Backup Documents 02/09/2021 Item # 9A PL20200000191-HeritageBayPUDA_BCCHearing-FinalQuarryPresentation_20210209HERITAGE BAY PUD AMENDMENT (PUDA)
PL20200000191
Collier County Board Of County Commissioners
February 9, 2021
Collier County Government Center
1
1
Applicant: Quarry Community Association
Anthony P. Pires, Jr. B.C.S. – Woodward, Pires & Lombardo, P.A.
Chris Meares, P.E. – Native Engineering, PLLC, Civil Engineer
Vicki Castro, P.E. – Palm Traffic, Transportation Planner/Traffic Expert
Michael Yates – Palm Traffic, Transportation Planner/Traffic Expert
Greg Stuart, MAURP– Stuart and Associates, Land Use Planning Expert
Cheryl Ollila – Quarry Community Association, President
INTRODUCTION
2
2
THE HERITAGE BAY PUD
3
Heritage Bay PUD – Comprised of Heritage Bay and The Quarry Communities and the Commercial Activity Center
Designed and built as an integrated, interconnected Mixed Use PUD w/ interconnection to the Commercial Activity Center
3
THE HERITAGE BAY PUD ROAD NETWORK
4
Limestone Trail is a platted, private, two-lane road in the Quarry Community Association (Quarry) that is owned and maintained by the Applicant.
Limestone Trail continues to be used by Quarry and Heritage Bay residents to access the Commercial Activity Center.
Limestone Trail is located outside Activity Center #3.
4
The Amendment & Why We Are Here …
Text Amendment to the Heritage Bay PUD to construct a permitted PUD use-right; i.e., a guardhouse/traffic control facility.
Consistent with the PUD, to clarify the ability to install gates on Limestone Trail and other Heritage Bay PUD privately owned roads.
Text Amendment will not affect use of the interconnecting and privately owned Limestone Trail by Heritage Bay and Quarry residents that have enjoyed for approximately 15 years.
THE AMENDMENT
5
5
RECOMMENDATION: TO APPROVE THE PUD TEXT AMENDMENT WITH 1 CONDITION
A 6 - 1 Vote by Planning Commission.
Planning Commission recommendation confirms the Text Amendment Is Consistent with the Heritage Bay PUD Ordinance.
Planning Commission recommendation confirms the Text Amendment Is Consistent with the GMP and the Collier County Code.
Planning Commission Findings: Applicant has right to close Limestone Trail to the public.
Planning Commission recognized Staff’s recommendation of denial as regulatory over-reach.
PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING ON JANUARY 7, 2021
6
6
HERITAGE BAY ACCESS TO/FROM THE PUD ACTIVITY CENTER
7
LEGEND
Existing Gate Location
Current Traffic Movement – Option 1
Current Traffic Movement – Option 2
Current Traffic Movement – Option 3
THE AMENDMENT BACKGROUND – CURRENT TRAFFIC
7
8
LEGEND
Existing Gate Location
Proposed Gate Location
Future Traffic Movement – Option 1
Future Traffic Movement – Option 2
Future Traffic Movement – Option 3
THE AMENDMENT BACKGROUND – FUTURE TRAFFIC
HERITAGE BAY ACCESS TO/FROM THE PUD ACTIVITY CENTER
(WITH GATES ON LIMESTONE)
8
County’s approval and creation of current development and traffic operations.
The Amendment – Maintains historic vehicular and pedestrian interconnectivity consistent with the PUD Master Plan, Collier County GMP, Collier County regulations, and Collier County
LDC.
The Amendment – Heritage Bay PUD Ord. Sec. 2.5.A clearly permits this use and improvement
Process should be as a minor site plan modification.
9
THE AMENDMENT BACKGROUND – RESPONDS TO NEW CONDITIONS
9
10
THE REQUESTED TEXT AMENDMENT
10
The Applicant’s Concern and Objective:
The Concern _ Increased cut through public traffic on homeowner’s association private road (Limestone Trail) responding to new development and major County modifications, including the
new Woodcrest/Quarry Dr./Immokalee Rd. traffic signal.
