Fwd_ Proposed One Naples ProjectEXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Commissioner LoCastro,
I noticed you were not copied with this important communication from Bay Colony Foundation refuting the comparison of One Naples to Bay Colony for comparability and consistency purposes.
We look forward to our meeting with Commissoner LoCastro on Friday morning at 8:00am.
Ken Melkus
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:
From: Brian Maher <bamaher55@gmail.com>
Date: February 10, 2021 at 20:09:26 EST
To: Kim Rosenberg <krosenb@hotmail.com>
Cc: Buzz Victor <buzz@unitedstor-all.com>, Ken Melkus <KMelkus@wcas.com>
Subject: Re: Proposed One Naples Project
Very good, thanks Kim.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 8:07 PM Kim Rosenberg <krosenb@hotmail.com <mailto:krosenb@hotmail.com> > wrote:
We've resent our letter on comparability to the County Commissioners. Just in case they have forgotten our position.
Kim
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S9, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone
Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/ghei36>
________________________________
From: James Hoppensteadt <jimh@pelicanbay.org <mailto:jimh@pelicanbay.org> >
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021, 7:06 PM
To: 'andy.solis@colliercountyfl.gov <mailto:andy.solis@colliercountyfl.gov> '; 'burt.saunders@colliercountyfl.gov <mailto:burt.saunders@colliercountyfl.gov> '; 'Collier County District
4 Commissioner Penny Taylor'; 'bill.mcdaniel@colliercountyfl.gov <mailto:bill.mcdaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> '; 'Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov <mailto:Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>
'
Cc: 'OchsLeo'; Jane Brown; 'John Gandolfo'; Kim Rosenberg; Larry Baumann; Melanie Miller; 'Mike Foley'; Mike Ruffolo; Suzanne Minadeo; Trent Waterhouse; RodriguezDan; 'JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net
<mailto:JeffKlatzkow@colliergov.net> '
Subject: Proposed One Naples Project
Commissioners,
I originally sent this email on October 30, 2020. The County’s process, has been appropriately thorough, and understandably time-consuming. Between the end of October 2020 and now,
the One Naples project has gone through the Planning Commission, multiple public meetings, plan modifications, and importantly, a new Commissioner has been elected to the Board of County
Commissioners. There does seem to persist however, an ongoing commentary that compares the One Naples project to Pelican Bay. Therefore, the Foundation wishes to reiterate our position.
Re: Proposed One Naples project
Dear Commissioners:
The Pelican Bay Foundation (Foundation) recognizes and values the importance of redevelopment to maintain property values and the quality of life in our community. We appreciate both
the multiple and complex considerations of the criteria provided for in the land development code, the comprehensive plan amendments, the rezoning requests, etc., and, further, respect
the concerns, objections, or support, of various community interest groups, individuals, or businesses.
The Foundation expressly neither supports nor opposes the proposed One Naples project. In fact, we appreciate the open communication with which Stock Development has approached this
proposed project. However, because properties within Pelican Bay have been cited as compatibility justifications for the One Naples project, the Foundation believes it has an obligation
to clarify how Pelican Bay differs from the area to the north of Vanderbilt Drive since it is not part of Pelican Bay.
Pelican Bay was created years ago as a comprehensive, well-planned, mixed-use Planned Unit Development, and it is vastly different from the neighborhoods to our south, north, and east.
The planning, the PUD regulations and the applicable private declarations and covenants that govern Pelican Bay and have controlled its development include a myriad of factors, controls,
constraints and planning techniques to regulate and manage development. The allowance of high-rise construction and mixed-use development are regulated and controlled by multiple different
and important factors and controls.
To compare only height in Pelican Bay to other areas, without also considering the overall planning and multiple other constraints that apply to Pelican Bay, seems like selective cherry
picking. It is not an apt comparison. For example, the maximum height of principal structures within the Pelican Bay PUD is two hundred (200) feet above finished grade, provided that
minimum yards must be maintained, from tract or development parcel lines, right-of-way lines and/or the edge of the gutter of a private road, of fifty (50) feet or one-half (1/2) the
height of the structure, whichever is greater.
Simply stated, Pelican Bay is a well-planned, well-organized and well-run large-scale development that should not be compared or used in a comparative analysis to justify any position
(for or against) relative to development outside of its jurisdictional boundaries unless the entire Pelican Bay regulatory scheme of controls and constraints are similarly included.
We wish you well in your deliberations of the value and appropriateness of the proposed One Naples project for the Vanderbilt Beach neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Jim Hoppensteadt
President / COO
Pelican Bay Foundation
6251 Pelican Bay Blvd.
Naples, FL 34108
239-260-8460 direct
239-597-6927 fax
***** The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If the reader of this
message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message
including any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. *****