Pg. 1200 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. 1201 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. 1202 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 :
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 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. 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 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. 1205 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. 1206 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. 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.e
Packet Pg. 1210 Attachment: ATTACHMENT D - PL20190002018 CCPC Applicant Backup+ (12854 : PL20190002018 - 3205 BECK BOULEVARD REZONE)
9.A.5.f
Packet Pg. 1211 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: 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
Planning Commission 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 Edwin Fryer Meeting Pending 08/06/2020 9:00 AM
9.A.6
Packet Pg. 1212
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. 1213 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. 1214 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. 1215 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. 1216 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. 1217 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. 1218 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. 1219 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. 1220 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. 1221 Attachment: Staff Report-Rockedge 7-20-20 (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)
9.A.6.b
Packet Pg. 1226 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. 1227 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. 1228 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. 1229 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. 1230 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. 1231 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. 1232 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. 1233 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. 1234 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. 1235 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. 1236 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. 1237 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. 1238 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. 1239 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. 1240 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. 1241 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. 1242 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. 1243 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. 1244 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. 1245 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. 1246 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. 1247 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. 1248 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. 1249 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. 1250 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. 1251 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. 1252 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1256 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. 1257 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. 1258 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1262 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. 1263 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. 1264 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. 1265 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. 1266 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. 1267 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. 1268 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. 1269 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. 1270 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. 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)
9.A.6.g
Packet Pg. 1287 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)
Justin A. Robbins
9.A.6.g
Packet Pg. 1288 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)
9.A.6.g
Packet Pg. 1289 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. 1290 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. 1291 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. 1292 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. 1293 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. 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)
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
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. 1350 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. 1351 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. 1352 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. 1353 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. 1354 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. 1355 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. 1356Attachment: 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. 1357 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. 1358 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. 1359 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)
Page 2 | 2
Project Location
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.g
Packet Pg. 1381 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)
9.A.6.gPacket Pg. 1382Attachment: 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. 1383 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. 1384 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. 1385 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. 1386 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. 1387 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 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 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. 1392 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. 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.g
Packet Pg. 1396 Attachment: Attachment F-Application (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)
9.A.6.h
Packet Pg. 1397 Attachment: Virtual Hearing Waiver Letter to CAO 2020-07-08_DRHorton (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)
9.A.6.iPacket Pg. 1398Attachment: 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)
9.A.6.i
Packet Pg. 1400 Attachment: Sign Posting Affidavit and photos 7-15-20 (12345 : PL20190002553 Rockedge PUD)