Comment - The general public has no legal right of use and, at the present time, there is a de minimis cut thru traffic by members of the general public;.
11
APPLICANT CONCERNS AND OBJECTIVES – CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC
11
June 2019
Applicant requested Insubstantial Change to Site Development Plan (SDPI).
Collier County – indicated application should be filed under Insubstantial Change to Construction Plan (ICP)
October 2019
ICP application pre-app requested - County changed requirement from ICP to Insubstantial Change to PUD (PDI) due to perceived changes to traffic circulation.
Collier Staff did not provide any factual quantitative evidence of traffic impacts on other public facilities for decision.
January 2020
PDI pre-app meeting - County changed their requirement from PDI to PUD Amendment (PUDA) advising that the proposed gates would result in “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;” under Section 10.02.13.E.1.e,
LDC citing anticipated changes to traffic circulation.
Collier Staff did not provide any factual quantitative evidence of traffic impacts on other public facilities for decision.
12
THE APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS
12
At a pre-application meeting for an insubstantial change to the PUD, County staff advised that the proposed gates would result in “ 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;” under Section 10.02.13.E.1.e, LDC
Comment – Then, as now, Collier County Staff has not provided any factual, quantitative evidence of traffic such impacts on other public facilities to the degree that would merit a recommended
project denial.
13
THE APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS (cont.)
13
The present alignment of Limestone Trail was approved:
Administratively on March 30, 2004 by Collier County staff by a revision to the PUD Master Plan; and,
The Board of Commissioners of Collier County by the approval of the Quarry Phase 1A plat on November 16, 2004 and recording in January of 2005.
Heritage Bay PUD Ord. 2.5 – to allow by right the installation of Traffic Control Facilities and Gatehouses within Limestone Trail ROW.
14
PUD ORD. SEC. 2.5–APPLICANT RIGHTS TO ESTABLISH ACCESS CONTROLS
14
15
PUD ORD. SEC. 2.11.C–APPLICANT RIGHTS TO ESTABLISH ACCESS CONTROLS
15
16
PUD ORD. SEC. 214–APPLICANT RIGHTS TO ESTABLISH ACCESS CONTROLS
16
17
Heritage Bay PUD [Ord. No. 03-40] adopted 07/29/03
Heritage Bay PUD [Ord. No. 03-40]
Revised MCP to move internal road 03/30/04
Limestone Trail
Weathered Stone Dr.
Quarry Dr.
Heritage Bay Blvd.
PUD and Master Plan then and now provide/maintain internal access to the Activity Center for Quarry and Heritage Bay residents.
Commercial activity center with internal access to neighborhoods so residents will not have to travel out on Immokalee Road to shop for their every-day needs.
Current County approved Access Control Facilities @ Weathered Stone Dr., Quarry Dr. and Heritage Bay Blvd.
LIMESTONE TRAIL & THE HERITAGE BAY MCP
17
Background of Heritage Bay PUD and Development Approvals
March 30, 2004: County Staff administratively approved Master Plan Revision 2 which changed internal roadway alignment of what is now Limestone Trail
Weathered Stone Dr.
Quarry Dr.
Limestone Trail
Weathered Stone Dr.
Quarry Dr.
Limestone Trail
Immokalee Rd.
Immokalee Rd.
Collier Blvd.
Collier Blvd.
Bellaire Bay Dr.
Bellaire Bay Dr.
April 11, 2018 – County Town Hall: County presents on Heritage Bay PUD outlining history of zoning and improvements along Immokalee. Signal planned at Bellaire Bay Drive no longer viable
due to Collier County moving Bellaire Bay Drive closer to Collier Blvd.
18
LIMESTONE TRAIL & THE HERITAGE BAY MCP (cont.)
18
The Master Plan provides an internal interconnected street system without any language or provision that restricts the placement of gates on private roads within the internal PUD.
No public access requirements conditions imposed on placement or construction of the Weathered Stone Dr., Quarry Dr. and Heritage Bay Blvd. gates.
The absence of exact gate locations on MCP is common to most PUDS when the internal street systems are private and maintained by a homeowner’s association.
