Loading...
FW_ Sable Palm MPUD - Executive SummaryFrom:McDanielBill To:CapizziAixa Subject:FW: Sable Palm MPUD - Executive Summary Date:Monday, January 11, 2021 10:46:21 AM From: Tim Owens <silverf50@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, January 10, 2021 10:15 PM To: SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov>; LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: glubben1@mac.com; steve.young@empowerlight.com Subject: Sable Palm MPUD - Executive Summary EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. I’m writing about the upcoming agenda item at the upcoming BCC meeting. While this requested MPUD annexation has already been reviewed at the Collier County Planning Commission, many current residents of the Isles of Collier Preserve feel the petitioner's statements at that CCPC meeting overstated and misrepresented current residents’ views on this annexation. The petitioner, Minto, has thus far not committed to addressing any incremental amenities as they’d committed to the CCPC. Moreover, planned amenities are incomplete with previously committed to nature walkways, wildlife viewing stations, and a playground not even initiated nor completed. Many ICP residents feel this annexation unnecessarily expands the Sabal Bay MPUD with no real benefits to current residents. Developer communications to residents thus far suggest the developer has no intention to augment existing common property and amenities. This seems to be in direct conflict to decision criteria for evaluating PUDA proposals that stipulate any PUDA must not adversely affect the living conditions of the neighborhood. Additionally, the proposed annexation exposes the HOA ‘assigns’ (current HOA homeowners) to future and unknown infrastructural costs such as storm water and traffic infrastructure expenses when the community is ‘turned over’ to the HOA at completion of the development. Importantly, the proposed annexation of the ‘Fleischmann’ parcel is deemed to be within the MSTA (Municipal Special Taxing Authority) and yet there is no explicit language in the petitioner’s applications to exclude the remainder of the Sabal Bay MPUD from this MSTA obligation. We feel explicit exclusionary language must be included as part of any PUDA approval to protect current MPUD home owners. In summary, we see no legitimate benefit from integrating the processed Fleischmann parcel with the current ICP community and several valid reasons to prevent such annexation. With respect to the traffic consequences of this proposed development of 230 additional homes in the Fleischmann parcel, we take the view a more complete evaluation of the likely 500+ additional cars per day on the South/North portions of Bayshore Road has not fully accounted for other adjacent developments along Thomasson Drive and Bayshore Drive, i.e., the Dells parcel, the Cirrus Pointe parcel, the Mattamy Homes community on Bayshore and the row houses on Thomasson Drive currently under construction. The PUDA’s associated Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) makes plain this PUDA will have major effects on Bayshore and Thomasson Drives. (Reference page 30, line 5 of the Executive Summary). This is in direct conflict with the summary findings provided to the BCC as part of their review materials. We challenge the assumed traffic patterns comprised in the TIA associated with this proposed PUDA on several fronts and believe in general it understates the traffic impact of this proposed annexation. Collectively, we believe this PUDA is inconsistent with MPUD rezoning criteria and will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood in terms of reasonable access to and enjoyment of community common property/amenities, along with the deleterious effects of increased traffic. (Reference Page 5, Line 14 of the Executive Summary). We are asking for your vote to defer this agenda item at the upcoming BCC meeting so residents’ issues and concerns can be presented and integrated into the BCC’s deliberations on this proposed annexation. Please realize a large percentage of ICP residents are seasonal residents and haven’t been fully involved in the deliberations of this proposed annexation. The Covid 19 pandemic has introduced additional limitations on residents as well. We are asking for your support to a request for temporary deferral of this agenda item until residents’ perspectives can be shared with the BCC. In so doing we believe you will be equipped with a full understanding of the issues and concerns residents have with this proposal so a more informed decision can be made. Sincerely, Tim Owens 5047 Tortola Ct. Naples, Fl. 34113 23-682-6227 Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.