HEX Final Decision 2022-09 HEX NO. 2022-09
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
INSTR 6226844 OR 6104 PG 195
RECORDED 3/28/2022 12:28 PM PAGES 10
February 24, 2022 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
PETITION. REC$86.50
Petition No. PL20210002390 - Request for an insubstantial change to the Creekside
Commerce Park Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) by requesting a
modification to a deviation to allow Tract 7 to qualify for an alternative architectural
compliance process.The subject site is 5.25±acres located at 1336 Innovation Blvd in Section
27, Township 48 South,Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The petitioner is now proposing the following changes: 1) to include Tract 7 in the deviation
section 3.5.2 of the existing PUD,to allow buildings in Tract 7 to seek the alternative architectural
design process; and 2)to include a PUD monitoring note.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approval with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87 of the Collier
County of Ordinances, Sec. 8.10.00 of the Land Development Code, and Chapter 9 of the
County Administrative Code.
2. The public hearing for this Petition was properly noticed and conducted in accordance with all
County and state requirements.
3. The public hearing was conducted electronically and in-person in accordance with
Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04.
4. The Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative executed the Hybrid Virtual Quasi-Judicial
Public Hearing Waiver related to conducting the public hearing electronically and in-person.
5. The County Staff presented the Petition followed by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's
representative, public comment and then rebuttal by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's
representative. There were no objections at the public hearing.
6. The Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held on November 9, 2021, at Arthrex 1,
Arthrex Way,Naples, Florida. There were three attendees, one in-person and two via zoom.
Page 1 of 6
7. There is a concurrent application: PL20210001970, Site Development Plan Amendment for
Arthrex Studio X.
8. The County's Land Development Code Sections 10.02.13.E.1 and 10.02.13.E.2 lists the
criteria for an insubstantial change to an approved PUD Ordinance. The Hearing Examiner
having the authority of the Planning Commission may approve a request for an insubstantial
change to an approved PUD ordinance upon review and evaluation of the criteria in the Collier
County Land Development Code.'
Section 10.02.13.E.1 Criteria:
1. Is there a proposed change in the boundary of the Planned Unit Development(PUD)?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there is no
proposed change in the boundary of the PUD.
2. Is there a proposed increase in the total number of dwelling units or intensity of land use
or height of buildings within the development?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there is no
proposed increase in the number of dwelling units or intensity of land use, or height of
buildings within the development.
3. 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?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there is no
proposed decrease in preservation, conservation, recreation, or open space areas within
the development as designated on the approved Master Plan.
4. 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?
The record evidence and testimony,from the public hearing reflects that the requests do
not impact the size of non-residential areas or propose to relocate such areas within the
PUD boundary.
5. 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?
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 6
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there are no
substantial impacts resulting from this amendment.
6. 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 record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that 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.
7. Will the change result in a requirement for increased stormwater retention, or otherwise
increase stormwater discharge?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the proposed
changes will not impact or increase stormwater retention or increase stormwater
discharge.
8. Will the proposed change bring about a relationship to an abutting land use that would be
incompatible with an adjacent land use?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that there will be no
incompatible relationships with abutting land uses.
9. 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?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the proposed
changes to the PUD Document are consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE)
of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). Transportation planning staff reviewed this
petition, and no changes to the PUD Document are proposed that would be deemed
inconsistent with the Transportation Element of the GMP. This petition does not propose
any increase in density or intensity of the permitted land uses.
10. 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.
Page 3 of 6
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that due to the limited
nature of this request, a determination and public hearing under F.S. 380.06(19) will not
be required.
11. 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.?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that based on the
analysis provided above, the proposed change is not deemed to be substantial.
Section 10.02.13.E.2 Criteria:
1. Does this petition change the analysis of the findings and criteria used for the original
application?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the proposed
changes do not affect the original analysis and findings from the latest PUDA.
Deviation:
Proposed Deviation #2 (Revised Deviation in Section 3.5. 2. applies to I/C District only; see
underlined text below for added language to the original deviation)
Deviation #2 seeks relief from LDC Section 5.05.08, Deviations and alternate compliance, which
authorizes the County Manager or designee to administratively approve deviations from
compliance with Section 5.05.08 of the LDC for specific types of buildings,to allow general office
and medical office, hotel and physical fitness facilities that can be constructed on Tracts 5, and 6,
and 7 of the Master Plan to be eligible for this deviation process.