The Heritage Bay PUD and Master Plan are silent as to any commitment or requirement that all development within the PUD will be provided access to all the depicted roadways and to the
outside, general public.
19
LIMESTONE TRAIL & THE HERITAGE BAY MCP (cont.)
19
November 16, 2004: County Commission approves The Quarry Phase 1A Plat and approved Limestone Trail as a private Right-of-Way.
20
LIMESTONE TRAIL & THE HERITAGE BAY PLAT
20
21
LIMESTONE TRAIL & THE HERITAGE BAY PLAT (cont.)
21
2005 – 2020: multiple development approvals for development of properties in the Activity Center, that included the submittal of a TIS for each developed parcel/tract.
22
CR 951 ROAD NETWORK & HERITAGE BAY MCP
2005 – 2020 HERITAGE BAY PUD TRAFFIC STUDIES
22
All 14 TIS were accepted and approved by Collier County.
Of the 14 TIS, only one (1) assigned any external project traffic to Limestone Trail
That TIS was for Culver’s (in 2017) and showed only 15 AM and 11PM trips.
23
CR 951 ROAD NETWORK & HERITAGE BAY MCP
2005 – 2020 HERITAGE BAY PUD TRAFFIC STUDIES (cont.)
23
February 1, 2018
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Report by Norm Trebilcock for Davidson Engineering.
Compiled data from the prior TIS for the properties in the Activity Center.
Assumed that 35% of trips exiting the Activity Center would travel east on Limestone to Quarry Drive without data collection to validate assumptions of original traffic study before
community was constructed.
That assumed percentage of the total trips was essential to the County meeting the necessary warrants to place a signal at Quarry Drive and Immokalee Road.
The 2018 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Report provided the basis/support for the present signalization work at Quarry Drive and Immokalee Road.
24
CR 951 ROAD NETWORK & HERITAGE BAY MCP
THE 2018 SIGNAL WARRANT STUDY
24
With the traffic signal, and other major County modifications to the roadway network adjacent to and along Immokalee Road, the Quarry is concerned about increased cut through public
traffic on the private Limestone Trail.
This assumed increase in cut through traffic of 35% of exiting traffic is contrary to the LDC and Policy 9.5 of the Transportation Element of the GMP.
This increased cut through traffic exposes the Quarry and all of the residents of the Quarry to additional costs and liability.
This increased cut through traffic and its attendant noise was not anticipated by those who purchased homes in the Quarry just to the North of the Quarry’s privately owned road.
These issues will amplify and increase as development continues external to the Quarry and from continuing major modifications by Collier County to the County roadway network adjacent
to and along Immokalee Road.
25
THE NEED FOR PRIVATE ROAD CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC CONTROLS
25
26
THE NEED FOR PRIVATE ROAD CUT THROUGH TRAFFIC CONTROLS
Termination of Traffic Queue entering Quarry Main Gate during non-event weekday afternoon
Limestone
Trail
Quarry Dr.
Quarry Main Gate
Looking South From The Quarry Main Gate Towards Immokalee Rd. With Typical Queuing Cars
Limestone Trail
26
27
THE QUARRY NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
LEGEND
Existing Gate Location
Proposed Gate Location
Existing Conditions – Non-lawful General Public access to be prohibited
27
28
THE QUARRY NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN (cont.)
28
Heritage Bay Resident Access from Commercial Activity Center With Signal at Quarry Drive/Immokalee Road Active
29
THE QUARRY NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN (cont.)
LEGEND
Existing Gate Location
Proposed Gate Location
29
Turn Lane Extension by Collier County
Median Closure by Collier County
Public Access from Commercial Activity Center to EB Immokalee
With Access Controls on Limestone Trail
30
THE QUARRY NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN (cont.)
30
31
THE QUARRY NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
DIRECT ACTIVITY CENTER INTERCONNECTION
31
From A Professional Traffic Engineering Framework The Amendment Is Consistent with:
FLUE Policy 7.3;
Transportation Element 9.3;
LDC 4.04.02.A.1;
LDC 4.04.02.B; and
LDC 4.07.02.J.4.
Vehicular and pedestrian interconnections remain for lawful users.
Staff Position Is Inconsistent with 6.06.01.G _
“The use of local streets by cut-through traffic shall be discouraged.”
32
HERITAGE BAY PUD AMENDMENT
POLICIES, RULES & STANDARDS CONSISTENCY
32
THE PUD MASTER PLAN & THE CORE ISSUE
Is the PUD text amendment consistent with the intent and purpose of the Heritage Bay Ordinance and GMP Transportation Policies 7.3 and 9.3, to allow for the construction of an existing
use-by-right gatehouse within a privately owned ROW?
Ord. 03-40 Heritage Bay PUD Condition - Standard #7:
“The Heritage Bay PUD is designed to encourage internal vehicle trip capture by providing commercial and recreational uses and providing for pedestrian and bicyclist access to internal
community recreation and convenience retail centers.”
33
33
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Collier Staff recommends No to the amendment while citing Policies 7.3, 9.3 and LDC 4.04.02.B.
Strongly Disagree w/ Staff Recommendation _ Staff Recommendations Does Not Take Into Account That Limestone Trail Is A Privately Owned &
Maintained Road.
The amendment clearly complies & is consistent with 7.3, 9.3 & 4.04.02.B
34
34
POLICY 7.3 – DENIAL IS NOT LOGICAL
1. As per Ord. 03-40 Sec. 2.14.A.6, the Heritage Bay PUD currently permits by right Guardhouses, Gatehouses and access control structures within Tract “R” Limestone Trail;
2. The connection is maintained - no interconnection modification to the PUD’s roadway infrastructure layout, orientation and operational access; and
3. The general traveling public does not have a legal right to access Limestone Trail and Quarry Drive.
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.
35
35
1. A developed and vested PUD’s residential accessory use-by-right that is designed for a private community road network is a non-substantial site plan modification and should not require
this type of PUD Text Amendment;
2. Heritage Bay Ord. 03-40 Standard #7 -
The Heritage Bay PUD is design to encourage internal vehicle trip capture by providing commercial and recreational uses and providing for pedestrian and bicyclist access to internal
community recreation and convenience retail centers.
The developed project has been found, is & will be consistent with providing direct access to the commercial activity center; and
3. The regulatory assumption that the general public has the right to access private property dramatically contrasts with the common notion and definition of private property.
4. To enjoy the same right as other semi-gated and gated private road communities.
36
POLICY 7.3 – DENIAL IS NOT PREDICTABLE
36
37
EXISTING ACCESS
(WITHOUT LIMESTONE TRAIL ACCESS CONTROLS)
37
PUD Conditions – With the Limestone Trail Access Controls
Comment: No Change to Access Commercial Center – The Project Complies w/ 7.3
While Heritage Bay Residents Still Use Siesta Bay Drive for East & Westbound Movements
38
PROPOSED ACCESS
(WITH LIMESTONE TRAIL ACCESS CONTROLS)
38
POLICY 7.3 – IS PREJUDICAL TO THE APPLICANT
The amendment denial will serve to introduce more non-project general public traffic into the Heritage Bay community.
Increased through-traffic into the PUD will diminish resident safety.
Text Amendment denial based on solving a problem that allegedly is being created by The Quarry is not based on sound land use planning principles and practices; The Quarry is not responsible
for solving Immokalee Road and Woodcrest Drive transportation issues.
Professionally accepted planning & growth management principles and practices rests on ensuring a logical connection between rules that support a legitimate public interest and individual
property rights.
Other gated communities with private roads and gatehouses.
39
39
Woodcrest Drive and Other Pass-thru Traffic Onto Private Property Neither Warranted Nor Legal
POLICY 7.3 – IS PREJUDICAL TO THE APPLICANT (cont.)
40
40
THE TEXT AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH 7.3
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 project has been designed, constructed and operated based on adjoining neighborhood interconnectivity.
This interconnectivity is maintained.
The Text Amendment is consistent with 7.3.