Petitioner's Justification:
This deviation was previously approved by Ordinance 2016-32 and amended by Ordinance 2018-
19 to include Tract 6. All properties in I/C Tracts 5, 6 and 7 are owned by Arthrex and providing
for the alternative architectural compliance process will allow for common building design
elements for buildings comprising the Arthrex campus.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that, in compliance with LDC
Section 10.02.13.A.3, the petitioner has demonstrated that "the element may be waived without a
detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community" and LDC Section
10.02.13.B.5.h, the petitioner has demonstrated that the deviation is `justified as meeting public
purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal application of such regulations. "
Page 4 of 6
ANALYSIS.
Based on a review of the record including the Petition, application, exhibits, the County's staff
report, and hearing comments and testimony from the Petitioner and/or the Petitioner's
representative(s), County staff and any given by the public, the Hearing Examiner finds that there
is enough competent, substantial evidence as applied to the criteria set forth in Sections
10.02.13.E.1 and 10.02.13.E.2 of the Land Development Code to approve Petition.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number PDI-PL20210002390, filed by D.
Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. representing RES Florida 1370
Holdings,LLC,with respect to the property in the Creekside Commerce Park Commercial Planned
Unit Development (CPUD) Ordinance No. 06-50, as amended, and described as the property
consisting of 5.25± acres located south of Immokalee Road west of Goodlette-Frank Road in
Sections 27, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida:
• An insubstantial change to o Ordinance Number 2006-50, the Creekside Commerce Park
Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) to modify a previously approved
deviation to allow to Tract 7 to qualify for alternative architectural compliance process.
Said changes are fully described in the revised PUD document attached as Exhibit "A" and are
subject to the condition(s) set forth below.
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A—Revised PUD Document
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
See Ordinance No. 06-50, as amended, and described as the property consisting of 5.25+ acres
located south of Immokalee Road west of Goodlette-Frank Road in Sections 27, Township 48
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida
CONDITIONS.
All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development.
DISCLAIMER.
Pursuant to Section 125.022(5)F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any
way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency
and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant
fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or
undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law.
Page 5 of 6
APPEALS.
This decision becomes effective on the date it is rendered. An appeal of this decision shall be done
in accordance with applicable ordinances, codes and law.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS: SEE CLERK OF COURT, MINUTES
AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR
VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USES, AND BOAT DOCK EXTENSIONS SHALL BE
NOTED ON THE ZONING MAP FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES.
X. .....1••t_....----
March 25, 2022
Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT "A"
CIGradyMinor
Exhibit 1
PUD REVISIONS: Add Section 2.23, Revise Sections 3.4 F. and 3.5 2.
Creekside Commerce Park PUD 29331193162 (PDI) — PL20210002390
11-8-2021
Q. Grady Minor&Associates, P.A.
3800 Via Del Rey, Bonita Springs, FL 34134 • 239-947-1144 • engineering@gradyminor.com •
www.gradyminor.com
SECTION II
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
2.23 PUD MONITORING
One entity (hereinafter the Managing Entity) shall be responsible for PUD monitoring until
closeout 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 CPUD approval, the Managing Entity is Creekside
Commerce East, Inc., 2600 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34105.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 CPUD 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.
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
Words struck through are deleted; words underlined are added.
PL20210002390 Creekside Commerce Park PUD (PDI) November 12, 2021
SECTION III
INDUSTRIAL/COMMERCE DISTRICT
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
3.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
F. All I/C buildings shall meet the requirements of Section 5.05.08 of the LDC, except for
buildings located on Tracts 5,a .6, and 7 on the Master Plan, which shall be subject to
the deviation process in Section 5.05.08 of the LDC (see Section 3.5.2, Development
Deviations, of this PUD Ordinance). The building located on Tract 5 shall be similar in
architectural style to the conceptual building rendering in Exhibit C.
*** *** *** *** *** Text break *** *** *** *** ***
3.5 DEVELOPMENT DEVIATIONS
1. Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.04 D.1 which establishes a .45 floor area ratio (FAR)for
group housing uses, to permit an FAR of .6 for group housing uses, including the
intermediate care facilities.
2. Deviation from LDC Section 5.05.08, Deviations and alternate compliance, which
authorizes the County Manager or designee to administratively approve deviations from
compliance with Section 5.05.08 of the LDC for specific types of buildings, to allow
general office and medical office, hotel and physical fitness facilities that can be
constructed on Tracts 51 a+ 6, and 7 of the Master Plan to be eligible for this deviation
process.
3. Deviation from LDC Section 4.06.02.C.4., Type D Buffer, which requires a 10' wide Type
D buffer adjacent to rights of way, with trees spaced no more than 30' on center, to
permit the existing street trees planted along the west side of Creekside Street to satisfy
the minimum Type D buffer tree requirement of the eastern boundary of Tract 5.
Words struck through are deleted, words underlined are added.
PL20210002390 Creekside Commerce Park PUD (PDI) November 12, 2021