41
41
POLICY 9.3 – DENIAL IS NOT LOGICAL
9.3. The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout the road network.
The Staff Finding that the PUD amendment will remove public access is not logical
Limestone Trail was designed and built as a private road for the PUD, not for the general traveling pubic;
The general traveling public has direct commercial tract access via Collier Blvd., Goodland Bay Dr., Bellaire Bay Dr. and a portion of Weathered Stone Dr.; and
It is not logical to deny a permit based on the assumption of providing full public access into a private road network.
42
42
By denying the applicant the right to construct a permitted use within a private right-of-way and basing the denial on support of public access onto private lands, the Staff Finding
throws out accepted land use definitions and property rights principles and practices
The amendment denial deprives the Quarry Community Association the right to decide who can and cannot enter and use their property.
The text amendment does not impact current and projected Immokalee Road LOS D (see TIS Link Evaluation page 17).
Staff recommendation does not conform to accepted planning definitions, principles and practices.
POLICY 9.3 – DENIAL IS NOT PREDICTABLE
43
43
9.3. The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout the road network.
THE TEXT AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH 9.3
The text amendment complies with 9.3 by the design, configuration and interconnected operation of the PUD private and public road network.
Thirteen out of Fourteen approved traffic studies factored in zero vehicle trips assigned to Limestone Trail with a finding of Immokalee Road having excess capacity (see TIS Conclusion
page19).
44
44
4.04.02.B.2 Future mixed-use projects are required to provide an internal interconnection among major project phases, sections, or types of uses, unless one or more of the four circumstances
listed below is applicable.
LDC 4.04.02.B.2 – DENIAL IS NOT LOGICAL
Limestone Trail continues to provide an internal interconnection between PUD residential and commercial land uses; therefore, staff finding is not logical.
45
45
The regulatory standard is LOS; along Immokalee Rd and from Collier Blvd. to Wilson Blvd. the amendment will not lead to LOS diminishment.
Adopted LOS E Peak Hour Directional Capacity @ 3,300
2019 Peak Hr. Pk direction @ 2,050
Current LOS w/ Trip surplus capacity @ LOS D.
The PUD Amendment - may have 11 reassigned commercial activity center trips (see TIS Conclusion page 19).
COMMENT – 11 reassigned trips are de minimis.
Thirteen out of Fourteen approved TIS did not assign traffic onto Limestone and other public vehicular trips were already assigned to Immokalee Rd.
Staff recommended denial not based on predictable reliance on Collier rules and professional standards and practices.
LDC 4.04.02.B.2 – DENIAL IS NOT PREDICTABLE
46
46
4.04.02.B.2 Future mixed-use projects are required to provide an internal interconnection among major project phases, sections, or types of uses, unless one or more of the four circumstances
listed below is applicable.
Limestone Trail continues to provide an internal interconnection between PUD residential and commercial land uses
The text amendment complies with 4.04.02.B.2
THE TEXT AMENDMENT COMPLIES WITH LDC 4.04.02.B.2
47
47
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the GMP?
Policy 5.1 - YES (Staff Report pg. 7 para. 4) – “While the proposed change re-directs existing trips along the adjacent road network, specifically Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard;
the change does not increase the number of trips approved by the original development order. Therefore, the change meets Policy 5.1 of the Transportation Element of the GMP”
Transportation Element Policy 5.1 – “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”.
48
48
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the GMP?
Policy 7.3 - YES – No modifications regarding on-site traffic flows and Heritage Bay residents can still fully utilize Siesta Bay Dr. Therefore, staff findings are in error & the amendment
is consistent with Transportation Element Policy 7.3.
Staff Finding (Staff Report pg. 9, para. 2) – “The proposed change modifies the existing on-site traffic flows. Staff also notes that Heritage Bay residents are required to exit the
development at Quarry Drive to head eastbound on Immokalee Road to access Heritage Bay instead of using the internal access on Siesta Bay Drive. This causes a reduction in the internal
trip capture that was originally intended for the Heritage Bay PUD”.
Transportation Element Policy 7.3 – “The County shall implement, through its Land Development Code and Code of Laws and Ordinances, the provision of safe and convenient onsite traffic
flow and need for adequate parking for both motorized and non-motorized vehicles as a primary objective in the review of Planned Unit Developments, Site Development Plan, and other
appropriate stages of review in the land development application review process. Coordination shall occur with County Engineering staff where traffic circulation is outside the limits
of the public ROW.”
49
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY (cont.)
49
Whether the proposed change will be consistent with the GMP?
Policy 9.3 - YES – It is not feasible to require public vehicular use on a private road; therefore, staff findings are in error & the amendment is consistent with Transportation Element
Policy 9.3.
Staff Finding (Staff Report pg. 10, para. 1) – “The proposed change will remove the existing public and commercial traffic access to the interconnection currently provided by Limestone
Trail to the existing network including the future signalized intersection on Immokalee Road”.
COMMENT: The amendment will not remove public access since non-Heritage Bay public traffic does not have the right to use Limestone Trail or Quarry Drive as neither are part of the public
road network.
Staff Finding (Staff Report pg. 10, para. 1) “The interconnection is physically possible; it is not located in a designated environmentally sensitive lands; the interconnection was provided
during development of the community as part of the site development-platting approval; and the interconnection does provide a public and commercial benefit for a number of traffic generating
uses”.
COMMENT: The interconnection remains so “physical feasibility is not an issue”.
Transportation Element Policy 9.3 – “The County shall require, wherever feasible, the interconnection of local streets between developments to facilitate convenient movement throughout
the road network. ”
50
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY (cont.)
50
5. Whether changing conditions make the passage of the amendment necessary?
YES – The new traffic signal at Immokalee Road and Woodcrest/Quarry Drive will advance and aggravate the public driving use on a private road network, and with all costs born by the
private community.
Staff Finding (Staff Report pg. 12, para. 5) – “The proposed change is not necessary”.
51
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
CHANGING CONDITIONS
51
6. Whether the proposed change will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood?
No – As per staff “the proposed closure of Limestone Trail to the public will not adversely influence living conditions in the immediate neighborhood” (Staff Report pg. 12, para. 6).
Staff Finding – Yes - “However, the proposed change will have an impact on the neighboring public who may need to use Limestone Trail in times of emergency and/or when Immokalee Road
is congested”.
COMMENT: Staff finding is speculative and remains at odds with the quantitative facts that Immokalee Road LOS remains at D and that the new Limestone Traffic Control devices may re-direct
11 trips.
52
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
GENERAL ADVERSE CONDITIONS
52
7. Whether the proposed change will create or excessively increase traffic congestion?
No – As per Palm Traffic Engineering and Planning Limestone Trail TIS 10/12/20.
Staff Finding – Yes - “The proposed change to eliminate public access to Limestone Trail may create increased traffic congestion on Immokalee Road.”
COMMENT: Staff “may create” finding is speculative and remains at odds with the quantitative facts that Immokalee Road LOS remains at D and that the new Limestone Traffic Control devices
may re-direct 11 trips.
Staff Finding (Staff Report pg. 7, para. 3) – “While the proposed change re-directs existing trips along the adjacent road network, specifically Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard;
the change does not increase the number of trips approved by the original development order”.
Staff Finding (Staff Report pg. 8, para. 1) – “Since the amendment is not requesting additional intensity or density and the redistributed traffic that would otherwise utilize the internal
network, that would now be externalized, the change is deminimis”.
53
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
CHANGE OR CREATE TRAFFIC CONGESTION
53
13. Whether there are substantial reasons why the property cannot be achieved without amending the PUD?
Yes – Gatehouse/Access Control Structures are uses by-right as per Heritage Bay Ordinance; the use was envisioned originally at the beginning of the project. The project should never
have been forced into a PUD Amendment process since it is a minor site plan modification.
Staff Finding – No - “The subject property can be used in accordance with existing zoning; however, the proposed use cannot be achieved without amending the PUD.”
54
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
WHY THE PROPERTY CANNOT BE ACHIEVED
54
14. Whether the change suggested is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood and county?
No – Limestone Trail remains as a needed interconnection between the businesses and essential services located in the Heritage Bay Activity Center and Heritage Bay neighborhoods, and
not Collier County residents living south of Immokalee Road.
Staff Finding – Yes - “The proposed PUD Amendment is out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood and the county. Limestone Trail serves as a needed interconnection between the businesses
and essential services located in the Heritage Bay Activity Center and the Collier County residents located to the east and south along Immokalee Road”.
55
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
OUT OF SCALE WITH NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS
55
17. The impact of development on the availability of adequate public services consistent with LOS standards.
No – Limestone Trail improvement does not impact Immokalee Road LOS.
Staff Finding – No But - “The proposed closure of Limestone Trail does not add new trip impacts but does redistribute those impacts.
56
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
PUBLIC SERVICES AND LEVEL OF SERVICE
56
Staff Report page 10 para. 3:
“At the July 29, 2003, Board of County Commissioner meeting where the Heritage Bay Development of Regional Impact and Planned Unit Development petitions were heard, Bruce Anderson, representing
the applicant stated, “This project also features internal access to the activity center so that residents of Heritage Bay will not have to travel out on Immokalee Road to shop for
their every-day needs.”
COMMENT – The Amendment continues to allow Heritage Bay residents to not have to travel onto Immokalee Road for shopping.
Staff Report page 10 para. 4:
“Instead of developing as one consolidated project it was unfortunately split and ultimately built by multiple parties.”
COMMENT – Not relevant and Collier County approved all development.
Staff Report page 10 para. 5:
"Limestone Trail was platted with ownership and maintenance responsibility to The Quarry. However, during the Subdivision Plat review for The Quarry Phase 1A, staff requested a pedestrian
(sidewalk) connection between Coastline Way (roadway behind the gates) to the sidewalk on Limestone Trail. The 2004 response from the project engineer was that the sidewalk was not
connected because the link would join a street within the gated community to a street outside of the gated community, which could be used by the public.”
COMMENT - Not relevant in that from an operational, maintenance and cost perspective, a public sidewalk is functionally different from a private road.
57
THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
57
The Quarry is concerned about increased cut through public traffic on the private Limestone Trail brought about by the new traffic signal.
This increased cut through traffic is contrary to our neighborhood’s quality of life.
This increased cut through traffic exposes the Quarry and all of the residents of the Quarry to additional costs and liability.
This increased cut through traffic and its attendant noise was not anticipated by those who purchased homes in the Quarry just to the North of the Quarry’s privately owned road.
These issues will amplify and increase as development continues external to the Quarry and from continuing major modifications by Collier County to the County roadway network adjacent
to and along Immokalee Road.
58
THE QUARRY COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
58
59
CONCLUSION
59
60
Staff Report Excerpt – Page 7 of 16
CONCLUSION
60
61
Staff Report Excerpt:
Page 8 of 16 – Documents Intended Public Use Of A Privately Owned & Maintained Road
CONCLUSION
61
Limestone Trail is a private internal project roadway within the Heritage Bay PUD that provides access to the Commercial Activity Center.
Limestone Trail provides internal cross access to The Quarry and Heritage Bay and is a private road owned and maintained by the Quarry Community Association. Per the current Section
2.5.A of Ordinance 03-40 Heritage Bay PUD, the developer also has the right to establish gates as may be deemed appropriate on all project roadways.
As outlined in the proposed PUDA Text Amendment, residents of the Quarry and Heritage Bay will have full use of Limestone Trail.
62
CONCLUSION
62
10 out of 14 County approved traffic studies assumed that the existing median opening at Bellaire Bay Drive would be channelized and only one of those assigned traffic to Limestone Trail
as a result of the channelization.
The majority of the County approved trips in the trip bank have been assigned to Immokalee Road; the channelization of Bellaire Bay Drive was considered without using Limestone Trail.
Immokalee Road is operating with excess capacity (LOS D) and can accommodate the additional 11 reassigned CAC trips.
63
CONCLUSION
63
Approval for the gating of Limestone Trail by the proposed Text Amendment language will not result in an increase in traffic generation or change in traffic circulation or result in
land use activities that generate a higher level of traffic.
The Text Amendment meets all approval criteria, including 7.3, 9.3 and 4.04.02.B.2
We ask the Board to support the Planning Commission’s findings and approve the application.
64
CONCLUSION
64
END OF PRESENTATION
65
65